Loading...
10-15-01 Town Council Packet � � � Kfi 10 ' 15 -� 1 SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL Lc e4 REGULAR MEETING AGENDA OCTOBER 15, 2001 CALL TO ORDER AT 1:00 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL DISCUSSION AGENDA Item No. 2: 1:00 - 2:00 MINOR PUD AMENDMENT: VMF FACILITY LOT 44, DIVIDE -- Jim Wahlstrom. . . . . . Page 1 (Tab A) Item No. 3: 2:00 - 3:00 OFFICES AT SNOWMASS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT AND SUBDIVISION EXEMPTON -- Jim Wahlstrom. . . . . .Page 46 (Tab B) Item No. 4: 3:00 -4:30 SNOWMASS CHAPEL EXPANSION SKETCH PLAN PUD DISCUSSION -- Jim Wahlstrom. . . . . .Page 94 (Tab C) Item No. 5: 4:30 -4:50 PARCEL F PARKING LOT -- Bernadette Barthelenghi. . . .Page 166 (Tab D) BREAK 4:50 - 5:00 P.M. REGULAR AGENDA- 5:00 P.M. Item No. 7: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS (5-Minute Time Limit) Item No. 8: SECOND READING - ORDINANCE NO.14, SERIES OF 2001 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND SECOND READING CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING A MINOR PUD APPLICATION TO AMEND THE GRACIES CABIN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR LOT 2, GRACIES CABIN SUBDIVISION. -- Chris Conrad. . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 170 (Tab E) Item No. 9: FIRST READING - ORDINANCE NO. 24, SERIES OF 2001 OFFICES AT SNOWMASS MINOR PUD AMENDMENT AND SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION -- Jim Wahlstrom. . . . . . . . . . . .Page 46 (Tab B) 10-15-01 tc Page 2 Item No. 10: RESOLUTION NO. 43. SERIES OF 2001 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR BRUSH CREEK OFFICES (OFFICES AT SNOWMASS) -- Jim Whalstrom. . . . . . . . . .Page 46 (Tab B) Item No. 11: SEVEN STAR RANCH PUD REQUEST FOR EXTENSION -- Gary Suiter. . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 182 (Tab F) Item No. 12: APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF 10-01-01. . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 183 (Tab G) Item No. 13: MANAGER'S REPORT. . . . . Page 186 (Tab H) Item No. 14: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS Item No. 15: CALENDARS . . . . . . . . . . . Page 192 (Tab 1) Item No. 16: EXECUTIVE SESSION - Colorado revised Statues 24-6-4-2 (4) (b) - Snowmass Village Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article III, Section 2-45 (c) (2) Executive Sessions. AT THIS TIME THE TOWN COUNCIL WILL 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: PERSONNEL MATTERS DISCUSION WITH THE TOWN MANAGER HOWEVER, NO ADOPTION OF ANY PROPOSED POLICY, POSITION, RESOLUTION, RULE, REGULATION OR FORMAL ACTION SHALL OCCUR AT ANY EXECTUIVE SESSION. Item No. 17: 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: October 15, 2001 Agenda Item: Discussion Item: Aspen Skiing Company's Vehicle Maintenance Facility at Divide Lot 44 Minor PUD Amendment Presented By: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner Core Issues: Below is a suggested discussion agenda of core issues for the October 15, 2001 Town Council meeting concerning the proposed Minor PUD Amendment for the Aspen Skiing Company's Vehicle Maintenance Facility at the Divide Lot 44: • Access Issues (10 minutes)—pp. 1 & 2 for findings and p. 4 for conditions in the attached PC Reso. a) Improvements for Divide Road extended; Road width variance b) Mitigation of existing trees c) Impacts upon 30% slope areas d) Access to Krabloonik restaurant • Usage and Operations (10 minutes) —pp. 2& 3 for findings and 4, 5& 7 for conditions in the attached PC Reso. a) Changes to interior layout from original approval b) Parking arrangement; Need for temporary parking in future c) Outdoor storage d) Screening of yard and facility • Architecture/Height Variance (15 minutes)—pp. 2& 3 for findings and pp. 5 & 6 for conditions in the attached PC Reso. a) Design, exterior finishes and colors proposed for the facility b) Height variance issues (contrast between existing& proposed grades) c) Buffering requirements (see below) • Other Off-Site Impacts (20 minutes)—pp. 2& 3 for findings and pp. 5-7 for conditions in the attached PC Reso. a) Building and dog sled placements in relation to nearby forest b) Landscape buffering desired c) Lighting impacts d) Drainage, grading and erosion control; Detention pond location e) Consent from adjacent owners f) Skier access easements • Miscellaneous Items (time permitting)—pp. 7& 8 for conditions in the attached PC Reso. a) Minor PUD Amendment criteria compliance (pp. 12 &13 of report) b) Review of Phase II facility c) Need for Subdivision Improvement Agreement for infrastructure improvements, landscaping, and timing and warranty for off-site Lroad improvements and maintenance, and easement dedications \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userywWSC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-1501 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc t r General Info: Please reference the separate handout of the applicant's updated proposal in booklet format that has been supplied for Town Council's review prior to the meeting on October 15, 2001. Attached is the staff report, which summarizes all the major issues in detail in the review of the initial application, the subsequent supplemental information, and other material supplied during the Planning Commission review. The report also addresses in detail the Code criteria for Minor PUD Amendments as it relates to the Skico's proposed Vehicle Maintenance Facility. The report is provided, as required by Code, for information and reference purposes. However, the main focus at the Town Council meetings should be on the core issues mentioned above. Council Options: 1) Identify core issues of importance, including findings and any conditions which Council finds are appropriate; and/or 2) Provide direction to the applicant and staff to eventually prepare a draft ordinance for review by Town Council; 3) Schedule a site visit prior to first reading of ordinance tentatively scheduled for November 5. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the meeting follow the conduct of meetings per the Code as follows: 1) Summary introduction by staff of the application and the core issues; 2) Applicant's summary presentation of the proposal; 3) Staff comments, or questions by Town Council members to staff or applicant; 4) Accept comments or questions from the public; and 5) Schedule application and ordinance for first reading on November 5 and the public hearing and second reading of the ordinance on November 12. ^a- \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jw\ASC's VMF\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc 2 Planning Division Staff Report Project Name: Aspen Skiing Company's Vehicle Maintenance Facility at the Divide Lot 44 Minor PUD Amendment Part 1 : Summary of Application and Major Issues Applicant Information: Applicant: Aspen Skiing Company Owner: Aspen Skiing Company and adjacent owners Contact: Victor Gerdin, Mountain Planner, Aspen Skiing Company Project Summary: The overall phasing elements of the amended PUD are as follows: Phase 1 — Construct a 14,810 square foot facility incorporating on-mountain shipping and receiving, trash/recycle receiving, snowmobile maintenance, rubber tire maintenance, office/locker space, storage and six employee housing units (4, 1- bedroom and 2, 2-bedroom). This phase will also complete the mass grading for the site as well as improve the Divide Road to the site. • Skier Circulation proposed — From the Divide Skier parking lot: Two options are proposed to either keep the ski easement where it is or relocate the Ditch Trail off the west end of the Divide Skier parking lot to allow a steeper slope and easier access to the Slot Trail. From Krabloonik Restaurant: The proposal is to reverse the access options, making the Divide Road the primary access from the Slot Trail to the Ditch Trail across the Divide Road to the Krabloonik access road (both assumed to be snowpacked), and making the second access from the Slot Trail to the metal stairs above the Divide parking lot and then walking or skiing to the restaurant. Overall, Planning Commission felt that the Skico should work directly with the property owners to coordinate ski easement locations (see page 3 of the attached Planning Commission resolution for finding). • Transportation (Phase 1)—49 vehicles per day anticipated • Road Access Width — The existing gravel road varies from 15 to 18 feet in width. The initial proposal requests a variance to allow an 18-foot wide graded surface than over a Town required 22-foot wide surface. Town staff recommends a 20 foot paved road with two-foot shoulders (see attached Exhibit A— memorandum from the Public Works Department). The Fire District initially had a similar position. A compromise was reached between the applicant and the Fire District, during the Planning Commission review, to allow a 20-foot paved road with two-foot shoulders. The exception being that there would not be any shoulders in certain areas in attempt to \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jw\A.SC's VMF\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt-doc_so 3 save larger trees, especially the Spruce trees. One Spruce tree (located near the entrance to the VMF site) would need to be removed due to its close proximity to the existing road edge and due to proposed grading in the affected area in order to create a consistent 8% grade for the improved road extension. The revised plans show a cut and fill arrangement requiring no retaining walls. Phase 2 — Construct a 14,000 square foot facility to accommodate snowcat and/or mountain operations, equipment storage, lift maintenance bays, additional rubber tire maintenance bays, additional office space, and employee housing units. • Transportation (Phase 2)— 60 vehicles per day anticipated Construction Schedule— The anticipated construction schedule is as follows: Improvement Time Period Road/utility construction and site preparation (Note: April 1 —June 15,2002 900 feet of Divide Road will be closed during this time)_ Foundation construction(Phase 1) ___ June 15—Jul 15,2002 Building construction(Phase 1)Occupy and __ July 15—October 15, 2002 move in October 15—November 1,2002 Finish grade and landscaping May 15—June 15,2002 1 Proposed Changes —The following table lists the approved use area standards compared to the proposed amended use area standards: Major Structures: Approved Amended 2 primary buildings for Phase 1 Phase 2 Total allowed uses & summary structures for trash &fuel storage Anticipated Program by Type of Use: _ Total building area 28,850 sq.ft. 14.810 sq.ft. 14,000 sq.ft. 28,810 sq. ft. • Snowcat storage 8 18,405 sq.ft. 3,870 sq.ft. 7,600 sq.ft. 11,470 sq.ft. maintenance • Restaurant receiving 4,320 sq.it. 4,620 sq.ft. 4,620 sq.ft. • Ski patrol 8 multi- 3,917 sq.ft. 1,520 sq.ft. 4,800 sq.ft. 6,320 sq.ft. purpose • Employee housing 2,208 sq.ft. 4,800 sq.ft. 1,600 sq.ft. 6,400 sq.ft. Land Use Parameters: _ Maximum building square 28,850 sq.fl. 28,810 sq.ft. footage Maximum building height 36 feel 26 feel(actual:43'-5"from existing: 37'-4"from finished grade) Average building height 34 feet 26 feet in report(not addressed with revised plans Maximum number of N.A. N.A. dwelling unit/acre Ac _ reage 2.65 acres 2.65 acres Allowable F.A.R. 0.25 Same Minimum amount of 29 spaces 30 spaces parking spaces Minimum amount of open 0 acres space Minimum number 8 Up to 3 bedrooms Up to 9 bedrooms minimum square footage of restricted housing units \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userl w\ASC's VMFITC Rpt. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Mina PUD Amdt..doc 4 Applicant's Request: Approval of a ordinance for the Minor PUD Amendment to the Divide to allow the proposed changes to the Aspen Skiing Company's Vehicle Maintenance Facility at the Divide Lot 44 (applicable Code Sections 16A-5-300(b)(2)(a), 16A-5-300(c), and 16A-5- 310), including a street width variance and a height variance request. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: There are no conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan policies concerning the amendment to the PUD. History or Background: The previous vehicle maintenance facility approval per Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1989, was subsequently vested when permits were issued for development within the Divide Subdivision. However, staffs view is the current review criteria and development standards should apply in this case as a result of the proposed changes in the PUD, albeit minor in nature. Core Issues following Staff Review of Proposal: • Applicability of Current Rules and Impacts In 30% Slope Areas. As stated above, despite the previous vesting, the proposed changes trigger compliance with current Code regulations, including compliance with criteria for development with 30% slope areas. The road widening for the extension of Divide Road will impact within 30% slope areas. In response, the applicant submitted a geotechnical study, which states that, "the recommended slope grading will have adequate stability against failure and not pose a significant risk to damage to the adjacent property or hazard to public safety." The report further states that, "We should review the slope grading and retaining wall design when available and prior to construction." Staff Recommendation: The applicant verified that there would be no retaining walls with the cut and fill operations and the improvement to the road. However, if they were proposed, staff would be concerned about the appearance, finish, material and color to be used on the walls. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 1 and 2 of attached resolution for findings. • Road Access Width — Staff's and the Fire District's previous position was that the access road should be widened to meet the Town standard of 20 feet paved surface plus two-foot shoulders in lieu of the 18-foot graded road previously proposed by the application (paved according to the drawings) and regraded to maintain a consistent 8% grade. The Fire District previously requested a 24-foot wide paved surface. See separate memorandums attached from the Town's Public Works Department (Exhibit A) and the Fire District (Exhibit B). The applicant responded by still proposing the 18-foot road, but with a pull-off area. The Fire District responded a second time on July 18, 2001 with the same desire for a 24- foot wide road. �S mob \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jwW.SC's VMF\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc 5 A compromise was reached between the applicant and the Fire District, during the latter portions of the Planning Commission review, to allow a 20-foot paved road with two-foot shoulders. The exception being that there would not be any shoulders in certain areas in attempt to save larger trees, especially the Spruce trees. One Spruce tree (located near the entrance to the VMF site) would need to be removed due to its close proximity to the existing road edge and due to proposed grading in the affected area in order to create a consistent 8% grade for the improved road extension. The revised plans show a cut and fill arrangement requiring no retaining walls. The wider roadway seems necessary to accommodate a safe two-way mix of service/delivery vehicles and private vehicles. As a matter of information, the Divide Subdivision also shows a dedication for a 60-foot wide public access and utility easement centering along the existing access road. This should provide adequate room for the construction of cut and fill operations, tree mitigation and/or revegetation. However, consent from the property owner for these improvements should be provided. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees with the compromise reached with the Fire District, although such arrangement still requires a variance for the road width standard. Staff also recommended that the paved road extend to the west end of the site or the lot in order to effectively connect to the proposed parking and loading areas. The revised plans accommodate this request. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 1 and 2 of attached resolution for findings. • Usage and Operation — Staff requested that other restrictions concerning the usage and operation on the site should be noted on the plans specifically as they relate to storage of materials on the site and the management of vehicle fluids. In addition, staff suggested that there should be a prohibition on outdoor storage of materials and outdoor repair work. The applicant later provided the Skico's Hazardous Waste Protocol as of Spring 2000. Staff referred this information to the Fire District for review, but the Fire District later expressed concerns that the Skico comply with their policies and provided photographs of operations and storage contrary to the policies. The plans were subsequently amended to note that: "No permanent outside material storage or repair work permitted on site." Staff Recommendation: Staff felt at the time that the "permanent"wording should be more clearly defined, such as no more than 15 days as specified in Code Section 16A- 4-320©. In addition, the operations must comply with the intent of the Code standards. If screen fencing is desired at this time, staff recommends a fence design that is an improvement from mesh fencing with slats that was previously required with Ordinance 16, Series of 1989. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 2 for findings and pages 4 and 5 for conditions in the attached resolution. • Drainage Issues — Staff felt that drainage patterns per finished grade, proposed detention ponding and water quality issues needed to be addressed more definitively on the plans or by a separate plan. The magnesium chloride proposed could eventually have an impact on downstream flows in nearby creeks. The 1989 Drainage Plan referred to in the response letter shows a detention pond northwest of the site, but the revised plans did not at the time. The previous plans simply showed the fl grading northwest of the facility sloping off to a OW \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jw\ASC's VMF\IC Rpt. 10-1501 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc 6 match existing grades farther down the hill with no indication of a detention pond. The page 21 referenced in the original package also addressed revegetation and erosion control matters but not detention ponding needs. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommended that the detention pond for water quality purposes be retained in the plan. Revised plans now show a detention pond, and a detailed drainage and grading plan was just submitted on October 11, 2001. Staff recommends that the final drainage and grading plans be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to issuance of permits. Krabloonik has consented to the off-site drainage pond location (Exhibit E). Planning Commission Recommendation: See the conditions on pages 5 and 7 of the attached resolution. • Grading around the Site -- The revised plans show a 16 foot drop over a 25 foot distance which represents about a 1.5:1 slope (versus 2:1 in the response letter), which is fairly steep to adequately promote revegetation. Staff Recommendation: In lieu of grading down the hillside on the northwest side, staff recommended that this area be terraced with retaining walls to control erosion, generally where the previous detention pond was proposed. terraced retaining walls are still recommended by staff to stabilize the embankment and to assist with revegetation efforts. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 5 for condition, under Off-Site Grading, in the attached resolution. • Consent from Adjacent Owners for Off-Site Improvements -- Staff also requested that the applicant obtain permission from the adjacent owners for the off-site grading, road improvements, retaining walls and the relocated ski easement is requested. Even though the applicant's response letters indicated continuing discussion with adjacent owners, staff did not receive consent letters until the last Planning Commission meeting and up until October 11, 2001. Staff Recommendation: Krabloonik provided a consent letter (Exhibit E) as well as the Divide Homeowners Association (Exhibit F). Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 7 for condition, under Off-Site Improvements, in the attached resolution. • Parking Surfaces -- The initial plans didn't show the paved parking areas and service drives as being installed with the initial phased improvements. The supplemental response package still does not show and label the parking spaces and surface treatment on the Site Plan (page 1 of attached Exhibit A of the Planning Commission resolution) although it is shown on the Grading Plan and Landscape Plan (page 2 of Exhibit A in the resolution). Also see the plans attached to the back of the separate application booklet handout. Staff Recommendations: Site Plan showing show and label proposed parking improvements. \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jw\ASC's VMF\TC Rpt 10-1 -01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 3 of the attached resolution for finding. • Parking Requirements — Staff requested that the application identify how the required 30 parking spaces were derived. The response was provided on page 23 of a supplemental package dated July 9, 2001. A total of 30 spaces are noted, but the plans show 29 spaces, which was the amount shown with the original plans and in the project tables. Staff Recommendation: The assumption for the parking required seems generally reasonable, although staff believes there may be more than three Skico vehicles in the parking lot at any given time. The increase in the number of employee housing units may also create more competition for the parking spaces. Staff recommends, upon observation of the facility's future operations and upon a complaint basis, that the applicant agree to provide a temporary parking area on the Phase II portion of the lot if results of the town observations indicate a need for more parking. The applicant should also acknowledge the need to possibly redesign the Phase II portion of the site to accommodate more parking if this need arises. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 7 of the attached resolution for conditions. • Access Drive for Krabloonik Restaurant— The access drive for the restaurant is shown on the plans where the parking bays and service yard are proposed to be located for the Skico's Vehicle Maintenance Facility. Most recently, a proposed land exchange application from Krabloonik was submitting showing the proposed driveway accessing a new town parking lot eliminating about six parking spaces on the VMF site. Staff Recommendation: Staff believes there could be hazards in mixing traffic from the restaurant into the service yard and traffic from the vehicle maintenance facility, but the reasoning is that traffic accessing the Krabloonik restaurant or the proposed new Town parking lot would occur mostly during nighttime hours when the Vehicle Maintenance Facility is not in use. If this is acceptable, an access easement should be provided through the yard area from the Divide access road extension to provide legal access to the restaurant site. The Krabloonik application should eventually be revised in order to retain 30 parking spaces on the VMF site. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 4 for conditions in the attached resolution. • Landscaping — Staff suggested that more landscape islands be installed for the parking lot and service yard areas, and up against the building to improve the appearance of the facility. Ten percent of the parking area/service yard must be landscape per the Code. The landscape plan was revised to add one 10-Toot by 30-foot (approximately 3,000 square foot) landscape island in front of the building, although the applicant's response letter indicates that 1,000 square feet will be added. Staff Recommendation: Therefore, the size of the landscape island should be confirmed. If one considers the parking bay area alone, not including the service yard and drives, the 10% landscape area is met. The landscape plan also shows strategic placements for new tree plantings around the perimeter of the site which staff finds acceptable. S OP \\NT_SERVER\BLD PLN\user\jw\ASC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD AmdL.doc $ Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 3 for finding and pages 6 and 7 for conditions in the attached resolution. • Lighting — Staff felt that the initial set of plans showed too much lighting on the buildings. The response letter indicates a reduction by about 50% of the wall-mounted lighting and lighting underneath the soffit areas, but in viewing the subsequently revised building elevations, a significant amount of lighting was seemed to still be proposed and the lighting was not labeled. In addition, the soffit lighting detail was removed from the plans and there is no typical detail of the wall-mounted lighting describing the shielding method. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the lighting be labeled on the building elevations and that the detailing be added back on the plans. Staff also previously recommended that a solid fence be placed along the northwest property line as necessary to help shield the lighting and cut off the view angle from areas below and along Snowmass Creek. The applicant declined this request per the reasons outlined in their response letter dated July 9, 2001. Planning Commission Recommendation: See the conditions on page 6 of the attached resolution. • Screen Fencing along the Road — Staff requested that the application identify whether or not the screen fencing in front of the facility and along the road is still proposed. The applicant is not proposing a screen fence with the PUD Amendment application. Staff Recommendation: Staff agrees with the applicant's position in this case, because we find that a mesh fence with slats will be unattractive along the roadside. Since the applicant has agreed that there be no permanent outside storage of materials on the site, screen fencing seems unnecessary. Although, the "permanent" wording should be more clearly defined, such as no more than 15 days as specified in Code Section 16A-4-320©and must comply with the intent of the Code standards. The Planning Commission addressed this issue in its resolution. If screen fencing is desired at this time, staff recommends a fence design that is an improvement from mesh fencing with slats. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 2 for finding and page 5 under Outdoor Storage and page 6 under Landscaping for conditions in the attached resolution. • Ski Trail Connectivity— Staff requested that all public/skier trails should be identified on all the plans to show the relationship with the proposed improvements. Staff recommended that the application create and rededicate a new skier access, which egress the skiers prefer to use, from the Divide parking lot. Staff also requested another skier access trail from the optional skier trail recommended above by staff, be provided from the relocated Ditch Trail located southwest of the Phase II building in order to connect down to the access road and thus over to the Krabloonik restaurant. The revised plans did not reflect this recommended connection. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 3 in the attached resolution for finding. 0-13 0W \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jwVASC's VMF\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD AmdL.doc 9 • Building Elevations — Staff had several technical related comments concerning the building elevations, the material and color scheme notations, the relabeling of the elevations, footprint questions, and dimensioning that would need to be addressed with the resubmittal. Staff previously requested that the applicant supply a material/color sample board of the proposed exterior finishes, and it was eventually provided at the last Planning Commission meeting on October 3, 2001. Staff Recommendation: A condition should be added that the Town, whether it is staff or the decision-makers, review and approve the Phase II facility and building design prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant supplied an accurate color photo of the material and colors proposed for the building as previously requested. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 3 for findings and page 6 for conditions in the attached resolution. • Building Height— It was requested that an existing and finished grading plan be provided with an overlay of the roof plan to determine the height of the buildings, and a study was supplied as evidenced in pages 5 and 6 of attached Exhibit A in the Planning Commission resolution. However, the revised building elevations show changes between the existing and proposed grade. It appears that roughly 10 feet of fill will be or has been added to the site. The building will be approximately 43 feet, five inches above current grade and about 37 feet, four inches above finished grade applying the worse case scenario. The previous approval showed a maximum height of 36 feet with an average height maximum of 34 feet. Therefore, a height variance is needed, although the application has yet to request it in writing. Staff Reoommendation: It should be pointed out, however, that the trees in the surrounding forest areas are roughly 50 feet high and the proposal does provide an increase in employee housing from three units from previous approval to nine units in current proposal, including six units in the Phase I portion of the project. This additional employee housing provision would meet one of the Community Purpose criteria. Planning Commission Resolution: See page 2 for findings and page 5 for conditions in the attached resolution. • Employee Housing -- Staff requested that the application show the employee housing calculation requirements based on today's standards due to the requested amendment, even though the number of bedrooms proposed exceeds the previous approval. Staff Recommendation: The applicant's response letter indicated that this project would merely replace the building and operations at the Fanny Hill site. Therefore, staff did not pursue this matter. However, the applicant should provide some guarantee that the employee housing in Phase II will be constructed within a reasonable timeframe. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 2 under Height Variance for findings related to Employee Housing in the attached resolution. • Transit Service— Contrary to what the initial application stated, the Town doesn't provide bus service to the Divide parking lot and doesn't intend to in the future. See separate memo attached from the Town's Public Works Department (Exhibit A of this report). The 10 60mb \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\iwV%SC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Anndt..doc 10 I applicant's response letter indicates that "any required employee shuttle service to and from the VMF will be provided directly by ASC." Staff Recommendation: No further comments. Planning Commission Recommendation: Not address in the resolution. • Wildlife Impacts -- See attached letter from the Colorado Division of Wildlife with recommendations to avoid problems with black bear habitat in the area (Exhibit D of this report). The applicant states that they will eliminate the use of berry or fruit producing vegetation in the landscape plans. The applicant wishes for the Town to direct them on the use of dogs in the employee housing units. Staff Recommendation: No further comments. Planning Commission Recommendation: Not address in the resolution. • Construction Phasing --A construction-phasing plan and an erosion control plan, that the contractor will need to follow, was requested by staff. The applicant feels the information provided is acceptable. The applicant wishes to supply the specifics for the location of silt fencing and ponds with the erosion control plan at the time of building permit application. Staff Recommendation: Per Code Section 16A-4-250, the specific techniques for erosion and sediment control need to be demonstrated at this time. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 5 for condition under Detention Ponding, and page 7 under Drainage, grading and erosion control plans and Review of Phase it facility for other conditions in the attached resolution. • Subdivision Improvement Agreement— Under the advisement of counsel, staff requested that a new Subdivision Improvement Agreement be submitted for this facility to address the development on Lot 44 and other off-site improvements, such as the timing and warranty for the installation of the Divide Road improvements, access easement dedications, water and sewer lines, utility easement dedications, trail easement dedications, landscape improvements and mitigation, maintenance and repair issues, et cetera. The applicant previously indicated a request to submit later, but the timetrame for submittal was not stated. Staff Recommendation: Since a subsequent application is not required with this proposal, staff believes the S.I.A. for this Lot 44 and any associated off-site improvements should be submitted at this time for review. In any event, a building permit would not be issued until this agreement is finalized. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 7 and 8 of the attached resolution for conditions. Summary of Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the core issues being satisfactorily addressed and/or conditioned upon further action with the ordinance. \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jwVASC's VMF\TC Rpt. 1oi AS VMF Minor PUD Amdt-doc ]] Part 2: Detailed Case Analysis (for reference and informational purposes only) Public Notification: Legal notice, mailing and posting for a Minor PUD Amendment were not required for the Planning Commission meeting, but a 15-day notice will be required for the second reading of an ordinance before the Town Council tentatively scheduled for November 12, 2001. Public hearing notices to property owners within 300 feet of the site and the posting of public hearing signs will also be required for the Minor PUD Amendment for the Town Council meeting on November 12. Community Referrals: Referral packages were mailed to the following groups and agencies for review and comment: Public Works, Transportation, town Attorney, Engineering, Snowmass Water and Sanitation, Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District, Housing, Landscaping/ Parks/ Trails, Pitkin County, Colorado Division of Wildlife, United States Forest Service, KN Energy, Holy Cross Electric, Qwest, and AT&T Cable. The Public Works Department, the Fire District, the Water & Sanitation District, and the Colorado Division of Wildlife responded with written comments (Exhibits C and D of this report). Conformance with Code Criteria: [for reference and informational purposes only) Review Standards for a Minor Amendment to a Final PUD: According to Section 16A-5-390(c), Article V, Division 3, of the Land Use and Development Code, an application for a minor amendment to a Final PUD shall comply with the following standards: a) Consistent with the original PUD. The proposed amendment shall be consistent with, or an enhancement of, the original PUD approval. The amendment is generally consistent with the previous proposal. There is not a significant variation from the total square footage previously approved for the facility and the square footage in the current proposal. The proposed amendment reduces the total square footage slightly and the number of employee units has increased within the facility. b) No substantial adverse impact. The proposed amendment shall not have a substantially adverse effect on the neighborhood surrounding the land where the amendment is proposed, or have a substantially adverse impact on the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across the street from the subject property. The amendment does not create a substantial adverse impact upon the surrounding neighborhood, subject to addressing the core issues. The improvements for the parking and building locations generally stay in the same areas. c) Not change character. The proposed amendment shall not change the basic character of the PUD or surrouncgnq \\NT_SERVER\BLD_Pi-Wuser\iWASC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-15- ASC's VMF Minor PUD AmtlL.doc 12 The primary usage proposed for the facility remains generally the same (e.g., vehicle maintenance, storage, offices, and employee housing). However, some of the vehicle maintenance area will be reduced to accommodate restaurant shipping and receiving operations. d) Comply with other applicable standards. The proposed amendment shall comply with the other applicable standards of this Division 3, Planned Unit Development, including be not limited to Section 16A-5-300©, General Restrictions, and Section 16A-5-310, Review Standards. [see below]. The Core Issues section of this report generally summarizes the staff review of this case as it relates to compliance with the referenced General Restrictions and the Review standards outlined below. Minor PUD Amendment Code Criteria and Analysis: Below is an outline of the review criteria (in Italics) applicable to Minor PUD Amendment applications per the Land Use and Development Code followed by the staff analysis (in regular font) of each criterion. 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; Analysis: There is no minimum land area qualification for this type of PUD due to the uses proposed. (2) Compliance with PUD locational criteria; Analysis: A PUD may develop on any land within the Town. (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; Analysis: Staff recommends that certain restrictions apply to the management of vehicle fluids, storage of materials, and where repair work may be performed. (4) Compliance with maximum buildout limitations and criteria, including the 65% development rule; Analysis: The Comprehensive Plan's Buildout Analysis Chart does not apply to this site. The Divide Subdivision has maximized the total number of single-family units that may be built in the area, which are 40. (5) Compliance with the variation criteria concerning dimensional limitations; Analysis: The criterion does not apply to the proposed street width variance. Code Section 16A-4-200 states that the standards, including street standards, are not inflexible, however it is subject to the Town Engineer's recommendation to the Town Council. The Public Works Department recommends that the off-site access road be paved to 20 feet in width plus two-foot shoulders (Exhibit A). \\NT_SERVE R\BLD_PLNWseryw\HSC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-1501 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdl..doc 13 I (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. Analysis: This criterion does not apply in this case since the number of free-market single-family houses has been maximized (40). There are no more single-family homes proposed with this amendment, however, the number of employee units are increasing with the proposed amendment, which would comply with the criteria, since a height variance is needed in this case. (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 snowmelf between buildings, and to minimize the effects of transmission of noise between units and buildings. Analysis: See the height variance study on pages 5 and 6 of Exhibit A in the attached Planning Commission resolution. (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). Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Parking Requirements. (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) Sale, 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. Analysis: The Public Works Department and the Fire District recommend a paved 20-foot wide access road plus two-f of shoulders creating a 24-foot wide driveable 0-\\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jwVASC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-15- 1 A C's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc 14 surface to safely accommodate delivery trucks and private vehicles (Exhibits A and B of this report). A compromise has since been reached. See the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Access Road Width. 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 according to the Land Use and Development Code Section 16A-5-310: (1) Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; Analysis: The proposed minor PUD Amendment does not conflict with policies and recommendations in 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; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section under Building Elevations and the section below under Building Design. (3) Creative Approach. The PUD represents a creative approach to the development and use of the land and related physical facilities to produce better developments and to provide amenities for residents of the PUD and the general public; Analysis: Staff finds that the new building design is more attractive from the originally approved building design. (4) Landscaping. Sufficiency of proposed landscape buffering both within and between the PUD and surrounding lands to minimize noise, glare, and other adverse impacts, create attractive streelscapes and parking areas, and be consistent with the character of the Town; Analysis: Please see the comments in the section below under Landscaping, Grading and Other Design Standards. (5) Compliance with development evaluation criteria of Article IV of the Town's Development Code, including: a) Protection of Environmentally Sensitive Areas; Analysis: The properties involved are not part of sensitive wildlife habitat area. However, the Colorado Division of Wildlife had recommendations for addressing the impacts from the black bear habitat in the area (Exhibit D of this report). b) Brush Creek Impact Area; Analysis: A Brush Creek Impact Report is not necessary with this application. c) Flood plain and wetland areas; Analysis: Not applicable. d) Geologic hazard areas, steep slopes and ridgefine protection areas; Is dow \\NT_SERVE R\BLD_PLN\user\jwWSC's VMF\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc 15 Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Applicability of Current Rules and Impacts in 30% Slope Areas. e) Streets and related improvements; Analysis: Much of the roadway, driveway and circulation patterns on the site remain the same, although the access drive for the Krabloonik site enters through the proposed parking lot for the vehicle maintenance facility. Therefore, a public access easement should be provided through the site. t) Public trails; Analysis: Staff recommends that the option to relocate the public skier trail easement be provided from the Divide Skier parking lot onto a steeper trail for easier access to the Slot Trail. Staff also recommends a connection from the relocated skier access trail back toward the maintenance facility to better access the Krabloonik restaurant. Planning Commission decided that the applicant should work with adjacent owners concerning ski easement locations. g) Water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal and utilities; Analysis: Please see the attached comments from the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District concerning the adequate servicing of the site (Exhibit C of this report). h) Fire protection; Analysis: Please see the comments from the Fire District (Exhibit B of this report — two memorandums). i) Storm drainage; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Drainage Issues. j) Easement characteristics; Analysis: Easements will need to be released and/or rededicated with this proposal to accommodate the new utility lines and to provide a new access easement for the Krabloonik restaurant. k) Survey monuments; Analysis: The site has already been subdivided. I) Off-street parking standards; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Parking Requirements. m) Landscaping, grading and other design standards; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Landscaping. n) Energy conservation; Analysis: Staff requested that an Energy Conservation Plan be submitted with this application. The applicant subsequently supplied one in a supplemental package dated July 9, 2001. dow r \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jwVASC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-15- 1 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt-doc 16 o) Building design guidelines to preserve community character; Analysis: Please see the Core Issues section of this report for related issues concerning the Building Elevations and the Building Height. p) Restricted housing requirements; Analysis: The number of employee housing units and bedrooms has increased with this amendment proposal. q) Sign standards. Analysis: Staff requested that the applicant prepare a comprehensive sign plan at this time for the proposal, but it could be submitted later, it needed. (6) Suitability of the development, considering its topography, environmental features and any natural or man-made hazards that affect its development potential; Analysis: See the comments in the Core Issues section under Applicability of Current Rules and Impacts in 30% Slope Areas, Road Access Width, Usage and Operation, Drainage Issues, Grading around the Site, Building Elevations, and Building Height. (7) 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; Analysis: Please see the attached comments from the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District concerning the adequate servicing of the site (Exhibit C of this report). Also see the comments from the Fire District (Exhibit D — two memorandums). Since these memos, there has been a compromised reached concerning the road width and the placement of shoulders. (8) 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; Analysis: Please see the attached comments from the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District concerning the servicing of the site (Exhibit C of this report). (9) 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 frail 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. Analysis: Please see the comments in Core Issues section of this report under Road Access Width and Ski Trail Connectivity. _ 17 Ow \\NT_SERVER\BLD PLN\user\jw\ASC's VMF\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 ASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..00c 17 Attached Exhibits: [for reference and information purposes only) Exhibit A Memorandum dated June 18, 2001 from the Public Works Department Exhibit B Memorandums from the Fire Marshall (responses to initial submittal and the supplemental response) Exhibit C Letters dated June 10 & 11 from the Snowmass Water & Sanitation District and McLaughlin Water Engineers Exhibit D Letter dated June 19, 2001 from the Colorado Division of Wildlife Exhibit E Consent letter from Krabloonik restaurant received October 3, 2001 � Q i \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\jwLASC's VMF\TC Rpl. 10-1 -011AASC's VMF Minor PUD Amdt..doc 18 Exhibit A Page 1 of 2 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Wahlstrom FROM. Hunt Walker RE: Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility DATE: June 18, 2001 I have received the Divide vehicle Maintenance Facility Minor PUD Amendment and have the following comments : Road Road D follows the alignment of Divide Road, which the Town and Pitkin County have maintained as a public road since before the Town was incorporated in 1977. Fistorically the Town has maintained the road as a four-wheel drive road from May 1 to the first sncwfall of the year. Since Divide Road will be used as an access road to the Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility in the winter, staff recommends the road meet local road standards of a 20 ft . paved road plus 2 ft . shoulders from Divide Parking to where the access road leaves Divide Road. This road standard is necessary because delivery trucks, gas trucks, and the Town trash truck will be using the road on a regular basis. Staff assumes the Aspen Skiing Co. will maintain the road during the winter. Note: To the best of my knowledge the Public Works Department did not approve the narrower road width of 18 ft. as outlined in paragraph 9, Section 7, pg. 18. of the application. Post-iP Fax Note 7671 eeO(o (I D i Pa0,0, Z To i,on co:oew. �. Phw • Goons e .xe 4 . . Exhibit A Page 2 of 2 Solid Waste As mentioned above the Town' s roll off trash truck will be used to service the recycle, cardboard, and garbage trash compactors. The location of the Crash compactors seems to be acceptable as long as our roll off truck can access the garbage and recycle compactor storage bays. Transsportatiori Currently the Town does not provide bus service to the Divide Parking Lot, and doesn't intend to in the foreseeable future. Exhibit B I Page 1 of 2 70: Chris Conrad, Senior Planner From: John T. Mele, Fire Marshal Subject: Aspen Ski Co. Divide Maintenance Facility I have met with Mr. Victor Gerdin from the Aspen Skiing Company and have reviewed a sketch plan of their newly proposed maintenance facility at the Divide. The Snowmass- Wildcat Fire Protection District has the following concern at this stage of the planning process. The access road to the new maintenance facility is being proposed at 18 feet in width. We anticipate daily semi-truck deliveries, employee housing traffic and general Ski Company usage of this road. Therefore, we believe that the access road should adhere to the adopted Snowmass Village Municipal Code requirements of 24 feet. For your added information, automatic fire sprinklers will be required for this project. Fire hydrant placement will be coordinated in future planning stages. We have also been assured that fuel storage will be underground and will comply with all local and E.P.A. requirements. We look forward to working closely with the applicant to insure that fire and life safety is designed into the facility. Snowmass-Wildcat fire Protection District Exhibit B P.O. Box 6436 Snown-oss Villoge, Colorodo 81615 970-923-2212 Page 2 of 2 7-18-01 Jim Wahlstrom Town of Snowmass Village RECEIVED P.O. Box 5010 1 Snowmass Village, Co. 81615 JUL 8 2001 Snowmass Village Re: Aspen Skiing Company's Vehicle Maintenance Facilit} Community Development Dear Jim. In regards to the Aspen Skiing Company's Core Issue Comment Response to Staff dated 7-9-01 we have the following reply in reference to the still proposed 18-foot road width access to the Vehicle Maintenance Facility. The Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District maintains that a road width less than the 24 feet access that is required in Chapter 18 of the adopted Town of Snowmass Village Municipal Codes, (Building Regulations Sec 18-122.) could compromise the fire and life safety protection for a facility of this size and occupancy type. The Aspen Skiing Company's reference to Wood Road and Snowmelt Road widths are of little comparison to the semi-tractor trailer, hazardous waste/storage removal, restaurant supply deliveries and employee housing traffic that the proposed maintenance facility road will endure. Wood Road is primarily residential access and Snowmelt Road is heated and well maintained. Neither Wood nor Snowmelt roads can carry semi-tractor trailer vehicles well. The Aspen Skiing Company's suggestion that "various Fire District within the County have approved standards of lesser width provided tumouts for vehicle passing" is again short of comparison. The fact is that any approved roads within Pitkin County of lesser widths are primarily for residential single-family structures protected by fire sprinklers and not a 28,810 square foot vehicle maintenance facility with attached employee housing. Please call me, if 1 can answer any further questions or be of assistance. Sincerely John T. Mele Fire Marshal/Assistant Chief �� t Exhibit C Page 1 of 4 SNOWMASS WATER & SANITATION May 11, 2001 o I ; I . I C I Mr. Victor Gerdin, Aspen Ski Company P.O. Box 1248 Aspen Colorado, 81612 Re: Aspen Ski Companies Divide Maintenance Facility—Project Description 65-150.79 The District does have the capacity and ability to serve this project for both water and wastewater. Existing infrastructure at the bottom of the Divide Subdivision was originally designed, installed, and located to provide service to this project, however relatively long line extensions to provide water or to collect wastewater will be needed to serve this project due to its location beyond the existing facilities. A copy of Deans report was faxed to Chris Conrad this morning. Please pay special attention to MWE's comments when it comes to the possibility of adding a new sewage lift station. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (970) 923-2056. Robert Garcia District Manage Attachments MWE memo SNOWMASS WATT? 6T SANITATION DISTRICT • POST OTFICE Box 5700 • 660 FAIRWAY DRIVE • SNOWMASS VILLAGE • COIDRAoo 81615 TELEPHONE 970.923.2056 • TELEFAx 970.923.6271 Exhibit C ��j Page-2.0f 4 M � � E McLAUGHLPI WATER ENGINEERS. lid. I I I P AABC AXPCN•C0l,0RA06 xlf;l t 970-925.1'710 970-72L1974 lux u;wcu+pxuunal:na( MEMORANDUM TO: Rubert Garcia- SWSD District Manuger From: G. Dean Dcrosier, P. E. Date: May 10, 2001 RE: ASPEN S}:] COMPANUS DIVIDL MA1N ENANCE FACILITY - Project De;tription. 65-130.79 The District System does have the capacity and ability to serve this project fcr both water and waste water. Existing infrastructure at the existing bonom of the Divide Subdivision was orivinally designed, installed. and located to provide service to this project, however relatively long line extensions to provide water or to collect waste water will be needed to serve this project due to its location beyond the existing 13cilitirs. WATER: Water lines will not be able to be looped at this location and water line will dead-cnd at the proposcd huilding. An 8" DIP line exatnsion will conneuL to the existing 10" DIP line located near the existing fire hydrant at the intersection of Divide Read and the entrance to the Divide wbdivision and Krablooniks parking lot, or the start of the proposcd Divide Maintenance Faciliry Access Road. This 10" DIP line was installed to service this project. The new line extension w•il' follow art alignment that would allow it to serve not only domestic and fire protections to the proposed maintenance Facility,but to Krablooniks as well. The lines will nerd to be designed to provide service to the proposed facilities, ruture uses, and Krablooniks. The Aspcn Ski Company should contact the Fire Department to obtain the exact fire hydrant locations needed to service the ptojcec. All main line water line extensions will be 8" minimum Ci 52 Ductile iron Pipelines. Service line siZing to the facility is dependent on flows needed. We would also require that the existing service to Krabloeniks be replaced with a minimum of 4' DIP piping. ----------------- Exhibit C Page 3 Of 4 SEWER: 'rhe sewer to service this project will need to be lifted up from the building site to the existing sewer facilities in Divide Road. The closest existing manhole is located in the bike path at the intersection of Divide Road and the entrtnu to the Divide Subdivision, bowever, an existing 4' PVC force main line extensior.was installed from this manhole to the start of the proposed Divide Maintenance Facility access road. The 4" force main would need to be extended to a new lift station located next to the proposed maintenance facility. A new 8" minimum scv+er line and manholes would also be required to provide service to the Krablooniks facilities. All main saver lines will be 3" SDR 35 PVC with standard manholes sand the 4" lrorce Main is to be C-900 Cl 150 PVC. The required lift xtauon will need to be designed to handle the proposed maintenance facility use, any other ASC future uses, and Krablooniks. The facility will need to matt all District and State of Colorado requirements and apprcvals. The required site application to the State ol'Colorado health Department may take ns long as G months to get approved. The final design cannot take place until the site application is approved. i Fv G. Dc, �ro ` - CC: Robert Garcia - SWSD MWE - Denver LJJu+FvnbmiJ"Jaraipi d5.I3a.79 I I I I Exhibit C Page 4 of 4 May 11, 2001 Mr. Victor Gerdin,Aspen Ski Company P.O. Box 1248 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Re: Aspen Ski Companies Divide Maintenance Facility—Project Description 65-150.79 The District does have the capacity and ability to serve this project for both water and wastewater. Existing infrastructure at the bottom of the Divide Subdivision was originally designed, installed, and located to provide service to this project. However, a relatively long line extension will be needed to provide water or to collect, pump, or transport wastewater service to this project due to its location beyond the existing facilities. Please pay special attention to MWE's comments on the possibility of adding a new sewage lift station. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at(970) 923-2056. Sincerely, Robert Garcia District Manager Attachments MWE memo STATE OF COLORADO Exhibit D vp Sgt Owens,Governor Page t of 2 LO �O DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE 3 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Russell George,D4edor vow 8090 Broadway For 1Vrldlije- Denver, Colorado 80276 Telephone:(303)297-1192 For People 6-19-01 Town of Snowmass Village Planning Department P.O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 RE: Aspen Skiing Co. —Vehicle Maintenance Facility Dear Jim: The proposed maintenance facility, which lies on Lot 44 of the Divide Subdivision, does not lie within any currently mapped wildlife areas. The site lies adjacent to Krablooniks and the Road "D" and just below the ditch trail, which is a highly distwbed area. There is summer use of mule deer in the area as evidenced by tracks and droppings. In addition, black bear inhabit the area and could cause problems with improperly stored trash/garbage. Impacts to wildlife should be minimal with the following recommendations: 1. any disturbed areas be revegetated with native vegetation but with a weed management program 2. the proposal mentioned using certified weed free seed mixes,but they should also use certified weed free straw for their mulch 3. the use of serviceberry and chokecherry in their landscaping plan may replace those shrubs, which were lost to the development, but they will also attract bears as the berries ripen. The amount of shrubs planted will not make any significant difference in the amount of forage available to deer, elk, or bear. I would recommend that the species planted in the landscaping plan be native non-producing berry or fruit type shrubs/trees. This may help taking away an attractant for bears and help to mimm;z4 any conflicts. 4. Details of the employee housing units were lacking. I would recommend that dogs not be allowed in the units. If they are allowed, restrict to 1 dog/unit with a kennel restriction. These kennels would need to be constructed before the C.O. is issued for the units. Control of dogs is essential to minimi?r impacts to summer use of deer and elk above the units. 5. Maintain as much native vegetation outside the building envelopes as possible, especially the employee unit location. 6. All trash/garbage be kept in approved bear proof garbage containers. Centralized dumpsters with enclosures would be best. The installation and use of trash compactors at the facility and in each employee unit would help to minimize the amount of trash aim DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RE�,Greg E.Walther.Executive Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION,Rick Ensbom,Chair•Robert Shoemaker,Vice-Chair•Marianna Raaopoulos,Secretary Members,Bernard Black•Tom Burke•Philip James•Brad Phelps •Olive Valdez If you have any questions,please give me a call. Thank you for the oppomuuty to comment. Sbcerey, Exhibit D Page 2 of 2 Kevin Wright District Wil a Manager Colorado Division of Wildlife P.O. Box 5517 Snowmass Village Colorado 81615 Exhibit E 970-923-3953 Fax: 970-923-0246 Page 1 of 1 RECEIVED OCT 3 2001 Snowmoss Village Community Development This letter acknowledges and approves of the offsite improvements required for the Divide VMF recently submitted through the PUD Amendment application provided by Aspen Skiing Company. Krabloonik acknowledges that the Divide Final PUD, approved via Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1989, authorized Aspen Skiing Company to construct a 28,000 square Vehicle Maintenance Facility on Divide Subdivision Lot 44. Krabloonik also acknowledges that Aspen Skiing Company has applied for the PUD Amendment to modify the original VMF plans. The offshe improvements include: 1) Road improvements to 800 feet of Divide Road, to include a 20-foot wide paved surface with 2-foot graded shoulders mandated by the Snowmass Village Fire Department. These improvements will require cut and fill excavation of existing slopes, which will be revegetated, and some tree removal in accordance with the road improvement plan submitted with the application. 2) Sewer and water line improvements as necessary, mandated by Snowmass Water and Sanitation District. 3) Grading required to maintain the skier access from the TOSV Town Parking Lot E. 4) Grading required to relocate the dog sled egress route from Krabloonik. 5) Grading and erosion control measures, including a detention pond, on the Krabloonik property. 6) A realignment of the existing Krabloonik access through the VMF paved yard area. As an adjacent propery owner, Krabloonik recognizes and agrees with the above off-site improvements. Sincerely, -/ Dan MacEachen do --------------- Exhibit F Page 1 of t rnn. October 4, 2001 D I V I DE Mr. Chris Conrad Planning Department Town of Snowmass Village ('E P.O.Box �D. Snowmass Village, CO 81615 S,Ocr 1 1 2001 RE: Aspen Ski Company VW co^"nu• nV y eUoAge nr Dear Chns: This letter acknowledges and approves of the offsite improvements required for the Divide VMF recently submitted through the PUD Amendment application provided by It—he Aspen Siding Company. he Divide Homeowners Association acknowledges that the Aspen Skiing Company has applied for a PUD Amendment to modify the original VW plans. The offshe improvements include: 1. Road improvements to 800 feet of Divide Road, to include a 20-foot wide paved surface with 2 foot graded shoulders mandated by the Snowmass Wildcat Fire Department. These improvements will require cut and fill excavation of existing slopes, which will be revegetated. Some tree removal is required and is in accordance with the road improvement with the application. 2. Sewer and waken line .improvements gs necessary and mandated by the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District. 3. Grading required to maintain the skier access from the TOSV Town Parking Lot B. 4. Grading required to relocate the dog sled egress route from Krabloonik. 5. Grading and erosion control measures, including a detention pond. an adjacent property owner, The Divide Homeowners Association recognizes and green with the off-site improvements listed above. $incerely, Ric and President Rv/dcb/offsiteskico Soft SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 26 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING A MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO THE ASPEN SKIING COMPANY'S VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FACILITY ON LOT 44, DIVIDE SUBDIVISION. WHEREAS, the Aspen Skiing Company ("Applicant") has land use and site development approval to construct a Vehicle Maintenance Facility ("VMF") on Divide Subdivision Lot 44 (the "Site") per Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1989; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1989, acknowledged and approved the establishment of vested property rights in the Divide Final PUD and detailed Final Plat; and WHEREAS, imported fill was permitted to be placed on the Site by approval of an Annual Temporary Use Permit per Planning Commission Resolution No. 22, Series of 2001, in order to adequately prepare the site for the VMF as shown in Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, the Applicant would like to receive approval of the Minor PUD Amendment for the VMF to commence construction and move operations from the administrative building located at the base of Fanny Hill on the Base Village site; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application on July 25, 2001 September 5, and September 19 and heard the recommendations of the Town Staff and public comments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Findings. Based upon the information submitted and testimony in the record, the Planning Commission finds as follows: Access Road Improvements (extension of Divide Road): 1. Planning Commission finds that the road improvements to include 20 feet of pavement width and two-foot gravel shoulders are acceptable. The plans indicate that shoulders will not occur where large evergreen trees are located in an effort to preserve these trees. However, one evergreen tree would be PC Reso 01.26 Page 2 of 6 removed due to its close proximity to the road and the grading changes proposed. 2. The road cross-sections and plans reveal cut and fill locations, but no retaining walls will be required. Instead, 2:1 to 1.5:1 slopes will be created and revegetated. Access Provisions to Krabloonik site: There were concerns expressed about where the access drive would be located for the Krabloonik site. Engineer's Report concerning impacts within 30% slopes: Planning Commission finds that the engineer's opinion stating that the slopes in the area are not prone to instability or failure and that the proposed development will not cause greater slope instability or increase the potential for slope failure, and that there will be no significant risk that damage to adjacent property will result from the proposed construction. Screen Fencing: Planning Commission finds that the screen fencing previously approved for the site along the road is an artificial element and does not provide much in the way of screening due to the grade changes around the site. Outdoor Storage: Planning Commission finds that outdoor storage could pose a problem on the site. Height Variance: 1. Planning Commission finds that the height variance to a maximum of 43 feet 5 inches in height is not a major concern given the heights of the trees in the nearby forest subject to the conditions mentioned further in this resolution. 2. Planning Commission finds that the six additional employee housing units within Phase I plus the three future employee units in Phase 11, are in excess of the previously approved three employee housing units and serves in complying with the Community Purpose criteria in addressing the height variance. MONO PC Reso 01-26 Page 3 of 8 Lighting: Planning Commission finds that the lighting on the building could pose a glare problem for residents down the hill in Snowmass Creek. Skier access easements: Planning Commission finds that the skier access easement arrangement will be coordinated by the applicant with adjacent owners and therefore should not be addressed with this resolution. Architecture: 1. Planning Commission finds that less reflective exterior finishes should be utilized for the building and that the color schemes should blend with the surrounding environment to the greatest extent possible. 2. Planning Commission finds that the architectural design of the Phase I Vehicle Maintenance Facility is an improvement over the design shown in the previously approved plans. Landscaping: The Planning Commission finds and the applicant confirms that 55 Aspen trees, 24, 12-foot high Spruce trees, and 24, 6-8-foot Spruce trees and 65 deciduous shrubs will be planted around the site. Parking: 1. The applicant stated that the parking areas in front of the Vehicle Maintenance Facility will be paved. 2. Planning Commission finds that there could be competition for the parking on the site due to the six employee units added to the Phase I portion of the project. Miscellaneous: The application has been submitted and reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Section 16A-5-390 of the Town of Snowmass Village Land Use and Development Code (the "Municipal Code"). OW-M .000 PC Reso 01-26 Page 4 of 6 Section Two: Recommendation. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Town Council approves the Minor Planning Unit Development ("PUD") Amendment to the Aspen Skiing Company's Vehicle Maintenance Facility ("VMF") on Lot 44, Divide Subdivision. Said approval should be subject to satisfying the following conditions. Section Three: Conditions. The authorization of the Minor PUD Amendment shall be subject to the following conditions: Access Road Improvements (extension of Divide Road): 1. The access road shall be privately maintained. 2. The Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("S.I.A.") shall define the road construction specifications for the extension of Divide Road. Access Provisions to Krabloonik site: 1. The applicant committed to complete an access agreement with the owners of the Krabloonik site, Lot 45 of the Divide Subdivision, prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Applicant shall coordinate appropriate access provisions with the Krabloonik land exchange application, but still maintain 30 parking spaces on the site. 3. Once an access provision is defined, the existing access easement shall be released and a new one rededicated along the new driveway to the Krabloonik site. Screen Fencing: 1. Perimeter planting is preferred over screen fencing. See the Landscaping section in this resolution for further details. 2. Screen fencing shall be considered following a future assessment of the project after completion, as deemed necessary. -2� Oon PC Reso 01-26 Page 5 of 8 Outdoor Storage: There shall be no permanent, outside storage as noted on the plans, and such storage shall be no more than 15 days for unused equipment per the Municipal Code (Section 16A-4-320(c)). Off-Site Grading: There should be a three-year revegetation check to determine if terracing is needed for the off-site grading located to the north of the facility. Detention Ponding: 1. Detention ponding shall be shown on the final drainage and grading plan and subsequently constructed subject to adjacent owner consent. 2. Final drainage and grading plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. Height Variance: The height variance request to a maximum of 43 feet and 5 inches is not a major concern subject to the following: 1. The height variance study dated September 4, 2001 revealed that the roof structures will not exceed 36 feet (previous limit) for more than 50% of the structures per the Municipal Code criteria; 2. The existing trees on the northwest side of the site must be preserved. The applicant committed to increase the building setback from 40 to 50 feet from the northwest property line in an effort to preserve the existing trees; 3. The dog sled run along the northwest edge shall be varied in width in an effort to preserve the existing evergreen trees; 4. The facility shall be further shielded with the planting of additional evergreen trees if review by the Town, after completion of the facility, determines that additional trees are necessary; and 5. The applicant commits to providing bin walls, described as stacked boulders around existing trees, as needed for protection purposes. 0� 3os do* PC Reso 01-26 Page 6 of 8 Lighting: 1 . Lighting shall be limited to two to three footcandles utilizing motion detectors. 2. Wall-mounted lights shall be placed on lower level of building and shielded to direct lighting downward for the purposed of hiding the light source from view. 3. There shall be no ceiling lights within the employee housing units. 4. Contingency fencing on the northwest side of the site shall be considered if lighting intrusion poses a problem following a site visit in the future. However, natural buffering is preferred over screen fencing. 5. In the event of possible nighttime use of the maintenance area, the glass garage doors shall be shaded on the interior to prevent off-site lighting glare intrusion onto adjacent properties. Architecture: 1. A darker gray color should be used for the stair towers and garage doors. 2. The color scheme needs to blend with the surrounding environment to the greatest extent possible. 3. As presented before the Planning Commission, an accurate color photo of the final version of the materials and colors for the building's exterior finishes shall be provided to the Town prior to the issuance of building permits. Landscaping: 1. The existing evergreen trees on the northwest side of the site shall be preserved. The applicant committed to increase the building setback from 40 to 50 feet from the northwest property line in an effort to protect the existing trees from construction and grading operations; 2. The dog sled run along the northwest edge shall be varied in width in an effort to preserve the existing evergreen trees; 3. See further conditions under Lighting concerning the techniques to be used for the screening of the lighting at the facility from the Snowmass Creek area. PC Reso 01-26 Page 7 of 8 4. Up to six of the 24 larger, 12-Toot high Spruce trees previously noted in this resolution (Findings Section under landscaping) shall be planted on the north side of the facility for the purpose of buffering and screening the facility from the Snowmass Creek area. Parking: 1. A minimum of 30 parking spaces shall be provided on the site. 2. A temporary parking area of approximately 10 spaces, or as deemed necessary, shall be provided on the Phase II site if, in the future, the Town determines that the parking spaces on the Phase I site is not adequate. Review of Phase II facility: Planning Commission and Town Council shall review the amended plans in the future for the Phase.II facility. Drainage, grading and erosion control plans: The Town Engineer shall review and approve the final drainage, grading and erosion control plans for the site prior to issuance of a building permit. Off-Site Improvements: Written consent from adjacent owners shall be provided to the Town prior to the issuance of building permits. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (S.I.A.): 1. The applicant shall work with the Town Attorney concerning submittal of a S.I.A. for improvements primarily off-site, prior to Town Council review. 2. The S.LA. shall define the road construction specification for the extension of Divide Road. 3. Specifically, a Subdivision/Public Improvement Agreement for the Aspen Skiing Company's Vehicle Maintenance Facility located on Lot 44, Divide Subdivision, a Parcel C of the Divide PUD, shall be submitted by the owner of Parcel C to the Town Council for its approval prior to the issuance of any excavation of building permits for the facility. Prior to approval, the Town Engineer shall review the estimated installation costs and adjust said cost PC Reso 01-26 Page 8 of 8 accordingly. If the Town Engineer and the owner of Parcel C can not agree on an estimated cost for one or more items, the Town Council shall determine the cost. A letter of credit shall be used to secure performance of the Agreement. Said letter shall be established at the time the Town Council approves the Agreement. Miscellaneous: Story poles shall be erected after the trees shed their leaves for the benefit of the Divide Homeowners Association and for a possible site visit during the Town Council review. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED, as amended, on this 3rd day of October, 2001, on the motion of Planning Commissioner Gustafson and the second of Planning Commissioner Stout, by a vote of 4 in favor and 0 against (Commissioners Huggins, Benson, and Fridstein were absent). TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION- i Doug F urer, cti t g Chairman ATTEST: -L /V C S erry ocintire, Planning Commission Secretary o MM i- � FAN 1A 4snllI / r•: ; / ) 74698 6y698 0 ;f #U•"""'CIr Pub X 61 r 'v opwq 96cIIIA mmmcuS r34u33 ..•• -5 d a 1M �---- a � :: v� .o Q 1 s oauoua s d inl esa Palsfl �Q : x[5888 �!'• cof 6ZE69; i }y r e�°.P'+s ¢�. O 1 LZ4.97- ® % - Y .... iIPFLi6 fp(61�°! :` Sr ` •' f• .:( + ___ .QV pUy r �7�`�h PJV if 2d rawv ,`3 �-x i3 nIS 3 aaTPn �f x E o�� Zy An �IlaW7sv3 nIS KSIX - i V Amvdwo DMDI f _ - .. PLIdSY r :' _.... r _ . . :.c' .rt Q w F w _ .. Awrw ..................... ........ ... i -r .......... /: MPANY xai ;.:' .... gyp. Thc° KG GW / '! W / :. ..''' �� �"�� Acmcialtl ............................ �p _ :" .� ArchtecTC And "' . • ...: _ ...... St7uctudE Lot E ..:. .............. .. .... ......_ ..•\ ti. - � � .. D` r,......«� 8920 - ----------------- / ;: ® • '• , parr Duo:V.a / - ' . r . F. .f �8900 .......... -------------------- , ........ ...._ .. I _ ._. \L -'.I \l � ' Centernonce s,nww�vllawje —. - Colorado FA W7 oar an Landscape Plan ...-. ..�.. .-.••• .FTC' � r /^J % - ✓� ar.r a ✓�/ _> _ S U.LUST TWN EXHIBIT A •�;!I ! ;i i III i page 3 of 7 - IF � ICI- { j. i li I ff -1J I i I I !ii i - it'll +*+ I tl l W _ I ! TM ! ! f I ` +4 C 1u1 ( tin. � tow I EXHIBIT q _ Prigs 4 of 7 in I TM fv i I _(� I i I ( , u• M s I 3 � i Y I I � I ! I f I � I . . . .i' i•��� EXHIBIT A io Page 5 of 7 INA ua m Qq Aff a 1� 3 rI 1 # ry « u� k ', a Y� J 1 Tp ! � r 1 ! � �� l �'• bb X 1 1 in i ppp s "Aa � EXHIBIT A Page 6 of 7 gi 4 Y i i S ' bk >ri V � �a 65 1 r Ind Nola 3 4 Q i a �>R �rim Q T i + � _W, EXHIBIT A Page 7 of 7 { 'Fru q M ryi�x 11 �[ }� z: .74 ` tp ^ y`yFfl t�fLn l�- Vi �1•!^f ulY A )^f` y Y1 x��is� "'T' '��5•. e N N i R F' 'X •'tt R jl>•��t Ail i �• i,yt ' 1 . a 7•�J t �ry� V x. `.:. 10 `F E a r l X 4n ]r 1 e�4h���I{q,}ik�hfs�`�'t��1 �f t � P '•$r �'�� �t.al'�'t {} � �{ '1-�'l.F�`kfF�x/�CQ'!' �^Y1*e's'-•R }) 1:� 1'' Why} t nY.GeFR$•�°kn. t�S�:N� d�: a � t'��� Ems ' a(e SC•-..dS yI 'u1 6SV-aM+pri`t°l.• i rpq f.>$" 1 a qF W1Y N lug ' J 1 /a ha �a r�1l4i Y v d i 1' °JLln 1 ' . { S a ...... tom:.. 1 b^ 4.>.: nY•: � .. ��L. I I •i i . TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: October 15, 2001 Agenda Item: Discussion and First Reading Ordinance No. 24. Series of 2001: Minor PUD Amendment for Brush Creek Offices (Offices at Snowmass; and Resolution No. 43. Series of 2001: Subdivision Exemption for Brush Creek Offices (Offices at Snowmass) Presented By: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner Core Issues: Due to the minor nature of this application, staff prepared a draft ordinance in advance for Town Council's review and consideration. Much of the ordinance incorporates the Planning Commission's findings and conditions as well as staff recommendations, subject to review and modification by the Town Council. The core issues concerning this project are as follows: • Floor Area Calculation (p. 3 of PC Reso. for finding) • Parking Ratio (p. 3 of PC Reso.for finding) • Parking Usage and Restrictions (p.6 of PC Reso. for conditions) - Parking sticker program - Landscape islands - Information signs - Number of parking spaces - Garage space usage • Modifications to Permitted Use List (p.4 for finding and p. 9 for amended permitted use list) • Architecture (p. 6 of PC Reso.for condition) • Consent from adjacent owner (p. 5 of PC Reso.for finding) • Change concerning notice of adjacent owner of use changes (p. 4 for finding & p. 9 - Exhibit A for amended permitted use list) • Road easement (p. 6 of PC Reso.for condition) Please see the attached report detailing the staff analysis, recommendations, and the Planning Commission responses to these core issues. General info: Attachments: • Draft Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2001, for the Minor PUD Amendment with referenced exhibits; • Old Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1992, outlining notice and comment requirements to the adjacent owner. This is proposed to be changed and superceded by the draft ordinance; • Planning Commission Resolution No. 32, Series of 2001, without the referenced exhibits which are the same as in the draft ordinance; and • Draft Resolution No. 43, Series of 2001, for the proposed Subdivision Exemption to permit a land swap \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userNw\Offces at Snowmass\TC Communique 10.15-01.doc I Please reference the separate handout of the application booklet describing the proposed project in detail. Council Options: 1) Identify core issues of importance, including findings, conditions and/or any modifications which Council determines appropriate within the draft ordinance for the Minor PUD Amendment and the resolution for the Subdivision Exemption; and/or 2) Council may wish to withhold final action on the Subdivision Exemption resolution until the public hearing and second reading of the ordinance for the Minor PUD Amendment is completed on November 5, 2001. Staff Staff recommends that the meeting follow the conduct of meetings per Recommendation: the Code as follows: 1) Summary introduction by staff of the application and the core issues; 2) Applicant's summary presentation of the proposal; 3) Staff comments, or questions by Town Council to staff or the applicant; 4) Accept comments or questions from the public; and 5) Schedule second reading of the Minor PUD Amendment ordinance for November 5; Council may defer action on the Subdivision Exemption resolution until that date. sow \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryvh0lfces at Snowmass\TC Communique 10.15-01.doc 2 STAFF REPORT AND ANALYSIS OF CORE ISSUES, RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUMMARIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESPONSES REGARDING PROPOSED MINOR PUD AMENDMENT FOR BRUSH CREEK OFFICES (OFFICES AT SNOWMASS) 1. Floor Area Calculation. The applicant wishes to utilize the existing Code provisions in calculating floor area, which would permit inclusion of the upper level decks that are eight feet in width. Per the current Code, decks more than six feet wide need to be included as part of the floor area. This is contrary to the previous approval which did not allow the decks to be included as part of the floor area. The applicant wishes to enclose these decks. If the floor area calculations were used per the existing Code, there would be no increase of enclosed and unenclosed floor areas. To comply with previous provisions, the application probably would not qualify as a Minor PUD Amendment due to the limit of no more than 10% increase in floor area. Planning Commission didn't have an issue with this interpretation, including the use of the current floor area calculations in the Code, and noted it as a finding in its resolution. 2. Parking Ratio. The applicant wishes to use the current Code describing the parking required ratio, which is 1:300 square feet of gross floor area for commercial space. The previous approval was 1:235. The request seems reasonable considering that there are common areas, such as the entry area, storage rooms, and a break room within the building that is not used for commercial or office space and because a majority of the space is used for offices, which typically generate less traffic than retail space. The Planning Commission agreed with this finding. 3. Parking Usage and Restrictions. Using the 1:300 rate for the 11,810 square feet of floor area within the building, not including the 755 square foot garage, 40 parking spaces are required. Due to past complaints regarding parking usage, staff recommends the following conditions: a) Parking Sticker Program. A parking sticker program should be initiated by the applicant for the users within the building. The Planning Commission agreed with this as a condition in its resolution. b) Landscape Islands. Two landscape islands should be installed, located on both sides of the driveway, along the relocated east property line to help distinguish the commercial parking area from the adjacent residential parking area as well as provide some landscape buffering within the parking area. Planning Commission disagreed with staffs position stating that as much parking as possible should be made available for this site. c) Information Signs. Information signs should be placed within the above mentioned islands alerting motorists of no commercial or residential parking beyond the islands, depending on the travel direction. Planning Commission felt �% I \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNM0ffioes at Snowmass\TC Communique 10-15-01.doc 3 that these signs could become useful in the future as determined by the Planning Director, but without the placement within the above noted landscape islands. d) Number of Parking Spaces. Two additional parking spaces should be constructed west of the service/loading area to make up the difference with the recommended addition of two landscape islands. Planning Commission felt that without its requirement for two landscape islands, these spaces could be installed later as determined by the Planning Director. e) Garage Space Usage. The two garage spaces should be strictly used for maintenance vehicles and equipment associated with the business, and they should not be used for parking by the general public. Further, the maintenance vehicles or equipment should not be stored outside. Planning Commission agreed with this opinion. 4. Modification to the Permitted Use List for a second property management company. There is another property management company that has been operating in the building for some time. The draft ordinance modifies the use restrictions to allow this company to continue to operate subject to being restricted to operations within the garage and subject to the conditions above concerning the parking arrangements. Planning Commission agreed with this, with the exception of some of the parking arrangements, and the permitted use list was modified accordingly. 5. Modification to the Permitted Use List for a catering or food service company. Within the building there is also an existing catering or food service business, which has been in operation for some time and which occupies the previous 800 square foot storage area. The Town previously approved this use in December 1993. The draft ordinance modifies the use restrictions to allow this company to continue operations subject to 1) complying with the previous conditions of approval, 2) not inviting the general public on the premises, and 3) complying with all building, fire and health codes. Planning Commission agreed with this, and the permitted use list was modified accordingly. 6. Architecture. The material and colors of the exterior finishes and roofing materials for the proposed deck enclosures should match the treatment on the existing building. The applicant committed to this at the Planning Commission meeting and a condition to this effect is noted in the ordinance. 7. Consent from adjacent owner. The applicant referred the application to the Woodbridge Condominium Association for review and comment. The applicant later supplied an executed Exchange Agreement between the applicant and the Woodbridge Condominium Association concerning the land swap and the shared operation of the trash facility off site. The Exchange Agreement was referenced as Exhibit H in the Planning Commission resolution. 8. Change to notice of adjacent owner of use changes. Staff recommends that the requirement to notify and obtain comments from adjacent owners following Ordinance No. 07, Series of 1992 (attached) be eliminated in the new ordinance. Staffs view is that a referral and notification requirement to an adjacent property owner should not be part of and��, because the Town has a public notification W. • \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLMuseNw\0Mces at Snowmass\TC Communique 10-15.01.doc 4 process whereby adjacent owners are given the opportunity to voice opinions or submit letters for review at public meetings or hearings. Planning Commission concurred with staffs recommendation and the resolution reflects this in the findings section of its resolution and in part of the amended permitted use section (Exhibit A of the draft ordinance and the Planning Commission resolution). 9. Road easement. The road easement should be relocated following the current drive wa y alignment. Plannin g Co mmission agreed to this as a condition in its resolution. O-SO 000 \\NT_SERVER\aLD_PLN\useNMOfrioes at Snowmass\TC Communique 10-15-0i.doo 5 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 24 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE MINOR PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE BRUSH CREEK OFFICES (OFFICES AT SNOWMASS) SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA LAND USE PLAN AND PERMITTING DECK ENCLOSURES AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CHANGES ON THE SECOND LEVEL OF THE BUILDING. SAID APPLICATION ALSO INCLUDES A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION TO ADJUST PROPERTY LINES ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE PROPERTY WHICH INVOLVES LOCATION OF NEW PARKING AREAS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1988 ("Ordinance 19") granted Stage II Land Use Plan approval for the Brush Creek Office Building located within the SPA-1 Specially Planned Area zone district; and WHEREAS, said ordinance specified the intended land use and development parameters for that building, as described within Exhibit A of that ordinance. Such parameters specified a gross square footage of 11,050 square feet, including a minimum 755 square foot garage and 800 square feet of storage space. The initial parking requirement was 41 spaces with a condition that Council could require four additional spaces within five years; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, proposed the amendment of the Construction Management Plan of the LUP, by reducing the parking requirement to 36 spaces with an additional four more spaces in the future at Council's discretion. However, no plans could be located and the amendment was not recorded; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 07, Series of 1992, further amended the LUP by clarifying and expanding the use limitations, and providing notification of, and comments by, the Woodbridge Condominium Association for future changes in use. Such changes also clarified the restricted uses to prohibit the storage of building materials, building equipment, or construction vehicles not to include pick-up trucks; and WHEREAS, Brush Creek Office Partnership ("BCOP"), the current landowner, submitted ON August 1, 2001 a Minor PUD Amendment requesting approval of a Minor PUD Amendment to amend the Brush Creek Offices SPA Land Use Plan to permit the enclosure of the upper level roof decks, including architectural and roof modifications. Said application also requests a subdivision exemption which modifies the location of the east and west property lines on the property (Exhibit D), involving the location of six new parking spaces (Exhibit C) per Town Council owls( am TC Ord. 01.24 Page 2 of 9 Resolution No. 43, Series of 2001. The application also proposes the connection of a walkway from the Woodbridge Condominium site; and WHEREAS, Brush Creek Office Partnership ("BCOP"), the current landowner, is requesting reduction of the parking ratio from 1:235 to 1:300 as currently established under the Municipal Code for commercial developments; and WHEREAS, Brush Creek Office Partnership ("BCOP"), the current landowner, is also requesting that the current upper level decks, due to their width of eight feet, be included as part of the floor area versus the previously approved plans which excluded the exterior decks from the floor area calculation; and WHEREAS, a similar proposal was submitted in 1996, via processing of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1996, to increase the maximum building square footage, decrease the parking ratio and delete the storage requirement. Due to opposition from adjacent owners and the Planning Commission, Town Council did take action upon the ordinance; and WHEREAS, the current floor area within the building, including the second level of unenclosed deck space, is 11,810 square feet. The developed floor area is currently occupied by a real estate developer, three architectural firms, a catering or food service company (within the previous 800 square foot storage area), two builders, a realtor, a landscaping company, and a property management company. In addition to the 11,810 square feet, a snow removal/maintenance company occupies the garage space of 775 square feet; Parking on the site currently is at 38 spaces, not including the two garage spaces (Exhibit B); and WHEREAS, such enclosure of all of the decks, which are eight feet in depth, will expand the enclosed (emphasis added) square footage of floor area by 12.5%; and WHEREAS, a public meeting was held on October 3, 2001 before the Planning Commission to review the application, consider staff recommendations, and receive public comment; and WHEREAS, the Town's Planning Commission passed a resolution approving the Minor PUD Amendment with conditions as outlined in Resolution No. 32, Series of 2001; and WHEREAS, a public meeting and first reading of the ordinance (will be/was held) by the Town Council on October 15 followed by a public hearing and second reading of the ordinance on November 5, 2001, to review the application, consider Planning Commission and staff recommendations, and receive public comment; and WHEREAS, a required 15-day public hearing notice (will be/was) published in the Snowmass Sun on September 17, 2001 concerning the Minor PUD Amendment, • TC Ord.01-24 Page 3 of 9 and the applicant submitted verification that a public hearing notice was send to property owners within 300 feet of property following the procedures outlined in Code Sections 16A-4-560 and 16A-5-60; and WHEREAS, Town Council Resolution No. 43, Series of 2001, approved the concurrent application for a subdivision exemption permitting the exchange of property containing 4,629 square feet between the BCOP and the Woodbridge Condominium Association; and WHEREAS, such subdivision exemption does not require published, mailed and posted notice pursuant to Section 16A-5-60 of the Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Findings. The Town Council finds as follows: 1. That the application submission and public notification requirements, as specified within Section 16A-5-390 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"), have been satisfied. 2. Circumstances relevant to the 1988 SPA Land Use Plan established by Ordinance 19 have changed or were unknown at the time of its adoption. 3. The proposal is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire SPA and does not affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across the street from the property in question or the public interest. 4. The amendments will not alter the essential character of the locality, since the existing uses, the changes to the permitted uses are commercial in nature and the commercial character and usage of the building is not being substantially changed. 5. The parking ratios per the current Municipal Code may be applied. 6. The floor area calculations per the current Municipal Code may be applied. 7. The total developed floor area 11,810 square feet, not including the 755 square foot garage, of enclosed and unenciosed spaces, including the eight- foot deep deck areas on the upper level, will not be increased as a result of this PUD Amendment. The enclosed space will increase, but the total developed floor area of 11,810 square feet will remain the same. Therefore, /� TC Ord. 01-24 Page 4 of 9 the Minor PUD Amendment criteria, which does not permit more that a 10% increase in floor area, will not be violated. 8. Ordinance No. 07, Series of 1992, contained a provision authorizing the Town Planner to approve any use after the owner notifies Woodbridge Condominiums in writing of the usage request, and that after a response period by the association the Town Planner may approve or deny a usage request only if: a) The proposed use(s) is similar in character, both in terms of operations and related impacts on an individual and cumulative basis, to those uses specifically listed as a permitted use; and b) The exterior impacts associated with the use, such as traffic generation, parking needs, and generation of non-residential types of vehicles are not greater than would be the case for the specially listed uses. 9. Contrary to the above stipulations, Town Council finds that the Town of Snowmass Village alone should authorize the uses within buildings, and that because of the Town's referral process, public meeting and hearing notice requirements per the Municipal Code, adjacent owners are properly notified of such land use applications and have opportunity to present their concerns and comments before Planning Commission and Town Council meetings. 10. Town Council finds that the project has not adversely affected the neighborhood. The use restrictions and the recommended amendments to such use restrictions, per this resolution, incorporate a catering or food service business (subject to the previous conditional approval, the general public not being invited on the premises, and complying with all building, fire and health codes) and two property management companies (one being within the garage for maintenance-type equipment and vehicles). Such uses are generally consistent with commercial type operations, but they are still important to address per the previous concerns regarding the traffic, parking and related impacts of potential uses in the project. 11. The Town Council finds that the existing uses within the building per attached Exhibit A, as revised, are acceptable. 12. Town Council finds the circumstances relevant to the application request have changed since the original approval of 1988 and the most recent amendment of 1992 because the previous Town Council was very concerned about the associated traffic and parking impacts of the project. Over the past decade, the Town Council has observed the operating conditions of the project and finds that there are other similar uses not contained in the original and amended use list that would be appropriate at this location (see Exhibit A showing the amended use restrictions). -.04 go TC Ord.W-24 Page 5 of 8 13. The proposed amendments will not increase any of the maximum limits or decrease any of the minimum limits established in the Municipal Code. The proposed or existing uses are similar in nature to the commercial operations of the site. Any impacts are mitigated through measures such as the subdivision exemption and the location of new parking spaces, in addition to the restrictions outlined in attached Exhibit A and the conditional improvements reflected in Exhibit E, as deemed necessary at a later date. 14. The proposed amendment, because it is consistent with the commercial nature of this site, will not adversely affect the enjoyment of land abutting the Brush Creek Offices property. 15. The proposed amendment will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The existing uses are consistent with the intent of the commercial nature of this site. 16. Town Council finds that the arrangement of a new off-site trash facility is acceptable as outlined in the attached exchange agreement with Woodbridge Condominiums (Exhibit H). Section Two: Action. The Town Council hereby approves, subject to the conditions below in Section Three of this ordinance, the Minor PUD Amendment to the Brush Creek Offices SPA Land Use Plan, permitting deck enclosures and architectural design changes on the second level of the building; Said application also includes a subdivision exemption to adjust property line on the east and west sides of the property which involves location of new parking areas. Said Minor PUD Amendment, by this Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2001, shall also supercede Ordinance No. 07, Series of 2001, and the previous amendment to the Final Land Use Plan for the Brush Creek Office Specially Planned Area. Reference attached Exhibits C, D, E, F and G for details concerning this PUD Amendment. The amended land use and development parameters shall be subject to the following changes and the conditions below in Section Three: 1. The "Maximum Building Square Footage" is amended to read: 11,810 S.F., excluding roof overhangs and a 755 square foot garage. 2. "Minimum Number of Parking Spaces" is amended to read: 1:300 S.F. Gross Floor Area, excluding the 755 S.F. garage and all roof overhangs, subject to the garage providing two spaces for its vehicles/equipment but which shall not be available for parking by the general public. 3. Delete "Minimum Storage Square Footage 800 S. F." on" aw TC Ord. 01-24 Page 6 of 9 Section Three: Conditions. The approval shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. A parking sticker enforcement plan for the employees and owners of Brush Creek Offices shall be implemented to ensure that vehicles associated with the uses in the building remain only on the commercial property and not interfere with the parking provisions on adjacent properties; 2. An information sign shall be placed along the south curb line for eastbound traffic stating, "No commercial parking beyond this point' (Exhibit E), as deemed necessary by the Planning Director one year after completion of the deck enclosures. 3. An information sign shall be placed along the north curb line for westbound traffic stating, "No residential parking beyond this point' (Exhibit E), as deemed necessary by the Planning Director one year after completion of the deck enclosures. 4. Two additional parallel parking spaces shall be constructed along the west side of the loading and service drive (Exhibit E) to create 42 in lieu of 40 parking spaces, as deemed necessary by the Planning Director one year after completion of the deck enclosures. Such parking may be used by the general public. The two spaces within the garage shall not be available for use by the general public. 5. The two garage spaces shall not be used for public parking spaces, but shall serve as parking provided for the use within the garage, such as maintenance vehicles and equipment. 6. The materials and colors of the exterior finishes and roofing treatment for the deck enclosures shall match the existing building design. 7. The applicant shall release the current easement for the roadway and rededicate it per the current roadway alignment. 8. The above information shall be reviewed, and additional information may be required, by the Planning Director as part of the building permit application. The Planning Director may impose reasonable conditions, or refer the matter to the Town Council, as would be customary in connection with what the applicant may propose or the requirements of the Municipal Code in effect at that time. 9. The applicant shall deliver an amended and restated Minor PUD Amendment Land Use Plan, prior to the issuance of a building permit, in a form suitable for recording with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder which incorporates all land use and development parameters as per the subsequent Town Council _s(40- TC Ord. 01-24 Page 7 of 9 ordinance and conditions as well as identify the improvements and parking specified within the approvals. READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on First Reading on October 15, 2001 upon a motion by-Council Member , the second of Council Member and upon a vote of_ in favor and , against. READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, as amended, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on Second Reading on November 5, 2001 upon a motion by Council Member , the second of Council Member and upon a vote of_ in favor and _ opposed. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk TC Ord. 01-24 Page 8 of 9 Exhibit A. Land Use and Development Parameters Lot Area: 37,687 S.F. Maximum Building Ground Coverage: 12,300 S.F. Minimum Amount of Open Space: 25,385 S.F. Maximum Floor Area: 11,810 S.F., excluding roof overhangs and 755 square foot garage Minimum Garage Square Footage: 755 S.F. Minimum Number of Parking Spaces: 1:300 S.F. of gross floor area, excluding all roof overhang area, requiring 40 outside spaces and 2 spaces for the garage to be placed inside the garage but not available for parking by the general public. Maximum Building Height: 28 Feet Use Limitations: 1. Any use of the property which generates offensive noises, vibrations, smoke, dust, odors, heat, electrical interference, or glare beyond the property line shall be prohibited. In addition, no tenant of the building shall utilize the property for the storage of building materials, building equipment, or construction vehicles not to include pick-up trucks. 2. The garage shall only be used for the storage of vehicles of related to snow removal operations, property management equipment, or other property management maintenance-type operations. 3. There shall be no exterior commercial activity associated with any use of the property. 01SE GS TC Ord. 01-24 Page 9 of 9 4. With the above exceptions, the permitted uses for the Brush Creek Office Building may include: a) Accountants/bookkeepers; b) Real estate, appraisers, advertising agents, and insurance agents; c) Lawyers offices; d) Architects, engineers, and surveyors; e) Interior designers, art studio, photo studio; f) Physicians and dentist offices or clinics; g) Property management companies (limited to two such businesses, including the garage space); However, the garage shall be the only space permitted for the property management's maintenance-type equipment or vehicles; Such equipment or vehicles shall not be stored outside. h) Dressmaking, drapery work; i) One catering or food service business, which shall comply with the previous conditions of approval, shall not invite the general public on the premises, and shall comply with all building, fire and health codes; j) Conference services; k) Any use not specifically identified in this list may be allowed per the following procedures, which are similar to the provisions in Town Council Ordinance No. 07, Series of 1992, with the exception of having to notify and obtain comments from an adjacent property owner: The owner of the Brush Creek Offices (Offices at Snowmass) may submit to the Planning Director other businesses not on the list, but that are similar in character to the above listed uses. The Planning Director, without further notice, shall approve or deny the property owner's request. Approval shall only be granted if: 1. The proposed use(s) is similar in character, both in terms of operations and related impacts on an individual and cumulative basis, to those uses specifically listed as a permitted use; and 2. The exterior impacts associated with the use, such as traffic generation, parking needs, and generation of non-residential types of vehicles are not greater than would be the case for the specially listed uses. The decision of the Planning Director shall be the final action required. The Planning Director may refer a new use request to the Town Council, if there is a question as to whether such a use request is or is not similar in character to the above listed uses. 0051 4M o EXHIBIT B t Page 1 of 1 � o c k R \ \\ frl.od• to I rA I li o2 \ \ r c 0 \ i i S \ a 136 e. IL m o to ✓ �• so \ \ (,,r� upllil T. Michael Manchester Offices at Snowmass I� l'1' lH Associates. urnvululm xs L.v woodbAdg.Pd Up if 1111! f .• •. •. Snowmu.Villagc.ColaMe illil 1��)„ 1 l j EXHIBIT C i tb Page 1 of 1 n e S � � n 5� I ve \ \ I 6 � \ a � y � y � T. Michael Manchealer Of'f'ices at Snowrnass ill)H N, k Associates. ...ew+.e 2$L..�.w�ap.sa i il�l�, 'IiSS 6eow vfflmS 0.1.86 I11�II1 lll,; .. 1 EXHIBIT D Page 1 of 1 NO ly'�.,4pa L -A , ww�rm IOODDWDOS comwMil"W" . A PA ee.eS• �` OW-100,00t TO W1` oo lbw eboya b/t raa. �,, � OF 7 nryenwpr add � d a VMC64 AF SNOnUff L roHDOrwiDrs rWir Nenl ros /wr / Its., \� i ' r Toy wee' OR=SpAtz 1 / wy / rI /•N. / I I ' I GRAPHIC SCAIE �MrY/1 v�W, RAIN \ONA `\�\►� AA \` ��\`ice ` �``�a��•�``•�" '�`�\ �,I• � / \! fit.�_�c'.%`� ��. 1 J + 2:IaL"� Lj � 1 • :�� / Offices Snowmass r � 1d EXHIBIT F Page 1 or 1 i I I I I I I I I 1 f i I ' I tR t t t I i T. Michael Manchester offices at Ss%masS ^ k Aaeocial 'f, .�.e ...... . rrrrrrrrr iE\f 1 j k f EXHIBIT H EXCHANGE AGREEMENT = Page I of 5 THIS AGREEMENT is made this 10'h day of April, 2001, by and between WOODBRIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. a Colorado non-profit corporation (hereinafter "Woodbridge") and BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP, a Colorado general partnership (hereinafter "The Offices"). RECITALS A. Woodbridge and The Offices are the owners of adjacent property in the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado. B. Woodbridge and The Offices desire to exchange portions of their respective properties and to address other matters relating to the future use and operation thereof. C. The Exchange Parcels are identified on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. It is the intent of the parties that the Exchange Parcel I will be conveyed by The Offices to Woodbridge and that Exchange Parcel 2 will be conveyed by Woodbridge to The Offices, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the making and performance of the mutual promises and covenants herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Land Exchange. Woodbridge will convey to The Offices the land area identified on Exhibit A as Exchange Parcel 2. In exchange, The Offices will convey to Woodbridge the land area identified on Exhibit A as Exchange Parcel 1. All use of the existing and prospective parking within the land area owned by The Offices shall comply with the terms of Town of Snowmass Village Ordinances No. 19 Series of 1988 and No. 29, Series of 1989 as they currently exist or as they may be amended in the future. The exchange of parcels will require the approval by the Town as a subdivision exemption. The Offices will undertake and use their best efforts to secure such an exemption and will pay all costs and expenses associated with an application for subdivision exemption. Other than the foregoing, each party will be responsible for its own costs associated with the land exchange provided for in this Agreement. Any development by The Offices of Exchange Parcel 2 for parking will be undertaken in such a manner as to minimize disturbance to existing cottonwood trees and The Offices shall provide Woodbridge with copy of a landscape plan which satisfies this requirement prior to any development. 2. Walkwav/Easement. The Offices will grant permission to Woodbridge to install a short piece of sidewalk connecting two portions of stairways used for access to Buildings 1 and 2 located to the east of the office building as shown on the Exhibit A. The Offices will also grant any easement necessary to Woodbridge for the continued use of existing walkways and stairways. Woodbridge will provide Tire Offices with it release of liability and indemnification and will have the casement area included in its common area §� 1(4 NOV EXHIBIT H I Pape 2 of 5 liability insurance coverage. As long as the easement remains in effect, Woodbridge will be responsible for maintenance and snow removal thereon. 3. Screening. The Offices will design and install a permanent screen around the rooftop air handling units. The Offices shall submit to Woodbridge the specifications regarding the proposed screening of the rooftop air handling units for Woodbridge's approval in conjunction with the execution of this Agreement. Such specifications shall include a graphical representation of the structure as built including color and type of material used. This work may be performed in conjunction with any approved improvement to the Property or by August 31, 2001, whichever is earlier. 4. The Property's Dumpster. The Offices will vacate, demolish and remove its dumpster enclosure within 45 days of the date of the Exchange Agreement. 5. Dumpster Shed Sharing and Improvements. The Offices and Woodbridge shall share the dumpster located due east of the Property and on the north side ofAJFP8r--/0a£/z Woodbridge Road("the Dumpster 1. Two-thirds of the costs and expenses associated with the Dumpster's use, improvement, maintenance and trash collection shall be borne by Woodbridge and one-third shall be bome by The Offices. Any costs associated with the improvement of the Dumpster location shall be approved in advance by The Offices. Such Dumpster sharing arrangement shall cease if and when The Offices construct a new garbage receptacle upon its property, by mutual agreement between the parties or if in The Offices sole judgment, use of the Dumpster becomes impractical. Woodbridge shall place no additional restrictions or limitations beyond those required by the then current Snowmass Village Land Use and Building codes on the construction of a new garbage receptacle on The Office property. 6. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. 7. Time is of the essence of and each and every provision of this Agreement. 8. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 9. It is expressly understood and agreed that Woodbridge and The Offices shall each be entirely responsible for the payment of any attorneys' fees incurred by each part relating to the legal services furnished to such party in connection with the transactions contemplated herein; provided, however, that in the event of any litigation arising out of this Agreement or a breach of this Agreement, the defaulting or non-prevailing parry shall pay, in addition to any award or judgment, the prevailing party's reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses. 10. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts with the same effect as if all parties had signed the same documents. All such counterparts shall be EXC'IIANGr AGREEMENT 41 40 —2— ----------- --------------- -------------- EXHIBIT H Page 3 of 5 construed together and shall constitute one and the same instrument. The parties further agree that facsimile signatures upon this Agreement shall be binding and of the same effect as original signatures. 11. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. WOODBRIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. By John B. Srofe, President BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP By Its EXCHANGE AGREEMEN-r 3-- -P=�gff j \ EXIIANDE PARCEL 1 LLI 9L MANGE PARCEL 2I /n, E; I \\. // IN SIDEWALK A3 \ / .J m Ll / 1 • 1 1 I •` 1 , ------------- --------------- -- T? �WW •J M EaaC . !]; r�CJi:51%s5 urn. ---- --------- EXHIBIT H Page 5 of 5 construed together and shall constitute one and the same instr=ent. The parties futther Agree that INSIMllt SlgnatunS upon this Agreement shall ba bindinr and of the smile effect as original si8natures. 1 1. This Agreement shalt Inure to the beneilt of and be binding upon the patties and their reapecdve heir::,successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed thla Agmetnent as ofthe dry and year flrat abnva written, W001)B maE WvDDMD%M YM ASSOCIATION.INC. By n B. Srofe,Presid BRUSH GREEK OPFICI s PARTNMBHIP By Its ' VOW $Xf:IiANUSAUREE,MENT --r+— SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 7 SERIES OF 1992 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL LAND USE PLAN FOR THE BRUSH CREEK OFFICE SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village approved the Final Land Use Plan for the Brush Creek Office Specially Planned Area in Ordinance No. 19 , Series of 1988 ; and WHEREAS, the Brush Creek Offices Partnership has made application to the Town to amend the provisions of the Land Use Plan approved by Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1988 the use limitations described in the Exhibit A thereto; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed amendment and recommended approval subject to a limitation on the number of property management companies permitted and a provision stating specific procedures for determining whether a use not specifically identified in the permitted use list is generally consistent with the intent of the use list; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held in accordance with notice given as required by the Land Use Code, on April 6, 1992, to receive public comment; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed the proposed application and has made the following findings: 1. In 1988, when the Final Land Use Plan was approved, the Town Council was very concerned about the traffic, parking and. related impacts of potential uses in the project. 2. In order to ensure that impacts would be minimized and that traffic, parking and the exterior characteristics of the uses would be consistent with the adjacent residential neighborhood, the Town Council required a very detailed and limited use list for the project; and 3 . The Town Council finds that the limited use restrictions may adversely affect the viability of this project. Because of the nature of small businesses in Snowmass Village, many maintain several functions, making it difficult to show complete consistency with the limited . use restrictions. 4 . The Town Council finds that the project has not adversely affected the neighborhood, but new use restrictions that are consistent with the restrictions approved in Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1988 are still important. 5. The Town Council finds the circumstances relevant to the request but have changed since the original approval because the Town Council was very concerned about the associated traffic and parking impacts of the project. Over the past two years, the Town Council has experienced ' the operating conditions of the project and finds that there are other similar uses not contained in the TC Ord 92-7 Page 2 original use . list that would be appropriate at this location. 6. The proposed amendments will not increase any * of the maximum limits or decrease any of the minimum limits established in Section 10. 030 of the Land Use Code. The proposed uses are similar in nature to the originally approved and, therefore, the impacts are mitigated through measures already approved in Ordinance No. 19, 1988. 7. The proposed amendment, because it is consistent with the uses originally approved, will not adversely affect the enjoyment of land abutting the Brush Creek Offices property. 8. The proposed amendment will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new uses are consistent with the intent of the originally approved use limitations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Action The Town Council hereby approves the following amendments to Exhibit A of the Final Land Use Plan for the Brush Creek Offices Specially Planned Area: Paragraph 1, Use..Limitations, is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Any use of the property which generates offensive noises, vibrations, smoke, dust, odors, heat, electrical interference, or glare beyond the property line shall be prohibited. In addition, no tenant of the building shall utilize the property for the storage of building materials, building equipment, or construction vehicles not to include pick-up trucks. Paragraph 5, Use Limitations, is hereby amended to read as follows: 5. With the above exceptions, the permitted use for the Brush Creek Offices may include accountants/bookkeepers, lawyers,. architects, engineers, physicians and other medical professionals, dentists, advertising agents, appraisers, surveyors, real estate, interior designers, conference services, art studios, photo studios., dressmakers or seamstress, drapery works, insurance agents, financial advisors, travel agents, mortgage loan companies, one property management company, computer services and the administrative, management and/or bookkeeping/accounting offices of any business. The owner of the Brush Creek Offices may submit to the Town Planner other businesses not on the list but that are ow similar in character to the above listed uses. Before the Town Planner may approve any use, the owner of the Brush Creek Offices shall notify the Woodbridge Condominium Association TC Ord 92-7 Page 3 ("Association") in writing of the request. The written notice shall inform the "Association" of the specific nature of the proposed use and that the "Association" shall have up to fifteen (15) days from the date notice is mailed, known as the response period, to provide comments regarding the proposal to the Town Planner. The owner of the Brush Creek Offices shall submit to the Town Planner a certificate of mailing to the "Association" which shall state the date of the mailing and a copy of the information mailed. At the end of the response period, or sooner if the "Association" waives objection in writing, the Town Planner, without further notice, shall approve or deny the property owner's request. Approval shall only be granted if: 1. The proposed use(s) is similar in character, both in terms of operations and related impacts on an individual and cumulative basis, to those uses specifically listed as a permitted use, and 2. The exterior impacts associated with the use, such as traffic generation, parking needs, and generation of non- residential types of vehicles are not greater than would be the case for the specially listed uses. The decision of the Town Planner shall be the final action required unless an appeal is filed pursuant to this section. The Town Planner shall provide notice to the owner of the Brush Creek Offices and the "Association" within three (3) days of the response period. The applicant or any other party in interest may appeal a decision by the Town Planner to the Town Council provided said appeal is filed with the Town Planner within ten (10) days of the decision by the Town Planner. An appeal will be scheduled at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Town Council for its consideration. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on first reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 16th day of March, 1992 by a vote of 6 to 0. Council member Unger absent. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on second reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass village, Colorado on the 6th day of Apr jJ,,,,,�1992 by a vote of 6 to 0. Council member Unger was absent. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE S:OFFICIAL-. SF L RICHARD G. WALL, Mayor AMBER HARMON, Town Clerk own --------------- --------------- iTOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 32 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE MINOR PUD AMENDMENT FOR THE BRUSH CREEK OFFICE (OFFICES AT SNOWMASS) SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA LAND USE PLAN AND PERMITTING DECK ENCLOSURES AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CHANGES ON THE SECOND LEVEL OF THE BUILDING. SAID APPLICATION ALSO INCLUDES A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION TO ADJUST PROPERTY LINES ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE PROPERTY WHICH INVOLVES LOCATION OF NEW PARKING AREAS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1988 ("Ordinance 19") granted Stage II Land Use Plan approval for the Brush Creek Office Building located within the SPA-1 Specially Planned Area zone district; and WHEREAS, said ordinance specified the intended land use and development parameters for that building, as described within Exhibit A of that ordinance. Such parameters specified a gross square footage of 11,050 square feet, including a minimum 755 square foot garage and 800 square feet of storage space. The initial parking requirement was 41 spaces with a condition that Council could require four additional spaces within five years; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, proposed the amendment of the Construction Management Plan of the LUP, by reducing the parking requirement to 36 spaces with an additional four more spaces in the future at Council's discretion. However, no plans could be located and the amendment was not recorded; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 07, Series of 1992, further amended the LUP by clarifying and expanding the use limitations, and providing notification of, and comments by, the Woodbridge Condominium Association for future changes in use. Such changes also clarified the restricted uses to prohibit the storage of building materials, building equipment, or construction vehicles not to include pick-up trucks; and WHEREAS, Brush Creek Office Partnership ("BCOP"), the current landowner, submitted a Minor PUD Amendment requesting approval of a Minor PUD Amendment to amend the Brush Creek Offices SPA Land Use Plan to permit the enclosure of the upper level roof decks, including architectural and roof modifications. Said application also requests a subdivision exemption which PC Reso. 01-32 Page 2 of 9 modifies the location of the east and west property lines on the property (Exhibit D), involving the location of six new parking spaces (Exhibit C). The application also proposes the connection of a walkway from the Woodbridge Condominium site; and WHEREAS, Brush Creek Office Partnership ("BCOP"), the current landowner, is requesting reduction of the parking ratio from 1:235 to 1:300 as currently established under the Municipal Code for commercial developments; and WHEREAS, Brush Creek Office Partnership ("BCOP"), the current landowner, is also requesting that the current upper level decks, due to their width of eight feet, be included as part of the floor area versus the previously approved plans which excluded the exterior decks from the floor area calculation; and WHEREAS, a similar proposal was submitted in 1996, via processing of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1996, to increase the maximum building square footage, decrease the parking ratio and delete the storage requirement. Due to opposition from adjacent owners and the Planning Commission, Town Council did take action upon'the ordinance; and WHEREAS, the current floor area within the building, including the second level of unenclosed deck space, is 11,810 square feet. The developed floor area is currently occupied by a real estate developer, three architectural firms, a food service company (within the previous 800 square foot storage area), two builders, a realtor, a landscaping company, and a property management company. In addition to the 11,810 square feet, a snow removal/maintenance company occupies the garage space of 775 square feet; Parking on the site currently is at 38 spaces, not including the two garage spaces (Exhibit B); and WHEREAS, such enclosure of all of the decks, which are eight feet in depth, will expand the enclosed (emphasis added) square footage of floor area by 12.5%; and WHEREAS, a public meeting was held on October 3, 2001 by the Planning Commission to consider the application, staff recommendations and receive public input concerning the application. mom i PC Reso. 01.32 Pape 3 of 9 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Findings. The Planning Commission finds as follows: 1. That the application submission and public notification requirements, as specified within Section 16A-5-390 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"), have been satisfied. 2. Circumstances relevant to the 1988 SPA Land Use Plan established by Ordinance 19 have changed or were unknown at the time of its adoption. 3. The proposal is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire SPA and does not affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across the street from the property in question or the public interest. 4. The amendments will not alter the essential character of the locality, since the existing uses, the changes to the permitted uses are commercial in nature and the commercial character and usage of the building is not being substantially changed. 5. The parking ratios per the current Municipal Code may be applied. 6. The floor area calculation per the current Municipal Code may be applied. 7. The total developed floor area 11,810 square feet, not including the 755 square foot garage, of enclosed and unenclosed spaces, including the eight-foot deep deck areas on the upper level, will not be increased as a result of this PUD Amendment. The enclosed space will increase, but the total developed floor area of 11,810 square feet will remain the same. Therefore, the Minor PUD Amendment criteria, which does not permit more that a 10% increase in floor area, will not be violated. 8. Ordinance No. 07, Series of 1992, contained a provision authorizing the Town Planner to approve any use after the owner notifies Woodbridge Condominiums in writing of the usage request, and that after a response period by the association the Town Planner may approve or deny a usage request only if: --------------------------------------------- PC Reso. 01-32 Page 4 of 9 a) The proposed use(s) is similar in character, both in terms of operations and related impacts on an individual and cumulative basis, to those uses specifically listed as a permitted use; and b) The exterior impacts associated with the use, such as traffic generation, parking needs, and generation of non-residential types of vehicles are not greater that would be the case for the specially listed uses. 9. Contrary to the above stipulations, Planning Commission finds that the Town of Snowmass Village alone should authorize the uses within buildings, and that because of the Town's referral process, public meeting and hearing notice requirements per the Municipal Code, adjacent owners are properly notified of such land use applications and have opportunity to present their concerns and comments before Planning Commission and Town Council meetings. 10.. Planning Commission finds that the project has not adversely affected the neighborhood. The use restrictions and the recommended amendments to such use restrictions, per this resolution, incorporate a catering or food service business (subject to the previous conditional approval, the general.public not being invited on the premises, and complying with all building, fire and health codes) and two property management companies (one being within the garage for maintenance-type equipment and vehicles). Such uses seem generally consistent with commercial type operations, but they are still important to address per the previous concerns regarding the traffic, parking and related impacts of potential uses in the project. 11. The Planning Commission finds that the existing uses within the building per attached Exhibit A, as revised, are acceptable. 12. Planning Commission finds the circumstances relevant to the application request have changed since the original approval of 1988 and the most recent amendment of 1992 because the Town Council was very concerned about the associated traffic and parking impacts of the project. Over the past decade, the Planning Commission has experienced the operating conditions of the project and finds that there are other similar uses not contained in the original and amended use list that would be appropriate at this location (see Exhibit A showing the amended use restrictions). PC Reso. 01-32 Page 5 of 9 13. The proposed amendments will not increase any of the maximum limits or decrease any of the minimum limits established in the Municipal Code. The proposed or existing uses are similar in nature to the commercial operations of the site. Any impacts are mitigated through measures such as the subdivision exemption and the location of new parking spaces, in addition to the restrictions outlined in attached Exhibit A and the conditional improvements reflected in Exhibit E, as deemed necessary at a later date. 14. The proposed amendment, because it is consistent with the commercial nature of this site, will not adversely affect the enjoyment of land abutting the Brush Creek Offices property. 15. The proposed amendment will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The existing uses are consistent with the intent of the commercial nature of this site. 16. Planning Commission finds that the arrangement of a new off-site trash facility is acceptable as outlined in the attached exchange agreement with Woodbridge Condominiums (Exhibit H). Section Two: Action. The Planning Commission hereby approves, subject to the conditions below in Section Three of this resolution, the Minor PUD Amendment to the Brush Creek Offices SPA Land Use Plan, permitting deck enclosures and architectural design changes on the second level of the building; Said application also includes a subdivision exemption to adjust property line on the east and west sides of the property which involves location of new parking areas. Reference attached Exhibits C, D, E, F and G for details. The amended land use and development parameters shall be subject to the following changes and the conditions below in Section Three: 1. The "Maximum Building Square Footage" is amended to read: 11,810 S.F., excluding roof overhangs and a 755 square foot garage. 2. "Minimum Number of Parking Spaces" is amended to read: 1:300 S.F. Gross Floor Area, excluding the 755 S.F. garage and all roof overhangs, subject to the garage providing two spaces for its vehicles/equipment but which shall not be available for parking by the general public. 3. Delete "Minimum Storage Square Footage 800 S. F." fig ' PC Reso. 01-32 I Page 6 of 9 Section Three: Conditions. The approval shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. A parking sticker enforcement plan for the employees and owners of Brush Creek Offices shall be implemented to ensure that vehicles associated with the uses in the building remain only on the commercial property and not interfere with the parking provisions on adjacent properties; 2. An information sign shall be placed along the south curb line for eastbound traffic stating, "No commercial parking beyond this point' (Exhibit E), as deemed necessary by the Planning Director one year after completion of the deck enclosures. 3. An information sign shall be placed along the north curb line for westbound traffic stating, "No residential parking beyond this point' (Exhibit E), as deemed necessary by the Planning Director one year after completion of the deck enclosures. 4. Two additional parallel parking spaces shall be constructed along the west side of the loading and service drive (Exhibit E) to create 42 in lieu of 40 parking spaces, as deemed necessary by the Planning Director one year after completion of the deck enclosures. Such parking may be used by the general public. The two spaces within the garage shall not be available for use by the general public. 5. The two garage spaces shall not be used for public parking spaces, but shall serve as parking provided for the use within the garage, such as maintenance vehicles and equipment. 6. The materials and colors of the exterior finishes and roofing treatment for the deck enclosures shall match the existing building design. 7. The applicant shall release the current easement for the roadway and rededicate it per the current roadway alignment. 8. The above information shall be reviewed, and additional information may be required, by the Planning Director as part of the building permit application. The Planning Director may impose reasonable conditions, or refer the matter to the Town Council, as would be customary in connection with what the applicant may propose or the requirements of the Municipal Code in effect at that time. PC Reso. 0132 Page 7 of 9 9. The applicant shall deliver an amended and restated Mirior PUD Amendment Land Use Plan, prior to the issuance of a building permit, in a form suitable for recording with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder which incorporates all land use and development parameters as per the subsequent Town Council ordinance and conditions as well as identify the improvements and parking specified within the approvals. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of October, 2001, on the motion of Planning Commissioner Boineau and the second of Planning Commissioner Faurer, by a vote of 4 in favor and 0 against (Commissioners Huggins, Benson, and Fridstein were absent). TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION t Doug Faurer, Ictinq Chairman ATTEST: c her clntire, Planning Commission Secretary OA I PC Reso. 01.32 Page 8 of 9 Exhibit A. Land Use and Development Parameters Lot Area: 37,687 S.F. Maximum Building Ground Coverage: 12,300 S.F. Minimum Amount of Open Space: 25,385 S.F. Maximum Floor Area: 11,810 S.F., excluding roof overhangs and 755 square foot garage Minimum Garage Square Footage: 755 S.F. Minimum Number of Parking Spaces: 1:300 S.F. of gross floor area, excluding all roof overhang area, requiring 40 outside spaces and 2 spaces for the garage to be placed inside the garage but not available for parking by the general public. Maximum Building Height: 28 Feet Use Limitations: 1. Any use of the property which generates offensive noises, vibrations, smoke, dust, odors, heat, electrical interference, or glare beyond the property line shall be prohibited. In addition, no tenant of the building shall utilize the property for the storage of building materials, building equipment, or construction vehicles not to include pick-up trucks. 2. The garage shall only be used for the storage of vehicles of related to snow removal operations, property management equipment, or other property management maintenance-type operations. 3. There shall be no exterior commercial activity associated with any use of the property. �I PC Reso.0`1-32 Page 9 of 9 4. With the above exceptions, the permitted uses for the Brush Creek Office Building may include: a) Accountants/bookkeepers; b) Real estate, appraisers, advertising agents, and insurance agents; c) Lawyers offices; d) Architects, engineers, and surveyors; e) Interior designers, art studio, photo studio; f) Physicians and dentist offices or clinics; g) Property management companies (limited to two such businesses, including the garage space); However, the garage shall be the only space permitted for the property management's maintenance-type equipment or vehicles; Such equipment or vehicles shall not be stored outside. h) Dressmaking, drapery work; i) One catering or food service business, which shall comply with the previous conditions of approval, shall not invite the general public on the premises, and shall comply with all building, fire and health codes; j) Conference services; k) Any use not specifically identified in this list may be allowed per the following procedures, which are similar to the provisions in Town Council Ordinance No. 07, Series of 1992, with the exception of having to notify and obtain comments from an adjacent property owner: The owner of the Brush Creek Offices (Offices at Snowmass) may submit to the Planning Director other businesses not on the list, but that are similar in character to the above listed uses. The Planning Director, without further notice, shall approve or deny the property owner's request. Approval shall only be granted if: 1. The proposed use(s) is similar in character, both in terms of operations and related impacts on an individual and cumulative basis, to those uses specifically listed as a permitted use; and 2. The exterior impacts associated with the use, such as traffic generation, parking needs, and generation of non-residential types of vehicles are not greater than would be the case for the specially listed uses. The decision of the Planning Director shall be the final action required. The Planning Director may refer a new use request to the Town Council, if there is a question as to whether such a use request is or is not similar in character to the above listed uses. ------------ --------------- STOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 43 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR THE BRUSH CREEK OFFICES (OFFICES AT SNOWMASS) TO EXCHANGE AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF PROPERTY CONTAINING 4,629 SQUARE FEET BETWEEN THE BRUSH CREEK OFFICES (OFFICES AT SNOWMASS) AND THE WOODBRIDGE CONDOMINIUMS. WHEREAS, Brush Creek Offices Partnership ('BCOP"), is the owner of certain land commonly referred to as the Brush Creek Offices or Offices at Snowmass parcel adjacent to Brush Creek Road northeasterly of its intersection with Woodbridge Road; and WHEREAS, the BCOP submitted an application on August 1, 2001, concurrent with a Minor PUD Amendment for Brush Creek Offices (Offices at Snowmass) requesting to exchange an equal amount of land containing 4,629 square feet with the adjacent property owner, the Woodbridge Condominium Association, as described in Exhibit A, in order to resolve the existing enroachments on the east side of the property and to add new parking spaces on the west side of the property; and WHEREAS, the BCOP is requesting subdivision exemption approval pursuant to Section 16A-5-500 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Code") to permit them exchange an equal amount of property with the adjacent property owner, the Woodbridge Condominium Association; and WHEREAS, Section 16-204(a)(3) permits conveying title and/or fulfilling legal obligations, when no development will result thereafter without subdivision or planned unit development approval, without requiring a detailed and expensive subdivision platting process; and WHEREAS, the subdivision exemption does not require published, mailed and posted notice pursuant to Section 16A-5-60 of the Code. Compliance with published, mailed and posted notice for a public hearing concerning the accompanying Minor PUD Amendment for Brush Creek Offices (Offices at Snowmass) was held before the Town Council on November 5, 2001 to receive public comment; and WHEREAS, the Town Council reviewed and approved the concurrent Minor PUD Amendment application pursuant to Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2001; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and Town Council have also reviewed the subdivision exemption application and heard the recommendation of the Town Staff. -�3- TC Reso. 01-43 Page 2 of 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Findings. Based upon the information submitted and testimony in the record, the Town Council finds as follows: 1. The applicant and the adjoining property owner, the Woodbridge Condominium Association have consented to the subdivision exemption per the attached letters dated July 23 and July 20, 2001, respectively (Exhibit B) and the Exchange Agreement (Exhibit C). 2. The application was submitted and all public notification requirements have been satisfied in accordance with Section 16A-5-60 of the Code. 3. The exchange of an equal amount of land containing 4,629 square feet between BCOP and the Woodbridge Condominium Association may be exempted from the terms of the subdivision regulations and that there will be no further development of the parcel(s)without Subdivision or Planned Unit Development ("PUD") review. 4. That the request is consistent with the Review Standards for granting a subdivision exemption contained in Section 16A-5-530 of the Code. Section Two: Action. The Town Council hereby grants subdivision exemption approval allowing BCOP to exchange an equal amount of property containing 4,629 square feet with the adjoining property owner, the Woodbridge Condominium Association, as described within Exhibit A, as being exempted from the terms of the subdivision regulations. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on the motion of Council member and the second of Council member by a vote of_ in favor and _ against, on the 5th day of November, 2001. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION TC Reso. 01.43 A part of Tract 42, Section 4 Township JO Souta, Page 1 of 2 Range 86 Ifest of the 60 Principal Meridian, according to the Supplemental Plat for said Township and Range approved May 8, 1833, more particular4r described as follows: Beginning at a point from which Angle Point J of Tract 42 bears N46004747 a distance of 1320.68 feet and the Northeasterly Angle Point of Parcel A bears N54'50'04"r a distance of 248.18 feet; thence S25.55'29"E for a distance of 181.38 feet on the Western boundary line of Parcel A to a point on the green belt line; thence S60'32'00"If for a distance of 111.78 feet on said green belt line to an angle point on said green belt line; thence 573033'00"If for a distance of 123.92 feet on said green belt line to a point on the eastern boundary line of Parcel B; thence N00'00'00'W for a distance of 210.00 feet on said Eastern boundary line of Parcel B to an angle point in said boundary; thence N66'00'16"E for a distance of 59.16 feet on the boundary line of Parcel B to an angle point in said boundary; thence N77"40100 1E for a distance of 85.22 -feet on said boundary of Parcel B to the Point of Beginning Said parcel contains 37',687 square feet. ANA Beginning at the Southwest corner of said parcel; thence N46.24'18"If for a distance of 29.66 feet; thence N43.10'42"If for a distance of 80.00 feet, thence N46.24'J2"E for a distance of 55.97 feet; thence N00.00'00"If for a distance. of 62.83 feet, thence S89'2!'08"B for a distance of 22.00 feet to a point on the )test line of said parcel, said line also being the Easterly boundary of Parcel B; thence S00.00100"E on the Easterly line of said Parcel B for a distance of 124.46 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 4,629 square feet, more or less. LM Beginning at the Northeast corner of said parcel; thence S26066'29"$ for a distance of 181.38 feet on the Eastern boundary line•of said parcel, said line also being the westerly boundary line of Parcel A to a point on the Northerly green belt line, thence S60.32100"lf for a distance of 20.21 feet on said green belt line; thence N26.65'29"lf for a distance of 168.5) feet, thence N60'45'51"If for a distance of 78.64 feet to the Northerly angle point of said tract; thence N77'40'00"B on the North line of said parcel for a distance of 85.22 on said boundary line feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 4,629 square feet, more or less. 6011WO000 EXHIBIT A TC Reso. 01-43 Page 2 of 2 L 0 l ' NN A PA rypDlplDD6 DOYIXNYi � �a TOWp rnt10�p0K Y o�� �\ ` OF 7 ,� ilDVa biy ` *15 a IOODgBlDOi L4' CONDOMWLW 8� da - �t -- / * NA Comm 4 / of. WSW 0 al / R. L I • onAetnc scxu � y ' t / IMnw1 I Brash Crack OfficesPartnership EXHIBIT B 361 Forest Avenue,Suite 200 TC Reso. 01.43 . Lagtmn Beach,Califamis 92651 Page 1 of 2 July 23,2001 Town of Snow==Villago Planamg Department Alm: Cbris Comad and Tim Weh1strohm 016 genes Road Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 Dear Chris sad T= As the General Partner of Brush Creek Offices Part= P, I Hereby Am" Ooze Freilicb, Myler,Lcitner&Carlisle,and T.Michael Manchester&Associates,Inc.,to submit and process the I application for modification of the SPA Plan for the Offices at Snowmass parcel and for a subdivision exemption in the form which accompanies this letter.The names and relevant contacts at these two Earns are as follows: IT.Michael Manchester&Associates,Ina T.Michael Manchester and Jeff Dahl I PA Box 6573 25 Lower Woodbridge Read Snowmass Village.Colorado 81615 I 970-923-4411 Frailiclt,Myler,Leftner&Carlisle David J.Myler and E.Micbael Hof = 1 106 South UM Street, Suite 202 Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-920-1018 Thank you for your consideration in this Application,if you have any questions or require airy additional inforumdon,please do not hesitate to contact me. Very tatty yours, BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHM By Joe Hanauer General Partner No ----------------------------------------- Woodbridge Condominium Amociadou EXHIBIT B 100 Elbert 1A Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 TC Reso. 0143 Page 2 of 2 MY A, 2001 Town of Snowmass Village Plaaniug Department Atur.Cbru Conrad and Jim Wohlstrohm 016 Kerns Road 3aowmm Village,Colorado 81615 Dear Cbris and Jim: As the President of the Woodbridge Condominium Asso"041 hereby i wdw6ze Frvilich, Myles,Lcitoe:&Carlisle,and 7.Michael Manchester k Associates,Inc.,to subs dt and process tt e app9cadon for subdivision emmmption which eccompenles this letter. The vanes and relevam com u at that two firms me,u follows: T. Michael Manchester do Associates,I= T. %ficbaal Maaaheatar and Jeff Dahl P.O.Box 6573 25 L.owoc Woodbridge hoed Snowmass Village,Colxado$1615 970-923.4411 I Frailleb,Mylar.Left=des Carlisle David J.Myle r and S Michael Hoffman 106 South UM Sheet,SUlm 202 AVM Colorado 81611 970.920.1018 Thank you for your consideration in this Application,if you bave any qt esdcros or rtquire any addidood information,pie ue do not huh m to eomact me. Vey tniy yours, WOODItRMOE CONDOH NIUM ASSOCLATION,IN 2. Sy. Jo S:ofe rtsiderR EXHIBIT C TC Reso. 01.43 EXCHANGE AGREEMENT Page 1 of s THIS AGREEMENT is made this 10'" day of April, 2001, by and between WOODBRIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. a Colorado non-profit corporation (hereinafter "Woodbridge") and BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP, a Colorado general partnership (hereinafter"The Offices"). RECITALS A. Woodbridge and The Offices are the owners of adjacent property in the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado. B. Woodbridge and The Offices desire to exchange portions of their respective properties and to address other matters relating to the future use and operation thereof. C. The Exchange Parcels are identified on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. It is the intent of the parties that the Exchange Parcel 1 will be conveyed by The Offices to Woodbridge and that Exchange Parcel 2 will be conveyed by Woodbridge to The Offices, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the making and performance of the mutual promises and covenants herein, the parties agree as follows: I. Land Exchange. Woodbridge will convey to The Offices the land area identified on Exhibit A as Exchange Parcel 2. In exchange, The Offices will convey to Woodbridge the land area identified on Exhibit A as Exchange Parcel 1. All use of the existing and prospective parking within the land area owned by The Offices shall comply with the terms of Town of Snowmass Village Ordinances No. 19 Series of 1988 and No. 29, Series of 1989 as they currently exist or as they may be amended in the future. The exchange of parcels will require the approval by the Town as a subdivision exemption. The Offices will undertake and use their best efforts to secure such an exemption and will pay all costs and expenses associated with an application for subdivision exemption. Other than the foregoing, each party will be responsible for its own costs associated with the land exchange provided for in this Agreement. Any development by The Offices of Exchange Parcel 2 for parking will be undertaken in such a manner as to minimize disturbance to existing cottonwood trees and The Offices shall provide Woodbridge with copy of a landscape plan which satisfies this requirement prior to any development. 2. Walkway/Easement. The Offices will grant permission to Woodbridge to install a short piece of sidewalk connecting two portions of stairways used for access to Buildings 1 and 2 located to the east of the office building as shown on the Exhibit A. The Offices will also grant any easement necessary to Woodbridge for the continued use of existing walkways and stairways. Woodbridge will provide The Offices with a release of liability and indemnification and will have the casement urea included in its common area 9?to - ---------------------- EXHIBIT C TC Reso. 01-43 Page 2 of 5 liability insurance coverage. As long as the easement remains in effect, Woodbridge will be responsible for maintenance and snow removal thereon. 3. Screening. The Offices will design and install a permanent screen around the rooftop air handling units. The Offices shall submit to Woodbridge the specifications regarding the proposed screening of the rooftop air handling units for Woodbridge's approval in conjunction with the execution of this Agreement. Such specifications shall include a graphical representation of the structure as built including color and type of material used. This work may be performed in conjunction with any approved improvement to the Property or by August 31, 2001, whichever is earlier. 4. The Property's Dumpster. The Offices will vacate, demolish and remove its dumpster enclosure within 45 days of the date of the Exchange Agreement. 5. Dumpster Shed Sharing and Improvements. The Offices and Woodbridge shall share the dumpster located due east of the Property and on the north side of TTY hAw6? Woodbridge Road ("the Dumpster'J. Two-thirds of the costs and expenses associated with the Dumpster's use, improvement, maintenance and trash collection shall be borne by Woodbridge and one-third shall be borne by The Offices. Any costs associated with the improvement of the Dumpster location shall be approved in advance by The Offices. Such Dumpster sharing arrangement shall cease if and when The Offices construct a new garbage receptacle upon its property, by mutual agreement between the parties or if in The Offices sole judgment, use of the Dumpster becomes impractical. Woodbridge shall place no additional restrictions or limitations beyond those required by the then current Snowmass Village Land Use and Building codes on the construction of a new garbage receptacle on The Office property. 6. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. 7. Time is of the essence of and each and every provision of this Agreement. 8. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 9. It is expressly understood and agreed that Woodbridge and The Offices shall each be entirely responsible for the payment of any attorneys' fees incurred by each part relating to the legal services furnished to such party in connection with the transactions contemplated herein; provided, however, that in the event of any litigation arising out of this Agreement or a breach of this Agreement, the defaulting or non-prevailing party shall pay, in addition to any award or judgment, the prevailing party's reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses. 10. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts with the same effect as if all parties had signed the same documents. All such counterparts shall be EXCHANGE AGREEMENT —2— -go- EXHIBIT C TC Reso. 01-43 Page 3 of 5 construed together and shall constitute one and the same instrument. The parties further agree that facsimile signatures upon this Agreement shall be binding and of the same effect as original signatures. 11. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. WOODBRIDGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. By John B. Srofe, President BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP By A Its GXCHANGr AGRUNUN'f ago EXHANGE PARCEL 1 N. \� U Y n / �T ! h �• % LOO ' • L /I i , \ I \\ I • W U a �• fib. / � \ / � i�/.. EXHANOE PARCEL 2I /^' �y I \`, // NEW SIDEWALK . \ / —r - / J.a / \\ ' ... t. C ------. - _ ,• , ice{..._ -� !.. 1�.� I ' 1 � I —--- ---------- - - f! WW-V m E: c . l3: r�G��:51i5 APP. 14'01 a .o .v•�, - • _ EXHIBIT C TC Reso. 01-43 Pape 5 of 5 construed together and shall constitute one and the same instrument. 7b parties further agree that facsimile signatures upon lhts Agreement shall be binding and of tho sauc C&O U original sigtuturms. 11. TMs Agreement shall Inure to tha beneflt of and be binding upon the parties VW their respective heirs,successors and aulgro. A WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agmament is of the day and year Arai obnve tvrittan. wooDaRIDOB GONMOMR%91 IM ASSOCIATION.INC. By R n B.Srofe,Presid BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP By Its k%CHANOkAt1AEE.MFNT -3- TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: October 15, 2001 Agenda Item: Discussion Item: Snowmass Chapel Expansion Sketch Plan Review Presented By: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner Core Issues: Below is a suggested discussion agenda of core issues for the October 15, 2001 Town Council meeting concerning the proposed Snowmass Chapel Expansion Sketch Plan PUD: • Use (10 minutes)—pp. 3 & 4 of attached PC Reso. for findings a) Differences in the plans since the Pre-Sketch meeting and the joint meeting on June 25 (overview) b) Planned usage for all buildings, including lower level of sanctuary • Comprehensive Plan (15 minutes)—pp. 7& 8 of PC Reso. a) Buildout Analysis Chart and the provision for a floor area limit b) Acceptability of building coverage area above the allocated 20,000 square feet(eventually requires '/.approval by Town Council) c) Community purposes (if over 20,000 square foot allocation) d) Employee housing requirement of 626 square feet—acceptability of deed restricting current unit or other options proposed • Architecture (20 minutes)—pp. 1-3 for findings and pp. 11 & 12 for conditions In PC Reso. a) Design, scale and mass of the proposed facility b) Ridgeline protection provision c) Height variance from maximum 40 feet and average of 25 feet (eventually requires'/.approval by Town Council) • Landscaping (10 minutes)—pp. 11 & 12 of PC Reso. for conditions under Height Variance a) Identify landscaping desired around the site b) Land exchange effects on golf course, restrooms, and cart path • Natural Resource & Hazard Areas (time permitting)—p. 8 for findings and p. 12 for condition in PC Reso. a) Encroachment within the 25-fool riparian/wetland setback area b) Drainage conveyance and storage on the site c) Provision of Brush Creek Impact Report with the Preliminary Plan See the attached discussion agenda for the next meeting. General Info: Please reference the separate handout of the applicant's proposal in booklet format that was supplied for Town Council's review at the joint meeting on June 25, 2001. The latest submittal was received June 12, 2001. Included in the front portion of the application booklet is the applicant's response to staff comments provided for our information. \\NT_SERVER\BLD—PLN\useryw\Snowmass ChapekTC Rpt. 10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc ] Due to the length of time since the joint Town Council and Planning Commission meeting, attached is the staff report, similar to the one presented at that meeting, but which includes updates as a result of the Planning Commission meetings. The report addresses in detail the Code criteria for Sketch Plans as it relates to the Snowmass Chapel Expansion proposal. The report is provided, as required by Code, for information and reference purposes. However, the main focus at the Town Council meetings should be on the core issues. Council Options: 1) Identify core issues of importance, including findings and any conditions which Council finds are appropriate; and/or 2) Provide direction to the applicant and staff to eventually prepare a draft resolution for review by Town Council. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the meeting follow the conduct of meetings per the Code as follows: 1) Summary introduction by staff of the application and the core issues; 2) Applicant's summary presentation of the proposal and changes since the last set of meetings; 3) Staff comments, or questions by Town Council members to staff or applicant; 4) Accept comments or questions from the public; and 5) Schedule application as a discussion item on November 5 and the review of draft resolution for November 12. \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpl. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 2 PROPOSED TOWN COUNCIL DISCUSSION AGENDA FOR THE SNOWMASS CHAPEL EXPANSION SKETCH PLAN PUD Below is a summary of the discussion topics staff is suggesting for the upcoming Town Council meetings to review this application. MONDAY. NOVEMBER 5: • Access and Circulation -p. 7 of PC Reso. a) New bus shelter needs b) Improving pedestrian connections in and around site • Parking, Traffic, Transportation -pp. 4-6 for findings and p. 12 for conditions In PC Reso. a) Worse-case peak parking demand b) Verification of actually parking to be provided c) Need for updated parking agreement between Chapel/Community Center, Anderson Ranch and the Fire District • Timetable-p. 13 for condition In PC Reso. a) Acceptability of deferring steeple construction to later-date certain b) Construction schedule of interior improvements to lower level-desire for review later • Community Welfare-p. 8 for findings In PC Reso. a) Relocation of 15-inch sewer line b) Water line looping requirements for fire protection • Miscellaneous-pp. 6-9 for findings and p. 10 for Preliminary Plan submission requirements in PC Reso. a) Need for applicant to prepare a detailed Transportation Impact Analysis, Fiscal Impact Report, and Air Quality Report with the Preliminary Plan PUD application. MONDAY. NOVEMBER 12: • Review of Draft Resolution \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\Iw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 3 SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION POINTS AT THE JOINT MEETING ON JUNE 25, 2001 REGARDING THE PROPOSED SNOWMASS CHAPEL EXPANSION SKETCH PLAN PUD • Vegetation desired on north berm next to the sanctuary • Photo simulations needed from Fire District entrance • Questions concerning steeple height and proportionality • Connection between Community Center and proposed sanctuary should read or appear as two separate buildings • Transit connections are important; Possible shuttle route into site. • Bicycle trail connections even off-site are important • The amount of roof form is a concern • Construction timing/schedule wwqj r \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 4 Planning Division Staff Report Project Name: Snowmass Chapel Expansion Sketch Plan PUD Part 1 : Summary of Application and Major Issues Applicant Information: Applicant: Snowmass Chapel and Community Center (SCCC) Owner: Snowmass Chapel and Community Center (SCCC) Contact: Bob Schiller, Cottle Graybeal Yaw; Heather Gosda, SCCC Project Summary: • Construct a new 9,451 square feet sanctuary with a steeple cradled closely against the east side of the existing Community Center. The addition includes 7,851 square feet of enclosed space and 6,300 square feet in the lower level totaling about 14,151 square feet of floor area. Architecturally, the sanctuary is proposed to be clad with stone veneer, glass portals, and diamond-shaped copper shingles on 15:12 stepped roof pitches; - The sanctuary is designed to accommodate 300 persons with additional overflow capacity of approximately 50 persons; - The lower level of the structure is envisioned for meeting rooms, Sunday School classes, lecture rooms, counseling spaces and choral practice space; • A 78-foot high stone and glass steeple tower is proposed at the southeast corner of the sanctuary, not including a cross above the roofline. The steeple was narrowed but increased in height by 10 feet; • Increase building coverage 15,000 to 20,000 square feet (as allocated per the Comprehensive Plan's Buildout Analysis Chart) or beyond; • Increase maximum height of structures from 40 feet to 78 feet, measured on north elevation (68 feet high measured on south elevation). These heights do not include crosses above the roof line; • Increase maximum average height of structures from 25 feet to 26 feet; • Replace the existing pedestrian bridge with a new 10-foot wide stone bridge; • Expand and rearrange fire lane access to the Community Center and around the east and south sides of the proposed sanctuary addition; • Construct a labyrinth beside the south side main entrance into the new sanctuary; • Encroachment of development (paved access, labyrinth, and pedestrian bridge) into 25 foot setback from outside edge of Brush Creek and wetland areas; • The maximum driveway and parking coverage will remain at a maximum 8,000 square feet; • Conduct land swap with Snowmass Club Associates and golf course to accommodate the proposed sanctuary between Parcels 7 and 10; and • Relocate golf course restrooms and golf cart path as needed. 60011%I \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt.10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 5 Applicant's Request: Approval of a resolution for the Sketch Plan PUD and permission to proceed to Preliminary Plan review (applicable Code Sections 16A-5-300(b)(2)(a), 16A-5-300(c), and 16A-5-310), including a height variance, exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor area, and development within the 25-foot setback measured from the outside edge of Brush Creek and wetland areas. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: According to line item B66 of the Comprehensive Plan's Buildout Analysis Chart, Snowmass Chapel and the Community Center were allocated 20,000 square feet of existing/future commercial or other space (Exhibit A). It is the intent of the chart of the Code that the square footage limitation applies to floor area. According to the PUD, however, the maximum limit is 15,000 square feet of building coverage, but it did not address maximum floor area. The existing building coverage is 10,764 square feet. The initial application submittal proposed an increase of 9,183 square feet to a maximum 19,947 square feet of building coverage. However, the revised submittal shows an increase of 9,451 square feet, including 1,600 square feet of roof overhang area, which will exceed 20,000 square feet. The floor area figures, requested by staff, are part of a table supplied by the applicant (attached Exhibit J). The floor area figures are helpful in determining the extent of the floor area increase and could be used to establish a maximum floor area limit with this application. In this case, if the proposed floor area of 27,890 square feet is favorable to Town Council, staff recommends that a floor area limit of 28,000 square feet be established with this application. See the applicant's response to other Comprehensive Plan policies in the letter of response to staff comments (pages 5 and 6 of the letter). History or Background: The latest approval, for the addition of the Community Center, was documented in Ordinance No. 08, Series of 1997. The development parameters for the site (Parcels 7 and 8) are outlined in attached Exhibit B. At the pre-sketch joint meeting between Planning Commission and Town Council, decision-makers requested information as to why certain development parameters were established. Attached are copies of the affected Town Council minutes from the discussion of past affected ordinances related to the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center (Exhibit H). Staff was unable to find any specific reasoning why the development parameters were established other than the general compliance standards such as compatibility with surrounding areas, consistency with the master plan, and not adversely impacting adjacent properties. Core Issues following Staff Review of Initial Proposal: Application Description. As requested by staff, the application now includes a chart (page 2 of the response letter in the application booklet)which shows the existing development standards, the existing conditions, and the proposed standards in table format. However, please reference Exhibit J showing a revision of the table, which includes the floor area information. A minimum floor area was not established with the last PUD Amendment, and staff believes a floor area maximum should be established with this application if approved. The new sanctuary includes 7,851 square feet of enclosed space and the lower level contains 6,300 square feet for a total of 14,151 square feet of floor area within the new \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass ChapehTC Rpt.10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc q1 dw 6 sanctuary addition. Overall, the proposal would increase the total gross floor area from 11,715 square feet (including the exterior covered walkways) to 27,890 square feet (also including the exterior covered walkways). Staff Recommendation: If the proposal is acceptable, staff recommends that a floor area limit of 28,000 square feet, including covered walkways, be established with this application. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 7 of the attached resolution for findings. • Differences from the Pre-Sketch Submittal. The scale of the addition has changed since the pre-sketch meeting in February. At that time, non-dimensioned reductions of concept plans, building elevations, and scaled drawings were submitted and used to measure the proposed facility. The Sketch Plan application shows that the building footprint has been adjusted and moved closer to the Community Center to accommodate fire lanes and emergency access. The steeple has been narrowed and moved closer to the sanctuary, but increased in height by 10 feet to 78 feet. The proposed height of the sanctuary addition is now 78 feet measured on the north elevation; It is 68 feet high measured on the south elevation, which is the main entry side. The steeple is proposed at 78 feet in height measure from grade on the south end of the building site. The steeple will appear taller than the sanctuary building because the site slopes downward toward the north side of the building area by roughly 10 feet. The addition measures about 121 feet in length by 80 feet in width. The connection to the Community Center has been widened, as a result of compressing the addition closer to the existing buildings. The change would also accommodate a functional nursery space. Staff Recommendation: No comment. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 1, 2 and 3 for findings and pages 11 and 12 for conditions in the attached resolution. • Buildout Analysis. The application requests increasing the maximum building coverage from 15,000 to 20,000 square feet. A maximum of 20,000 square feet is allocated for existing and future buildout on the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center site per the Comprehensive Plan's Buildout Analysis Chart. It is the intent of the chart and the Code that the 20,000 square feet implies maximum floor area. Staffs finding is that the 20,000 square feet on the Buildout Analysis Chart, in this particular case, may have implied maximum building coverage limitation because the previous PUD Amendment noted a maximum building ground coverage of 15,000 square feet but was moot in addressing maximum floor area. If one assumes that two-story structures could occupy the permitted 15,000 square foot building coverage area, up to approximately 30,000 square feet of floor area could be developed. The initial Sketch Plan application noted that there is 10,764 square feet of existing building coverage and that the proposed sanctuary would increase the building coverage by 9,183 square feet to a total of 19,947 square feet. Contrary to the above, and per the revised Sketch Plan submitted June 11 to address staff comments, it should be noted that there are 7,851 square feet of enclosed sanctuary space and about 1,600 square feet of roof overhang space, which totals 9,451 square feet of building coverage. If this figure were used and added to the existing building coverage of \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.dov�I W goo 7 10,764 square feet, it would increase the building coverage beyond the 20,000 square foot allocation. The General Restrictions portion of the Land Use and Development Code states, "No buildout may be permitted to exceed 100% of the maximum number of future lots/units and commercial/other space listed for that subdivision, parcel or other development, except that under unique and exceptional circumstances where it can be sufficiently demonstrated by the applicant that the resulting development will, for good Cause shown, exceed the PUD review criteria standards, a reconsideration and amendment of the future buildout analysis chart allocation for that subdivision, parcel or other development may be considered. The Town Council shall then adopt an ordinance, approved by at least% of the members of the Town Council present and voting, amending the future buildout analysis chart and identifying the reasons why the amendment is warranted." In addition, since this application proposes 100% buildout or beyond, the Community Purpose criteria would be triggered. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that a maximum floor area limit be established with this application, if approved, and that the Community Purpose criteria be addressed. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 7 of the attached resolution for findings. • Usage. Page 7 of the text proposal, under"Proposed Amendment of Final PUD," indicates that "the proposed amendment does not seek to change the permitted uses." However, page 17 of the response letter indicates that, "the existing sanctuary space will be used primarily for lectures, presentations, and meetings. In addition, the existing sanctuary space will be available for use by wedding receptions and other events, which can bring substantial economic activity to the Town, in the form of catering and entertainment, lodging for guests, etc." The applicant provided tables, which show the parking demand based upon anticipated usage and operation of the facilities. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that all the uses be identified in the existing chapel, the Community Center, and the new sanctuary to verify compliance with the zoning and parking requirements. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 3 and 4 of the attached resolution for findings. • Parking. Staff requested that the applicant begin preparing a peak parking demand analysis for the site. The revised application includes a list of anticipated usage, events and operations within the existing chapel, Community Center, and the new sanctuary. Currently, the worse case parking demand appears to be the proposed sanctuary itself, which requires 101 spaces (using a 1:3.3 ratio for 300 fixed seats plus a 1:5 ratio for overflow seating). If the new sanctuary operates alone and/or at separate times from the other adjacent uses or the uses within the facility, then the current number of spaces in the parking lot would technically be adequate. The required minimum number of parking spaces per the existing PUD application is 105 spaces. Page 10 of the applicant's response letter states that, "Applicant has no desire to reduce the parking count below those presently provided." On the other hand, the text of the proposal under the Parking Summary (page 13) indicates that, "Approximately six \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpl. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp. Sketch Plan.d`A` 8 existing stalls will be displaced by construction of a more attractive and convenient access walk to the new facility." Also, considering unavailable current parking demand figures from Anderson Ranch, the parking analysis should be evaluated further. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the minimum 105 parking spaces established with the previous PUD approval be retained with this application. Staff also recommends that the existing parking agreement between the Chapel/Community Center, Anderson Ranch, and the Fire District be updated as a result of this proposal to incorporate the usage, restrictions and identify the location of the 30 off-site spaces, offered by Chaffin/Light Associates, into the agreement. The purpose for the need to update the agreement is because the current agreement only addresses the existing Chapel parking area on Lot 2A (see Exhibit E) and the use of 10 parking spaces on the Fire District site, which was offered in exchange for an access easement to the parking lot from the Chapel site. Be advised that the access easement to the Fire District site affected three parking spaces in the Chapel lot. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 4, 5 and 6 for findings and page 12 for conditions in the attached resolution. • Photo Simulations and Compatibility. Staff requested further photo simulations in order to show the proposed sanctuary against the entire ski mountain in the background, including the mountain top ridgelines. Staff also requested photo simulations from further down valley to gain a better understanding the scale of the facility in relation to more of the surrounding area. The applicant submitted seven photograph simulations in an attempt to demonstrate compatibility. It should be noted that the photos are not precise and some of the more distant views showing the sanctuary location were estimated. • Impacts of Massing, Scale, and Character. Some of staff's general observations in favor of the development is that it appears to provides an architectural landmark for the community, it is clad with a significant amount of stone veneer to create a sense of permanence, and it provides a cultural amenity for the community. Unfavorable comments relate to, but are not limited to, the larger scale and mass of the structure in contrast to other surrounding structures and other existing conditions, the creation of more demand upon the existing parking lot, and its impacts upon adjacent properties (e.g., the golf course, other land uses which utilize the parking lot, potential impacts to pedestrian traffic circulation and transit usage, and potential visual impacts). • Height Variances and Building Elevations. The maximum height restriction for the site is 40 feet with an average building height not to exceed 25 feet. The proposed steeple and sanctuary are 78 feet in height, which for the sanctuary is measured along the worse case elevation (north side). This side of the sanctuary is proposed to incorporate a landscaped eight-foot high, off-site berm in an attempt to lessen the perceived height of the structure. The applicant also submitted a volumetric study of the roof forms to determine the average height of the structures with the new sanctuary and compliance with the height variance criteria. The criteria states that Town Council may approve a height variance "provided that at least 50% of a building, structure or group of structure's footprint within the PUD conforms to the height limits of the underlying zone district." Pursuant to the application's volumetric study and figures, the largest roof forms and areas on the sanctuary account for 29% of the total roof area on the site. The remaining 71% are supposedly below the 40-foot \\NT_SERVER\BLD PLN\useryw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plen.docc WO 9 limit. It appears, however, that the average roof height was determined using the best-case grade scenario, that being the use of measurements along the south elevation. Staff Recommendation: Staff finds that the average height of the roof, for at least the northern portion of the sanctuary, should be based upon the worse case grade using measurements along the north elevation. Instead, the applicant used the square footage figures in the roof volumetric study to make a case for compliance (see Exhibit C in the attached Planning Commission resolution). Staff believes a roof plan overlaying the existing and finished grade contour map to demonstrate compliance with the Code for determining building height measurements may be necessary during the Preliminary Plan review. Another part of the height variance involves the average height limitation. The current average height is listed at 15.74 feet, probably using best-case grade scenario again. The maximum average height is 25 feet. Including the new sanctuary, the average height is 26 feet, using the same volumetric study. However, the average height could increase if the worse case measurements along the north elevation are utilized. Staff Recommendation: Again, staff recommends that same procedure noted above be used for determining the average height of the buildings. Overall, Staffs view is that the steep 15:12 roof pitches on the sanctuary will significantly help the applicant's cause in demonstrating compliance with at least the 50% restriction. The two height variances require % approval of the Town Council by ordinance identifying the reasons why the height variances are warranted. The height variances also trigger compliance with the Community Purpose criteria. Concerning the steeple and the proposed height of 78 feet, Ordinance No. 08, Series of 1997, requires the design of a steeple to be proportionate to the building and requires Town Council approval. In contrast from the pre-sketch materials, the steeple was narrowed and increased in height from 68 to 78 feet. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 2 and 3 for findings and pages 11 and 12 for conditions in the attached resolution. Height Limit Analysis. The application also includes a Height Limit Analysis, which is located in the application booklet behind Tab E — "Photos" and the photo simulations. The analysis shows where the 78 foot height limit would occur if a horizontal line were extend from the top of the roof or steeple to the nearby hillsides. Obviously, if the sanctuary were viewed below the horizontal line, the structure would appear taller than those views above the horizontal view plane. It should be noted that the elevation, which matches the 78-foot height, is 8,233 feet, according to the application. In addition to this analysis, it was confirmed during the site visit with Planning Commission that a portion of the proposed structure would be visible above the mountain ridgelines to the east of the site as viewed from Brush Creek Road. According to the Code, "No development of new structures shall be designed or located in such a way that it will appear to penetrate above the ridgeline as seen from Brush Creek Road." Staff Recommendation: Staff believes the 8,233-foot contour is the height of the sanctuary building measured along the south elevation. The finished floor elevation of the existing chapel and Community Center is 8,167 feet and from reading the floor plans of the proposal, it appears that the new sanctuary level will have the same finished floor \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch PlanA0r6 I^ - 10 elevation. Therefore, 8,167 feet plus the 78 foot high steeple equals 8,245 feet, and as a result, the horizontal line projection would be about 12 feet higher than the red line illustrated on the Height Limit Analysis. Even with the increase, the horizontal view plane from the maximum height of the structures is generally in the vicinity of the 300- foot adjacent owner notification area for those views looking south and west. Staff recommends that a roof plan be provided overlaying the existing and finished grades to verify structure heights, perhaps during the Preliminary Plan review. Concerning the ridgeline protection provision, perhaps the Code should be revised to incorporate an exception for exceeding the ridgeline provided certain criteria were met, such as the type of use proposed or a significant community purpose/benefit it provides to the community. In addition, motorists would be required to remove their focus from road to view the protrusion above the ridgeline. The roof peak would drop rapidly as one travels up Brush Creek Road, or vice versa, due to the steep grades in the area. Planning Commission Recommendation: See middle of page 3, item 3 of the attached resolution for finding. • Community Purposes/Bus Shelters/Pedestrian Circulation. In light of the fact that the new sanctuary may provide a necessary and vital cultural facility, creating a visible presence and an architectural landmark for the community as noted by the applicant, staff suggested that the applicant consider participating in construction of a new bus stop shelter and creating improved pedestrian circulation and connectivity in and around the site and to the new shelters. The response letter (page 4) indicates that the applicant is not agreeable in participating in bus shelter construction and wishes to not address pedestrian circulation at this time. Staff Recommendation: Staff finds that a bus stop with shelters, serving both downhill and uphill riders, are needed on Owl Creek Road generally in the area where the access road leads to the Chapel parking area. In addition, pedestrian circulation paths from these bus stops to, from and around the buildings and parking lots, including the 30- space off-site parking area, could be provided to improve pedestrian circulation. The relocation of the golf cart path should also be addressed. Staff would recommend some commitment from the applicant in addressing the need to provide bus shelters and improved pedestrian circulation. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 7, item 3 under Community Purposes in attached resolution. • Employee Housing. The employee housing calculations are outlined on pages 14 and 15 of the text proposal. The calculations show that 626 square feet of employee housing is required. In accordance with a letter from the Chapel dated June 7, 2001 (behind Tab D in the application booklet), SCCC is investigating a few options for the provision of employee housing as follows: 1) deed-restricting the unit that already exists on the site, 2) purchasing a free-market unit within Pitkin County and then deed-restricting the unit, or 3) purchasing an already deed-restricted unit in another project. Staff Recommendation: Deed-restricting the current unit makes sense the unit size of 692 square feet fulfills the requirement (see Exhibit D of the attached Planning Commission resolution). However, additional employee housing, beyond the minimum requirement, could be provided to fulfill the Community Purpose criteria. Concerning the \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.d c on ] second option, staff recommends that purchase of a free-market unit be made within the Town, but not outside Town limits (i.e., in Pitkin County). Concerning the last option, purchasing another deed-restricted unit in another project would not fulfill the employee housing requirement for the Chapel expansion because an existing deed-restricted unit was likely provided to meet the employee housing requirements on another project or fulfill a community need. Planning Commission Recommendation: See pages 7 and 8 of the attached resolution for findings. • Riparian/Wetland Setback Encroachment. The application proposes development within the 25-foot setback area measured from outer edge of Brush Creek or a wetland area. Development that would encroach, per the revised plans, includes the labyrinth, the emergency access drive and the new pedestrian bridge. The revised plans show that the steeple will not encroach into this setback area established by the Town. Staff Recommendation: According to the Land Use and Development Code, there is a setback reduction exception from the outer edge of the Brush Creek riparian corridor if the reduction is for the purpose of accommodating underground utilities, roads, trails, bridges and similar facilities. A Brush Creek Impact Report will be required with the Preliminary Plan submittal. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 8 of the attached resolution for findings. • Drainage Issues. The revised application indicates that a concave landscaped area at the center of the entry courtyard could receive some or all of the increased storm drainage and slowly infiltrate into the ground. Typically, drainage in detention ponding is released through a pipe into a storm sewer or other drainage outlet. Detention ponding may also be an issue on the downhill side of the site, north of the sanctuary, perhaps in the area where the berm is proposed. Staff Recommendation: The Preliminary Plan application should address the locations of detention ponds and address mitigation techniques to protect Brush Creek and lessen the impacts from any drainage into Brush Creek. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 12 of the attached resolution for condition. • Utility, Sewer, and Fire Protection. There is a 15-inch main sewer line, situated beneath the proposed footprint area of the new sanctuary, which will need to be relocated. Water line looping will also be required to meet water pressure needs for fire hydrants located on the east side of the sanctuary. The applicant states that they will work with the Water and Sanitation District along and the Fire District to meet their requirements. Staff Recommendation: The Preliminary Plan application should show the proposed relocation of the sewer line and the water line loop as coordinated with the water and sanitation district and the Fire District. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 8 of the attached resolution under Community Welfare for finding. \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\userNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.dod♦'tr il' 12 Phasing. The application states that the steeple and the lower level of the sanctuary would be constructed or improved at a later date. Staff Recommendation: Staffs preference would be to see the steeple constructed concurrent with the sanctuary building, if approved, or that a date certain be established for the construction of the steeple. Staff believes the steeple will provide variation in the architectural design and appearance of the facility from surrounding properties. The response letter indicates that it is the applicant's intent to construct the steeple simultaneously with the sanctuary but would prefer flexibility in order to be fiscally responsible. Concerning the lower level improvements, staff also recommends that a timeframe be established for completion of these improvements, especially the restroom facilities if they are intended to replace the facilities on the golf course. Planning Commission Recommendation: See page 13 of the attached resolution for condition. Part 2: Detailed Case Analysis (for reference and informational purposes only) Public Notification: Legal notice will need to appear in the Snowmass Sun by October 31, 2001 for the Town Council meeting on November 12, 2001 to consider a draft resolution for this application. The applicant will also need to submit verification that certified 10-day public hearing notices were sent to property owners within 300 feet of the site and that the site was posted with public hearing signs by November 2, 2001. Community Referrals: Referral packages were mailed to the following groups and agencies for review and comment: Public Works, Transportation, Building, Police, Town Attorney, Town Manager, Engineering, Snowmass Water and Sanitation, Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District, Housing, Landscaping/ Parks/Trails, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Colorado State Forest Service, Army Corps of Engineers, KN Energy, Holy Cross Electric, US West, and AT&T Cable. The Fire District and the Water & Sanitation District responded with written comments (Exhibits F and G). Conformance with Code Criteria: [for reference and informational purposes only] PUD Sketch Plan Process and Review by Decision-Makers: According to Section 16A-5-300(b), Article V, Division 3, of the Land Use and Development Code, a summary of the items the Planning Commission and Town Council should consider in a conceptual manner during review of the sketch plan (depending on the size and complexity of the proposal) include the following: \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNvASnowmass Chapel\TC Rpl. 10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doq 040" 13 (1) Use. The appropriateness of the use at the location; (2) Comprehensive Plan. Consistency with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the 65% development rule and the appropriateness of the community purposes the applicant proposes to achieve; (3) Architecture and landscaping. Appropriate locations of buildings, compatibility of the mass, scale and density of the building with the character of the community and surrounding buildings, and the adequacy and appropriate locations of common or dedicated open space; (4) Natural resource and hazard areas. Identification of natural resources and hazard areas on the property along with appropriate mitigation; (5) Access and circulation. Acceptability of access and circulation including possible transportation options; (6) Parking. Compliance with off-street parking requirements and provisions; (7) Timetable. The appropriateness of the timetable or phasing of the development; and (8) Community welfare. Promotes the public health, safety and welfare. Sketch Plan Code Criteria and Analysis: Below is an outline of the review criteria (in Italics) applicable to Sketch Plan application per the Land Use and Development Code followed by the staff analysis (in regular font) of each criterion. 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; Analysis: There is no minimum land area qualification for this type of PUD due to the uses proposed. (2) Compliance with PUD locational criteria; Analysis: A PUD may develop on any land within the Town. (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; Analysis: Staff recommends that all the proposed uses be identified within the buildings to verify compliance with the zoning and the parking requirements. (4) Compliance with maximum buildout limitations and criteria, including the 65% development rule; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Buildout Analysis and the section in the report titled Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. (5) Compliance with the variation criteria concerning dimensional limitations; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Height Variances and Building Elevations. (6) Compliance with the Community purposes criteria for PUD's, if applicable, utilizing the following purposes: J 607 so \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 14 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. Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Community Purposes/Bus Shelters/Pedestrian Circulation. (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. Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Height Variances and Building Elevations. The open space area percentage will eventually need to be verified during the review process. (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). Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Parking. (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. Analysis: Much of the roadway and driveway circulation patterns in and around the Chapel site remain the same, with the exception of creating a fire lane emergency access lane along the east and south sides of the proposed facility. The Fire District also requested fire related items that could be addressed later (Exhibit F). Also see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Community Purposes/Bus Shelters/Pedestrian Circulation. Ov \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass ChapehTC Rpt. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 15 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 according to the Land Use and Development Code Section 16A-5-310: (1) Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; Analysis: Please see the portion of the staff report under the section titled Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and the Core Issues section under Bulldout Analysis. (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; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section under Impacts of Massing, Scale, and Character. (3) Creative Approach. The PUD represents a creative approach to the development and use of the land and related physical facilities to produce better developments and to provide amenities for residents of the PUD and the general public; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section under Impacts of Massing, Scale, and Character. (4) Landscaping. 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; Analysis: The development standards in the PUD don't address a minimum landscape area standard. However, the typical standard for a PUD in the Land Use and Development Code is 25%, which the application should demonstrated by submittal of a detailed landscape plan during the review of the Preliminary Plan application. Staff also requested a plan view and a cross-section of the proposed berm and landscape buffer on the north side of the new sanctuary to show how it would appear next to the proposed sanctuary structure, proposed to be pulled back as indicated on page 9 of the application text. Staff also requested information concerning the golf cart path relocation. If a Council member happens to read this, call me before the meeting to verify and I'll buy you at least a cheap lunch, five dollars maximum. The applicant declined to provide information concerning these requests. (5) Compliance with development evaluation criteria of Article IV of the Town's Development Code, including: a) Protection of Environmentally Sensitive Areas; Analysis: The properties involved are not part of sensitive wildlife habitat area. b) Brush Creek Impact Area; Analysis: A Brush Creek Impact Report be l be reouired with the Preliminary Plan review. OP \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-1601 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 16 I c) Flood plain and wetland areas, Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section under Riparlan/Wetland Setback Encroachment. d) Geologic hazard areas, steep slopes and ridgeline protection areas; Analysis: Not applicable. e) Streets and related improvements; Analysis: Much of the roadway, driveway and circulation patterns on the site remain the same, although a traffic study should be required with the Preliminary Plan application to determine impacts to the area. f) Public trails; Analysis: Public trails are not affected by this proposal, but staff recommends improvement of the pedestrian circulation system on the site. Please see the comments in the Core Issues section under Community Purposes/Bus Shelters/Pedestrian Circulation. g) Water supply, sewage disposal, solid waste disposal and utilities; Analysis: Please see the attached comments from the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District concerning the adequate servicing of the site (Exhibit G). h) Fire protection; Analysis: Please see the comments from the Fire District (Exhibit F). i) Storm drainage; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Drainage Issues. j) Easement characteristics; Analysis: This will be addressed more in detail during the Preliminary Plan application and the review of the subdivision plats for the area, including relocation of the main sewer line, the needed water line looping, and the fire hydrant placements. k) Survey monuments; Analysis: This will be addressed more in detail during the Preliminary Plan application and the review of the subdivision plats for the area, including the implementation of the land swap areas. I) Off-street parking standards; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Parking. m) Landscaping, grading and other design standards; Analysis: Open space areas are represented on the drawings and appear to be adequately placed. The specific landscape design for these areas, as well as the berm proposed on the north side of the sanctuary, will need to be addressed in detail with the Preliminary Plan application. M � Vap \\NT_SERVER\BLD PLN\usee4w\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-15-01 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 1 n) Energy conservation; Analysis: An Energy Conservation Plan will be required with the Preliminary Plan application. c) Building design guidelines to preserve community character,• Analysis: Please see the Project Summary and Core Issues section of this report for related issues concerning exterior finishes and building height. p) Restricted housing requirements; Analysis: The calculations in the application reveal that 626 square feet of employee housing is required. Please see the Core Issues section under Employee Housing for a list of options and staff recommendations. Also see the Community Purpose criteria as it relates to proposals requesting 100% buildout or beyond. q) Sign standards. Analysis: Signs can be addressed more in detail during the Preliminary or Final PUD reviews or may be reviewed separately via a Comprehensive Sign Plan. (6) Suitability of the development, considering its topography, environmental features and any natural or man-made hazards that affect its development potential; Analysis: See the comments in the Core Issues section under Height Variances and Building Elevations, Height Limit Analysis, and Impacts of Massing, Scale and Character. (7) 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; Analysis: Please see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Utility, Sewer and Fire Protection and the attached comments from the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District concerning the adequate servicing of the site (Exhibit G). Also see the comments from the Fire District (Exhibit F). (8) 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; Analysis: Please see the attached comments from the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District concerning the servicing of the Snowmass Chapel expansion proposal (Exhibit G). Also see the comments in the Core Issues section of this report under Utility, Sewer and Fire Protection. (9) 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. Analysis: Please see the comments under Phasing of the Core Issues section of this report. ` I1 ' 00 \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 18 Attached Exhibits: [for reference and information purposes only] Exhibit A Buildout Analysis Chart identifying the affected parcel Exhibit B Ordinance No. 08, Series of 1997, documenting the approval of the latest PUD Amendment including the current Development Parameters Exhibit C Map of Anderson Ranch modifications from Town Council Resolution No. 45, Series of 1997, showing location of a future sanctuary Exhibit D Copy of parcel map showing general location of proposed land swap area Exhibit E Current subdivision plat of the site Exhibit F Memorandum from the Fire District received May 7, 2001 Exhibit G Memorandums from McLaughlin Water Engineers and the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District dated May 10, 2001 Exhibit H Town Council minutes of past meetings discussing the Snowmass Chapel Exhibit I Existing Parking Agreement executed in November 1998 Exhibit J Letter with table of existing and proposed project data figure, including floor area amounts. Planning Commission Resolution No. 14, Series of 2001, with referenced exhibits. . =04Q WV \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass Chapel\TC Rpt. 10-1501 S'mass Chapel Exp.Sketch Plan.doc 19 Q SHOWMNSS VIL AGE ~+ o BU{[.ROUT _ SOF DWELLING UNITS COMMERCIALIOTHER LAND USE ZONING a EXISTING AS OF EXISTING AND LU EXISTING FUTURE EXISTING FUTURE 4.6.98 APPROVED FUTURE EXISTING FUTURE PARCELS WEST WOODBRIDGE B37 sonner"ck VOW MFR MFR SPA-1 6 0 6 0 7 0 0 638 StoneNidge Aw MFR MFR SPA-1 91 1 91 1 102 0 0 B39 Stonebridge Ln vAv MFR MFR SPA-1 95 8 95 8 114 2682 2682 640 SVRA Pod Facility ww REC 0 0 0 0 0 2336 B41 Tamarack Ww MFR MFR sPA.gcc4 A 36 0 36 0 40 0 0 842 Tenacettouse ww MFR MFR SPA-1 29 1 29 1 33 0 0 843 Tinrbedine ww MFR MFR SPA-1 96 5 96 5 112 0 B44 Top of the Village ww MFR MFR SPA-1 111 0 •111 0 123 - 0 B45 Top of the V&aW Gatehouse ww MFR MFR SPA-1 5 3 5 3 8 0 0 646 Wildcat Slope ' ww OS OS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 647 Wifdwood Lodge ww MFR MFR SPA-1 146 10 146 10 172 B46 Willows,Center ww MFR MFR SPA-1 40 0 40 0 44 0 0 B49 Willows,Lower WW MFR MFR SPA-1 24 0 24 0 1 27 0 0 B50 Woodrun Place WW MFR MFR PUD 54 0 54 0 54 0 0 651 Woodrun V(Parcel 7)) ww REC MFR PUD 0 0 0 0 10 0 ' 652 Woodrun V(Trap E) WOW REC REC PUD 0 0 0 0 0 5000 B53 Wcodm V Towrthkunes ww MFR MFR PUD 45 0 45 0 45 0 1588 324 1588 351 2435 EAST WOODBRIDGE 654 Anderson Ranch Jew I PUB PUB PUD 0 16 0 26 26 48654 55110 655 Deerbrook ew MFR MFR SPA-1 15 0 15 0 15 0 0 B56 Faraway North(Woodbridge) ew VACANT MFR SPA-1 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 B57 Faraway South Parcel K err VACANT MFR SPA-1 0 0 0 0 50 0 658 Faraway South Parcel K8N ew VACANT MFR SPA-1 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 B59 Homestead ew MFR MFR PUD 14 0 14 0 14 0 0 680 Melton Extension . ew OS OS OS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 661 Offices at Snowmass Jew OFFICE OFFICE 0 0 0 0 0 13500 862 Ridge few MFR MFR PUD 36 0 36 0 36 0 0 663 Ridge East . ew OS Os 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BI>rt Ridge Run I ew MFR MFR DU 30 0 30 0 30 B65 Seasons Four ew MFR MFR SPA-1 96 1 96 1 97 0 0 J 666 Snowmass Chapel 8 CC ew PUB PUB 0 1 0 1 1 20000 20000 F 66T Snowrnass Mountain ew MFR MFR SPA-1 59 1 59 1 60 0 0 B68 Srawrnass Villas(Bite Roofs) ew MFR MFR SPA-2 28 0 28 0 28 0 0 B69 SnowmassMfildcat Firehouse ew PUB PUB 0 10 0 16 16 13692 17000 B70 WWcat BLM I Jew 0 0 ..._.__ Page 2 buildout complete revised Exhibit B Page 1 of 5 SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 08 SERIES OF 1997 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SNOWMASS CLUB PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RELATING TO PARCELS 7 AND S. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1980, previously approved the Final Planned Unit Development (PUD)Plan for the Snowmass Club PUD; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1982, amended Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1980, and established certain development standards and permitted land uses for Parcels 7 and 8 in conjunction with the approval of construction of the.Snowmass Chapel and attendant parking facilities; and WHEREAS, within Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1982, findings were made which found the amendments to the Snowmass Club PUD, (allowing for the Snowmass Chapel development and proposed future phased development of the site) to be consistent with the Town of Snowmass Village Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center, Inc.(the- "Applicant"), has submitted an application to amend the Snowmass Club PUD with a building addition of approximately 4,700 square feet within Lot 1, Snowmass Interfaith Chapel Subdivision as well as additional and reconfigured parking facilities and associated landscaping on Lot 2A, Snowmass Interfaith Chapel Subdivision Replat "A"; and WHEREAS, Section 16-152(c)(3) of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Code") provides for Town Council review of a PUD modification; and WHEREAS, Town Council has waived the required application and processing fees; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heard a presentation by the applicant and the recommendations of the Town Staff; and WHEREAS, Town Council determined that the most appropriate parties for notification were those within 300 feet of the subject property in the application; and WHEREAS, in accordance with posted, mailed, and published notices, a public hearing was held before the Snowmass Village Town Council on June 16, 1997 to receive public comment concerning this application; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: go ------------- ------ Exhibit B TC 97-08 Page 2 of 5 Page 2 Section One: Findings 1. The applicant has submitted information and designs to permit the Town review of the proposed amendment as required by the Code. 2. All public notification requirements, as specified within Section 16-152 of the Code, have been satisfied. 3. The amendment is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire Snowmass Club PUD and does not adversely affect adjacent properties. 4. The proposed conceptual architecture and design of the project is compatible with the surrounding properties. 5. The'Town Council has reviewed the application and determined that it is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Snowmass Village Master Plan. 6. The amendment has been found to be consistent with the applicable review standards set forth in Section 16-152(d) of the Code and should be granted approval, subject to the recommendations and conditions contained within this ordinance. 7. The Land Use and Development Parameters set forth within Exhibit A are appropriate and consistent with the general purpose and intent of the Snowmass Club PUD. 8. Chapter 17, Article U, of the Municipal Code establishes the restricted housing requirements for new development. The Town Council finds that there is no job generation rate for this development and therefore no impact is created. Section Two: Approval of Amended Land Use and Development Parameters The Town Council hereby approves an amendment to the Final Planned Unit Development Plan for the Snowmass Club Subdivision, as described within Exhibit A, subject to the special conditions stated in Section Four and the conditions stated in Section Five below. C ---- Exhibit B TC 97-08 Page 3 of 5 Page 3 Section Three: Architectural and Design Approval The Town Council hereby approves the architecture and site design for those additions and alterations shown in the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center application which application is on file with the Town Planner, and is incorporated herein by this reference, subject to the special conditions stated in Section Four and the conditions stated in Section Five below. Section Four: Special Conditions 1. The Applicant shall,submit a letter of understanding between the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center and the Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District agreeing to jointly use the existing trash facilities prior to building permit issuance. 2. The Applicant shall demonstrate, prior to building permit issuance and to the satisfaction of the Town Attorney, that construction may occur within those areas identified as containing easements. Section Five: Conditions 1. The Applicant shall deliver to the Building and Planning Department a Land Use Plan Amendment in a form suitable for recording in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, that is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this ordinance. Said document shall be submitted no later than September 30, 1997. Failure to comply with the foregoing terms and conditions shall cause the tetras and conditions of this ordinance granting. approval, to be suspended until compliance with this condition has occurred. 2. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for any proposed exterior lighting for the building or parking area prior to building permit issuance. 3. Ali requirements of the Town to meet the needs of the Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District, related but not limited to emergency access, hydrant location, and fire suppression systems, shall be satisfied by the Applicant. 4.^ All necessary easements, as required by the Town shall be provided to accommodate the location and relocation of the utilities, parks and trails located within the subject property. All easements shall be provided no later than September 30, 1997. Failure to comply with the foregoing terms and �� Exhibit B TC 97-08 Page 4 of 5 Page 4 conditions shall cause the terms and conditions of this ordinance granting approval, to be suspended until compliance with this condition has occurred INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on this 16th day of June, 1997, with a motion made by Council member Burwell and a second by Council member Grenda, by a vote of 3 in favor and 0 opposed. Council member Boineau abstained and Council member Manchester was absent. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on second reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 7th day of July, 1997, with a motion made by Council member Burwell and a second by Council member Manchester, by a vote of 3 in favor to 1 opposed. Council member Boineau abstained. Council member Hatfield opposed. SECOND READING RECONSIDERED, upon a motion of Council member Hatfield and upon the second of Council member and by a vote of _in favor and _against. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED as amended on reconsidered second reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on this 4th day of August, 1997, with a motion made by Council member Hatfield and upon the second of Council member and by a vote of _in favor and_opposed. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL Ted Grenda, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk Exhibit B TC 97-08 Page 5 of 5 Page 5 Exhibit A LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS for Portions of Parcels 7 and 8 of the Final Planned Unit Development for the Snowmass Club Subdivision Lot 1, Snowmass Interfaith Chanel Subdivision, a portion of Parcel 7 Permitted Uses: Chapel Public Meeting Rooms Counsel Rooms(4) Daycare Study Kitchen Administrative Offices(3) Residential Unit(Accessory) Maximum Number of Dwelling Units: One unit not to exceed 1,200 sq. ft. Maximum Building Ground Coverage: 15,000 sq. ft. Maximum Parking and Driveway Coverage: 8,000 sq. ft. Maximum Building Height: 40 feet above existing natural grade except at the steeple, which shall be designed in proportion to the building and shall be subject to approval of the Town Council. Average Building Height: 25 feet Lot 2A, Snowmass Interfaith Chapel Subdivision Renlat "A", a portion of Parcel 8 Permitted Uses: Parking Trails Minimum Number of Parking Spaces: 105 Maximum Number of Parking Spaces: 120 Non-separability: Ownership of Lot 2A shall not be transferred independently of Lot 1 Wi 1$ - f Vc �ru CL qt _�z''.-4 i '.,�•n�c�:° Q-1 � 'r °.emu?�f 'l��� '•� Y iF ` �1� aj1 7 AAiS CIM� � � .'�•' .' i / ' � I I i ��i� •� a'.'k.... .. .` � �r� (((111 " �' � raw'-�:a-• °'.•�i�', � ilw�...... ��� p[ � �� TC Pw 7C Mta M ldA 1 \ c •laeL31/ Od Lar 2 Q � • 32'0B�9dE O r 0 / W r R.529.55' M L•426.9i' • r K RO• / .' K o 46 T.225.63' 1 � EE Ul C.411 ' lYl�� 010 bi CB.N4r5tf24•E 1/A.P.1 Y.f, i / / 4 � `b• P�-Liles o• 05-24`zs• R•1352.2 / �G L •127.58 T .63.64 s C •127.54' .• Ta1- �q4. co •N 21•4d49•E Gy.A '4Ly. • RC. TO TK ZK ew ` ssC9 T6s.6ar SEASON Eon DEDICATED , 4 OPEN SPACE S m a CONDO,�� PARCEL 7 s6sa!rb.� +�'� i r J.JO AC. .. DEDICATiON ESC ®` � � a 1 •aka � nrsert 1 r I GDAW � PARCEL B A r 3.0 AC ' r 9 00 IB / W SNOWMASS .9 m 8 WILDCAT FIRE n r PROTECTION S o.ne•3136 o aaTRKr FwE e° PARCEL 6 STATION R.SQOD a BOOK 256 2 ® 6.92 AC L•1034 T.6409; --PAGE $0, 566°21 c .65.95W R0. OWL CREEK NsS-id36,w ouKr Pam r.� . 6rl 6x•2Yoo'rurlm I �' d 8 9a3p ` n, PIIOP. LIN syy4T'0O .o. �p,nsy NOWT NOW T • • 9A G•2B•O9'I>:• &.24•57'ss' D•W07'd' O 2T•.81, R -65 \+ R •591.64 R.216.74 R •228.47' R •461.81 R 05A6� L•290.71' L 94.44 . C •40.36 L •216.se L •OL44 T .146.35' T •47.96; 7 •20.23', T .plSH 7 •44.26 IC•262��Qp'' C •93.70 C •40.'.0 .21..92' C •sL40 CB•973.51'36"1n . CB •N61••Sj37•W CB. N74 Y 7.B•3r 1o•NBI . Exhibit E Page 1 of 1 rP`• S. 10 � OOLF Se COUP / OLOOO to • ..� ..` 88q� / i M" i 11 qL� I II w1'• / _ / LOT IG1dEr L ' Af w r •ruurn L.Of 2 •�•� ,r YIIYrglN woo r•„• Id A rapt•• k IBY.CO f.66�1y FAW suz:'fir �FCIIpy Im ��1 Snowmass-Wildcat fire Protection District Exhibit F P.O. Box 6436 Snowmoss Village, Colorado 81615 970-923-2212 Page Il of 1 �cE Mq y D 7?001 To: Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner � I'Nlove 011' nt From: John T. Mele, Fire Marshal , Subject: Snowmass Chapel and Community Center expansion The Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District has been working with Otak/Rock Creek Studio concerning emergency access issues for the Chapel expansion. We believe that Otak/Rock Creek Studio has given us other assurances concerning fire and life safety for this project. I understand these assurances to be the following: 1 All existing or new Fire hydrants and Fire Department Connections for the Chapel expansion will need to be located or relocated in accordance with U.F.C. 10.403 and U.F.C.10.561 as adopted by the Town of Snowmass Village. The Fire District will indicate the placement and need for fire appliances. Fire hydrants currently indicated by the planner may not reflect the Fire District's final approved locations. 2. As previously agreed to, by the Otak/Rock Creek Studio planners, the proposed Labyrinth will conform to U.F.C. 10.204 surface requirements so as to provide an unobstructed all weather driving capability for fire department vehicle access. 3. Automatic fire suppression will be required for the proposed Snowmass Chapel expansion. 4. All Fire Lanes will have signage to indicate that no parking will be allowed. We would appreciate the Snowmass Chapel and Community Centers written acknowledgement and agreement to the above life safety issues. As always, we look forward to our continued working relationship with the Chapel on their proposed expansion. goo ------------------------------------------- Exhibit G &A, " Page I of 3 McLaughlin Water Engineers, Ltd. US /-2 4A15 C Aspon, Co. 0,1611 FAX TRANSMITTAL: phone: (303)925-1920 FAX 0• 5-1974 FAX NO. q ? 2" —j 2 6 / DATC: TO: COMPANY: FROM: RE: 11HE PRO. 0 Number of pages (total including this sheet) 3 If you don't receive all pages, PILDSO contact at our office. Phone (303)095-1920. Thank You. Comments: C///?,(!r 5 cr'�/ G/7 Ztj2 4 00 U Exhibit G Page 2 of 3 M . • E McLAUGI LIN WATER ENGINEF;RS, lyd. 1l l f AAnC ACFt:N,COLORADO 81611 990-925.1920 910-925-11446X muca:p��iiCrpl:�wl MEMORANDUM TO: Robed Garcia- SWSD District Manager From: G. Dean Derosier, P. E. Date: May 10. 2001 RE: Snowmass Chapel -Conceptual Review Comment: 65-150.80 The District System does have the capacity and ability to serve this project for both water and waste water. This system will be required to be looped to provide adequate fire protection for the new facilities. The District's existing 15" VCP main collection line will need to be relocated. WATER: The existing 8" DIP water line is located behind the existing building and dead-ends at a fire hydrant located in the middle of the proposed new structure. The existing line will need to be relocated behind the existing and proposed structure. The existing fire hydrant will need to be relocated to the front of the new Cbapel. The District will require that this line be extended across Brush Creek and connect to an existing 8" line in Anderson Ranch which dead-ends near the main parking lot. This will provide a looped water system to provide better and more reliable water senice and increase fire protection to both the Anderson Ranch and Chapel. The existing line as installed will not be able to provide adequate fire flows to service the new structure. Interconnection of these two lines was included in the original layout of this ;area. Additional casements and/or property will need to be obtained to reroute the water line behind the new building as it will need to cross the property behind the Chapel. New easements will be needed to extend the line to the new Eire hydrant location and to the connection with the existing line from Anderson Ranch. The new water line will cross Brnlsh Creek and approvals from the Corps of Engineers for a Nationwide 404 Permit will be required. The Chapel should contact the Fire Department to obtain the exact fire hydrant locations needed to service the project. All main line water line extensions will be 8" minimum Cl 52 Ductile Iron pipelines. Service line sizing to the facility is dependent on flows needed. Existing lines may need to be relocated and resizcd to provide adequate service. —day _ Exhibit G Page 3 of 3 SE W F.R: The new building is proposed to be located directly overtop of the District'! existing I S" VCP main line. This existing 15" VCP line will need to be relocated as part of the project. The refocation will be to the bast of the proposed structure. This is the main sewer line from the Village area, Wood Run, Ridge Run, Divide, Center, Etc, and service must be continuously maintained. New manholes will be required as well as services from the Chapel. The main sewer line relocation will be 15" SDR 26 PVC with standard manholes and the 4" services are to b :900 Cl 150 PVC. CT. QQer se , P .. CC: Robert Garcia - SWSD MWE - Denver taU'a�v�apr uviwd o�ulY!•1!6.RO 0 t- Exhibit H page 1 of 7 08-04-97.TC Page 3 Item No. 6: 2ND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 12. SERIES OF 1997 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOUNTAIN VIEW EMPLOYEE HOUSING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Manchester made a motion to approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1997, seconded by Hatfield. Joyce Ohlson explained changes to the Ordinance since First Reading which included; a Condition which states that the outside color and materials will be reviewed by the the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a Building Permit, any new bus stops be covered and lighted, all necessary easements be provided by the Town, and that a reference be made to language in Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1987 which addresses unit density on certain parcels. After further discussion, a role call vote was taken and the motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 7: RECONSIDERATION OF 2ND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 8, SERIES OF 1997 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SN03VMASS CLUB PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RELATING TO PARCELS 7 AND 8 Council member Boineau stepped down from the Council table. Hatfield made a motion to reconsider Second Reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1997. Burwell seconded the motion. Ohlson explained that at their meeting on July 21, 1997, Council agreed to reconsider Second Reading of this Ordinance. The applicant's expectation was that the Ordinance be an amendment to the Snowmass Club PUD, not a stand-alone PUD. The motion to reconsider was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. Council member Boineau abstained. Burwell made a motion to approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1997, seconded by Manchester. Hatfield stated that he is opposed to lack of consistency with the Master Plan's scenic quality goa s an ac o a or a e ousmg mitigation. A Role (.Call vote was taken an reconsideration o Second Reading of the Ordinance was approved by a vote of 3 in favor to 1 opposed. Mayor Grenda, Council members Manchester and Burwell voted in favor. Council member Hatfield opposed. Council member Boineau abstained. Item No. 8: 1ST READING- ORDINANCE NO. 14, SERIES OF 1997 AN ORDINANCE RATIFYING AND REAFFIRMING THE OBLIGATIONS OF THE TOWN PURSUANT TO CERTAIN LEASE AGREEMENTS FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES Exhibit H Page 2 of 7 07-07-97.TC Page 2 Item No. 4: GUEST-MICHAEL ADAMS REQUEST FOR FUNDING-COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES ENTRANCEIMPROVEMENTS Michael Adams stated that Country Club Estates was impacted by the realignment of Owl Creek Road due to the Burnt Mountain development. He said that the Aspen Ski Company and the Snowmass Land Company discussed contribution to upgrade the private entrance of Fairway Drive during the Burnt Mountain review. He explained that since the road realignment the entrance no longer feels like a residential street, tourists attempt to use Fairway Drive as a short cut to the Snowmass Club which increases traffic, traffic speed on Fairway Drive has increased, and the Two Creeks Day Skiers use this street for parking to avoid parking fees. Adams is requesting that $21,000 be allocated from the Burnt Mountain Settlement Agreement mitigation funds for construction of a stone entryway design at the entrance to Fairway Drive. The Snowmass Homeowner's Association passed a Resolution in support of this request. Suiter explained that mitigation monies outlined in the Burnt Mountain Agreement are earmarked for certain impacts that were created by the development. One fund not earmarked was a donation of $250,000 for public improvements. Grenda suggested the Town donate a portion of the costs. Bill Burwell read the Homeowner's Resolution and encouraged the Town to support this request as a community safety issue in a residential area. Marianne Rakowski stated that the funds outlined in the Agreement are allocated for transportation purposes and for public improvements, and cannot be used for private funding. She stated that RETT funds could be used if the property is located in a Town right-of-way. Joyce Ohlson stated that a variance may be required from the Town for this project. Council requested that the homeowners contact Joyce Ohlson in the Planning Department to determine the proper procedure to process the application. Council directed Art Smythe to increase traffic patrol on this road. Item No. 5: 2ND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 08, SERIES OF 1997 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE COMBINED CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SNOWMASS INTERFAITH CHAPEL SUBDIVISION. Burwell made a motion to approve second reading of the Ordinance, seconded by Manchester. Lee Alice Johnson submitted revised copies of the Ordinance which included changes since first reading. Johnson explained that since there is no job generation rate, there will not be any impact to emp oyee housing. Manchester requested a ectton our, ., s ou rea , "T a applicant s a submit a etter of understanding between the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center and the Fire District, agreeing to jointly use the existing trash storage with an increased level of service." Jim Benson Exhibit H Page 3 of 7 explained the inappropriate uses of the current space in relation to the need for additional space. 07-07-97.TC Page 3 Council requested deletion of Condition No. 5, stating that this issue was addressed during first reading, and approved that Town fees be waived. After further discussion, the motion was approved by a vote of 3 in favor to 1 opposed. Bomeau abstained. Hatfield opposed. Grenda,Burwell and Manchester voted in favor. Hatfield stated that he feels there are employee housing issues and that the development does not comply with the Town's Master Plan relative to scenic quality issues. Item No. 6: MANAGER'S REPORT RETT & Sales Tax Revenues Report Suiter explained that 1997 Town revenues may have Tabor Amendment implications. Staff will update Council in August to determine if a 1997 Special Election ballot question is necessary. Comprehensive Plan Suiter explained that this item was placed on today's Agenda as a Council update, and was not intended to bypass the Oversight Committee. Mayor Grenda stated xhat discussion of this item will be removed from the Council Retreat Agenda since the Oversight Committee would not be able to meet before the Council Retreat. Town Council and Staff Retreat Suiter asked that Council submit any expectations or discussion items to him for the Retreat Agenda. He stated that a Council dinner will follow Monday's Retreat session on July 14, 1997, 6:30 p.m. at the Snowmass Club. The Draw Parcel Suiter suggested that staff move forward with a Feasibility Analysis Study. Grenda stated that Reid Haughey, of A.P.E. (Aspen Pitking Employee)Housing,has asked to be involved in the Draw Parcel discussions. Council members Manchester and Boineau represent Council at the meetings. Vacation Suiter informed Council he will be taking two weeks vacation beginning on July 21. Suiter will be in Town the first week and will attend the July 21 Council Meeting. He will be out of Town during the week of July 28. Pool Committee Suiter stated that he will arrange for a Pool Committee meeting to be held after the Council Retreat. _ � A00 Exhibit H Page 4 of 7 SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 06-16-97 Mayor Grenda called to order the Regular Meeting of the Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday, June 16, 1997 at 4:00 p.m. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Ted Grenda, Judi Burwell, Jack Hatfield, Bill Boineau COUNCIL ABSENT: Michael Manchester STAFF PRESENT: Gary Suiter, Town Manager; Lee Alice Johnson, Assistant Town Planner; John McCarty, Landscape Architect; Hunt Walker, Director of Public Works; Brian Olson, Sergeant, Police Department; Rhonda B. Coxon, Deputy Town Clerk PUBLIC PRESENT: Mike McLar y, Jim Hooker, Jeff Tippett, Bob Fridstein, John Wilkinson, Jim Pokrandt, Madeline Osberger, Diedre Boineau, Brent Gardner-Smith,B.J. Adams, Gary Ross,Rick Griffin Melissa Schmidt, Ben Dodge and other members of the public interested in today's Agenda items. Item No. 2: APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF 05-27-97 Boineau made a motion to approve the Minutes.of May 27, 1997, seconded by Burwell. Hatfield asked that under the Manager's Report, within the Snowmelt Road paragraph the first sentence be changed to read, "Suiter stated that repairs have been made to damages on the new concrete on Snowmelt Road caused earlier when two vehicles were driven around the barricades and onto the freshly poured concrete, The drivers were issued tickets......". There being no further discussion, the Minutes were approved as amended by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. Council member Manchester was absent. Item No. 3: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no Public Non-Agenda items. Item No. 4: PUBLIC HEARING-ORDINANCE NO, 08. SERIES OF 1997 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON ORDINANCE NO. O8, SERIES OF 1997, APPROVING THE COMBINED CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT Exhibit H Page 5 of 7 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SNOWMASS INTERFAITH CHAPEL SUBDIVISION 06-16-97.TC Page 2 Mayor Grenda opened the Public Hearing for public comment at 4:03 p.m. Suiter noted for the record that notification and submission requirements have met in accordance with the Municipal Code. There being no public comment, the Public Hearing was closed at 4:04 p.m. Item No. 5: 1 ST READING -ORDINANCE NO, 08, SERIES OF 1997 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON ORDINANCE NO. 08, SERIES OF 1997, APPROVING THE COMBINED CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SNOWMASS INTERFAITH CHAPEL SUBDIVISION Burwell made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 08, Series of 1997, seconded by Grenda. Johnson noted that the PUD was approved by Ordinance in 1982, and this proposal is within the parameters that were set forth in that Ordinance. Johnson explained three issues need to be discussed today, the Parking Agreement,which needs to be signed by Anderson Ranch, the Fire Department, and the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center; emergency access for the Fire Department, and the utility issue. Hatfield questioned the necessity for the size of the building. Burwell explained the size was determined by need and usage planned for the building. Hatfield requested that staff determine_if this project will generate employee housing. The location o e new grave Ted, overflow parking lot for the Fire epartment. There being no further discussion the Ordinance was approved by a vote of 3 in favor to 0 opposed. Council member Boineau abstained and Council member Manchester was absent. Hatfield voted in favor reluctantly. Item No. 6: RESOLUTION NO. 26, SERIES OF 1997 A RESOLUTION PERMITTING A COMBINED CONCEPTUAL& FINAL REVIEW OF A MINOR DEVELOPMENT & WAIVING CERTAIN SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE GRACIES CABIN PARCEL Boineau made a motion to approve Resolution No. 26, Series of 1997, seconded by Burwell. Johnson noted that this is a Resolution reviewing the submission process. The submission will be further reviewed by Council in July. The Resolution was approved by , a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. Council member Manchester was absent. Exhibit H 6�'q7 Page 6 of 7 [because em No. 2: Resolution No. 11. Series of 1997 Discussion and action regarding Resolution No. 11, Series of 1997 recommending conceptual and final approval of a minor PUD modification to the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center. hlson asked the Commission if they had all the packet information as it was distributed in two rts and she apologized for it being distributed that way. hlson stated that the Council made a determination on May 27th that this is a minor application the original Snowmass Chapel and Community Center PUD included this component. is is a modification to the original PUD with some discussion about architecture of style and mpatibility. The square footage was recognized in the original PUD and does not go beyond at. Benson said this is really Phase 2 of this project. Charlie Eckert, Architect for the project, viewed the request for the applicant. Eckert stated that the property is owned by the Snowmass Chapel and they are adding a two story 4400 sq R community center, all handicapped accessible with an elevator upstairs. A breezeway will be connecting the two buildings. Eckert said the architecture compatibility fits nicely with the existing Chapel, and it will be done in the same siding, roofing, and same color. Also included in this project slight extension and resurfacing of the parking lot which is shared with Anderson Ranch, the Fire Department and the Chapel. It was pointed out that the Chapel owns the parking lot. Eckert reviewed the proppsed parking area changes. Ohlson said the Fire Department will be submitting plans in the fall and their plans will dove tail well with the Chapel plan. There was also discussion regarding the dumpster locations. Benson said that the parking lot use between the different entities is reviewed annually. Benson said that no overnight parking or recreational vehicles are allowed to use the lot. There was discussion as to the uses at the new community center. Benson reviewed the landscaping. Pease suggested additional trees for the area. Huggins suggested putting together a "dream" landscape plan. Umbreit suggested having a rendering done so that people could have a visual concept of what could be done, and felt that it might help get people more excited about getting involved in donations. Brady made a motion to approve Resolution No. 11, Series of 1997. Ohlson suggested two additional conditions. Number 5 would be that the final ordinance and final land use Plan should specify that the parking lot is a required element of the Chapel development and shall not be conveyed or developed separately, and Number 6 that the applicant supply revised plans showing the relocation of the fire hydrant, if required by the Fire Department and that all . necessary easements be provided to accommodate the relocation of the sanitation lines. Pease wanted to add to the Recommendations that a landscaping plan outlining the planting schedule prior to first reading should be provided. Brady amended his motion to approve the conceptual and final approval subject to the addition of the two conditions and the landscaping recommendation above. Umbreit seconded. All in favor by a vote of 4 to 0. Benson abstained. Non-Agenda Item Item 1. Complaints. 431 Item No. 2: Second Reading of Ordinances . . Exhibit H a. Ordinance No. 11 page 7 of 7 Series of 1982 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 8 , SERIES OF 1980 , AND APPROVING CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TO THE GROSS PARCEL PLAT FOR THE SNOWMASS CLUB SUBDIVISION APPROVED PURSUANT TO OR- DINANCE NO. 8, SERIES OF 1980. This Ordinance provides for an amendment to allow a chapel as a permitted use on Parcel 7 and parking require- ments on Parcels 7 and 8 of the Snowmass Club Subdivision P.U.D. Councilmember Tippett moved to adopt Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1982 , on second reading. Councilmember Rogers seconded. Rich_ Linquanti , attorney for the Snowmass Comp in= gwrled as to w et er of n� ri€Sfs�se Company might xpec o receive employee housing cre it or tthe one uni to e a owe on arce , care aker/ cu o ian uni or e c a el,dep_en ing u on the res riZ'& ion ns Placed on said unit i— n the rinal p at. Following iscussion, Town anner Et ridge was irec ed to follow- up on this issue as part of the final plat process. There being no further discussion, a roll call vote was taken: Desmond, aye; Francis , aye; Johnson, aye; Kevan , aye; Rogers, aye; Tippett, aye; Wall, nay. The motion to adopt Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1982 , on second reading was carried by a vote of 6- in favor, 1 opposed. Councilmember Wall voted in opposition. b. Ordin nce No. Series of 1982 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF THE LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY OWNED BY THE TOWN FOR RESTRICTED (PMH) HOUSING. Councilmember Tippett moved to adopt Ordinance No. 12 , Series of 1982 , on second reading. Councilmember Rogers seconded. Councilmember Wall pointed out a correction in the Council vote on first reading. Councilmember Johnson was absent and his absence should be reflected in the Ordinance copy. There being no further discussion, a roll call vote was taken: Desmond, aye; Francis, aye; Johnson, nay; Kevan, aye; Rogers, aye; Tippett, aye; Wall, aye. The motion to adopt Ordinance No. 12 , Series of 1982 , on second read- ing, as corrected, was carried by a vote of 6 in favor, 1 opposed. Councilmember Johnson voted in opposition. Item No. 3: Resolutions 04 2a mom a. Resolution No. 48 Series of 1982 Exhibit I Page 1 of 5 PARKING LOT USE, MAINTENANCE & IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this I Stlt day of October. 1998_ by and between the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation ("SCCC") and the Anderson Ranch Arts Center("ARAC"), and the Snowmass Wildcat Fire District, a Colorado quasi-municipal corporation ("SWFD"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the undersigned are owners of contiguous parcels of real property located in Snowmass Village, Colorado; WHEREAS, said parcels of real property are served by a parking lot located on SCCC property ("Parking Lot's, accessed by a Town road ("Access Road") currently jointly used according to an Agreement between the parties dated November 1991 ("1991 Agreement'; WHEREAS, the undersigned desire to terminate the 1991 Agreement and establish an updated agreement regarding the common use, maintenance and improvement of said parking lot; WHEREAS, this Agreement is based upon pursuit of Option 1 of the Architectural Plan Letter D and the timetable and items under Phasing as indicated by the Parking Lot Meeting Minutes of February 25, 1997, attached hereto as Exhibit "2'; and NOW THEREFORE. in consideration of the promises, covenants and agreements hereinafter contained the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Parking Lot. The Parking Lot, the subject of this Agreement, is described as Lot 2A presently established and in place and owned by the SCCC, centrally located between the other parries' properties. The deed granting such ownership is attached as ,addendum B making it a part of this Agreement in reference. _. Access Road. The Access Road extends off of Owl Creek Road near the intersection with Brush Creek Road, and is on Town of Snowmass Village property. The parties hereto aeree to the intent of formally having this Access Road declared a public road, to be improved. named and maintained as a Town public road, accessing the multiple properties of the parties. Until such time as the access Road is in fact a public road. the parties agree to assume the responsibility therefor on the same basis as the Parking Lot. _. Sharing of Costs. The costs, maintenance and improvements for use of the above described Parking Lot ''A shall be shared based on the following percentages: SCCC @ 45%: ARAC 1 55°'o and SWFD 3.00,10. ' _ am=) Exhibit i Page 2 of 5 (a) Assessment of contributions in the appropriate ratio are all to be cash - or, if agreed by the other party, in-kind service which shall be given a value as mutually agreed upon by the parties from time to time. (b) A perpetual non-exclusive access easement will be granted by SCCC to SWFD to a parking area on SWFD property south of the parking lot as noted in Architectural Plan Letter D("Parking Lot Plan") in exchange for SWFD relinquishing rights to ten (10) spaces in the Parking Lot. This provision shall not be affected by termination of this Agreement. (c) The Parking Lot shall be used primarily by SCCC on Sundays, religious holidays and other SCCC related events, which usage will increase upon expansion of the SCCC facility including its proposed sanctuary. The Parking_ Lot shall be used primarily by ARAC on weekdays June through September and for other ARAC rel a—te-d events su-c has a Annuil —.—Auction. SC an A agree to ma a est efforts to cooperatively plan peak usages by each organization with SCCC having the primary use on special service days such as funerals and memorials. (d) This Agreement will be in effect for one year at a time, and on or about each anniversary date, the directors of SCCC and ARAC will review, and if necessary and so agreed, modifv the Agreement with any substantial modifications to be approved by their respective board of directors. These individuals will work cooperatively together to identify peak use times and numbers of vehicles to determine an appropriate use schedule. 4. Improvements. A current plan for improvements to said Parking Lot has been approved with consensus between ARAC and SCCC, with work to begin May 15, 1998, or earlier if weather permits. SCCC and ARAC shall share in the cost of agreed upon improvements of the Parking Lot in the ratio established in the above Paragraph 3. Said improvement:ian shall be attached as Architectural Plan Letter D. attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "I". 5. Maintenance. SCCC and ARAC shall share in the wst of regular maintenance including snow plowing, grading and graveling, striping, clearing of debris, landscaping and insuring the Parking Lot according to the ratio established in Paragraph 3(a). A budget of such maintenance shall be approved in advance of expenditures and any extraordinary expenses of over $1,000.00 shall be approved in advance. other than for emergency purposes. 6. Restrictions. The parties agree that the Parking Lot. as herein described, is for the exclusive use of the parties to this Agreement for the purpose of parking vehicles by the parties and their guests and invitees. Limitations on such use are: (a) No overnight parking except as available and with the permission of the Manager. There shall be designated areas for overnight parking for ARAC residents or guests. limited to six (6) spaces located in the north-east comer. For summer use an additional twenty (:.0) spaces will be available during week days only. r .b) Vehicles determined by the Manager to be abandoned snail be towed at Exhibit owner's expense. - Page 3 of 5 (c) No camping or recreational vehicles shall be IeR in the Parking Lot for longer than twenty-four (24) hours without prior consent of the parties. (d) Parties shall use best efforts to contact each other in advance of special events or extraordinary use of the Parking Lot. (e) SWFD shall have no right to parking spaces in the Parking Lot, only the access right to its own parking area via the easement referenced in Paragraph 3(b) above. 7. Manaper. The Director of SCCC shall perform the duties and responsibilities of Parking Lot Manager as described above in Paragraph 3,Use. This Manager will perform these duties as part of his or her job as Director of SCCC and SCCC will be compensated by credit for an in-kind contribution valued at$780.00 annually. 8. Assessments. SCCC and ARAC shall share in assessments according to the ratio per Paragraph 3(a) above. The Manager shall provide notice to these parties setting forth the amount owed for expenses pursuant to this Agreement on a quarterly basis. In the event a party fails to pay any portion of expenses, or provide agreed-upon in-kind services, for which such party is responsible within fifteen (15) days after such notice is mailed to the part•, the amount due shall bear interest from and after the due date at the rate of eighteen percent (18 110) per annum, and the Manager or any of the parties may commence an action for collection of the amount due. The defaulting party or parties shalf pay all costs of collecting theamount due, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Any failure of the Manager to pro"ide timely notice of expenses owed shall not be deemed a waiver of such assessment. 9. Notices. Notice, as herein required, shall be deemed delivered upon being personally delivered, or placement in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, and bearing he address of the party or panes as shown below: SCCC President of the Board Snowmass Chapel & Community Center PO Box 17169 Snowmass Viiiage. CO 81615 with a cc: to: Director, SCCC AFAC President of thn Board Anderson Ran,:h Arts Center PO Box 5598 Snowmass Village. CO 51615 with a cc: to: Director, ARAC 10. indemnification and Liability Insurance. SCCC and ARAC hereby—.lease. indemnifv and :told each other and SWFD harmless from anv claims for damage cr injury related to the use of this parking lot by guests. agents, licensees or invitees of any party. E=ach parry further agrees :o maintain in full force and effect at all times a policy of general liability insurance covering the Parking Lot area with each of the parties named as a co-insured, in amounts mutually agreed upon by the parties that the parties acknowledge and agme that SWFD Exhibit Page 4 of 5 shall name the other parties as additional insureds on its policy of general liability insurance to a maximum coverage of SWFD's liability under the provisions of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act. In the event a party fails to provide such insurance, the other parties may obtain the coverage and assess the defaulting party for such costs. 11. Amendment and Termination. It is the intent of the parties to create a cooperative long-term relationship between SCCC and ARAC regarding their shared use, maintenance and improvement of the Parking Lot. This Agreement shall only be terminated or modified by mutual written agreement between both SCCC and ARAC. 12. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of all successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed and delivered in several counterparts, each of which shall have the force and effect of one original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. SNOWMASS CHAPEL AND COMMUNITY CENTER, INC., a Colorado nonprofit corporation By: "r� - J 'es W. Light ANDERSON RANCH ARTS CENTE B . l r-t %< Lj SNOWMASS WILDCAT FIRE DISTRICT, a Colorado quasi-municipal corporation By: (Notary blocks follow on next pa¢el J --------------- Exhibit I Page 5 of 5 [Notary blocks for Parking Lot Use, Maintenance and Improvement Agreement] STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing was subscribed and sworn to before me this_JSIay of , ev„ r 1998, by James W. Light, as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center, Inc. 'W"11111111 Witness my hand and official seal. NOTAftp My commission expires: � l J '� v2 . pbeori �� I t c t�� Notary Public e "I" MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAML AW fin.i9M STATE OF C ) S. 11C ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing was subscribed and sworn to before me this day of ljode.vvg� 1998. by 3esrrcr—Qtk� of Anderson Ranch Arts Center. F;gvA CL*SUS 6P Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: MICHAEL S. ETTI GR NOTARY PUBLIC; N0. 02ET5036i94Zotary Pi.iolic QUALIFIED IN NASSAU COUNTY STATE OF COLORADO j COMMISSION EXPIRES DECEMBER 12, 199 ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing was subscribed and sworn to before me this—�t day of u mrI, 1998, by Ill IIAiAq , as of Snowmass Wildcat Fire District. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 10 t ot2 y Publit'� U ,•``''stun Chapei/ParkinttLot.agt �����Q '••, 'V P`dp s COTTLE GRAYBEAL YAW architects Exhibit J Page 1 of 3 September 13,2001 . RECEIVED SEP 13 2001 SrKY*Tmss Village Community Development W.Jim Wahistroln Community Development Department Town of Snowmais Villagg PO Box 5010 Snowmass Village;CO 81615 via fax. 923-1861 3 pp. Re: New Snow mass Chapel Sanctuary Sketch Plsm Submittal Dear Mr.Wahlstrirm: In your Technical Comments on our Sketch Plan Submittal you provided a table of prt jest data which you asked us to fill out. We did so,but did not complete the line for Gross Bui ding Area because we under:tood it to be"Not Applicable." In your Staff Report you asked tha' this information be provided, in order to consider adding a Floor Area limitation to the reel nremeats of the PUD. The table below slows a current take-off of Gross Floor Areas,including covered waL ways and decks. These numbers are the result of a take-off from the latest drawings and so dill r slightly from those given trhen the submittal was first compiled,back in March. (The main di Terence has been extending the lower level beneath the Nursery in order to create a separate Baiter Room,as idea suggested by :he contractor as part of their estimating process.) Original Chapel Community Center i New Chapel Totals GrolmdLewl 6,050 2,355 7,426 15,831 Upper Lew! 0 2,190 7,5741L 9,764 Covered Exterior 160 960 1,175 2,295 Totals 6,210 5,505 16,1751 27,890 ASPEN:Port Office Box 529 Basalt.CO 81621 www.ebyarehiteetecom tel 970:927.4923 fax 970.927.8578 email:aspen @ceyarchiteas.com ASPEN TELLURIDE VAIL COTTLE GRAYBEAL YAW arebiteets Exhibit J Here is your original table with the Gross rloor area information added. Page 2 of 3 SNQWMASS CHAPEL EXPANSION L01' 1, SNOWMASS INTERFAITH CHAPEL SUBDIVISION, A PORTION OF PARCEL 7 Catego ry Existing Standard E)dst(ng Condition Proposed Permitted Uses Chopek Public rr*ting Same Permitted Uses Sam*Permitted roemx i,^.oune61 rooms(a); (Net*:no daycare operation No daycale Dsmirs; SWcV. 1Qdien; oxw on this sibs) Admm�blradwe Me"(a1: Itasldemiel Unit foceesso Maximum Number o one,net to exam 1,200 af. same ems. To be deed Dvallina Unit restricted as Employ e Housing Maximum Building 15,000 s t. 10,764 a.f.existing 20, a.f: wed; Coven s 19,947 Lt. oced Gross FloorArea Notopp6eabI*—Themisno current rhtion on Gran 11,716 One,ext.wslkweys) 27,600(Inc.exL was ways) Floor Mee toll this PUD 'mum PaAdny antl ,000 J.. ems tM Drf Coven Maximum ulldino He ght a0 feet abovs natural grede 29.6 feet existing at center 78 fast pwuding set pb except at the steeple,which dwstory portion of do ahsli be designed In Community Center PiopoNon to this buMirg and ahsll be subject to approval 'of this Town Council i Avers *Buildin Hal sN 15.74 et 26 feet maxlmtm Op*n Solve Arm 2S%(fillnlstandard 1r LOT 2A, SNOWMASS INTERFAITH CHAPEL SUBDIVISION REPLAT"All" A PORTION OF PARCEL 8 Category ExIstina Standard ExIstina Condition Proposed Po"nM&d Uses Paddn ; Tnas Same Same mum Number of 1 1 axttang Some Pallid SO: almum Number of 1 105 axwft 62Me .parift oni*Penb9tty *nhlp of Lot 2A shall Sam* some net be trsnsWred IndeorridenDir of Lett t RECEIVED SEP 13 2001 . Snowmsss Village Community Development s� o ASPEN:Posr Office Box J29 Basalt,CO s 162 t wdw.csyuchitecu.com =1970.927.4925 hx970.027.e579 email:aspen@cayamhlteL'ts.eorrt ASPEN TELLURIDE VAIL COTTLE GRAYBEAL YAW a.ctrr.crr Exhibit J Page 3 of 3 We are sending st parately a hard copy of this letter along with a set of reduced forma prints illustrating which area In each building were included in this tabulation. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any comments or questions. ' Sincerely _ Bob Schiller Ene. Waebnom06t1Dl.doe RECEMED SEP 13 200111// Sno*Rness village Community Development `40 ASPEN:Pon Office Box 529 RuWt,CO 81621 www.cgyarchiteen.com W 970 S127.492S fax 970.927.6578 emad:aspcn@cgyaichitectc.com :. ASPEN TELLURIDE VAIL SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING A SKETCH PLAN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE SNOWMASS CHAPEL. WHEREAS, the last approval of the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center was documented in Ordinance No. 08, Series of 1997; and WHEREAS, the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center, Inc. ("Applicant") has submitted a Sketch Plan PUD Amendment on March 9, 2001 and subsequently revised it on June 11, 2001 to address staff comments (see Exhibit A for general layout); and WHEREAS, the Sketch Plan PUD Amendment proposes to construct an approximate 9,483 square foot sanctuary building addition with a total floor area square footage of approximately 14,151 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application on September 5 and 19, 2001 and heard the recommendations of the Toyvn Staff and public comments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft resolution for the Sketch Plan PUD Amendment on October 3, 2001 outlining its findings, recommendations and conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Findings. Based upon the information submitted and testimony in the record, the Planning Commission finds as follows: Architecture: 1. The "signature" church architecture near the Town entry is favorable. 2. The architecture of the sanctuary addition seemed contemporary for Snowmass Village image. During the Planning Commission review, the applicant amended the architectural concept in a manner generally deemed appropriate by the Commission. The concepts presented at the September 19'" meeting are consistent with the desired village image. Planning Commission finds that, based upon these concepts, the architecture should be further refined during the Preliminary Plan review process. 0441 mop PC Reso 01-14 - Page 2 of 13 3. The overall sanctuary height on the north elevation could be mitigated by an addition of a lower height or other architectural articulation. The revised building elevations, submitted at the September 19'h meeting, showing the projection of the vertical element on the north elevation, the horizontal banding on the north elevation, and the incorporation of the side windows to create a stepped roof is an improvement (Exhibit B). The Planning Commission finds that these changes are substantial steps in mitigating and addressing the height concerns. The applicant is encouraged to explore further means of mitigating the height impacts. 4. The overall roof mass is a concern, especially the large roof volume on the east and west elevations. The incorporation of the side windows to create a stepped roof is a visual improvement (Exhibit B). The Planning Commission finds that these changes are substantial steps in mitigating and addressing the height concerns. The applicant is encouraged to explore further means of mitigating the height impacts. Height Variance: 1. The height variance proposed above the previous 40-foot height limit of 40 feet to 78-feet for the sanctuary addition, measured along the north elevation, and the 78-foot high steeple, measured along the south elevation, may be justifiable due to the following reasons: a) The roof study prepared illustrates that 50% of the roof structures for all the existing and proposed buildings will not exceed the previous height limit of 40 feet (Exhibit C); b) Approximately 150,000 cubic feet of volume is needed for the custom organ planned for the facility as explained by the applicant. The Planning Commission finds that this type of organ is actually a unique community amenity that will help promote the economic, social, and cultural well being of the community. As a result, a variance may be justifiable if the height and mass are mitigated as per items 3 and 4 above under Architecture. The form of the structure in this case seems to be following the function; c) The roof pitch proposed is steep at approximately 14:12, which lessens the mass of the structure and is generally consistent with the mountain design characteristics that are desired in Snowmass Village; PC Reso 01-14 Page 3 of 13 d) The roof form on the side elevations has been modified to incorporate clerestory side windows allowing the roof to be stepped (Exhibit B); e) The vertical element on the north elevation has been projected to improve the architectural relief (Exhibit B); f) Horizontal banding has been employed in the north elevation building design to lessen the perceived height of the structure (Exhibit B); and g) Berming in front of the north building elevation is proposed. 2. It is understood that a possible use of a cross might be placed at an appropriate scale and size above the 78-foot height limit subject to review and approval during the Preliminary Plan PUD process. 3. A few hundred yards along the Brush Creek Road frontage, located west of the Chapel, provide views of the site looking east. These views during the site visit indicated that the sanctuary would break the ridgeline of the mountains in the background. Planning Commission finds that the sanctuary should be an exception to the ridgeline restrictions due to the usage in this particular case and because the height variance criteria are being met. The Planning Commission finds that "windows," which open the view to the Chapel from Brush Creek Road, are appropriate. The Planning Commission also finds that a combination of earth berming and a layering of landscape materials from the Brush Creek Road right-of-way to the Chapel, which should consist of grasses, shrubs, and trees, are important to minimize the visual impact of the project. This element of the design should be refined through the preliminary PUD review and approval process. Uses: 1. The applicant stated that the existing chapel would become a 175 to 200 seat community hall once the sanctuary addition is constructed. It would be used primarily for public and private meetings or functions, and wedding receptions. 2. Two counseling rooms in the Community Center would become offices and another counseling room would be converted to serve as the connection to the new sanctuary. 3. The applicant stated that there would be no balcony within the sanctuary. -f 43� PC Reso 01-14 Page 4 of 13 4. The lower level of the new sanctuary would be used for Sunday School, counseling services, a choir room, meeting rooms for community and church- related groups, mechanical and storage areas, and restrooms which may be shared by golfers and the general public. 5. The Planning Commission finds, therefore, that a suitable plan should be established which satisfactorily addresses the on-site and off-site overflow parking needs regardless of the use and transit service to and from the facility. Parking: 1. The Planning Commission has considered the issue of parking in some detail. With regard to this matter the Planning Commission finds that the Land Use and Development Code does not specify parking standards for this type of facility. Planning Commission finds that the parking rate of 1:3.3 for fixed seating within the sanctuary addition and a 1:5 rate for overflow seating is acceptable in determining the parking required for the facility. The existing parking is contained on a separate parcel owned by SCCC. This parking is shared between the Snowmass Chapel, Anderson Ranch, and to a lesser degree the Snowmass Wildcat Fire Protection District. There is a joint use agreement related to this parking. It dictates that the entities will coordinate activities and use of the parking lot to minimize the impact of parking beyond the site. The Planning Commission finds that this approach to joint parking utilization and minimizing the amount of hard surface areas within Snowmass Village is appropriate and has functioned successfully at this location for many years. 2. Parking will not go below the previous minimum of 105 spaces, and the applicant stated that they would not go above the previously approved parking supply of 120 spaces. The Planning Commission finds that it does not seem practical to require additional parking lot development in this area to serve the Snowmass Chapel and Anderson Ranch. Additional parking will compromise an existing park, quality landscaping, a public trail, environmentally significant areas, and/or other areas of importance to the Town. 3. The applicant and Chaffin/Light Associates indicate that an additional 30 spaces can and will be made available as overflow parking at the Chaffin/Light office property along Owl Creek Road. This location is within walking distance (approximately 750 feet) of the Snowmass Chapel. It is an appropriate location for overflow parking for the Snowmass Chapel. This shared parking arrangement is consistent with community planning buy to PC Reso 01-14 Page 5 of 13 objectives since it provides for the most efficient use of parking and eliminates the need for additional hard surfaces in this area. It will be necessary for the applicant to submit an appropriate parking easement with the preliminary application to ensure that this overflow parking will be available. The applicant also will need approval of Anderson Ranch in a suitable form, to authorize a pedestrian connection across the Anderson Ranch property. 4. To ensure that the Snowmass Chapel, Anderson Ranch, and the Snowmass Wildcat Fire Protection District can operate successfully in this area, the joint parking lot agreement should be reviewed and amended as necessary to reflect the current parking proposal. The agreement should establish procedures for coordinating, scheduling, and managing the joint use of parking in this area. Information should be presented with the preliminary PUD application to demonstrate that the joint use agreement will effectively address the issues described here. 5. The Planning Commission finds that, to the extent practicable, the various activities that will take place in the project are identified in the sketch plan application. While it is appropriate to identify such uses in the firral approval of the project, there should be some flexibility in the use of the facility. Community needs will change over time. The key is to ensure that a joint parking agreement and a backup transportation and parking mitigation plan are in place to address the limited number of instances when on-site and the Chaffin/Light overflow parking will not be adequate to accommodate parking needs. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that the applicant should submit a backup transportation and parking mitigation plan with the preliminary PUD application. This plan should describe alternative parking locations, approval of the owner of such parking or procedures for gaining temporary use of such parking, and the means for transporting people to and from any remote parking location. This plan should: a) establish procedures for notifying the Town of overflow parking needs beyond the parking areas identified in this plan; b) notify the Town of any anticipated use of Town parking lots; c) set forth procedures for obtaining approval to use Town parking lots; Such procedures to be defined during the Preliminary Plan PUD review; d) establish a commitment by the applicant to periodically review the parking arrangement with the Town to ensure that the use of the facility, .4us PC Reso 01-14 Page 6 of 13 traffic and parking impacts does not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare; and e) establish a requirement that the applicant will make appropriate adjustments to the project's operating plan should traffic and parking issues occur. 6. The driveway entrance off of Owl Creek Road could be utilized for parking on one side to accommodate overflow parking needs. The Planning Commission finds that this is an acceptable short-term parking solution to infrequent parking overflow demands; provided however, the applicant maintains adequate fire and emergency access through this area. Transportation and Traffic The Planning Commission finds that the Snowmass Chapel's primary use and traffic generation patterns correspond to period of lower traffic volumes on the internal Town roadways. Based on the historical use of the current facility and information provided with the Sketch Plan application, as reported by the applicant in their submittal, the use of the facility during the weekday is comprised of 8-10 vehicles for employee and similar users. Approximately twenty (20) vehicles may arrive midday (a total of 40 trips generated) related to the use of the facility. These trips are generated during non-peak times of the day. (Peak traffic periods are typically between about 8:00 A.M. and 10:00 A.M. and about 3:30 P.M. and 5:30 P.M.) The information shows that the majority of the facility's use occurs on the weekends, particularly on Sunday. Typically 80-100 vehicles trips are can be expected at 8:30 to 9:00 A.M. time frame and exiting about noon. Approximately 90-100 vehicles are generated for Sunday evening services. Traffic volumes are typically lower on Sundays, as the guest turnover occurs. Traffic volumes are typically highest on weekdays. While an event may occur which generates a larger number of vehicular trips, such occurrences are infrequent (i.e., Christmas or Easter service). Planning Commission finds that the traffic impacts summarized above along with the parking arrangements previously described seem to be an adequate substitute for a detailed Transportation Impact Analysis required with the Preliminary Plan PUD application. The Planning Commission finds that, given the use patterns of the facility, the existing transportation infrastructure of the Town should be adequate to accommodate this facility. Since this is an important community facility and, because the use of the facility corresponds to PC Reso 01-14 Page 7 of 13 periods of lower traffic volumes on the roads, it does not seem necessary to require further investigation of transportation related impacts. Comprehensive Plan and Related Floor Area Limitations: Planning Commission finds in favor of the application's request for a maximum 20,000 square foot building coverage, not including the 1,600 square feet of roof overhang area, and a maximum 28,000 square foot floor area limit for the site due to the following reasons: a) The approximate 7,500 square feet on the lower level of the proposed sanctuary is situated mostly below grade; b) The existing Chapel and Community Center are also partially below grade; and c) The site is constrained leaving limited areas where uses could be located. d) The purpose of the facility is unique to Snowmass Village and it is an important community facility, which benefits residents of and visitors to the community, in one way or another. The facility is distinguishable from other private residential and commercial developments. Community Purposes: 1. Planning Commission finds that the proposed facility in itself is a community benefit. 2. With the recognition of the importance of this type of improvement to both residents and visitors alike, the Town, while requiring that such facilities are compatible with the village scale and image and that site design and other similar matters are fully evaluated, could find that detailed studies related to such matters as traffic, air quality, and fiscal impacts may not be necessary. 3. There is no need for additional trails and transit facilities. The Planning Commission finds that there are an adequate number and distribution of public trails and transit facilities to provide access and service to the project. Employee Housing: 1. Planning Commission finds that the applicant's proposal to deed restrict the existing housing unit of 692 square feet within the chapel building to meet the 0441 an PC Reso 01-14 Page 8 of 13 626 square foot employee housing requirement is acceptable (Exhibit D). This proposal meets the requirement of the Town's Land Use and Development Code related to the provision of affordable employee housing. 2. Planning Commission also finds that as an option to the above proposal, the applicant may purchase a free-market unit to deed restrict for employee housing or may purchase a deed restricted unit elsewhere within the Town for use by Chapel employees; provided however, such approach is deemed consistent with the employee housing policies established by the Town Council. Natural Resources: 1. The applicant supplied a revised site plan showing the summer time survey of the wetland/riparian boundaries. The revised plans indicate that the steeple does not encroach into the 25-foot wetland/riparian setback area. 2. The proposed improvements such as the replacement pedestrian bridge, the labyrinth, and the fire lane are permissible following the Municipal Code standards and are necessary to provide pedestrian connectivity and fire protection. Community Welfare: The applicant stated that they would work with the water and sanitation district and the fire district concerning requirement for relocation of the 15-inch sewer line and the water line looping requirements for fire protection. Fiscal Impacts The Planning Commission finds that a detailed fiscal impact report, which is a requirement of a preliminary PUD application, may not be necessary for this project. The intent of the Land Use and Development Code is to identify the direct fiscal impacts of a project on the Town and special service districts and, through the land use approval process, ensures that such impacts are off set and mitigated before land use approvals are granted. The Planning Commission finds that because of the uniqueness of this project, its significance to the community may not be measured in terms of direct positive or negative benefits. In this instance, the issue is not whether this project will have direct positive or negative fiscal impacts on the Town and related taxing districts. The fiscal impacts ` IuAWO PC Reso 01-14 Page 9 of 13 of this project are indirect/secondary and difficult, at best, to calculate. The importance of this facility is its contribution to the quality of life in the community. It helps to sustain the social and cultural environment that is essential for a successful and sustainable community. As proposed, the facility accomplishes this objective. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that it may not be necessary to provide a detailed fiscal impact report for this project with the preliminary PUD application, nor should fiscal impacts be a measure for approving or denying this application. Air Quality With regard to air quality, the Planning Commission finds a substantial amount of information has been collected over the years regarding air quality within the Brush Creek Valley. Based on the information provided with the sketch plan application, and given the history of the present facility, the Planning Commission does not believe that issues of idling vehicles, wood burning fireplaces, and related air quality typically found in residential and commercial development are of concern in this project. The primary source of air pollution from this project will be road dust (PM10) generated by traffic on the road system. Based on the historical use of the current facility and information provided with the Sketch Plan application, the use of the facility occurs primarily during periods when traffic volumes are lower. The information shows that during the week there are typically a small number of cars at this facility. The largest gatherings are typically during the evening hours and on Sunday,when traffic volumes are lower. The Planning Commission finds that this is an important community facility. It may not be necessary to require further investigation of the quantity and composition of pollutants that will be discharged on a daily and seasonal basis or require further study and identification of the dispersal qualities of any pollution because the use of the facility corresponds to periods of lower traffic volumes on the roads. Miscellaneous: The application has been submitted and reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Section 16A-5-390 of the Town of Snowmass Village Land Use and Development Code (the "Municipal Code"). -l �q � PC Reso 01-14 Page 10 of 13 Section Two: Recommendation. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Town Council approve the Sketch Plan Planned Unit Development ("PUD") Amendment for the Snowmass Chapel Expansion for a 300-seat sanctuary addition and permit the applicant to prepare and submit a Preliminary Plan PUD Amendment application. Said approval should be consistent with the Sketch Plan, as revised, and subject to satisfying the following conditions in Section Four of this resolution. Section Three: Preliminary PUD Application. Certain planning issues and, as a result, submission information requirements aimed at allowing the community to properly evaluate a development project, may not be applicable to this application because of it quasi-public nature and due to the fact that it is an important community facility. To clarify the key issues that are applicable to this application, that the Planning Commission finds that the following should be the minimum submission information requirements necessary to effectively review those issue related to this important community facility that are of community- wide concern. Detailed studies related to a Fiscal Impact Analysis, Transportation Impact Analysis, and an Air Quality Analysis may not be necessary. a) Minimum Contents as set forth in Section 16A-5-40(b) b) Preliminary Development Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(b) c) Comparison to Sketch Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(c) d) Listing of Proposed Variations as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(d) e) Architectural Plans as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(e) f) Landscape Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(f) g) Solid Waste Disposal Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(h) h) Energy Conservation Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(i) i) Open Space Map as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(k) j) Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5- 340(c)(2)(m) O ��O I PC Reso 01-14 Page 11 of 13 k) Clearing, Grading and Drainage Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5- 340(c)(2)(n) 1) Geologic Report as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(q) m) Brush Creek Impact Report as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(r) n) Construction Management Plan as set forth in Section 16A-5-340(c)(2)(t) Section Four: Conditions. The authorization of the Snowmass Chapel Expansion Sketch Plan PUD Amendment shall be subject to the following conditions: Architecture: 1. Planning Commission recommends its preference for traditional church or chapel architecture presented in the example European village photographs during the application review. This traditional character is better addressed by the revised architectural concept plans submitted to the Planning Commission at its September 19th meeting. 2. Side windows are to be incorporated as illustrated on revised building elevations (Exhibit B). However the applicant should continue to study the effect of using windows of a greater vertical dimension other than four (4) feet in height to improve the proportionality of the design element. The applicant should demonstrate the impacts of these options at the time of the Preliminary Plan application. In addition, side windows are desired for the lower roof step located on the side elevations. 3. The material and color of the exterior finishes should blend with the surrounding environment. 4. Due to the scale and prominent effects of the roof elements, special attention should be paid to the roofing material and color on the facility. Height Variance: 1. Landscaped berming incorporating a mix of trees, shrubs, and grasses, extending from the Brush Creek Road right-of-way to the base of the building shall be installed. The landscaping should be appropriately clustered and layered to create a natural amenity for the area and buffering of the facility. This landscaping is not expected to screen the facility, but rather to soften the .O-i5 I low PC Reso 01-14 Page 12 of 13 massing and height while allowing appropriate views of the building as seen from Brush Creek Road. The applicant should coordinate with the adjacent owner to make arrangements for these improvements. 2. Older plant material growth should be preserved to the extent possible. When appropriate, vegetation that must be eliminated shall be relocated to the extent possible along Brush Creek Road to provide further buffering. Parking: 1. Parking on the site shall be a minimum of 105 spaces as committed to by the applicant and per previous approval. The applicant committed to maintaining up to a maximum of 120 spaces per the previous approval. 2. Shuttle service during overflow events will be provided between the site and the off-site 30-space parking area located approximately 750 feet away from the site as committed by the applicant. The applicant should provide a back up plan for off-site parking demands, including notification to the Town as necessary of the need to use Town parking facilities or property off-site and use of the Town shuttles to provide transportation services between off-site facilities and the Chapel. 3. The Preliminary Plan PUD shall incorporate a specific proposal employing the management of the parking usage. The proposal should address coordination of events and parking with Anderson Ranch and the Snowmass Wildcat Fire Protection District. This proposal should be established through an updated joint use agreement between these entities. This agreement should allow for review as needed with the Town of Snowmass Village. 4. An updated parking agreement between the Snowmass Chapel and Community Center, the Fire District, and Anderson Ranch shall be provided, as committed to by the applicant, to addressed the shared parking arrangement. Natural Resources: Drainage should be directed away from the buildings, while ensuring that the Brush Creek riparian zone is adequately protected. 1 � _ PC Reso 01.14 Page 13 of 13 Timetable: If the construction is deferred for the steeple, Planning Commission agrees with the staff recommendation that a date or time frame should be established to complete such improvements. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED, as amended, this 3rd day of October, 2001, on the motion of Planning Commissioner Gustafson and the second of Planning Commissioner Stout, by a vote of 3 in favor and 0 against. (Commissioners Huggins, Benson, and Fridstein were absent; Commissioner Boineau abstained). TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION Doug Faur ,r, Ting Chairman ATTEST: C ShemCkIcIntire, Planning Commission Secretary _153 - EXHIBIT A $ Page 1 of 2 I�I►�� 1100 I: N11 ffififff -� I � f � /A �•• ,s : 7 y ow 0 tj go ZA t II I• } / ` I \� & { � A\ o t ' ` t tit v E � o � Not for Construction �� •t Preliminary Only. e•R �• +° pp t p r1li I Sn I - U tW Wetland Boundary Survey owmass Chapel & Community Center II I �� 11 gancmary C � Plan I ` EXHIBIT q / Page 2 of 2 Av till,. . I �3 a p wdCAW" --- , so 40 �r COTTLE GRAYBEAL YAW EXHIBIT architects - P89e t of 6 September 14, 2041 Mr.Jim Wahlstrom Community Dove`.opment Department Town of SnowmRis Village PO Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 via fax. 923-1861 5 pp. Re: New Snowmass Chapel Sanctuary Sketch PLIn Submittal Doar Jim: Since meeting witr the Planning Commission on 915,we have developed several mine- modifications to the Chapel exterior which respond to massing concerns expressed by he Commission members. As illustrated on the attached sketches our suggested modifications are fora-fold: First,we are proposing to add a small step to the highest roof plane, so that it is intern med by a horizontal band of clerestory windows about two thirds of the way down from the ride :. This would occur on both the east and west sides of the roof. The intent is to make the roof I less monolithic and giVe the upper part of the building more of an"inhabited"feeling,witl 3ut radically clianging the interior or exterior design. The addition of this band of windows high on either side of the Sanctuary space leads 3 the second move,which is to delete glass on the South Elevation, at the step between the 1.twer (entry)roof and the middle roof(which covers the mar of the Sanctuary). In one sense this deletion balances the added cost, light intensity and heat loss of the new clerestory wit lows. More importantly,having solid wall here will increase the dramatic impact of the glasr.at the higher step and at the wall between Narthex and Sanctuary below, _Third, we are suggesting a series of subtle stone separations in the veneer to give the b.dlding a slight horizontal blinding. This subtle offset to the dominant verticality of the building will enhance its chars I er and reduce the visual appearance of height. r ASPEN.Post Office Bo:$20 Basalt,CO B 1621 www.cgpmhitccts.eom tcl 070:937.4923 fa:970.917.8578 ematl:aspen @cgyarehltccts.eom ASPEN TELLURIDE VAIL COTTLE CRAYBEAL YAW EXHIBIT B .cblrrcJS Page 2 of 6 Fourth,we have projected the central portion of the North wall slightly and suppcated this on relatively slim columns. This relieves what some Planning Commission members see nod to perceive as a eont=ous veatical wall. We believe these,:hanges sre improvements to the design and will help to answet con .erns voiced by the Planning Commission members last week. Our intent is to prescnt these chant/es when we meet with the con mission again on 9/19. We are also worldng on a concept for additional landscaping to mediate the appesranc t of the North Elevation. :3eeame of the time required to coordinate this with the golf course wnership, we will not have that inforraation until the meeting, on 9119. Please call with ar y questions or comments. Very truly yours, �p Bob Schiller Senior Associate Eno.Four sketcher, ntsosdpmi/mowmsss ehspt It"histrom091401.dw ASPEN:Post Office Box$29 Basalt,CO 81621 www-C9Ystch1tcct1.e0m td 970.927.4925 fox 970.927.8578 email.a spen@egysrehitects.cmt ASPEN TELLURIDE PAIL 71 J•tw _,ice min � e � /:.�!� i� ice■ �q.. ,��11\ i i . s+,. a.•llr., . �► l.��� i�.. �a �4�1 gib 'w• i 11 •• n 4, il[j�IILI���'�l8l�il i�(19[l�Jlf ll�l �1�11111(fl li�flllilfl i� , ;y��---=---Mil fli►�ill,� _ ��,,, , , •� SIB iW �It NO s�for { lei /{��'i������'������i�e.l�■,�-��� • tole Jo MItIn" 40 VIA b�(,�'�f�+i �..•..: �,�t r/y - _ s1 �( _ _�flr "f �1 =t�1�17•�a '� •�♦>r`�1��11 '_ ���! �/. � �� /L�'f/���a�L JIB, �.. I"UOAA;�'jllafii a i .z \ �I f I 1 /all' Y�I Mali 1111111, It MIMI iTwj W111111I .. ..,.r, •r■Qi� tNMI 1 A♦ min rim 1 .t iilvi' ;.�. +i, lids 3� iie.....Vti•.,A 46. 1 sfrr= ti�f 1.\:.��{•r.- - IL ------- --------------- ---—------------— �. COTTLE (AKA rZrAL IAr •rcbltcctr ' EXHIBIT C Page 1 of 2 September 13,2001 RECEIVED SEP 13 2001 Snowmess Village W. Jim Wablatrom Community Development Community Development Deparnnent Town of Snow=ss Village PO Box 5010 Snowmass Mar, CO 81615 via fax. 923.1861 2 pp. Re: New Snowmass Chapel Sanctuary Sketch Plan Submittal Dear W. Wablstrom: I In your Technical Comtneru on our Sketch plan Submittal you questioned our analys s of the perce>mrge.'of proptosed'wtal roof area which would exceed the existing 40'height lim t and suggested we preFare a series of illustrations of roof heights versus existing and propc ;ad grade. At the moment we do not have the information to prepare the drawings you suggested We have, however shaded ft a attached combined roof plea to show the portions of roofs which i xcoed the 40' limit We have$Shred these from the existing grades and,as before,we have figs •ed the north roofs from the lower grade at the north end of*a building. This diagram indit ates that there ate approx. 5153 sf, of roof exceeding the 40' limit Phis is 26% of the total roof an:a(approx.20,000 sf.)of existing and proposed buildings,well belt v the 50% which is allowable. Plawe do not hesitate to contact us with any comments or questions. Sim I Bob Schiller Enc. aahbv=061301dee ASPEN.Post Office Boa 529 Basalt, CA 01621 v .cgyarehiteets.eom tel D70.927.4935 faK 970.927.8578 email:aspen@cg arehitear.com ASPEN TELLURIDE VAK 4WL"Wo i • . � 'fie 6Fs' . cn •pM�ez�' Ma�e� 0 3 L' • ' j HAP KOK . rn C4 t+,Aaae �eR:s• H+eleays' r.rgf _ �il`a51 . 61y1 O41' W *=Nor L . into," We6epc' L p.K' iii+a rs .feo'�e p.s I also �ISa __ Li'�D�/ttASS GNAPfpr RGdF 1/1'�o►It . • e rs' Irp r' a • _r+' { !'c-dr - -- Te hn Eq A { H2o b'x16�=,to*e %-.4&41 f-4-1 ti --1 -sn,n%JA ' ' a+ bxlb'�rti Grtd44t� �o�-( [,o►SE ' �^'-, •-�.pM�•ngt,..v�na� 1 l�t� ! 1,�1►5 PitEPAReo\ NW N EXHIBIT D �.: a - .t - >;�Y. • r ... '. ''r ' ' �ti� Page 1of2 Vv . .i': s. • +.t� MJt{.ii .•f5. 1�ti :: 7j, :�.� •.:� �.LIIV r L.•; _..n.• rib • `: . '• ,*;.. ` ` :Y� .: .11\_' a;�' .j •• ,'' �l. .✓ .: Y,�+�s �i; � •T r''4�' `t, .• • �•7Y'.:, •. 'CJ: a .. {yf.<•, !1. .,a. ..i. .JF/rtF 'f, I a �+ •( a. i_yY � 1 ' ..'' 1 .t 'i. "v} . •5• ~/v. •Y IJ ,�'!. , 3'�f sw/i' Y l... •y • v 3 .• rill :+bif Act },.'.s � ••,. ••f•.. •'' � •� +;±- •I• ••' b�1. +. +. ,• .i. L ..' •-'i.. '4��: .('/, ia.l.Z.,i +�Ir�.. •� }'��`1�.�• .i:4 7 `••5 :Y •:�fi:'•;ti'. ':14�'j'1:}1,'�5a' (f\L y:: .s...a s 4 i..3:• ���', .1 aN.�� ..yf.. .s•c _�h ,�1±- +:fl••Jt \ri. _1 !'K5't' iL { ) •'! .£.' �'�' ... . aln.' .,, .'" ?fZ'} re .C.L (+• ~• , •' } .:sT .7l>•'?a,�';�1''}+ .�1 •,.1:�'•, 7•��•' • y J• •'.dl '.b �� i 1 ;.^�• •• •• •'N � :� '. ' w:' :`� {. . •�f .: 1! •-; a i..V,s. � * •+• ! .�•> �j R,: •; 1 iyJir.o,y:i l.�(;.`. i�tie�• ••.. •'•i�_ 3 a � �•' � •a. �^ •r Y.p ,�+�i4 ' F. . �J�... °S .]: ^;5i�:t7! i7 M{..:�:)•.:•. .•S: .t ':7i ` ti . 7.: \/.� r7 ..�� s PAO •�7t i. s�,. ; '.,•511. ,1 . .e Yd•+'L .• }'� .�I. V.. .. �6r'e . , �• 'Y• 4•' 19•y ••- t� �: �.?1�n f. in *1 ; '+'�;�'ti+ .a ••',}. ' + yt, iv 1: t.'1:y,1 .t3;.J.. .s' .t:S: r' M J N^ "j LY .[ ;f•iti ', a. '''y•; } �"��., �.: :a fir, . 4f `.J. •, .•�.. 'k',`j�.�d!' ;y '• :y a.•.'• ' 1�7nt 7 .r.. +• r. i' rr VA ., , '! •Jt•. a. ' �.t 1.1 •j7 ��'� ' :tn+ 7. A� ,L... AS• �•,,:'�• 7 •P'My✓:r.. �r•:a.. / 'r.#)�• ` ..: 'T`: � F,t.J i•• •. ..' .,Q. r r •�.� ••A'^(.M.:, •� I•.r! � ��. .. ^ • � .Y.� �L.1r', -T, ' y • � ,��I +: .. .rr.', 11{,,•..,+, . 1 � -�fi' .. 1`•''�t . ,�,�;� �, � dam,,.. ' Y• w �• •.v 39;'1 t � to G42� ! Z'Kg's 1lo'a bolo' of rY%1121144 HUUSIP44 U4 11 — A P,15A CALe. . hW ON,r,/M AyS CHAPEL 4 44L:-,c.J"L,. GrlTk• m x UA N o=o . + y Nv TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: October 15, 2001 Presented By: Bernadette Barthelenghi Agenda Item: Parcel F Parking Lot Core Issues: The parking lot being proposed is not a permitted use by right on lot 2 or 3 according to the East Village PUD. One half of the parking lot being proposed is located in a Elk Migration Corridor. Numerous Village citizens have called staff members and myself to request a parking lot at the bottom of the Tom Blake Trail Head. On July 19, 2001 Larry Green, TOSV'S Wildlife Specialist made recommendations for the parking lot, which if implemented in total could reduce the impacts to wildlife. Larry has not changed his opinion on the original location of the parking lot. Larry Green's memos are attached. General Info: Town Council directed staff to look at implementing Larry Green's recommendations, which included moving the parking lot further to the west onto Parcel F Lot 2, zoned Mixed Use according to the East Village PUD. Staff will present a graphic plan to Town Council that shows the new parking lot location, revegetation and landscaping for the old parking lot area. Recommendation: As part land owners, conceptually approve the parking lot and landscaping with the condition that the parking lot is closed April 25 to June 20 as recommended by Larry Green. Direct staff to proceed with a minor PUD Amendment to the East Village PUD to allow public parking, which will necessitate discussions with the Snowmass Land Company. Staff will also install an Elk Calving education sign. Sign is attachad. ("sler W de'l, cle computer Oelnewlpenele �;�: ``� , Ttis trail is ct©red from May 1 S - ,lune 2 'i '� f • ' ' - f©r etk calving: AX of t. n 5• S • �`t • Efk Calving occurs #rom May 15 - June 2i . • Cow elkretumtothesameareaeachyeartohavetheircalves. • This is an extremely sensitive time period for elk. Human disturbame of calving areas has been shown to reduce reproduRivesuccessandcauseabandonmentofcalvingareas. Facbreakintosma�groupsdurh�gcalvmgsayoumaynotnoticelange [orscentrations of elk and it may seem that theyhave left the a rea. • f{youseeael kwl fbyitseff,LEAVERAIANE..donotp'idcitup.The Page I of I cow is just out feeding.. The calf has tJ�T been abandoned.. ego hitp://www.summilcreations.com/proofs/elkpr-oof.jpg 10/11/01 MEMORANDUM DATE: July 19, 2001 TO: Craig Thompson,Hunt Walker FROM: Larry L. Green, TOSV Wildlife Specialist RE: Review of Parcel F Parking Lot Impacts Overview: The public is expressing renewed interest for a parking lot on Owl Creek to access the Tom Blake Trail. On July 17, 2001,Hunt Walker,Bernadette Barthelenghi and I met at the site to review the parking lot drawings on Parcel F,Lot 3 as presented in the July 16, 2001 Town Council agenda packet. Discussion: Attached is a memorandum I wrote on December 11, 2000. No information that I have learned since December would lead me to change the opinion I offered then. The proposed parking lot is still located in a mapped elk and deer migration corridor. However, if Council feels it is appropriate to approve a parking lot in this area, I have several recommendations,which if implemented in total, would reduce wildlife impacts: 1. Move the lot to the west as far as practical (approx. 60 feet). This would not remove it from the mapped migration corridor, but it would move it closer to the west edge of the migration corridor. Approximately half of the lot would be located on Parcel F,Lot 3 zoned open space and half on Parcel F,Lot 2 zoned Mixed Use PUD. 2. Moving the lot to the west would also place it at or near the bottom of a fairly steep and treeless cut bank which is not as usable (but does not preclude its use) as a migration corridor. 3. Keep the lot as close to Owl Creek Road as possible. Traffic use of Owl Creek Road already has a negative impact on the habitat adjacent to the road. 4. Revegetate the old parking lot on Parcel F,Lot 3. Adding a grove of Douglas fir and aspen trees in the old parking lot would facilitate wildlife movement across the road but not be so close to the Owl Creek road that deer and elk could jump out in front of oncoming traffic without first being observed by motorists. 5. Close the parking lot during the trail closure(April 25 to June 20). MEMORANDUM DATE: December 21, 2000 TO: Bernadette Barthelenghl FROM: Larry L. Green, TOSV Wildlife Specialist RE: Parcel "F" Parking Lot Wildlife Impacts overview: The Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan maps shows that parcel F is.designated as a mule deer and elk migration corridor. Parcel F is located Immediately adjacent to elk severe winter range and mule deer winter range. These designations are supported in varying degrees by past correspondence from biologists Randy Cote, Kevin Wright, Dan Baharav, Jonathan Lowsky and Dawn Keating. It appears that Parcel F was deeded to the Town of Snowmass Village to be held as a "conservation corridor" for the purpose of access for deer and elk to winter ranges. The survival of elk and deer in the Roaring Fork Valley is dependent upon access to and abundance of winter range and especially, severe winter range. While percentages may be in question, it has been suggested that as much as 90 percent of the migration corridor for the Maroon Bells - Snowmass Wilderness has been lost. The biologist listed above also seem to agree that the migration corridor may have shifted easterly due to increased development and disturbance, but not to the exclusion of use of parcel F. There is also agreement that potential for development to the east of parcel F where the majority of the migration Is taking place, may shift-migratlon patterns west toward parcel F. Recommendation: While several studies, one recently in done in Pitkin.County, show that development creates negative Impacts to wildlife, it would be difficult to show that leaving a small parking lot on parcel F would have a major negative impact to wildlife or wildlife migration. However, all biologists are in agreement that parcel F has some varying degree of wildlife value, with a potential for increased value if development should occur to the east. Parcel F is already impacted by Owl Creek Road on the north and Sinclair Road easement on the south, and by Nordic, equestrian and summer trail easements. Further uses of parcel F could eventually cumulate to such a point as to seriously degrade the wildlife value of this land. looMr TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: October 15, 2001 Agenda Item: Second Reading — Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2001, an ordinance concerning a Minor PUD application to amend The Gracie's Cabin Planned Unit Development for Lot 2, Gracie's Cabin Subdivision. Presented By: Chris Conrad, Planning Director Core Issues: . Please review Conditions 7 and 9 within the enclosed ordinance for changes directed at first reading. Condition 7 defines owner responsibility for maintenance of the cabin and Condition 9 grants the Town first right of refusal to acquire the cabin should any future owners decide to demolish or remove it. Further research by staff indicates that direct pedestrian trail access from the Two Creeks base area to Gracie's Cabin via the ski slope. There is pedestrian access by way of the summer trail easement that is adjacent to Two Creeks Drive (see enclosed trail diagrams). The Sleigh Ride easement is for sleigh and equestrian use only. General Info: The land within which the Sleigh Ride easement Is owned by the Aspen Skiing Company. Staff will contact Dave Bellack prior to the meeting to discuss whether pedestrian access could be made available using the Sleigh Ride easement. Council Options: Second Reading approval, approval with additional conditions or denial. Staff Staff recommends second reading approval of the enclosed Recommendation: ordinance. - � 10 - PAuseAmonradd lS Word OocstGracWs CabKTC 01-14 Grade's Cabin Minor PUD Arnend TC Comment W.doc 2 .. �r BRUSH CREEK ROAD L-22AO' w a 1 r came awom �AJT Wrwnrn .... SWUM ...�w• 1 N74 ,..r PARCEIm LOT i '� / I 4 WE �• 4.947 ACRES t �\\ ! 1 u•w° B� 100,00•w �6�s�oritlq • 1 % � •.. L-ISO.7T R: a.,o•�ro C1 OHMITOOtCr. � �� \ MSS.°0' s.emao' DARCEL L%381 `�\ gj 1 °i�'wa FSJ. !pC � w-ue•eN t 1 p,, .p; �:. ----- — <FS� hOgS '•:..'9L� PARCE Lq I � a g/ ; .ew.'°� i♦- ej. i, / ESSFSry4,T 11 ti� 1 PARCELIB ;run �-r^ 4LOTy/ ' "# �e / 4tsu'{zT� ;1 ACRES Aw / O / Z {'+ / 1 I eve / q sraw•° ��� I e $ -d f�e1// ( / I y �0 "" 11E60.1J'•w �fl 'M,i /1I I SLOT �ii 1{a1�� �Sr m it y9� 1 I" F 1 c 19.628/IZ I I1 4 N 1 �i d/ PARCEL E • r tQ• 1 L = AgtES t �� I I ' ~ �� 5.958 I . i°rn�, t7 I rrw I •/ l+e I! ACRES t .s �I .wms \ J zI y I tU q IVAI of I ;; E iRAILESMNi. � ?''r.�✓f' ,P,'P''�-t � �/ ^ ` ( /r �� VSUBD V'1310H 1N 8J1� 41 low • 110 DJ �j 1 �( s ho ��, .� w�= �� M;7- :Ai&.g%.o�.1§7 WA 19 M ep OWN / � TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 14 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING A MINOR PUD APPLICATION TO AMEND THE GRACIE'S CABIN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR LOT 2, GRACIE'S CABIN SUBDIVISION. WHEREAS, Town Council Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1997 ("Ordinance 11"), granted approval to the Gracie's Cabin Planned Unit Development ("PUD"); and WHEREAS, said approval involved the creation of two(2)residential lots by subdivision plat (the "Plat") as recorded in Plat Book 52 at Page 73 and the recording of the Land Use Plan (the "Land Use Plan") in Plat Book 52 at Page 74 of the real estate records of the Pitkin County, Colorado Clerk and Recorder; and WHEREAS, Stephen D. and Lisa S. Lebovitz (the "Applicants"), being the owners of Lot 2, Gracie's Cabin Subdivision ("Lot 2"), have requested Minor PUD Amendment approval to permit the relocation of a 388.5 square foot structure, being the original Gracie's Cabin, from within the platted building envelope to an area outside the envelope proximate to the adjacent Two Creeks ski slope, as shown and further described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, said amendment further involves increasing the maximum floor area and building height limits as necessary to enable this relocation to occur; and WHEREAS, amendments to the PUD contained in this Resolution were processed under the provisions of Section 16A-5-390 of the Snowmass Village Municipal Code (the "Municipal Code"); and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the procedure and requirements set forth in Section 16A-5-390 of the Municipal Code have been followed; and WHEREAS, in accordance with posted, mailed and published notices, a public hearing was held before the Snowmass Village Town Council on October 8, 2001, to receive public comment concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Town Council received and considered the application, all relevant support materials,the report of the Town Staff,and public testimony given at the October 8 and 15, 2001 Town Council meetings; and — 1 �)3waft TC Ord. 01-14 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the proposed amendments satisfy the review standards specified within Section 16A-5-390(3) of the Municipal Code; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, as follows: Section One: Action. The Town Council hereby approves this ordinance amending the Gracie's Cabin Planned Unit Development for Lot 2, to hereby read as follows: Land Use Plan Map Summary: A. Permitted uses by right: a. Single family detached dwelling; b. Accessory uses associated with and in support of single family detached residential use; c. Landscaping and irrigation (up to 4,000 sf subject to adopted Wildlife Management Plan); d. Retaining walls for the private roadway outside of the building envelope as shown on the final plat. e. Gracie's Cabin pursuant to Town Council Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2001. Permitted uses: - Non-habitable accessory building and uses customarily found in connection with the principal use. - Daytime meeting area for not-for-profit, and educational groups not to exceed 50 people or 12 days per year. Prohibited uses: - Rental or use for commercial purposes. - Use for storage, living or sleeping purposes. ��' Igam TC Ord.01-14 Page 3 B. Density: a. One (1) single family dwelling per lot, as per building envelope identified on the final plat. b. Driveways, retaining walls, or utility features shall not be considered either major or accessory structures and shall be allowed outside the building envelope as defined by the final plat. C. Land Use Parameters; 1. Maximum allowed floor area: Gracie's Cabin: 388.5 sq. ft. All other structures: 5,500 sq. ft. 2. Maximum building height: Principal — 28 feet Accessory— 18 feet Gracie's Cabin — 25 feet 3. Minimum number of parking spaces: 1 per bedroom 2 spaces minimum per dwelling unit 4. Minimum building setback: Established by building Envelope or Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2001 5. Minimum lot area: 60,287 sq. ft. Section Two: Conditions of Approval. The Town Council approval shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. The PUD amendments authorized by this ordinance are to enable the relocation and reconstruction of the original Gracie's Cabin at the location and in the manner shown in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, only. No modifications are permitted without further Town approval. 2. This approval is based upon the Applicants representation that reasonable accommodation will be made to allow not-for-profit, and educational groups not exceeding fifty (50) people in number to utilize Gracie's Cabin for up to but not exceeding twelve (12)daytime visits or 14 TC Ord. 01-14 Page 4 meetings per calendar year. Accordingly,the Town Council has granted approval for the placement of this above grade structure outside the platted building envelope and to permit the calculable floor area of the cabin to be excluded from being part of the 5,500 square foot floor area limit originally established for the Lot. Failure by the Applicants, heirs, successors or assigns to comply with the terms and conditions of this ordinance, including failure to demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to allow the use of Gracie's Cabin by said groups, may be cause for reconsideration of the approval granted by the Town Council. 3. Should the Town receive complaints that access is unreasonably being denied to qualifying groups,the complaints will be promptly forwarded by the Town to the owner of Lot 2 requesting a written response within thirty (30) days of receipt. The Town Manager may then determine whether the matter should be referred to the Town Council for determination as to whether reconsideration of the approval granted should occur. 4. If it is determined that the facility is not being reasonably made available for use by qualifying groups or that the terms and conditions of this ordinance have not been satisfied,the Applicant may be required by the Town Council to remove Gracie's Cabin from the Lot. If floor area is available or may be purchased under the Town's Excise Tax provisions, the cabin would then only need to be relocated to within the platted building envelope. 5. The owners have agreed to install and maintain a restroom, consisting of toilet and sink, within the cabin. A bear proof trash container shall be located on the deck so that people visiting the cabin can properly dispose of trash. 6. No group using the cabin shall cause or permit to exist any disruptive behavior, excessive noise, waste or trespass, nor create any other nuisance in or about the cabin, so as to be detrimental to the owner or surrounding property owners. 7. The owners shall be responsible for maintaining the cabin and ensuring tFW E-9ach group using the cabin will. prior to leaving. s rler-ta leau+ag, clean the cabin and surrounding area to the condition it was in prior to the visit. Any damage that may occur during any group's use, whether in or about the cabin, shall be promptly repaired, at—sash - 1"'&aw TC Ord. 01-14 Page 5 8. The owner may submit a proposal for one (1) sign to the Planning Director for approval. Said sign may describe the historical nature of Gracie's Cabin and request that visitors be respectful of the property. 9. The Town of Snowmass Village shall be given first right of refusal to acguire and/or relocate Gracie's Cabin should the owners or their successors ever decide to demolish or remove the structure from the garcei• 10. For the period of time that the cabin is located within the parcel, the terms and conditions of this ordinance shall be: a) perpetual; b) a covenant running with the land; and c) binding on the owners, successors and assigns. This ordinance shall be recorded, at Applicant's expense, in the records of the Pitkin County, Colorado,Clerk and Recorder. Section Three: 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, as amended,on First Reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on the 8th day of October, 2001 upon a motion by Council Member Virtue, the second of Council Member Mercatoris, and upon a vote of 5 in favor and 0 against. READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on the 15th day of October, 2001 upon a motion by Council Member the second of Council Member and upon a vote of_ in favor and _ against. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE ATTEST: T. Michael Manchester, Mayor Trudi Worline, Town Clerk MOTT? tE 1 1 1. s.go8 � I a s g EXHIBIT "A" 'I ,1 f� Ilil 7111. °ox�}nnce No. 14, Series of 2001 S! 1�j1i li11 e !� (Page 1 of 4) i E I ' i.l t will / r 9 � i x6 tlf Y F All ' I f1 7�'�i ��� i�n I�I� li !! ►1 �I �I •I 1!'d :li 1' i,31 OF Ee�in!'`ti �`� Fe�� Et��[1� 3! jl • ' II'I II 18 Nit fill 1 7 11 lei 11. 1 I i . . . oV �li y{ III ` a EXHIBIT "A" Ordinance , No. 14, Series of 2001 (Page 3 of 4) �g 'C w m + T I = II I u -'' 1•f. > A . _ -t 7 111111111 � i r f EXHIBIT "A" =-� Oxdinance No. 14, Series of 2001 (Page 4 of 4) ;I — Aw 1744. CoWr. GWIN �u-nJ �I.eyct�vN i 1 ' I 11 r i I Na1LLF � I Z oKwrlrL ckblt4 � i � l + s•b If L j 411 pr TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: October 15, 2001 Agenda Item: Seven Star Ranch PUD Request for Extension Presented By: Gary Suiter, Town Manager Core Issues: . Progress on access road negotiations. • Identifying alternative solutions. General Info: This application was extended until October 23, 2001. 1 have distributed under separate cover a letter from Joe Wells explaining the status of access negotiations. I have also met with Pitkin County staff to get an update on the Droste lawsuit and status of the Droste application. Not much news on that front. They are, however, still supportive of the general development concept. Council Options: Approve or deny applicant's request. If Council denies the request, then you will need to vote on the application itself by the October 23rd deadline. Staff Approve extension, per applicant's request, to Recommendation: December 18, 2001. Instruct the applicant to continue to investigate other access alternatives. SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 01, 2001 CALL TO ORDER AT 2:00 P.M. Mayor Manchester called to order the Regular Meeting of October 1, 2001 at 2:08 p.m. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: T. Michael Manchester, Arnold Mordkin Douglas Mercatoris, Richard Virtue, and Robert Purvis COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: All Council Members were present. STAFF PRESENT: Gary Suiter, Town Manager; Carey Shanks, Assistant to the Town Manager; Bernadette Bathelenghi, Landscape Architect; Hunt Walker, Public Works Director; Craig Thompson, Community Development Director; Art Smythe, Chief of Police; Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director; Jim Wahlstrom, Senior Planner PUBLIC PRESENT: Madeleine Osberger, Don Schuster, Gerd VanMoorsel, John Rex, Kristen Skirkanich and other members of the Public interested in today's Agenda. Item No. 2: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS There were no public comments Item No. 3: ENTRY WAY IMPROVEMENTS DISCUSSION Benadette Barhelenghi, Landscape Architect, in response to a Council request, reviewed the Master Plan Improvements for Brush Creek and the Golf Course improvements, the Brush Creek realignment and the round-about conceptual design to see if these projects may be built in conjunction with each other. Public Works Director, Hunt Walker noted that one of the major pieces missing for the roundabout is the triangle piece owned by Seven Star. The Council discussed the bridges, dredging of the pond, the relocation of the stream and the design of the roundabout. Council wanted to further evaluate the alternatives available to them with no decision being made at this time. The Mayor observed that 10-01-01 tc Page 2 none of the components of the project appear to conflict with one another and that the projects could be phased. Item No. 4: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING — ORDINANCE NO. 23 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN OR SNOWMASS CLUB Mercatoris made a motion to approve second reading of this Ordinance, seconded by Virtue. Mayor Manchester opened the Public Hearing for public comment. There being no comment from the public the Council reviewed the ordinance page by page and made various changes to the language. Virtue made a motion to table the ordinance to the next Regular Meeting so the amendments can be made, seconded by Mercatoris. The motion to table was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Mayor Manchester closed the Public Hearing at 3:20 p.m. Item No. 5: APPROVAL OF 08-20-01 AND 09-17-01 MEETING MINUTES Mercatoris made a motion to approve the minutes of August 20,2001, seconded by Virtue. Council Member Mordkin made a change to page 31 of the packet under the item Emergency Response Plan, add "Manager" after the word Town. There being no further changes the motion to approve the minutes of August 20, 2001 as amended was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Mercatoris made a motion to approve the minutes of September 17, 2001, seconded by Mayor Manchester. Council Member Mordkin noted on Page 33 third paragraph 5'" sentence down beginning with "Walker stated" should be changed to "consideration should be given as to whether this proposal would exceed the cap" The motion to approve the minutes of September 17, 2001 as amended was approved by a vote of 5 in favor to 0 opposed. Item No. 6 MANAGER'S REPORT Budget Philosophy Suiter noted that discussion on the budget would relate to 3 topics: • Budget Philosophy • Presentation techniques • Schedule Budget Meetings Mayor Manchester noted that Council gets burdened by line items when the budget is presented in its usual format and suggested a chart that shows the trends in a graphic format. He noted that a summary of each department and charts of each would be helpful. It was also decided that the detail should also be available for back up and reference. Council also requested a report showing frontline staff cost, frontline plus one, and then all other staff. They also wanted to see discretionary and non-discretionary numbers in total. Council does not wish to see the budget numbers out to 2005. Council will meet with the Town Manager and the Finance Director on October 29"' and 30th from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and follow-up meeting on November 81"from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. I jq 10-01-01 tc Page 3 Incident Report - TOSV Computer Virus Council Member Virtue asked for a second opinion regarding this incident. Council Member Purvis asked if there is some procedure we could have used to keep the back up from infecting the new and the old server. It was directed by Council to call some of our colleagues and inquire how this virus affected them. This survey will be done and the Town Manager will report on a future Manager's report. Item No. 7 DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS/STATUS REPORT Community Park Council Member Purvis stated that over the weekend the Community Park was used for a soccer tournament. The Park was left in an unacceptable slate, with many containers of food left on the ground. Council directed staff to be sure that the group who reserved the Community Park pays restitution for the condition that the park was left in. Free Trees Council Member Mercatoris reminded staff to arrange with Don Schuster to obtain some of the large free trees from the Snowmass Club Phase II Project for the three locations within the Town. The locations would be Daly Townhomes, between Creekside Parking lot and Brushcreek Road and at the Crossing's landscape easement. Mecatoris noted there are some RETT funds that could be used for this project. Item No. : CALENDARS No discussion on this item. Item No. 9: ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Council Member Mordkin made a motion to adjourn the Meeting, seconded by Purvis. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 in favor to 0 opposed. Mayor T. Michael Manchester had left at 3:50 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Submitted By: Rhonda B. Coxon, Deputy Town Clerk �5 woo TO: SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: GARY SUITER, TOWN MANAGER RE: MANAGER'S REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 12, 2001 DISTINGUISHED BUDGET AWARD I am extremely pleased to announce that Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director has received the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for 2001. This is the second year in a row that Marianne has been recognized for her achievements in governmental budgeting. Congratulations to Marianne and her staff for keeping Snowmass Village on the leading edge. GOLF COURSE TREES For your information, Town staff has coordinated with the Snowmass club to relocate twenty trees to various locations throughout the Town. The trees will be distributed to locations including Creekside Condominiums, Daly Townhomes and the Community Park. Upon soliciting bids for this work, the lowest was $800.00 per tree. This will be an additional $16,000 expenditure paid for by the RETT fund. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND 2001 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES I have met with the Mayor and received his final comments on the above documents. I'm in the process of amending those documents to reflect T. Michael's input. Once updated, I will distribute them to Town Council for your review. We can then either adopt them at the November 5, 2001 meeting or take a few minutes during the Budget Meetings at the end of this month and agree to them then. I appreciate Council's input on this matter. EMERGENCY RESPONSE MEMO Attached is a memo from Art Smythe providing an overview of our emergency response systems and capability. The Town participates in the Countywide Incident Command System (ICS) in order to maximize local resources. With the plane crash that occurred this summer, and the events of September 11th, I thought it appropriate to provide you with some basic information on our systems. Also, I'm told that Pitkin County is coordinating a class for Elected Officials to discuss their role in disaster planning and Emergency Response. We will provide you with details of this training opportunity when they become available. l 000 Manager's Report 10/15/01 Page 2 of 2 COMPUTER VIRUS RESEARCH I have assigned the follow-up research on computer virus vulnerability to Carey Shanks. Carey has been in touch with other Municipalities as well as trade organizations to determine the impacts of the wave of recent virus attacks and compare safety procedures and software. Carey is nearing the completion of this research and will provide you with a copy of his report this week. ASPEN VALLEY MEDICAL FOUNDATION GRANT I am pleased to announce that the Town of Snowmass Village Police Department has been awarded a $15,320 grant from the Foundation for 2001. The Grant is designated for purchase of automated external defibrillators for the Town's patrol cars. This will increase the level of service provided by our public safety officers, providing them with additional capacity to save lives. My thanks to the Aspen Valley Medical Foundation for their support of our community. PROJECT CHART Carey and I have been developing a Project Chart that will be installed on the wall of the Town Council Chambers. We will provide Council with personal copies as well. It is hoped this chart will help Council and staff stay focused on Priority Projects and increase our strategic approach to accomplishing our goals. *Response requested 00197 I GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 180 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60601 312/977-9700 • Fax: 312/977-4806 September 27, 2001 Mr. Gary Suiter Town Manager Town of Snowmass Village Box 5010 0016 Kearns Road Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Dear Mr. Suiter I am pleased to notify you that Town of Snowmass Village, CO has received the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the current fiscal year from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). This award is the highest form of recognition in governmental budgeting and represents a significant achievement by your organization. When a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award is granted to an entity, a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Presentation is also presented to the individual or department designated as being primarily responsible for its having achieved the award. This has been presented to: Marianne Rakowski,Finance Director We hope you will arrange for a formal public presentation of the award, and that appropriate publicity will be given to this notable achievement. A press release is enclosed for your use. We appreciate your participation in GFOA's Budget Awards Program. Through your example, we hope that other entities will be encouraged to achieve excellence in budgeting. Sincerely, Jeffrey L. Esser Executive Director JLE/af Enclosure 89 ' WASHINGTON OFFICE 1750 K Street, N.W., Suite 350,Washington, DC 20006 202/42 9-2750•Fax: 202/42 9-2755 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 180 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 800. Chicago. Illinois 60601 312/977-9700 i Fax: 312/977-4806 September 27, 2001 PRESS RELEASE For Further Information Contact Stephen J. Gauthier (312)977-9700 •1111 f!!lifilf!!•tlfiilf iif iFl fft lff•iliFilfi!•ififtt!•tfiiffiif lif lY••t■YltftiliitY Chicago--The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) is pleased to announce that Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado has received the GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for its budget. The award represents a significant achievement by the entity. It reflects the commitment of the governing body and staff to meeting the highest principles of govern mental budgeting. In order to receive the budget award, the entity had to satisfy nationally recognized guidelines for effective budget presentation. These guidelines are designed to assess how well an entity's budget serves as: • a policy document • a financial plan • an operations guide ■ a communications device Budget documents must be rated "proficient" in all four categories to receive the award. When a Distinguished Budget Presentation Award is granted to an entity, a Certificate of Recognition for Budget Presentation is also presented to the individual or department designated as being primarily responsible for its having achieved the award. This has been presented to Marianne Rakowski,Finance Director. Since the inception of the GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program in 1984, approximately 800 entities have received the Award. Award recipients have pioneered efforts to improve the quality of budgeting and provide an excellent example for other governments throughout North America. The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit professional association serving 13,000 government finance professionals throughout North America. The GFOA's Distinguished Budget Presentation Awards Program is the only national awards program in governmental budgeting. 004 $1- WASHINGTON OFFICE 1750 K Street, N.W., Suite 350, Washington, DC 20006 202/42 9-2750•Fax! 202/429-2755 Memorandum To: Gary Suiter From: Art Smythe Date: 10/12/01 Re: Town's Emergency Preparedness Following recent local and national events, we have received a number of inquiries regarding the Town's emergency preparedness. In response, I have drafted this memorandum,which provides an overview of our emergency operation systems. Public Safety Council The Town of Snowmass Village Police Department is a member of the Aspen-Pitkin County Public Safety Council. The PSC includes representation from fire departments,emergency medical services, law enforcement,Aspen Valley Hospital,American Red Cross,Aspen Skiing Company,City of Aspen,Pitkin County,Public Works,etc. The Public Safety Council's mission is to identify problems and facilitate solutions in matters concerning public safety in our communities through open communications,coordinated disaster preplanning and cooperative training. Staff support for the Public Safety Council is provided by the Pitkin County Emergency Management Coordinator, Cindy Mohat. Critical Incident Management The Snowmass Village Police Department operates under the Incident Command System (ICS). ICS is a standardized on-scene emergency management concept that uses an integrated organizational structure that can grow and diminish with the demands of an incident. This form of management will accommodate a smooth interface with mutual-aid agencies from local to federal levels. Officers on the department are trained in various levels of ICS,from 100 to 300. ICS operates under a Unified Command which allows all agencies with responsibilities for the incident, either geographical or functional,to manage an incident by establishing a common set of incident objectives and strategies. This is accomplished without losing or abdicating agency authority, responsibility, or accountability. ICS also provides for the smooth transition of operation oversight of an emergency incident. This was evident during the plane crash this past summer when command of the incident went from the Fire Department,to the Police Department and finally to the U.S. Forest Service. Incident Management Group Developed through the Public Safety Council, the Incident Management Group is available to all public safety agencies in Pitkin County. The IMG provides a"turn key" management team for long duration emergency incidents. When a management team is not needed, IMG will provide assistance and support to the existing command structure and assist in fielding and organizing resources. The Incident Management Group, with representation from the Snowmass Village Police Department, was activated following the World Trade Center attack to assess local impacts. OW4 qO 1111111111b ASPEN VALLEY MEDICAL FOUNDATION Board of Directors - Gerald Wendel President October 11, 2001 John Sarpa President-Elect Jane E.Hills Secretary Art Smythe Tice Kaspar Chief of Police Treasurer Town of Snowmass Village Police Department Diane Anderson PO BOX 5010 Stephen Briggs Eric Calderon Snowmass Village CO 81615 Morris Cohen,MD,FACC David M.Cornell Susan Crown Dear Art, Marc L.Epstein Matthew C.Ferguson We extend our heartfelt congratulations to Town of Snowmass Village Police Sheldon L. h Lein David A.Gititlitz Department on being selected to receive a grant award from the Aspen Valley tx Michael A.Goldberg Medical Foundation for 2001! Susan Hass Peter Town of Snowmass Village Police Department has been selected as an Affiliate of o J.Nelson son Hoffman T.J.Hoffmaster the Medical Foundation with funding in the amount of $15,320. This grant is Richard C.Jelinek awarded for the following purpose: Carolyn W.Kane Chris Martinez,MD Randy Middlebrook Equipment support to purchase five LifePak 500 automated external defibrillators Virginia Newton for patrol cars. Virginia Pearce Nancy R.Peterson William J.Rodman,MD Enclosed please find a check for the full amount of this grant. Charles G.Rolfes Sue Smedstad A Grant Contract will be forthcoming. Please sign the contract and return it to us. Ben A.Vanderwerf,MD.PhD Dorothy S.Wildman We will countersign the Contract and return a fully executed copy to you for your Rhys A.Williams,MD files. Honorary Directors Mrs.D.R.C.Brown,Jr. On behalf of our Community Grants Committee, the Board of Directors and staff, Morton A.Heller Aspen Valley Medical Foundation is delighted to support your important work in 6ve Homeyer serving the health and human needs of our community. John McBride Robert O.Morgen,MD Robert R.Oden,MD Sinceitely Russell Scott,Jr.,MD Rosamond B.Stanton Don Stapleton Mrs.Henry L.Stein Edgar H.Stem,Jr. - Executive Director Kristin Hoegh Marsh Kristin Hoegh Marsh Executive Director Executive Assistant Denise Miller Enclosure Neighbor to Neighbor Coordinator w Susan M.Hunke �4 1 r P.O.Box 1639 Aspen,Colorado 8`11612•970.544.1298•Fax 970.544.1562 :October Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 16 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 4:00 P.M. CAST @ County HHS Mintutn Budget Meeting 48 29 30 31 10:00—4:00 10:00—4:00 HALLOWEEN Budget Mtg. Budget Mtg. 1 November Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10:00—2:00 Election Day 10:00—4:00 Budget Mtg. Budget Mtg. With Council 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2:00 P.M. Thanksgiving T.C.MTG. 25 26 27 28 29 30 3 � � � i Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility Aspen Skiing Company Minor PUD Amendment Application Submission Submitted to: Town of Snowmass Village P.O.Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Applicant: Aspen Skiing Company P.O.Box 1248 Aspen, CO 81612 May 10, 2001 VXCEIVED OCT 1 0 2001 Snaxrr'P Vli'I1nh: Comrnunity Dev�.��;ocnt A S P E N S K I I N G COMPANY May 10, 2001 Chris Conrad Planning Director, Town of Snowmass Village P.O.Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Re: Minor PUD Amendment for Divide Lot Vehicle Maintenance Facility Dear Chris, Thank for meeting with Bill Kane and myself on March 28, 2001 regarding the Minor PUD Amendment for our Divide Lot Facility. During this pre-application conference we identified the submission requirements for this application and with this cover letter we include the following. 1) Project phasing and purpose 2) Subdivision Improvement Agreement 3) Existing Approvals vs. Proposed Amendment Comparison 4) Skier circulation analysis (to/from Divide parking and Krabloonik) 5) Transportation summary 6) Preliminary Construction Management Plan 7) Stormwater Runoff, Erosion and Draninage Control Plan 8) Fugitive Dust Control Plan 9) Clearing, grading and drainage plan 10)Land Use Planning map showing permitted uses 11)Revised Site Plan (with property boundaries included) 12)Site Characteristics plan (existing conditions) 13)Revised Floor Plans 14)Revised Building Elevations 15)Exterior materials and colors 16)Proposed fencing plans 17)Road construction Plan and Profile drawings 18)Final grading plan 19)Landscape Plan 20)Exterior Lighting Plan 21)Fuel storage summary (report from John Mele) Enclosed with this cover letter are 22 copies of the above information and a check for $600. Post Office Box 1248 •Aspen, CO 81612 970.923.1220 • Fax 970.923.4875 aPrinteamRny dPawr w ..skiaspen.com I look forward to presenting this information to the Planning Commission and Town Council. Please call me with any further questions, or if any additional information required, at 923-0555. Thanks again for all your efforts on our behalf. Sincerely, V �k-a� Victor Gerdin Mountain Planner CC: Rob Baxter, Dave Bellack, Ted Guy, Bill Kane, Mike Kaplan, Doug Mackenzie Contents 1. Introduction......................................................................Page 2 2. Project phasing and purpose...................................................Page 3 3. Subdivision Improvement Agreement........................................Page 4 4. Existing Approvals vs. Proposed Amendment Comparison...............Page 14 5. Skier circulation analysis (to/from Divide parking and Krabloonik)..... Page 15 6. Transportation summary....................................................... Page 17 7. Access Road Construction Plans............................................. Page 18 8. Preliminary Construction Management Plan............................... Page 19 9. Stormwater Runoff, Erosion and Drainage Control Plan.................. Page 21 10. Fugitive Dust Control Plan ................................................... Page 24 11. Illustrations a. Land Use Planning Map b. Divide PUD Plat Map c. Topographic Survey Map d. Existing Conditions Map (showing site characteristics) e. Revised Site Plan (with property boundaries and phasing plans) f. Revised Floor Plans g. Revised Building Elevations (w/exterior materials/colors & exterior lighting) h. Road Construction Plan and Profile drawings i. Retaining Wall Profile drawings j. Final Grading Plan k. Landscape Plan I. Skier Circulation Map 12. Appendices a. Ordinance 16, Series of 1989................................................... Page A-1 b. Letter of Commitment from Snowmass Water and Sanitation District c. Letter from John Mele re: Fuel storage and fire access d. Approved 1994 VMF Drawings 1 1. Introduction Aspen Skiing Company acquired Lot 44 of the Divide Subdivision PUD from the Snowmass Land Company in the late 1980's. At that time, Lot 44 was zoned, and the PUD approved, to provide for a Vehicle Maintenance Facility (VMF) on this site. Currently, vehicle maintenance operations take place near the bottom of Fanny Hill. These maintenance operations and this facility were intended to be relocated to Lot 44 to accommodate the development of Base Village. In 1989, TOSV passed Ordinance 16, Series of 1989 which approved the VMF, and the associated buildings and activities. The facility was approved for 28,850 square feet in which vehicle maintenance, restaurant shipping & receiving and employee housing activities would take place. Since that time, Aspen Skiing Company has decided to relocate the track vehicle maintenance portion of this facility to an on mountain location at Elk Camp Meadows. Being more centrally located on the mountain, this on-mountain maintenance location will work more efficiently with nightly snowcat grooming operations during the winter season. With the majority of snowcat maintenance relocated from the Divide location, the primary function of the Divide VMF will be to sustain on-mountain restaurant shipping &receiving activities. However, snowmobile maintenance, rubber tired vehicle maintenance, mountain operations storage and employee housing will remain as part of the original activities on the Divide site. The building shape, exterior materials and color have changed slightly from the original PUD approval and are addressed in this Minor PUD Amendment. In addition, the development phasing of the approved and entitled 28,800 square foot facility is also addressed. 2 2. Project Phasing and Purpose The comparisons provided on the Permitted Use Comparison sheet demonstrate the phasing concept. The purpose for construction phasing allows Aspen Skiing Company to initially construct the most necessary functions, i.e. restaurant shipping and receiving, snowmobile maintenance and rubber tire vehicle maintenance, that will be displaced when Base Village construction begins. The primary reason for the reduction in snowcat maintenance and storage area from the approved to the amended proposal is the fact that the primary snowcat maintenance facility will be located on USFS lands near Elk Camp Meadows. This location will allow more room for this facility and is more centrally located on the mountain reducing snowcat travel time to various parts of the mountain. The overall phasing elements of the amended plan are as follows: Phase 1 — A 14,900 square foot facility incorporating on-mountain restaurant shipping and receiving, trash/recycle receiving, snowmobile maintenance, rubber tire maintenance, office/locker space, storage and employee housing. This phase will also complete the mass grading for the site as well as improve the Divide Road to the site. Phase 2 — A 13,900 square foot facility to accommodate snowcat and/or mountain operations equipment storage, lift maintenance bays, additional rubber tire maintenance bays, additional office space and employee housing. 3 3. Subdivision Improvement Agreement SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT THE DIVIDE THIS AGREEMENT is made this 21srday of AUGUST , 1969 , by and between the TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE , COLORADO , a municipal corporation ("Town" ) , and Snowmass Land Company, an Illinois general partnership ("Developer") . RECITALS : A. Developer is the owner of certain property situated in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, more particularly described as "The Divide" , according to the recorded plat thereof (the "Property") . B. Developer desires to develop the Property and has submitted to the Town a final subdivision plat showing a proposed subdivision layout for said lands (the "Plat" ) . C. Developer has further submitted to the Town a site improvements plan for those improvements and a landscaping plan, in connection with the Property being constructed by the Developer (collectively the "Site Improvements Plan" ) . D. The Town' s Planning Commission and Town Council have approved the final subdivision plat submitted by the Developer subject to certain requirements and conditions which involve the installation and construction of utilities and the improvements shown on the Site Improvements Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, i�i consideration of the premises and the terms and conditions herein stated and for other valuable consideration, the adequacy of which is acknowledged by the parties hereto, it is agreed as follows : 1. Developer's Guarantee and Warranty. Developer hereby guarantees the installation as hereafter provided, as necessary to serve the Property, and payment for, the Divide Road, the parking lots , and all utility lines , storm drainage improvements and storm sewers , sanitary sewer lines , water lines , water storage tanks , fire hydrants, and any other improvements described in the Site Improvements Plan. Developer hereby warrants the Divide Road, the parking lots , and all publicly dedicated utility improvements constructed or installed by Developer for a period of one year after acceptance by the Town or the utility companies of such improvements . Developer agrees to promptly correct any deficiencies in installation in order to meet the requirements of the plans and specifications applicable to such installation. In the event such installation is not completed substantially within the applicable schedules attached hereto and according to the specific plans set forth in 4 , TC ORD 89- 16 EXHITIB C PAGE 48 the Site Improvements Plan, the Town shall have the right to cause such additional work to be done as is necessary to complete the installation in such manner and Developer shall be liable for the cost of such additional work. 2 . Water Lines and Sanitary Sewer Collection Lines. (a) At the request of Developer, Snowmass water and Sanitation District (the "District") shall engineer and install all water lines , water storage tanks and sanitary sewer collection lines , whether such lines and other improvements are actually on the Property, bordering the Property or on other lands connecting the Property to the existing water distribution system and sewage collection system, in accordance with the standard specifications of the District. (b) Installation of said lines is anticipated to be completed in accordance with the schedule in Exhibit A. (c) The cost of all of said lines shall be borne by Developer through tap fees or pursuant to an agreement between Developer and the District. 3. Electric, Gas , Telephone and Cable TV Facilities. At the request of Developer, Holy Cross Electric Association shall engineer and install all electric distribution lines and facilities required for the Property, according to a schedule subject to approval by the Town Engineer , and Developer shall pay for such work in accordance with the established charges of the Association. At the request of Developer, Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company shall engineer and install all required gas lines and facilities required, according to a schedule subject to approval by the Town Engineer and Developer shall pay for such work in accordance with the established charges of the Company. At the request of Developer, Mountain Bell shall engineer and install all required telephone lines and facilities according to a schedule subject to approval by the Town Engineer and Developer shall pay for such work in accordance with the established charges of Mountain Bell. At the request of Developer, Canyon Cable Television shall engineer and install all cable television lines and facilities required for the Property and Developer shall pay for such work in accordance with established charges of Canyon Cable Television. 4 . Storm Drainage Improvements. (a) Developer shall install all storm sewer lines and facilities described in the Site Improvements Plan. (b) Developer anticipates completing the installation of said lines and facilities in accordance with the schedule in Exhibit A. 5 L, 11. V7- 1V EXHIBIT C PAGE 49 (c) All of said lines shall be installed at Developer' s sole expense . (d) The installation of all such lines and facilities shall be subject to inspection and approval by the Town Engineer, the cost of such inspection to be paid by Developer. (e) Any drainage facilities installed by Developer pursuant to this subsection, and accepted by the Town Engineer, shall be dedicated to the Town, together with an easement therefor if not shown as an easement on the recorded plat. 5 . The Divide Road. (a) Developer agrees to improve and pave the Divide Road, from its intersection with Brush Creek Road, in accordance with the plans and specifications of the Site Improvements Plan. The connection therewith the following shall apply: (1) Developer agrees to install any traffic control signs and standard street signs as required by the Town. (2) Developer agrees to revegetate all cuts and fills resulting from the improvement thereof in a manner which will prevent erosion. (3) The surface of the roadway will not be finished until all utility lines to be placed in the roadway have been installed. (4) During the period of construction, the roadway shall be kept reasonably free from accumulations of dirt and debris , through traffic shall be permitted on the roadway to the extent practicable, and all road cut areas caused by the installation of utilities shall be promptly repaired. (b) The parties recognize that the plans and specifications for the Divide Road provide for a paved roadway 24 feet wide with 2 foot shoulders on each side , and that it will be necessary for the Town to acquire such rights of way and/or easements as shall be necessary to widen the Divide Road to the width provided for in the plans and specifications. (c) In the event that the Town shall acquire the rights of way and/or easements required to widen the Divide Road by May 1, 1990, the Town shall forthwith give written 6 iU vnU i/7- 1V . EXHIBIT C PAGE 50 notice notice thereof to the Developer. Upon receipt of such written notice , the Developer shall thereafter undertake the improvement and paving of the Divide Road as provided for herein and shall complete such work within 12 months after receipt of such written notice, unless delayed by causes beyond its reasonable control. (d) In the event that the Town shall not have given the Developer the written notice provided for in subparagraph (c) above by May 1 , 1990 , then the Developer shall, nevertheless, thereafter undertake the improvement and paving of the Divide Road as provided for herein and shall complete said work within 12 months thereafter , unless delayed by causes beyond its reasonable control; but only to the extent that such improvements and paving can be constructed within the right of way and/or easements for the Divide Road then owned by the Town and the plans and specifications shall be deemed to be modified accordingly. Upon the completion of said work, Developer shall pay to the Town the "Estimated Amount" which shall be required to pay the costs of completing the Divide Road to its full width as provided for in the plans and specifications , and the Developer shall, thereupon, automatically be released from all further liability for the completion of the improvement and paving of the Divide Road. Such Estimated Amount shall be determined by the mutual agreement of the Town and the Developer based upon cost estimates thereof. (e) The construction of the improvements and paving of the Divide Road by the Developer, whether pursuant to subparagraph (c) or subparagraph (d) above, shall be subject to inspection and approval by the Town Engineer and the costs of such inspection shall be paid by the Developer. 6 . Parking Lots. Developer agrees to construct, at Developer' s cost, the parking lots within the Property, being Lots 42 and 43 as shown on the Plat in accordance with the plans and speci i' cations of the Site Improvements Plan. Developer anticipates completing the construction of said parking lots in accordance with the schedule in Exhibit A. 7 . Trail Easement. With respect to that certain public trail easement shown on the Plat which is located over and across the route of the existing water line easement, Developer agrees , at Developer' s cost, to improve and surface the trail in accordance with the plans and specifications of the Site Improvements Plan. Developer anticipates completing the construction of said improvements in accordance with the schedule in Exhibit A. 7 ll QIu 0` - 10 EXHIBIT C PAGE 51 8 . Private Roads . Developer agrees to construct , at Developer' s cost, all private roads within the Property in accordance with the plans and specifications of the Site Improvements Plan. Developer anticipates completing said private road construction in accordance with the schedule in Exhibit A. Developer agrees to install any traffic control signs and standard street name signs as required by the Town and to revegetate all cuts and fills resulting from construction in a manner which will prevent erosion. The construction of such private roads shall be subject to inspection and approval by the Town Engineer and the cost of such inspection shall be paid by the Developer. 9. Landscaping. Developer shall install landscaping in accordance with the Site Improvements Plan, at Developer ' s expense, and according to the anticipated schedule in Exhibit A. All such landscaping is subject to approval by the Town Engineer. 10. Road Cuts. Developer acknowledges that the Town has adopted a road cut ordinance, the provisions of which shall apply to the alteration of any road necessitated by the installation of any utilities described in this Agreement. 11. Traffic Control and Public Skiing Access. During the construction of any utilities or improvements described herein, Developer shall be responsible for controlling and expediting the movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic through and around all construction sites and activity and shall keep all public skiing access areas open and clear for public skiing from the commencdment of ' skiing operations in November of each year until the close of skiing operations in April of the following year. 12. Maintenance and Repair. (a) Developer agrees that it shall repair or pay for any damage to any existing improvements damaged during the construction of new improvements . The Town shall notify Developer within a reasonable time after discovery of any claim hereunder, and Developer shall have a reasonable period of time within which to repair same. (b) At such time as the Developer records Covenants in office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado, which obligate The Divide Homeowners Association to maintain the private roads within the Property, the Developer shall be released from the obligation and liability to maintain such private roads or to be responsible for the cost of such maintenance . 8 a y y.• y % 1 V .EXHIBIT C PAGE 52 13 . Letter of Credit. To insure Developer ' s performance under this Agreement, Developer shall , prior to the commencement of construction of any improvements, provide the Town with a satisfactory financial guarantee in the form of an irrevocable Letter of Credit (the "Letter of Credit" ) issued by a bank or other financial institution, and in form and substance, satisfactory to the Town in the amount of $ 1 , 290 500 . 00 , determined in accordance with the schedule in Exhi it B, conditioned on Developer' s full performance of its obligations hereunder and payment by Developer of the cost of installing all improvements required to be paid for by Developer. Upon completion of each phase of improvement as shown on Exhibit B, and inspection, approval and acceptance thereof by the Town Engineer, utility company or the District, as applicable, the amount of the Letter of Credit shall be reduced by the amount allocated to that phase in Exhibit B, except ten percent thereof. The final release of the Letter of Credit shall occur at such time as all proposed improvements are completed and approved by the Town Engineer (based on notices of completion and acceptance by the District or utility companies , as and if applicable) . 14 . Default. If Developer shall default in the performance of Developer' s obligations hereunder and shall fail to cure such default within 30 days after receipt of written notice from the Town spe Tying the nature of such default (or if such default cannot be cured within the aforesaid period of time, if the Developer shall fail to promptly commence to cure the same and to thereafter diligently proceed with such cure) , then the Town shall be entitled to undertake such work as may be necessary and appropriate to cure such default and the Town shall be reimbursed for the costs thereof by application against the Letter of Credit. 15. Limitation of Liability. No recourse shall be had for any obligation of or default by Developer under this Agreement or for any claim with respect to this Agreement against any partner or joint venturer of Developer or against Burnt Mountain Corporation or any other creditor or lender of Developer under any rule of law (including, without limitation, the rule of law that general partners and joint venturers are jointly and severally liable for the indebtedness of a partnership or joint venture, as applicable) , contractual provision, statute or constitution or otherwise , it being understood that all such liabilities of the partners or joint venturers of Developer are to be, by the execution of this Agreement by the Town, expressly waived and released as a condition of , and in consideration for, the execution and delivery of this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall constitute a waiver of any obligation of Developer to the Town 9 TC ORD 89- 16 EXHIBIT C PAGE 53 under this Agreement or shall be taken to prevent recourse to or of the enforcement of any rights of the Town as against the assets of Developer. 16 . Amendment. This Agreement, Exhibits A and B hereto, and the Site Improvements Plan referred to herein, may only be amended by written instrument signed by the Town and the Developer. 17. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their successors and assigns ; provided that, except as provided in paragraph 12 (b) above , purchasers of residential lots within the Property or any homeowners association that receives title to any portion of the Property shall not incur any liability hereunder and no person or entity, including any homeowners association that receives title to any portion of the Property, may claim to be a third party beneficiary of the terms , conditions, or covenants of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be signed the day and year first written above. ATTEST: TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO 0/YYIbjA,.. haA,^rn 01�..� By: Town Clerk Mayor APPROVED: Town Attorney SNOWMASS LAND COMPANY, an Illinois general partnership By: Kenneth R. Sontheim, its Attorney in Fact pursuant to General Power of Attorney recorded April 20 , 1989 in Book 590 at Page 443 of the Pitkin County, Colorado, Records 10 TC ORD 89- 16 EXHIBIT C PAGE 54 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 22nd day of AUGUST , 1989 , by RICH T as Mayor of the wn To of Snowmass i a Vge , Colorado and A as Town Clerk of the Town of Snowmass Village , Colorado. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: /0 2. 9 Nota a P� 1C STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 22nd day of AUGUST , 1989 , by Kenneth R. Sontheim, as attorney in fact for Snowmass Land Company, an Illinois general partnership Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires : Notary Poblic 11 1V VKU 6y- 1b EXHIBIT C PAGE 55 EXHIBIT A The improvements outlined in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement are estimated to be completed based on the following schedule: Construction of the internal private roads is anticipated to begin in August of 1989, with final completion by October 1990. Construction of a portion of the water and sanitary sewer are estimated to begin in September of 1989 and all the water and sanitary sewer improvements to be completed and ready for final inspection by the Town Engineer by November 15, 1990. All drainage improvements shall be installed and ready for inspection by the Town Engineer by November 1, 1990. Divide Road from the Brush Creek Road intersection to the Krabloonik parking lot shall be paved and ready for inspection by the Town Engineer by October 10, 1990. The Divide parking lot and the Krabloonik parking lot shall be paved and ready for inspection by the Town Engineer by October 10, 1990. All landscaping and revegetation shall be completed and ready for inspection by the Town Engineer by July 10, 1991. All gas, electric, telephone and cable television utility improvements are estimated to be installed and ready for final inspection by the Town Engineer by December 1, 1990. The last day of work in 1989 for work on the improvements will be November 18, 1989. Commencement of work in 1990 shall begin after April 22, 1990. 12 .TC ORD 89- 16 EXHIBIT C PAGE 56 EXHIBIT B to SUBMISSION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT for THE DIVIDE The estimated cost of installation of improvements necessary to serve the Property, as described in this Subdivision Improvements Agreement, is as follows: Divide Road $300,000 Divide Parking Lot $20,000 Krabloonik Parking Lot $20,000 Drainage $40,000 Electric Power $250,000 Natural Gas $40,000 Cable Television $30,000 Telephone $30,000 Landscaping $450,000 Signage $500 Public Trail $40,000 Dust Abatement $20,000 Sub-total $1,240,500 Divide Road Escrow $50.000 TOTAL $1,290,500 13 4. Existing Approvals vs. Proposed Amendment Permitted Use Comparison The Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility was approved in Ordinance 16 of 1989 with the following uses permitted by right: - Ski area maintenance shop and equipment storage facilities. - Ski area operational and supervisory offices. - Receiving and storage for ski area restaurant equipment and supplies. - Employee housing. - Accessory uses and facilities related to any of the above uses, but not limited to, access roads, fuel storage and dispensing, parts and supply storage, ski patrol locker area and multi-purpose room. Following is a list of the approved use area sizes compared to the proposed amended use area sizes. The quantities are in square feet: Major Structures Approved --------------Amended---------------- -Two primary buildings for allowed uses. Phase 1 Phase 2 Total - Summary structures for trash and fuel storage. -Anticipated program by type of use: a. Total building area 28,850 14,810 14,000 28,810 b. Snowcat storage and maintenance 18,405 3,870 7,600 11,470 c. Restaurant receiving 4,320 4,620 - 4,620 d. Ski patrol and multi-purpose 3,917 1,520 4,800 6,320 e. Employee housing 2,208 4,800 1,600 6,400 Land Use Parameters - Maximum building square footage 28,850 sf 28,810 - Maximum builidng height 36 ft 26 ft - Average building height 34 ft 26 ft -Maximum number of dwelling units/acre na na - Allowable F.A.R. 0.25 - Minimum amount of parking spaces 29 spaces 30 spaces - Minimum amount of open space 0 acres - Minimum number and minimum square footage of Restricted housing units up to 3 BR up tog BR 14 5. Skier Circulation Analysis (to/from Divide parking and Krabloonik) Currently, skier access to and from the Divide Skier Parking Lot and Krabloonik Restaurant exists and in some cases is not especially user friendly. This Minor PUD Amendment addresses the skier circulation to and from these facilities upon completion of the Divide VMF. Divide Skier Parking Lot Currently, skiers and snowboarders parking in the Divide Skier parking lot access the Slot Ski Trail via the Ditch Trail on the west end of the parking lot. The platted easement for this access is along the entire Ditch Trail however, because the platted easement is relatively flat, users currently ski off the Ditch Trail approximately 150 feet from the parking lot onto Divide Road and on to Slot Trail. This freeform access will no longer be available when the Phase II storage facility is constructed. The future ski access from the parking lot will either remain on the platted skier easement or a separate access trail can be constructed allowing a steeper across the slope contours behind and uphill of the Phase II storage facility. Access to the Divide Skier Parking from the slopes of Snowmass Mountain is via Slot Trail and down the metal stairway to the parking lot. Krabloonik Restaurant The ski-in and ski-out access to Krabloonik restaurant has not been very convenient since the completion of the Divide Subdivision itself. Currently there are two ways to access the restaurant: 1) via Slot Trail to the metal stairs above the Divide Parking Lot and walking/skiing on pavement/snow for approximately 800 feet to the restaurant. 2) via Slot Trail to the Ditch Trail and across the snowpacked Divide Road to the snowpacked Krabloonik access road. The Ditch Trail access is very flat and difficult to locate. Total distance approximately 1,200 feet. Ski-out from Krabloonik occurs by reversing either of these two ski-in options. Dan MacEachen indicates that Krabloonik's ski-in lunch business decreased substantially when the Divide Subdivision was completed. He indicates further that the majority of the current lunch business drives to the restaurant and that the ski-in lunch business is negligible for a variety of reasons. The Divide VMF proposal requires that Divide Road be maintained as an all weather road accessing the facility which will make a difficult ski-in/ski-out access even more so. 15 Aspen Skiing Company and Krabloonik are researching the feasibility ofjointly transporting lunch patrons directly from the slopes via snowcat, trailered vehicle or even dog sled to regenerate the lunch business at Krabloonik as well as the guest opportunities that go with it. Doe Sled Routes The Krabloonik dog sled operations will continue as they do now. ASC officials have been in contact with Dan McEachen and have worked out the details of dog sled ingress and egress. Generally speaking, the grading plan shown in this application accommodates a route for the dog sleds from the Krabloonik kennel to the Divide that will be snow covered. The VMF is designed to maintain a season long snow surface on the building's northwest side specifically for restaurant snowcat access. The VMF will also be situated to allow a 40-foot corridor between the building and the tree line to the north. Dan confirms this space will be adequate to accommodate the snowcat traffic (which essentially occurs either early morning or late afternoon) and the dog sled traffic in a satisfactory manner. 16 6. Transportation Summary Multiple uses are associated with Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility. The uses will generate traffic by delivery trucks, snowcats, snowmobiles, mountain operations pick up trucks, heavy equipment, and employee (both resident and non-resident) vehicles. Following is a list and approximate maximum number of trips per day: Restaurant tractor trailer delivery trucks 3 per day—mornings Other restaurant delivery trucks 5 per day—mornings Mountain Operations delivery trucks 3 per week —random Garbage collection truck 3 per week — midday Fuel delivery truck 1 per month— random Employees 20 per day—moming/evening Residents 20 per day—momin /evening Total 49 per day Snowcat 20 per day—before 8am, after 4pm Snowmobile 40 per day—primarily morning/evening Total 60 per day Many restaurant employees will begin and end their work at this site but public transit from the rodeo lot will be their primary access to the facility. 17 7. Access Road Construction Plans Access Road Width The access road to the VMF site will be widened and regraded to accommodate the vehicular ti af5c described in the Traffic Management Plan. The current TOSV code requires a 22-foot wide graded surface with 2-foot graded shoulders. The road plan and profile drawings included with this application indicate a dimension that meets these specifications. This is substantially wider than the 12-15 foot unimproved surface that currently exists. We propose to request of variance of the TOSV code to allow the construction of a 18-foot wide graded surface rather than a 22-foot surface. A 22-foot wide road surface would essentially eliminate ALL the mature aspen and spruce trees on the right side of the road (looking downhill) and also require substantial retaining walls on the left hand side of the road. We have spoken with the Fire Department and the TOSV Public Works Department regarding the prospects of an 18-foot road variance. Public Works doesn't feel this narrower width will compromise snow removal operations, garbage pickup or other related issues. The Fire Department however does have concerns regarding emergency vehicle access and the fact that large trucks will frequently use this road. Snowmass Water& Sanitation District Water Main The SWSD main raw water line from Snowmass Creek exists in portion of Divide Road where access to the VMF will take place. The grading plans submitted with this application may have to be revised to ensure adequate cover over this pipeline. Snowmass Water& Sanitation District's water engineer has been apprised of this road improvement project. He suggests the pipe depth be confirmed prior to construction to confirm whether or not the pipeline will have to be relocated. 18 8. Preliminary Construction Management Plan This Preliminary Construction Management Plan serves to satisfy the requirement of this Minor PUD Amendment for the Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility. The eventual building contractor will submit a more detailed Construction Management Plan at the time of actual construction which is anticipated to commence in April 2002. The Preliminary Construction Management Plan will identify the following: • Preliminary construction schedule • Construction site limits and protection • Construction access and staging • Dust and Noise Control • Emergency Contacts Preliminary Construction Schedule It is anticipated this project will begin in April 1, 2002 and the facility operational by November 1, 2002. Following is an estimated construction schedule: Road/utility construction and site prep April 1 through June 15, 2002 (900 feet of Divide road will be closed during this time) Foundation construction June 15 through July 15, 2002 Building construction July 15 through October 15, 2002 Occupy and move in October 15 through November 1, 2002 Finish grade and landscaping May 15 through June 15, 2003 Adjustments will be made to this schedule based on weather conditions, construction conditions or contractor needs. Construction Site Limits and Protection All efforts will be made to confine the construction to Lot 44. Prior to construction, construction perimeter fencing will be installed as necessary and the material staging area identified. In addition, sediment runoff fence will be installed as required. Please refer to the erosion and stormwater runoff control plan submitted as part of this application. Temporary sanitary toilets will be available on site as required. Construction Access and Stapine Access to the construction site is via Divide Road. Road and utility construction will take place prior to building construction. Worker parking will be in the TOSV parking lot at the top of Divide Road. 19 Primary and long-term construction/material staging will take on Lot 44. Temporary short term staging (3 days or less) will take place on the TOSV parking lot at the top of Divide Road. Dust and Noise Control Dust will be controlled according to the attached Aspen Skiing Company Fugitive Dust Control plan. Noise will be controlled to abide by the established TOSV Noise Control Standards. Emergency Contacts Following is an emergency contact list: Victor Gerdin Aspen Skiing Company, Planning 970-923-0555 Doug Mackenzie Snowmass Mountain, General Manager 970-923-0509 Rob Baxter Snowmass Mountain, Mountain Manager 970-923-0502 Additional names of contractor contacts will be added as the project nears construction. 20 9. Stormwater Runoff, Erosion and Drainage Control Plan Snowmass Mountain erosion and drainage plan was designed to protect the natural resources in the project area. The plan consists of, for the most part, two measures. The first is the use of silt fences and erosion bales located at the toe of disturbed sites during the construction activities. The second control measure is an aggressive revegetation program described in the Revegetation Plan. Seeding and mulching will be enacted within ten days after the completion of the soil disturbing or construction activity. The specific erosion control measures are detailed on the revegetation and drainage maps. Other erosion control measures will be used throughout the area as needed. One specific measure is water bars. They will be installed at appropriate intervals along cleared ski slopes and roads to limit distance that sheet runoff can flow unchecked. The water bars will divert runoff into the adjacent uncleared forest whenever possible. Where appropriate, energy dissipating structures (i.e., rock, hay bales, or slash piles will be installed to prevent erosion in the forested areas receiving the diverted slope runoff. The U.S. Forest Service has assisted in the designation of additional control measures, if any are needed. These measures may include, but are not limited to silt fencing, sediment basins, check dams, berms, mulching, revegetation, or natural materials will be used to decrease energy and remove silt. A checklist of construction activities with the associated control measures follows. Ski Trail Road Lift Snow Ski Trail Road Construction Construction Construction Construction Making Construction .............................................I....................................................;.................................................................................................... ......... Sediment Basins loo 00 00 00 ,00 I Check Dams 00 00 00 00 00 Filter Barriers 00 xx xx xx 00 Diversion Ditch oo xx xx xx xx Berms 00 00 xx 00 00 Revegetation xx xx xx xx xx Mulching 00 00 00 00 00 Sodding 00 00 00 00 00 ..._._...................................i ..............................................................................................................................,..........................................___.........._.., Other ioo 00 00 00 !00 j legend: XX- required with project where appropriate oo- Optional as needed where appropriate 21 Revegetation This revegetation plan is designed to satisfy the requirements of the U.S. Forest Service and the Aspen Skiing Company. Snowmass Mountain has a long history of successful revegetation efforts. The knowledge learned over the years on site will be applied to all aspects of this project. Revegetation of the disturbed sites will have four primary goals: (1)prevent soil loss and siltation of drainages as a result of removing forest cover; (2) establish vegetation that is compatible with existing native vegetation in appearance, composition, and permanence; (3) creating habitat that will support use by native wildlife; and (4) to provide quality skiing terrain. These goals will be accomplished by planting native grasses or species adapted to the area and using mulch to reduce soil loss and enhance the establishment of seeding. In areas with steep slopes and shallow or erodible soils, much will be used in combination with an erosion control mat or netting to provide further protection of soils and seedlings. Follow-up measures, such as additional seeding and/or fertilization, will be applied as needed. The native seed mixes listed below have been selected to provide visual diversity, prevention of soil erosion and ensure that a variety of feed materials are available throughout the growing season. All supplied seed will be free of noxious weed seeds. A signed statement certifying that the seed furnished is from a lot that has been tested will be made available. Seed which has become wet, moldy or otherwise damaged in transit or in storage will not be used. During the process of clearing sites, both rubber-tired and tracked equipment will be used on slopes of 30 percent or less. On steeper slopes, only tracked equipment will be used. Damaged areas will be regraded to appropriate smoothness and patched with soil material, if necessary. Seed bed preparation will consist of leaving a rough, irregular soil surface. This will include removing large rocks. Regardless of the mix of seed used, seed will be planted by broadcasting or drill seeding within ten days after soil disturbing activity has ended. Toward the end of the construction season all areas will be evaluated and additional revegetation measures will be implemented as needed. Planting during early fall will allow the seed to be fully moistened and worked into the soil by natural processes prior to germination in the spring, for some species, over wintering enhances germination by weakening the seed coat. Seeding rates will vary because of seed size, method of seeding and site requirements. Seeding rates of 50 to 250 seeds per square foot, depending on seed size, will be used on most sites. 22 Available plant nutrients are a necessity for any aggressive revegetation program that restores and maintains soil productivity resulting in healthy, vigorous vegetation. Generally, all vegetation responds favorably to the addition of nitrogen and phosphorous fertilizers. A mixture of 20-20-10 or Biosol will be used as a supplement to assist revegetation. An application rate of 50 to 250 seeds per square foot, followed by a second application of equal amount later in the growing season or the following growing season has been demonstrated to be most effective and efficient. Following seeding, slopes with a steepness less than 2:1 will be mulched with approximately 1,500 pounds per acre of straw. This straw or hay will provide the cover needed while still allowing sunlight to penetrate the mulch, warming the soil and enhancing plant growth. Application is done either by hand placing or mechanically blowing the mulch. The straw will be crimped into the soil and, in areas subject to wind erosion, they may be anchored with a tackifier. Areas with a steepness greater than 2:1 will be further stabilized by using plastic netting or mat. Based on the specific mitigation and monitoring plan set forth by the Decision Document signed by the Aspen District Ranger, ASC and Forest Service personnel will be conducting evaluations to ensure quality resource protection. A standard of 70 percent ground cover after the second growing season or the amount equal to the adjoining undisturbed areas, if less than 70 percent will be used to determine reapplication, modification, or fertilization. The Forest Service will also monitor ASC's compliance with the revegetation specifications contained in the annual Summer Construction Plan. Gary Schultz, Snowmass Trails Director, will be responsible for ensuring revegetation for this project is successful. He can be reached through Aspen Skiing Company at extension 4503, or directly, 923-0503. Reclamation Areas that will be reclaimed are building sites, structure placements, and landforms that will be moved, replaced, or abandoned. Reclamation will consist of minor disturbances from grading the previously developed areas into the natural contours and revegetating. These areas will be reclaimed as the construction schedule allows or requires. Appropriate and revegetation will occur within ten days after construction activities on site have been completed. 23 10. Fugitive Dust Control Plan This plan addresses dust control during and after earthmoving activities. Preventive measures applied during construction are more economical and effective than corrective measures. Dust Control for Unpaved Roads on Site Chemical Stabilizers On unpaved roads on areas where traffic is heavy, approved chemical stabilizers, such as magnesium chloride, will be used. Speed Control Speeds shall be limited to a 20-mph maximum on mountain roads and 15 mph near residential dwellings. Road Surface The surface of the existing roads is comprised of rock, a combination of compacted soils and gravel. Maintenance of roads is accomplished with gravel, grading and application of water/chemicals when necessary. Other Low permeability fences will be used in areas where wind erosion or additional dust control or additional dust control measures are needed. Low permeability fences will be installed near the base near the base area where to road passes by private homes. Dust Control for Disturbed Surface Areas Waterine Areas to be disturbed shall be watered as necessary on an ongoing basis. Chemical stabilizers Chemical stabilizers will not be used on graded areas where future revegetation is required. Speed Control 24 Speeds shall be limited to a 20 mph maximum on mountain roads and project sites, and 15 mph near residential dewellings. Minimizing Disturbed Areas Areas of disturbance will be minimized. Revegetation of disturbed areas will occur as soon as possible after disturbance occurs. Due to construction sequencing of activities, all of the disturbed sites will not be exposed at the same time. Furrows Due to the nature of wind above 9,000 feet, the use of furrows has little value. Compaction Soils will be managed to prevent accumulations of loose dirt. Wind Breaks Low permeability fences will be used in areas where wind erosion or additional dust control measures are needed. Steep Slope Covering The steep slopes on the project (road cuts, ski trails)will be revegetated (seeded and mulched) within ten days of final grading. Netting will be used on sites requiring additional measures to hold the mulch in place. Prevention of mud and dirt tracking onto paved surfaces Gravel transition zones will be established between mountain roads and paved public roads. Cleanup of Paved Area Cleanup of carry out will be accomplished by washing down the Divide Road pavement as needed. The gravel transition zones will be maintained to ensure proper performance. 25 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 16 SERIES OF 1989 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE FINAL LAND USE PLAN AND DETAILED FINAL PLAT FOR THE DIVIDE WHEREAS, The Snowmass Land Company (applicant) has submitted a request for Final Planned Unit Development Plan, the product is the Final Land Use Plan and Detailed Final Plat approval for Parcels 17, 18 and 19 , as described in Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1987 , hereafter known as "the Divide" ; and WHEREAS, the Divide is zoned MU-PUD and the Land Use Code of the Town of Snowmass Village permits a Planned Unit Development in said zone district; and WHEREAS, GDBS, owner of Parcel 19 has consented to the applicant' s development application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the Town of Snowmass Village has reviewed the application and has heard a presentation by the applicant and Town Staff and recommended approval of the project; and WHEREAS, in accordance with both written and published notice, a public hearing was held before the Town Council on August 7, 1989 to receive public comment on the applicant's request. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Findings 1. The application was submitted in accordance with the provisions and requirements of the Town of Snowmass Village Land Use Code. 2 . That no significant changes have been made to the proposed development approved in the Conceptual Plan and that no new information has been submitted or discovered which would make the project now inconsistent with the Town of Snowmass Village Master Plan. 3 . The proposed development is in conformance with the development evaluations and constraints to development. The Town Council finds that the applicant' s request to construct a roadway on grades in excess of 30 percent A- 1 T. C. Ord. 16, 1989 Page Two is necessary to minimize adverse impacts which would otherwise be created if the road were constructed in an area of less than 30 percent grade. 4 . The development is in conformance with the intent and — objectives of the underlying zone district and the general restrictions of a Planned Unit Development described in Section 10. 030 of the Land Use Code. It is acknowledged that Parcel Number 17 identified in Ordinance Number 10, Series of 1987 , was rezoned from SF-30 to MU-PUD to accommodate the specific development plan considered herein. Since the Plan contains detached single family residential units in the area designated as Parcel 17 it is therefore consistent with the zoning originally approved in Ordinance No. 10. 5. The development is in general conformance with the design standards of the Town. The design for the Divide Road, a 24 foot pavement and 2 foot shoulder, is generally consistent with the design standards given the overriding desire to minimize environmental impacts contained in the Village Master Plan. 6. The development is in conformance with all other applicable regulations of the Town not specifically subject to variation by Chapter 10 of the Land Use Code. 7. The Town Council agrees with the conclusion of the fiscal impact report. It finds that there are net benefits to the Town. The greatest impact will be on public parking in the core of the Village, that being roughly 20 to 25 spaces. The Town Council believes that the cost of maintaining the Divide road will not be impacted because of the improved surface conditions. All other roads will be privately maintained. The impact on the Town' s maintenance facility should not be impacted because no new equipment or service levels will be required for this development. As mitigation, the Applicant will pave Divide Road, improve two parking lots containing up to 72 spaces to be deeded to the Town, dedication of pubic trails, provide water storage facilities which positively affects the Town system, and commitments to convert Parcel 15 from unrestricted to restricted housing. 8 . The major air quality impact will be from dust generated from the Divide Road. This problem will be resolved by coating the road with magnesium chloride during site preparation and subsequently paving the road. A- 2 T. C. Ord. 16, 1989 Page Three 9 . The Town Council finds that the impact of the development on the transportation system of the Village will be minimal . The greatest impact will be on Divide Road at its intersection with Brush Creek Road. The applicant will make intersection and sight distance improvements to minimize impacts. 10. The Applicant 's proposal for storage space in the caretaker unit does not represent a deviation from the conceptual approval; but rather, it is considered a clarification of the intended use of the property. The storage space is considered desirable. 11. Upon the effective date of this approval , the Krabloonik dog sled, training and racing operation will be considered a non-conforming use in the Planned Unit Development Plan. Further, said use shall not be considered a pre-existing condition. Said use shall be considered in compliance with the Planned Unit Development Plan upon annual approval by the Town of the operational aspects of the activity. Section Two: Action The Town Council hereby approves the Final Planned Unit Development Plan as described on the Land Use Plan for the Divide attached herewith as Exhibit A and as further documented in Exhibit B, subject to the conditions stated below. The Town Council hereby acknowledges and approves the establishment of vested property rights in The Divide Final Planned Unit Development Plan and Detailed Final Plat, consistent with the provisions of Section 3 . 050 of the Town of Snowmass Village Land Use Code. The Town Council hereby approves the Detailed Final Plat and Public Improvements Agreement, as described in Exhibit C attached hereto, for the Divide. The Mayor and Town Clerk are hereby authorized to execute said documents attached hereto on behalf of the Town of Snowmass Village. Section Three: Conditions 1. The Applicant shall deliver a Land Use Plan in a form suitable for filing for record in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, that is in compliance with the terms and conditions of this Ordinance. A- 3 T. C. Ord. 16, 1989 Page Four 2 . All dedications to the Town of Snowmass Village, including Divide road and Lots 42 and 43 shall be proven to be free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. 3 . The Applicant shall execute the Public Improvements Agreement, attached hereto in Exhibit C. 4 . The final Land Use Plan and Detailed Final Plat for the Divide shall not become effective until compliance with conditions number 1, 2 and 3 , and the applicant has made payment to the Town for all costs of recording. S . If, .in the future, the owner of the property attempts to alter any aspect of the Land Use Plan approved herewith, the owner shall be required to comply with all provisions of the Town Codes, Ordinances and Master Plan in existence at that time. It is acknowledged that the zoning for the property is pursuant to the Land Use Plan approved herein. 6. The location of both underground water storage tanks and both pump stations are acceptable. However, this application has not included any detail about either site. Therefore, the applicant shall submit detailed landscape, grading plans and any other pertinent information for Town approval prior to the issuance of any permits for these facilities. 7. The specific material and color schemes that will be used on the exterior of the Aspen Skiing Company' s maintenance facility have not been provided. Specific colors for the walls, parapet, metal roof and frame constructed areas of the project shall be submitted by the owner of Parcel C for Town Council approval prior to the issuance of any permits for this project. The ' Planning Commission shall be included in this approval process. 8 . The fence(s) which are installed for screening purposes by the Aspen Skiing Company along Divide Road on Parcel C shall be maintained by the owner of Parcel C in a sound condition at all times that the fence (s) are in place. 9 . The applicant shall insure proper sight distance from Divide Road at Brush Creek Road to the South (uphill) . This shall be done concurrently with the issuance of any excavation or building permits for the Divide. The Town Engineer shall grant final approval of the Applicant ' s improvements prior to the pavement of the A- 4 T.C. Ord. 16, 1989 Page Five Divide Road. 10. The applicant shall make striping improvements on Divide Road at its intersection with Brush Creek Road in accordance with the recommendations of the Traffic Consultant. 11. All residential uses in the Divide shall be subject to the covenants of the Snowmass Homeowner's Association. This is conditioned on the Snowmass Homeowner' s Association Design Committee placing a representative of the Divide Homeowner's Association on its Committee for the purposes of reviewing and granting design approval as required by the covenants of the Snowmass Homeowner's Association. This representative shall have veto power over a design approval for the Divide residential uses to be granted by the Committee if the approval is not deemed to be consistent with the representative' s interpretation of the Committee' s criteria. 12 . A public improvements agreement for the Aspen Skiing ■ Company' s Maintenance Facility located on Parcel C shall be submitted by the owner of Parcel C to the Town Council for its approval prior to the issuance of any excavation or building permits for the facility. A letter of credit shall be used to secure performance of the Agreement. Said letter shall be established at the time the Town Council approves the Agreement. Prior to the approval, the Town Engineer shall review the estimated installation costs and adjust said cost accordingly. . If the Town Engineer and the owner of Parcel C can not agree on an estimated cost for one or more items, the Town Council shall determine the cost. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on first reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 7th day of August, 1989 by a vote of 7 to 0 INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on second reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 21st day of August, 1989 by a vote of 6 to 0 Councilmember Duhn absent. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO z Z� Richard G. Wall, Ayor A- 5 T. C. Ord. 16 , 1989 Page Six ATTEST: Qnnnlaw honKr,o�� Amber Harmon, Town Clerk A- 6 To: Chris Conrad, Senior Planner From: John T. Mele, Fire Marshal Subject: Aspen Ski Co. Divide Maintenance Facility I have met with Mr. Victor Gerdin from the Aspen Skiing Company and have reviewed a sketch plan of their newly proposed maintenance facility at the Divide. The Snowmass- Wildcat Fire Protection District has the following concern at this stage of the planning process. The access road to the new maintenance facility is being proposed at 18 feet in width. We anticipate daily semi-truck deliveries, employee housing traffic and general Ski Company usage of this road. Therefore, we believe that the access road should adhere to the adopted Snowmass Village Municipal Code requirements of 24 feet. For your added information, automatic fire sprinklers will be required for this project. Fire hydrant placement will be coordinated in future planning stages. We have also been assured that fuel storage will be underground and will comply with all local and E.P.A. requirements. We look forward to working closely with the applicant to insure that fire and life safety is designed into the facility. 1�f SNOWMASS WATER & SANITATION May 11, 2001 D I > T R I C T Mr. Victor Gerdin, Aspen Ski Company P.O. Box 1248 Aspen Colorado, 81612 Re: Aspen Ski Companies Divide Maintenance Facility—Project Description 65-150.79 The District does have the capacity and ability to serve this project for both water and wastewater. Existing infrastructure at the bottom of the Divide Subdivision was originally designed, installed, and located to provide service to this project, however relatively long line extensions to provide water or to collect wastewater will be needed to serve this project due to its location beyond the existing facilities. A copy of Deans report was faxed to Chris Conrad this morning. Please pay special attention to MWE's comments when it comes to the possibility of adding a new sewage lift station. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (970) 923-2056. Robert Garcia District Manage Attachments MWE memo SNOWMASS WATER ST SAMTATION DISTRICT • POST OMCE Box 5700 • 660 FAIRWAY DRrvE • SNOWMASS VILLAGE • COLORADO 81615 TEUPNONR 970.923.2056 • TRLBFA1970.923.6271 May 10 01 06101P MOLRUGHLIN WRTER ENG 870-826-1874 P. 8 M V1' L'r McI.AUG14LIN WATC•R ENGINEERS, ltd. III Y AAHC ASI%N,Co l.('J kN)U K u;11 970.925.19211 'ML925-1974 I'ax ucwra.yara nrol.tul MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Garcia- SW SD District Manager From. G. Doin Dcrosier, 11. E. Date: May 10, 2001 RC•'. ASPEN SKI COMPANIES DIVIDE MAINTENANCE FACILITY - Project Des3ri-,tion, 65-150.79 The District System does have the capacity and ability to serve this project for bunt water and waste water. Existing infrastructure at the existing bottom of the Divide Subdivision was originally designed, installed, and located to provide service to this project, however relatively long line extensions to provide water or to collect waste water will be needed to serve this project due to its location beyond the existing facilities. WATER: Water lines will not be 4blc to be looped at this location and water 1'ne will dead-end at the proposed building. An 8" DIP line extension will connect to the existing 10" DIP lint Inceted near the existing fire hydrant at the intersection of Divide Road and rho entrance to the Divide subdivision and Krablooniks parking lot, or the start ofthe limpesed Divide Maintenance Facility Access Road. This 10" DIP line was installed to service this project, The new line extension wiC follow an alignment that would allow it to serve not only domestic and fire protections to the proposed maintenance facility, but to Krablooniks as well. The lines will need to be designed to provide service to the proposed facilities, future uses, and Krablooniks. The Aspen Ski Company should contact the Fire Department to obtain the exact fire hydrant locations needed to service the project. All main line water line extensions will be 8" minimum C! 52 Ductile Iron Pipelines. Service line suing to the theility is dependent on flows needed. We would ulso require that the existing service to Krablooniks be replaced with a minimum of 4" DIP piping. May 10 01 06102P MoLRUGHLIN WRTER ENO 870-825-1974 P, 8 SEW GR: The sewer to service this project will need to be lifted up from the building;site to the existing sewer facilities in Divide Road. The closest existing manhole is located in the bike path at the intorsection of Divide Road and the entrance to the Divide Subdivision, however, an existing 4" PVC force main line extension was insudled from this manhole to the start of the proposed I)ivide Maintenance Facility access road. The 4" force main would need to be extended to a new lift station located next to the Proposed maintenance facility. A new 8" minimum sewer line and manholes would also be required to provide service to the Krablooniks facilities. All mein sewer lines will be 8" SDR 35 PVC with standard manholes and the 4" Lrorce Main is to be C-900 Cl 150 PVC. The required lift station will need to be designed to handle the proposed maintenance IaciliLV use, any other ASC future uses, and Krablooniks. The facility will need to meet all District and State of Colorado requirements and apprcvals The required site application to the State of Colorado Ilcalth Department may take as long as 6 months to get approved. The final design cannot take place until the site application is approved. G. Dc ero{ 41 •• .. L/-, CC: Robert Garcia - SWSD MWE - Denver gJJ'uw,IWidonuund.xiipM1GS-ISU.79 {, •a Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility Aspen Skiing Company Minor PUD Amendment Application Supplemental Submission Submitted to: Town of Snowmass Village P.O.Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Applicant: Aspen Skiing Company P.O.Box 1248 Aspen, CO 81612 July 9, 2001 i Table of Contents Cover letter to Jim Wahlstrom Part 1: Core Issue Comment Response.............................................page 1 Part 2: Technical Comment Response..............................................page 8 Project Phasing and Purpose (revised pg. 3 of original submission)...........page 17 Permitted Use Comparison (revised pg.14 of original submission)............page 18 ASC Hazardous Waste Protocol ....................................................page 19 Divide VMF Parking Rationale .....................................................page 23 Green Design Memo ..................................................................page 25 DOW Response letter .................................................................page 27 Revised Illustrations Site Plan........................................................................Illustration E Floor Plan ......................................................................Illustration F Building Elevations ..........................................................Illustration G Grading Plan ..................................................................Illustration J Landscape Plan................................................................Illustration K Skier Egress Plan..............................................................Illustration L Appendix Geotechnical Report A S P E N S K I I N G C O M P A N Y July 9, 2001 Jim Wahlstrom Town of Snowmass Village P.O.Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Re: Response to Staff Comments -- Divide VMF Minor PUD Amendment Dear Jim, This letter accompanies my response to the TOSV Staff Comments to the recently submitted Divide VMF Minor PUD Amendment received on June 22, 2001. Each item is addressed in the following text. Part 1 addresses the Core Issues of your comment letter and the Part 2 addresses each technical comment from the staff as necessary. Additional, or rewritten, submittal items follow the comments as do the resubmitted Illustrations. Thanks for working on this project for us and please call me at 923-0555 with any further questions. Sincerely, v� Victor Gerdin Mountain Planner CC: Bill Kane Pon Office Box 1248 •Aspen, CO 81612 970.923.1220 • Fax 970.923.4875 I ..skiaspen.rom �P,NIOa On flOt}pCO PCpC! - J Part 1: Core Issue Comment Response 1. The current facility design as previously approved was vested, however, the amendment to the past PUD approval would trigger compliance with current Code standards. Aspen Skiing Company understands that, although the previous building was approved, compliance with the current Code Standards is required for approval of this Minor PUD Amendment. 2. Other restrictions concerning the usage and operation on the site should be noted on the plans specifically as they relate to storage of materials on the site and the management of vehicle f uids. There should also be a prohibition on outdoor storage of materials and outdoor repair work. We understand and support the need to restrict outside storage and outdoor repair work. However, the reality of ski area operations suggest that occasionally there is need for such activity to take place. Therefore the statement, "no permanent outside storage of materials or repair work is permitted on site" will be included on a revised site plan. We also included the document that outlines ASC's hazardous waste handling policies and procedures with this packet. 3. The inconsistencies in square footage proposed for each phase needs to be clarified. A revised "Project Phasing and Purpose" page is included that reflects Phase I as 14,810 square feet, and Phase II as 14,000 square feet. 4. Staffposition is that the access road should be widened to meet the Town standard of 20 feet paved surface plus two foot shoulders. See separate memo attached from the Town's Public Works Department. This criterion results in an overall 24-foot wide road bed, the construction of which ASC feels will change the character of the area more than is necessary for this facility. A 24-foot wide roadbed would require that most of the mature trees on the downhill side of the road be removed and retaining walls constructed. This is essentially a dead end service road upon which the relative frequency of two way truck traffic to will be minimal. Furthermore, the letter from Public Works assumes Aspen Skiing Company will maintain this road in Winter. Given these guidelines, ASC maintains that an 18-foot road surface with one-foot shoulders,with one emergency turnout, will adequately service this site and minimize the removal of native mature vegetation in the area. As a comparison, there are portions of existing very high volume roads in Snowmass Village (Wood Road as an example) that exist with a 24-foot road bed and over much of its length. Another example is Snowmelt Road which is 20 feet from curb to curb. 5. The road access width will also need to be resolved with the Fire District. ASC feels this is an internal issue between TOSV Community Development and the Fire District. As a suggestion, various Fire Districts within the County have approved road standards of lesser width provided turnouts for vehicle passing are incorporated at certain intervals. Such turnouts could be incorporated into this road construction in areas where the topography of the area warrants these turnouts. 6. The paving of the access road should extend to the west end of the site so there is continuity ofsurface treatment from the road to the paved parking/service yard areas. It also appears that part of the asphalt surfacing impacts a proposed dog sled run easement area. Illustration H indicates that paving ends at station 6+18.46. This indication was in reference to a previous contract and is not pertinent here. Pavement will continue to the yard area. However, ASC contends the West Side of the building will not require pavement, as this area will be used minimally in the summer. The West Side of the building will primarily be used in Winter where the restaurant snow cats will be loaded and the building design intends that this side of the building remains snow covered during ski operations. Snow storage activities will take place to ensure the surface will remain snow covered well into the spring. The dog sled access on this side of the building will remain snow covered as per the site plan. A 40- foot setback between the building and the existing trees ensures adequate movement of snowcats and dog sleds. Dan McEachen confirmed this dimension. 7. Identify the location of all retaining walls, including the "Divide" retaining wall. This reference on Illustration I pertains to another project previously constructed. 8. This PUD Amendment will trigger compliance with the current "development in 30%slope" criteria in the Code. A slope analysis diagram was included with the original submittal on Illustration D. There are areas where the existing Divide Road was originally constructed, both within and without the Lot 44 property boundaries,through areas where slopes were originally as steep as to 40%. This is also the area where the road widening is anticipated. We look for direction and a vote from Planning Commission and Town Council representatives, per the Land Use Code, to deal with this non-compliance. The only other area that possesses greater than 30% slopes is a small area on the northwest side of the building where the ridge will be flattened and widened to create the building platform. 9. The f nished grade of the access road appears to drop off suddenly by 30 feet when comparing against the existing grading. An error in contour labeling has been corrected in a revised grading plan. 10. Drainage patterns per finished grade,proposed detention ponding and water quality issues need to be addressed more definitively on the plans or by a separate 2 1 � Y i plan. The magnesium chloride proposed may eventually have an impact on downstream flows in nearby creeks. The final site drainage plan is the same as the plan submitted and dated June 1989, the second to last drawing in the appendix. Detention ponds and water quality issues are addressed in Section 9 -- Stormwater Runoff, Erosion and Drainage Control Plan, on page 21. We assume detention ponds are only required during the construction phase until satisfactory revegetation has been reestablished. The construction detention pond is addressed in the Temporary Annual Use Permit to begin earthwork and is included with this supplemental submission. Magnesium Chloride WILL NOT be used as a dust suppressant if so desired by TOSV. 11. In lieu of grading down the hillside on the northwest side, we recommend that this area be terraced with retaining walls to control erosion. The slope depicted in the Grading Plan on the northwest side of the building will be a 2:1 slope. ASC has had much success revegetating such slopes on the mountain and anticipate the same success here. However, if a site inspection upon completion of the rough grade in the area warrants slope retainage, then ASC will comply. 12. Permission from the adjacent owners for the off-site grading, road improvements, retaining walls and the relocated ski easement is requested. Discussions with Krabloonik have been ongoing through the design process and they are aware, and support, the offsite grading to the northeast of the building. Dan McEachen has expressed this grading will actually enhance his property and facilitate viable dog sled operations once the building is constructed. Regarding the current skier egress from Lot E, the existing egress currently DOES NOT follow the platted ski easement. This plan calls for skier egress to follow that platted easement unless some other agreement is warranted and agreed to by all parties. We assume that some of these issues can be addressed during the public hearing portion of this review process. 13. The paved parking areas and service drives should be represented on the Phased Site Plan as being installed with the initial phase. Paved parking areas are intended to be part of Phase I and are so noted on the revised site plan. 14. The off-street parking requirements, including handicap parking spaces, should be outlined for the revised PUD Amendment. In other words, how were the 30 spaces derived? A parking rationale is included with the revised PUD Amendment. 15. More landscape islands are requested for the parking lot and service yard areas, and up against the building. Ten percent of the parking area/service yard must be landscape per the Code. Please reference the other landscape-related comments in this report. The paved yard area is approximately 30,000 square feet. The current landscaping plan indicates approximately 2,400 square feet of proposed landscaping in and around the area. An additional 1,000 square feet of landscaping will be added to the northeast end of the building. 3 16. Lighting on the building appears a little too obtrusive. Solid fencing along the northwest property line might also help shield the lighting and cut off the view angle from areas below along Snowmass Creek. The lighting for this project is all indirect downcast lighting incorporated into building eaves and/or wall mounted sconces. There are no yard lights proposed for this facility. We have, however, at staffs request reduced the lights at doorways by nearly 50% so that adjacent doors share a light rather than each have their own. In addition, the door lights will be switched separately to further reduce the amount of light. That way the lights would only go on when someone is loading and unloading.The suggestion to provide solid fencing also seems arbitrary at this point. The building's north elevation maximum height, 27 feet, in conjunction with a 40 foot setback from the ridge, suggest that only the top few feet of the building would be visible from the Snowmass Creek Valley. The steepness of the existing topography suggests at least a 26-degree line of sight angle from Snowmass Creek. This line of sight angle combined with the 40-foot setback from the ridge indicate that very little of the building would be visible, if any. Also, the large conifer trees, more than 50 feet tall, will substantially shield the view from Snowmass Creek. We suggest that a large solid fence only be constructed if deemed necessary after the building is constructed. 17. Identify whether or not the screen fencing in front of the facility and along the road is still proposed. See further comments in this report concerning the design of the fence. The screen fencing proposed in the 1989 proposal is not included in this PUD Amendment. We think such a screen fence would far less attractive then a landscaped, neatly kept yard area and a building with attractive architectural elements incorporated in the deign. 18. Public trails should be identified on all the plans. Improved public trail connectivity is requested from the relocated public trail/ski easement. Public trails have been added to all plans. New public trails are possible however the existing trail easement approved in the original PUD would have to be amended. We assume requested trail connectivity is from the trail that starts at Lot E and connects to the unpaved portion of Divide Roads. Would this trail be used for skiing, hiking or biking? The existing trail easement is a ski trail that follows the ditch to Slot Trail 19. There are several technical related comments concerning the building elevations, the material and color scheme notations, relabeling of the elevations,footprint questions, and dimensioning. The building design related issues are addressed in revised building drawings. 20. An existing and finished grading plan needs to be provided with an overlay of the roofplan to determine the height of the buildings. Drawings are furnished with supplemental application information. 4 21. We request that you show the employee housing calculation requirements based on today's standards due to the requested amendment. We have reviewed the TOSV Land Use Code regarding Job Generation Formulas (Sect. 16A-4-400). This building type and its uses - a vehicle maintenance facility and restaurant storage - do not fit within the categories suggested in the Code, and thus it is impossible to measure this facility using the code's standards. More importantly, this building, and the operations related to it, merely replace activities which currently take place in the shop yard at the base of Fanny Hill. This facility will not generate new employees but will merely relocate existing ones from Fanny Hill. Because there is no job generation and therefore no employee housing requirement, the employee housing proposed as part of this project is not intended as mitigation for the Divide project. The employee housing at the Divide will be used to mitigate future ASC employee housing mitigation requirements. 22. The Town doesn't provide bus service to the Divide parking lot and doesn't intend to in the future. See separate memo attached from the Town's Public Works Department. Any required employee shuttle service to and from the VMF will be provided directly by ASC. 23. See attached letter from the Colorado Division of Wildlife with recommendations to avoid problems with black bear habitat in the area. Many of the comments in the DOW report are consistent with the"Revegetation" portion of Section 9 of the May 10, 2001 submittal. In addition we will eliminate the use berry or fruit producing vegetation in the landscaping plans. Regarding dogs in the employee housing units,we will specify whatever TOSV deems appropriate in the area. 24. A construction phasing plan and an erosion control plan, that the contractor will need to follow, needs to be submitted next time. We feel the information provided in Section H and Section 9 adequately describes the construction management and erosion control necessary for a PUD Application. Specific details such as actual locations of sediment retention fencing and ponds will be provided at the time of Building Permit Application when allowing this detail to be provided specifically by the contractor who is not yet chosen. 25. A new Subdivision Improvement Agreement needs to be submitted for this facility on Lot 44 and other off-site improvements. A Divide Subdivision Improvements Agreement Amendment to address the off-site impacts associated with this project will be submitted at a later date. 5 Part 2: Technical Comment Response Minor PUD Amendment Criteria: • The Minor PUD Amendment criteria in the Code seem to be adequately address in your letter dated May 18, 2001. We will forward the letter to the decision-makers for review along with the remaining application package. Confirmed. Compliance with General Restrictions: Uses— l. A restriction should be noted on the plans that there will be no outside storage of materials or repair work performed on the site. New plans submitted see core response# 2. 2. There should be a program to address the management of vehicle fluids used within the facility. It should address how they will be stored(new and used), how they are planned to be recycled, how oily rags will be stored and/or removed, and how accidental spillage offluids will be contained(such as use of trench drains within the repair area or garage and that no outdoor repair work will be performed,for example). Trench drains and oil separators are considered standard design criteria for the building to comply with EPA standards. A copy of ASC's hazardous waste handling policies and procedures is also included with this packet. Core response#2. 3. The plans should show and label the locations for the planned underground fuel storage tanks as well as any fuel pump islands. Will the underground tanks be double- lined? Fuel storage tanks are indicated on the new site plan. All new ASC underground fuel storage tanks and delivery system installations are double walled with leak detection equipment installed per EPA Standards. 4. What is the area drawn boxed in on the west side of the site? Are the two line perpendicular from the building proposed to be fencing? If so, we are not agreeable to creating an outdoor storage area, plus it would block the proposed dog sled run. The two lines are topographic contour lines indicating the final grade in the area. No fencing is planned in this area and the dog sled egress will not be blocked. 5. It would be helpful to note the acreage of 2.65 on page 14 as well as the amended FAR, which is about the same as what's allowed. A new page 14 with the above information is included with this packet. 6 Maximum Buildout— • The Comprehensive Plan's Buildout Analysis Chart does not apply to this site. Dimensional Limitations and Standards for Granting Variations— • Seethe comments under Building Design. Parking— • See the comments under Off-Street Parking Standards. Road Standards— • Seethe comments under Streets and Related Improvements. Compliance with Review Standards: Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan — • No comment on this review criterion. Preservation of Community Character— • See the comments under Building Design. Creative Approach — • No comment on this review criterion. Landscaping— • See the comments under Landscaping, Grading and Other Design Standards. Compliance with Article IV— • See the comments below. Suitability for Development— • See the comments below. Adequate Facilities and Efficient Spatial Pattern -- • See the comments under Water Supply, Sewage Disposal, Solid Waste Disposal and Utilities. Phasing— • On page 3, it mentions Phase I as 14,900 square feet and Phase 2 as 13,900 square feet. However,page 14 notes 14,810 and 14,000, respectively. Which page is correct? A revised "Project Phasing and Purpose" page is included that reflects Phase I as 14,810 square feet, and Phase II as 14,000 square feet. 7 Compliance with Article IV.- Sensitive Wildlife Habitat Areas— • There are no sensitive wildlife areas identified on this site per the Comprehensive Plan. However,please see the attached letter dated June 19 from the Colorado Division of Wildlife with recommendations to avoid problems with the black bear habitat in the area. We request that you respond back to them in writing with copy to us. A revised landscape plan would also address some of their concerns. A copy of the DOW response letter is included with this packet. Brush Creek Impact Area -- • Not applicable to Brush Creek. However, the magnesium chloride proposed for dust control will eventually have an impact on Snowmass Creek. Drainage patterns, detention ponding and water quality will be important items to address with this application. Therefore, we request a copy of a more detailed drainage plan for this project addressing the noted concerns. The final site drainage plan is the same as the plan submitted and dated June 1989, the second to last drawing in the appendix. Detention ponds and water quality issues are addressed in Section 9 -- Stormwater Runoff, Erosion and Drainage Control Plan, on page 21. We assume detention ponds are only required during the construction phase until satisfactory revegetation has been reestablished. The construction detention pond is addressed in the Temporary Annual Use Permit to begin earthwork and is included with this supplemental submission. Magnesium Chloride WILL NOT be used as a dust suppressant if so desired by TOSV. Geologic Hazard Areas— l. Even if the Code language prohibiting development on 30%slopes went into effect following the approval of the Divide PUD, the criteria would be triggered as a result of the PUD Amendment. According to the Land Use and Development Code, the Town Council may authorize development on slopes greater than 30% in circumstances not listed above if at least %. of the Town Council members present and voting approve an ordinance finding that: a) The development is unable to avoid the steep slopes, and the reasons therefor; and b) One the basis of competent engineering or geologic reports and data and testimony received, the design and/or construction techniques that will be incorporated with the development will satisfactorily mitigate the risk of potential harm to the public health, safety or welfare. A slope analysis diagram was included with the original submittal on Illustration D. There are areas where the existing Divide Road was originally constructed, both within and without the Lot 44 property boundaries, through areas where slopes were 8 originally as steep as to 40%. This is also the area where the road widening is anticipated. A copy of the geotechnical analysis for the entire site, conducted in 1994 by Delta Geotechnical Consultants, is included with this submission. It identifies the slope stability issues in the south and east portions of the site on page 6 of the report. We look for direction and a vote from Planning Commission and Town Council representatives, per the Land Use Code, to deal with this non-compliance. The only other area that possesses greater than 30% slopes is a small area on the northwest side of the building where the ridge will be flattened and widened to create the building platform. 2. For the Town to allow development under any of the above circumstances, the applicant shall provide an opinion from a professional geotechnical engineer licensed in the State stating that: a) The slope is not prone to instability or failure; b) The proposed development will not cause greater slope instability or increase the potential for slope failure, and that therefore, there will be no significant risk that damage to adjacent property will result from the proposed construction. 3. Compliance with the above criteria will need to be demonstrated at this time with this application. The geotechnical analysis for the entire site, conducted in 1994 by Delta Geotechnical Consultants, is included with this submission. It identifies the slope stability issues in the south and east portions of the site on page 6 of the report. 4. We will need to see a design for the proposed retaining walls at this time, including materials and color. The retaining walls outlined in the original application were the originally required 24-foot road width design. A lesser width road may not require retaining walls and further road design will be postponed until a final road width requirement is confirmed. Streets and Related Improvements— l. The paving for the access road should be extended from the east end of the site to the west end of the site; Otherwise, vehicles will be traversing from paved surfaced to gravel to paved surface again. The paved surface will be continuous from the existing pavement of Divide Road to the paved VMF yard area. 2. See the attached memorandum dated June 18. Staff's position is that the road should be widened to a 20 foot paved surface plus two foot shoulders. This criterion results in an overall 24-foot wide road bed,the construction of which ASC feels will change the character of the area more than is necessary for this facility. A 24-foot wide roadbed would require that most of the mature trees on the downhill side of the road be removed and retaining walls constructed. This is essentially a dead end service road upon which the relative frequency of two way truck traffic to will 9 be minimal. Furthermore, the letter from Public Works assumes Aspen Skiing Company will maintain this road in Winter. Given these guidelines, ASC maintains that an 18-foot road surface with one-foot shoulders, with one emergency turnout,will adequately service this site and minimize the removal of native mature vegetation in the area. As a comparison, there are portions of existing very high volume roads in Snowmass Village (Wood Road as an example) that exist with a total width 24-foot road bed and over much of its length. Another example is Snowmelt Road which is 20 feet from curb to curb. 3. The phasing Site Plan should note that Road D will be paved versus "non paved. " These words are deleted from the revised site plan. 4. The plan view of the grading plans appears to show an abrupt worse-case road cut of about 30 feet, however, the profile drawing only shows a worse-case cut of 12 feet which gradually transitions into existing grade. Please correct the affected drawings for accuracy. The error in contour line labeling is corrected on the revised site plan. 5. Address the tree mitigation plan proposed as a result of the significant road cuts proposed. The landscape plan specifically identifies the placement of 48 spruce trees, 55 aspen trees and 65 deciduous shrubs. Public Trails— l. The proposed trail relocation should be identified on all the plans other than the Skier Egress plan. Done. 2. We recommend that another trail connection from the relocated trail to the access road, generally connecting in the vicinity of where the two roads/driveways meet in the middle of the lot. New public trails are possible however the existing trail easement approved in the original PUD would have to be amended. We assume requested trail connectivity is from the trail that starts at Lot E and connects to the unpaved portion of Divide Roads. Would this trail be used for skiing, hiking or biking? The existing trail easement is a ski trail that follows the ditch to Slot Trail. 3. It appears that part of the asphalt area is within the planned location of the cat routes and dog sled run trail in the southwest portion of the site. Perhaps the edge of the asphalt area should be moved to the east farther to accommodate these routes/trails. Fencing in snowcat loading area also seems to be depicted on the plans within the dog sled run, although it is not labeled. Do the lines drawn represent a fence or edge of asphalt? Please clarify. The revised site plan will indicate the edge of pavement in question to be moved east to accommodate the routes and trails described above. The two lines are topographic contour lines indicating the final grade in the area. No fencing is planned in this area and the dog sled egress will not be blocked. 10 Water Supply, Sewage Disposal, Solid Waste Disposal and Utilities— • No comments other than those supplied by the Water& Sanitation District. Fire Protection — • We agree with the Fire District that the access road should be widened to accommodate safe two-way traffic for trucks and cars. Retaining walls and tree mitigation will likely be required. Storm Drainage— 1. The application needs to provide more information concerning the drainage patterns via finished grades, detention ponding, and erosion control planned for the site in graphic form other than the grading plan and narrative provided in the report. We understand that graphic form of erosion control scheduling is requested. However, the contractor will eventually determine the sequence to which this site will be developed. A contractor will not be chosen until design drawings are complete and a Building Permit application is submitted. We suggest this requirement be a condition of approval of the building permit. 2. Show all proposed retaining wall locations on the grading/drainage plans. Done. 3. The parking and driveways for the facility must be shown on the Phasing Site Plan and noted that it will be installed with the initial phase building. Done. Other Improvement Standards— • A new Subdivision Improvement Agreement needs to be submitted for this facility on Lot 44 and another off-site improvements. A draft of the S.I.A. needs to be brought in with the next submittal. A Divide Subdivision Improvements Agreement Amendment to address the off-site impacts associated with this project will be submitted at a later date. Off-Street Parking Standards -- 1. The parking and driveways for the facility must be shown on the Phasing Site Plan and noted that it will be installed with the initial phase building. Done. 2. The application should attempt to outline how the 30 parking spaces needed was derived for the initial phase development. We want to make sure there is enough parking for the facility to prevent passenger vehicles from interfering with delivery vehicles despite our request for more landscape islands in the parking area and up against the building (see comments below). A parking rationale statement is included with this supplemental submission. ]1 1 3. The required number of handicap parking spaces should be identified on the plans. Done. 4. Please demonstrate that there is adequate room for delivery vehicles. It would be helpful to show minimum turning movement radiuses for the sizes of trucks (and trash trucks) anticipated using the facility. You may shown on the plans or provide a separate plan showing the turning radiuses. Done. Landscaping, Grading and Other Design Standards -- 1. In lieu of grading down the hillside northwest of the initial phase facility, we recommend that the area be terraced with retaining walls to better prevent erosion from occurring. The detention pond for surface runofffrom impervious surface areas must be located in a landscaped area. Also show the detention pond on the Landscape Plan. The slope depicted in the Grading Plan on the northwest side of the building will be a 2:1 slope. ASC has had much success revegetating such slopes on the mountain and anticipate the same success here. However, if a site inspection upon completion of the rough grade in the area warrants slope retainage, then ASC will comply. 2. We request letters of permission from the adjacent property owners concerning the off- site grading, roadway improvements, retaining walls and the relocated ski access easement around and near the site. Discussions with Krabloonik have been ongoing through the design process and they are aware, and support, the offsite grading to the northeast of the building. Dan McEachen has expressed this grading will actually enhance his property and facilitate viable dog sled operations once the building is constructed. Regarding the current skier egress from Lot E, the existing egress currently DOES NOT follow the platted ski easement. This plan calls for skier egress to follow that platted easement unless some other agreement is warranted and agreed to by all parties. We assume that some of these issues can be addressed during the public hearing portion of this review process. 3. We recommend that some landscape islands be added here and there in front of the building (along north, east and south elevations) to help break up monolithic walls and the asphalt surface against the building. The paved yard area is approximately 30,000 square feet. The current landscaping plan indicates approximately 2,400 square feet of proposed landscaping in and around the area. An additional 1,000 square feet of landscaping will be added to the northeast end of the building. 4. Likewise, a few landscape islands should be installed within the parking bay in strategic locations to help with screening and aesthetically break up the asphalt area. 10%of the parking lot must be landscaped per the Code. See above. 5. There should be a legend provided keying the symbols to the types of trees and shrubs proposed. This would also partially address the Colorado Division of Wildlife's recommendations per their letter. The shrubbery should be labeled as minimum 5- 12 gallon size at installation. The original plan included a vegetation landscape legend. See revised landscape plan for the deletion of berry bearing shrubs per the DOW recommendation. 6. Will an automatic irrigation system be provided to water the new plant material? No. 7. Is the screen fence in front of the facility along the access road still planned with this proposal or will it be removed? If it were still proposed, we'd recommend a better looking screen fence other than mesh fencing with slats. The screen fencing proposed in the 1989 proposal is not included in this PUD Amendment. We think such a screen fence would far less attractive then a landscaped, neatly kept yard area and a building with attractive architectural elements incorporated in the design. 8. We recommend that a solid fence be stalled along the northwest property line to shield and cut off the view angle from the Snowmass Creek area below of the wall-mounted lighting and from lighting within the building. The suggestion to provide solid fencing also seems arbitrary at this point. The building's north elevation maximum height, 27 feet, in conjunction with a 40 foot setback from the ridge, suggest that only the top few feet of the building would be visible from the Snowmass Creek Valley. The steepness of the existing topography suggests at least a 26-degree line of sight angle from Snowmass Creek. This line of sight angle combined with the 40-foot setback from the ridge indicate that very little of the building would be visible, if any. Also, the large conifer trees, more than 50 feet tall, will substantially shield the view from Snowmass Creek. We suggest that a large solid fence only be constructed if deemed necessary after the building is constructed. 9. It appears that there may be too much exterior lighting proposed for this facility which includes both upper and lower lighting on the exterior of the building. We don 't believe it is necessary to incorporate lighting below the soft areas. In addition, perhaps only one or two exterior lights would be all that is needed in the affected garage door entries versus having lights at every bay. The lighting for this project is all indirect downcast lighting incorporated into building eaves and/or wall mounted sconces. There are no yard lights proposed for this facility. We have, however, at staff's request reduced the lights at doorways by nearly 50% so that adjacent doors share a light rather than each have their own. In addition, the door lights will be switched separately to further reduce the amount of light. That way the lights would only go on when someone is loading and unloading. Soffit lighting will also be reduced. Energy Conservation — • An Energy Conservation Plan should be submitted with this application. Attached is a memo from ASC's Auden Schendler, Director of Environmental Affairs, outlining the energy efficiency and other environmental measures Aspen Skiing Company 13 plans to incorporate in the new Snowmass vehicle shop. Aspen Skiing Company has made a commitment to environmentally responsible development, outlined in the booklet "Building Sustainable Resorts"Our goal is a whole-building integrated design approach to create fundamentally well-designed buildings at or below market cost. A result of high-quality integrated design is environmental sustainability. Building Design — AII of the comments below have been incorporated in a revised set of building floor plan and elevation drawings by Ted Guy. 1. A material/color board of the exterior finishes and roofing proposed on the building should be submitted at this time for review by Planning Commission and subsequently by Town Council. 2. All color schemes should be noted on the building elevations at this time, including all accents, trims and doors (garage doors and pedestrian doors). 3. The roofshould be called out as a standing-seam metal roof, if that is what's proposed, including its pre-manufactured color or treatment. 4. The type and color of CMU should be further described at this time. It should be a darker earthlone color, split faced, and integrally colored. 5. We recommend that the CMU wainscot treatment be provided around the entire building (even above the loading docks) to create a varied appearance of the exterior finishes on the building from all angles. It would also serve to protect the metal siding from being damaged from vehicles,forklifts, and dollies and from the general movement ofsupplies. The CMU could be stepped up the building at the transition/grade change points to create a sense of continuity in the design. 6. The top elevation on Illustration G should be labeled as the SOUTH ELEVATION; 7. The second from top elevations should be relabeled from WEST ELEVATION to EAST ELEVATION. S. The SOUTH ELEVATION should be relabeled as the NORTH ELEVATION. 9. Dimension the maximum height of the building on all elevations. It should match the 26 feet noted on page 14. 10. Dimension the length and width of the buildings on the Floor Plans (Illustration F). 11. Please outline the structural footprint of the stair tower locations on the Floor Plan drawing. 14 12. We request that the stairway towers be constructed with the initial phase versus in the future. These towers will add to the architectural interest of the building. 13. Please provide a finished grade drawing showing the roofplans of the building. This information is needed to demonstrate compliance with how building heights are measured per Code and to determine the exact height of the building. You will also need to demonstrate that the height of the building will not exceed the previous approved height of 36 feet from existing grade. Perhaps this could be shown on the building elevations. When looking at the finished floor level of 8884 feet and the nearby existing grade of 8870 feet, it appears that the finished grade for the site will be 10 feet higher than the existing grade, which could make it difficult to stay within the previous height restriction from existing grade. 14. Please see previous comments concerning the lighting on the building. 15. Are building elevations proposed for the Phase 2 building, or will you be submitting a new PUD Amendment later to address the building design for that phase? A separate PUD Amendment will be provided for the proposed Phase 2 building. Restricted Housing— The amount of employee housing proposed seems reasonable, although we request that you show us the calculation for employee housing based upon the current ratios and formulas in the Code. This is required as a result of the proposed PUD Amendment. Following the Code,you will need to show us your estimate for the number of employees per 1,000 square feet for this type of facility to complete the formula. We have reviewed the TOSV Land Use Code regarding Job Generation Formulas (Sect. 16A-4-400). This building type and its uses, a vehicle maintenance facility and restaurant storage, do not Tit within the categories suggested in the Code, and thus it is impossible to measure this facility using the code's standards. More importantly, this building, and the operations related to it, merely replace activities which currently take place in the shop yard at the base of Fanny Hill. This facility will not generate new employees but will merely relocate existing ones from Fanny Hill. Because there is no job generation and therefore no employee housing requirement, the employee housing proposed as part of this project is not intended as mitigation for the Divide project. The employee housing at the Divide will be used to mitigate future ASC employee housing mitigation requirements. Sign Standards— • We recommend that you prepare a sign program for review with the PUD Amendment in lieu of waiting until after final approvals. Sign details should also be submitted at this time showing compliance with the sign code. If proposed, the signs, including dimensions, may be shown on the site plan and/or the building elevations and we can 15 , handle and review the Comprehensive Sign Plan concurrent with the PUD Amendment review. A sign program is attached with this resubmittal. Attachments— • Memorandum from the Town 's Public Works Department dated June 18, 2001 • Letter from the Colorado Division of Wildlife dated June 19, 2001 16 2. Project Phasing and Purpose (revised) The comparisons provided on the Permitted Use Comparison sheet demonstrate the phasing concept. The purpose for construction phasing allows Aspen Skiing Company to initially construct the most necessary functions, i.e. restaurant shipping and receiving, snowmobile maintenance and rubber tire vehicle maintenance, that will be displaced when Base Village construction begins. The primary reason for the reduction in snowcat maintenance and storage area from the approved to the amended proposal is the fact that the primary snowcat maintenance facility will be located on USFS lands near Elk Camp Meadows. This location will allow more room for this facility and is more centrally located on the mountain reducing snowcat travel time to various parts of the mountain. The overall phasing elements of the amended plan are as follows: Phase 1 —A 14,810 square foot facility incorporating on-mountain restaurant shipping and receiving, trash/recycle receiving, snowmobile maintenance, rubber tire maintenance, office/locker space, storage and employee housing. This phase will also complete the mass grading for the site as well as improve the Divide Road to the site. Phase 2 — A 14,000 square foot facility to accommodate snowcat and/or mountain operations equipment storage, lift maintenance bays, additional rubber tire maintenance bays, additional office space and employee housing. 17 4. Existing Approvals vs. Proposed Amendment Permitted Use Comparison The Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility was approved in Ordinance 16 of 1989 with the following uses permitted by right: - Ski area maintenance shop and equipment storage facilities. - Ski area operational and supervisory offices. - Receiving and storage for ski area restaurant equipment and supplies. - Employee housing. - Accessory uses and facilities related to any of the above uses, but not limited to, access roads, fuel storage and dispensing, parts and supply storage, ski patrol locker area and multi-purpose room. Lot 44 is 2.65 acres more of less, and this development comprises a 25% FAR. Following is a list of the approved use area sizes compared to the proposed amended use area sizes. The quantities are in square feet: Major Structures Approved --------------Amended---------------- -Two primary buildings for allowed uses. Phase I Phase 2 Total -Summary structures for trash and fuel storage. -Anticipated program by type of use: a. Total building area 28,850 14,810 14,000 28,810 b. Snowcat storage and maintenance 18,405 3,870 7,600 11,470 c. Restaurant receiving 4,320 4,620 - 4,620 d. Ski patrol and multi-purpose 3,917 1,520 4,800 6,320 e. Employee housing 2,208 4,800 1,600 6,400 Land Use Parameters -Maximum building square footage 28,850 sf 28,810 -Maximum builidng height 36 ft 26 ft -Average building height 34 ft 26 ft -Maximum number of dwelling units/acre na na -Allowable F.A.R. 0.25 - Minimum amount of parking spaces 29 spaces 30 spaces -Minimum amount of open space 0 acres - Minimum number and minimum square footage of Restricted housing units up to 3 BR up to9 BR 19 Hazardous Waste Protocol Prepared by Aspen Skiing Company's Environmental Affairs Department Spring 2000 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Last November, Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) received the ski industry's first Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hazardous waste inspection. Thanks to the hard work of our vehicle, lift, snowmaking, and building maintenance crews, we were compliant in nearly every area of the company. That's good, because even the smallest violations can result in hefty fines (John Elway Motors was fined $3,000 for one drum with a missing lid; American Airlines was fined $8 million for storing hazardous waste in a warehouse illegally!) To be better prepared for future inspections, avoid violation of RCRA and DOT laws, streamline the hazardous waste disposal process, and save money, we've developed this protocol. It will help guide all ASC managers and employees on how to better handle, store, transport, and dispose of any hazardous wastes. This should be available to ALL employees in contact with hazardous wastes. ASC is a Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator (CESQG). This means we don't have to meet the laborious documentation and handling requirements of larger generators. To keep our lives easy, we must meet three requirements: 1) Identify our hazardous waste; 2) Comply with storage quantity limits; • Generate less than 100 kg/month (220 pounds/month) of hazardous waste and less than 1 kg/month of acutely hazardous waste; • Never have more than 1000 kg (2,200 pounds) at one time on premises. 3) Ensure proper treatment and disposal of waste. OVERVIEW OF HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL PROCESS Prior to pickup, hazardous waste is stored at the Buttermilk Containment Area (BCA), located next to the vehicle maintenance shop at Buttermilk. Employees must sign-in all deposits and new barrels MUST be labeled accurately. Drum holes must always be capped. Unidentified waste costs ASC thousands of dollars in testing and disposal—this is money that could be going to your department, or to a raise. The sign-in sheet is in a green binder at the BCA. 19 HAZARDOUS OR REGULATED WASTES Waste Paint Related Materials (These include solvents, mineral spirits, paint thinner, oil-based paints and other non-latex waste paint related material). Oil-based paints are a hazardous waste. The goal with paint waste management is twofold: 1) to avoid paint waste in the first place by not generating it; and 2) to purchase only non-hazardous latex (water) based paints. • Avoid creating paint waste by using every ounce of paint in each can. If you can't, empty old paint containers into labeled 55-gallon drums ("latex" or "oil based") at the BCA. New 55-gallon drums should be labeled with the appropriate hazardous waste labels, available from Environmental Affairs, plus a "flammable' label. It costs up to 600 dollars to dispose of one drum of waste paint. It can cost an extra $300 to identify the waste if it is not labeled properly. • Empty paint cans must be dry prior to being thrown out. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THROWING OUT DRIED PAINT CANS. • All unused or paint-tainted solvents, mineral spirits, and paint thinner must be dumped into the 55-gallon drum labeled "oil-based paint waste." Rags contaminated with hazardous wastes Rags or absorbants that have been primarily used with solvents, brake cleaners, oil-based paints, or other hazardous materials may not be thrown in the normal trash. In fact, ASC is liable for groundwater contamination from this source. Rags should be stored in a covered 55-gallon drum labeled "Hazardous Absorbants" until they can be: • laundered (Carbondale's Crystal cleaners has an industrial laundry service); • or disposed of at a licensed facility (Ashland Chemical is our service provider). Keep these rags separate from other oily or greasy rags. Oily Absorbants (Saturated Oily Rags and Pig Mats) Oily absorbants and rags that are saturated (usually from spills) must be placed in labeled 55-gallon drums and eventually transported to the BCA for disposal at a licensed facility. Rags that are not saturated but have some amount of oil (for example, a rag used to wipe down an engine block after an oil change) may be thrown in the trash, and should not be consolidated with other such rags. If your shop is generating a large amount of non-saturated oily rags, (>250 lbs. annually) please contact Environmental Affairs. You won't have to make any changes in procedure, but we need the information. 20 Greasy Rags We are allowed to throw out 1000 lbs. of greasy rags each year. Greasy means the thick, relatively dry grease on lift machinery, for example, which likely won't migrate through a landfill into the watershed. These rags should be tossed into the trash as necessary, not consolidated. Fluorescent Bulbs Wand 8'1 All burned-out bulbs are hazardous and get recycled because they contain mercury, a nerve toxin. It's easy: Grainger has boxes for 30 4' bulbs or 15 8' bulbs. Just order a box through Jim Ward or Steve Sheehy, ((800) 994-2348 ext. 87524) pack the bulbs, and call the toll-free UPS number on the box to order a pickup. If you generate only a small amount of these bulbs, they can be stored in the labeled bins at the BCA until you have enough to package. For easier transport to the BCA, they can be taped together to avoid breaking. Antifreeze (Ethylene Glycol) Antifreeze can be poured into appropriately labeled 55-gallon drums at the BCA for disposal and recycling. It should never be poured down the drain. It is highly toxic and is attractive to animals and children due to its sweet taste. Used Oil Used oil can be burned in oil burning heaters at various locations. All other waste oil must be labeled as such and stored at the BCA. Don't mix used oil with anything. Safely store it in leak-proof containers away from workers. Oil Filters Oil filters should be hot-drained for a day and sent to the dump for recycling. Diesel/Water Mixture All diesel fuel should be fully used and not thrown out. However, if diesel fuel becomes contaminated with water, place it in a 55-gallon drum, label the drum, then take it to the BCA. Empty Drums A 55-gallon drum is empty only when it contains less than 1% of any material. Simply, this means all contents should be drained to the best of your ability. Drums should be cleaned out and reused within the company or taken to the BCA and labeled "RCRA Empty." Oil Separator Sludge This should be placed in a properly labeled 55-gallon drum at the BCA. 21 Aerosol Cans Aerosol cans can be thrown into the trash only when they are emptied completely. Partially empty cans containing hazardous waste can result in a fine of $1000 per can! The EPA calls their inspections "dumpster-diving for fines." Pesticides and Fertilizers Pesticides and fertilizers should NEVER be thrown away. ALL pesticides and fertilizers must be fully used. ASC's goal is to use as little pesticide as possible. This means employing alternative pest management strategies (contact Environmental Affairs for Integrated Pest Management strategies). Construction Wastes While not hazardous, construction wastes are a major component of ASC's waste stream, and often consist of wood, aluminum, copper, sheetrock, and glass. Minimize such waste by reusing it within the company or taking it to the landfill for reuse. Segregated wood, metal, and sheetrock can be disposed at the Pitkin County landfill at a reduced cost. Mystery Wastes You should NEVER generate a "mystery wastel" ALL wastes must be identified and must match one of our state regulated profiles (waste streams) listed below: Latex (water-based) paint Ethylene glycol (anti-freeze) Paint related Waste Diesel/Water Mix RCRA Empty Oil Separator Sludge Oily Absorbants (rags) Waste Oil Waste Fluorescent Bulbs If a waste is unidentifiable, contact the Environmental Affairs Department. Do not mix the waste with other waste streams. Remember, unknown wastes are extremely expensive to dispose of and are an increased legal liability. That said, it's still better to say you don't know than to guess! IF NO DRUM IS AVAILABLE FOR YOUR WASTE, DO NOT DUMP IT IN ANOTHER DRUM. PLEASE TALK TO DON MUSHET AT THE BUTTERMILK SHOP—HE WILL DESIGNATE A DRUM. Questions? Call Auden Schendler (aschendler @aspensnowmass.com, 923-8628, X4628). 22 Divide VMF Parking Rationale Thirty parking spaces are included in the Divide VMF development plan, two of which will be handicap spaces per Section 16A-4-310 of the Municipal Code. Following is the rationale supporting this number: • restaurant mangers, 6 spaces • ASC managers, 4 spaces • Phase I employee housing, 10 spaces (2-2BR units; 4-113R units) • Phase II employee housing, 4 spaces (2-2BR units) • Miscellaneous employee parking, 3 spaces • Miscellaneous ASC vehicle parking, 3 spaces All other restaurant and/or ASC employee parking will be at the Rodeo Lot a shuttle service provided. 23 Divide VMF Signage Program All sign will conform to the existing ski area signs which are dark gray with white lettering on a light gray frame. The following signs will accompany the Divide VMF project: 1 — 3'0" x 3'0" mounted on 2, 2x2 metal posts at the entrance to the yard area. Aspen Skiing Company Shipping & Receiving Vehicle Maintenance (address) 6 — 1' x 3' mounted on building above restaurant bays indicating name of restaurant. These sign will be placed both on the east and west elevation of the building. High Alpine 1 —2' x 4' sign mounted on the building's east elevation above maintenance bay. Vehicle Maintenance 1 — 1'x 3' sign mounted on building's east elevation above office entry Office 24 Aspen SkiiHg Company Memorandum To: Victor Gerdin From: Auden Schendler Date: July 10,2001 Re: Green Design at Snowmass Vehicle Shop The purpose of this memo is to outline energy efficiency and other environmental measures Aspen Skiing Company plans to incorporate in the new Snowmass vehicle shop. Aspen Skiing Company has made a commitment to environmentally responsible development, outlined in the booklet"Building Sustainable Resorts." Our goal is a whole- building integrated design approach to create fundamentally well-designed buildings at or below market cost. A result of high-quality integrated design is environmental sustainability. The most important step in making the Vehicle Shop a green building is early discussion with the architect, engineer, owner and occupants. This step has already occurred—ASC's architect, Ted Guy, is aware that this will be a green building. ASC has not yet undertaken the research necessary to specify energy efficient lighting, chillers, etc. mentioned below. We will keep the town of Snowmass apprised of this research as it occurs. • Insulation The foundation should be insulated. Walls and roof should exceed code. ASC is currently exploring the added cost of incorporating R-30 walls and R-40 roof. Windows should exceed code, at least R-3. (Most double-pane low-e windows are R-3 anyway.) • Boilers We will use Veissmann (or equivalent) fully-modulating natural gas boilers. These super-efficient boilers, which cost more, make economic sense because of the inordinately high cost of natural gas. • Chillers ASC will specify high-efficiency compressors and chillers. We are currently exploring the possibility of capturing waste heat for use in the building. • Lighting the Environmental Affairs Department and the architect will work to specify high efficiency lighting. The primary effort will be to research and specify efficient shop lighting. Daylighing—in the form of high windows, lightshelves, and possibly skylights, (though these tend to reduce whole building energy efficiency) can be 25 particularly effective in shops. "Light tubes" will be explored as well,because they can provide the type of intense light needed in shops. Back of house lighting will be T-8 fluorescent or compact fluorescent fixtures. • Renewable Energy Passive solar hot water preheat panels may be cost effective. Return on investment ranged from 13% to 25% before gas prices spiked. We could install a small system for$3-4k as a demonstration project. • Mechanical Systems HVAC and refrigeration systems will be HCFC free—tbis means using HFC coolant as a minimum standard. ASC would like to use an ammonia system, pending cost analysis. • Air Quality chemical/solvent storage rooms will have dedicated ventilation. Air to air heat exchangers may prove appropriate—ASC is exploring their use. • Recycling we will specify a location for a cardboard baler at the shipping and receiving dock. • Spill prevention ASC stores hazardous waste at the Buttermilk Containment area. However, it makes sense to have a concrete spill pad at the SM VMF for nonhazardous materials such as glycol and motor oil, which can be environmentally damaging if spilled. Aspen Skiing Company's Environmental Affairs department has allocated time to do research and legwork on the above issues and others, at the request of the development team. Please feel free to use the department as a resource. 923-8628. 26 July 6, 2001 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY Kevin Wright District Wildlife Manager Colorado Division of Wildlife 6060 Broadway Denver, CO 80216 Re: Aspen Skiing Company—Vehicle Maintenance Facility Dear Kevin, I have been asked to respond to your letter of June 9, 2001 sent to the Town of Snowmass Village Planning Department regarding the proposed vehicle maintenance facility on Lot 44 of the Divide Subdivision in Snowmass Village, CO. Following are the responses to your 6 recommendations: 1) All disturbed areas will revegetated per Aspen Skiing Company's Vegetation and Resource Management Plan which includes a weed management program. A copy of this plan has been supplied with our application to TOSV. 2) The disturbed area will be mulched with certified weed free hay or straw as per the plan. W have found that hay works better in this location as it is not as easily wind transported as straw. 3) Serviceberry and Chokecherry have been eliminated from our landscaping plan and a revised plan submitted with our application. 4) We will comply with whatever dog regulations TOSV wishes to provide for the employee housing units. 5) Native vegetation will be maintained as much as possible. 6) Trash compactors in an enclosed portion of the building are incorporated into the building. I hope this letter addresses the DOW concerns and also provides information that Aspen Skiing Company is pro-active and conscientious about many basic wildlife critical concerns. Please contact me at 970-923-055 if you have any further comments or suggestions. Sincerely, Victor Gerdin Mountain Planner CC: TOSV Planning Department 27 Post Office Box 1248 •Aspen, CO 81612 970.923.1220•Fax 970.923.4875 ®vnnua w Rm�ba Paro win+.skiaspen.com Hepworth-Pawlak Geolechnical,Inc. �l� �V r►� 5020 County Road Glenwood Springs,Colorado 81601 Phone:970-945-7988 8 Fax: 970.945-8454 hPgc oCa hpgeotcch.com August 23, 2001 Aspen Skiing Company Attn: Victor Gerdin P.O. Box 1248 Aspen, Colorado 81612 Job No. 100 762 Subject: Geotechnical Review of Proposed Development in Excess 30% Slope Areas, Proposed Maintenance Facility, Lot 44, The Divide, Snowmass Village, Colorado Dear Mr. Gerdin: As requested, we have reviewed the geotechnical conditions at the subject site with respect to building in areas in excess of 30% slope. We previously provided recommendations for the development in a report dated October 10, 2000, Job No. 100 762. The development will be within two areas of existing slopes in excess of 30%. One area is within the building footprint along the eastern side of a ridge and the other is in a short stretch of Divide Road adjacent to the large evergreen tree. The grading in the building area consists of filling and cutting which will completely eliminate the 30% slope condition. As a result of the grading, there will be no 30% slope constraint within the building area. The Divide Road improvements will consist of cutting up to about 6 feet deep to provide a uniform grade and a road width of 20 feet. Boring 14 drilled by Chen- Northern (report dated August 17, 1989) located just uphill of the road cut area encountered about 21 feet of clayey sand and gravel with cobbles and possible boulders above shale bedrock. Groundwater level was encountered at a depth of 13 feet when the boring was drilled in May. The hillside in this area appears relatively stable at the natural slope on the order of 35% to 40%. The roadway grading through the 30% excess slope appears feasible as planned. The cut area can be retained by a low boulder wall (up to 6 feet high) and a 11/z horizontal to 1 vertical backslope. The boulder wall should have adequate section for stability and an underdrain. The backslope should be revegetated to prevent erosion. In our opinion, the recommended slope grading will have adequate stability against failure and not pose Aspen Skiing Company August 23, 2001 Page 2 a significant risk to damage to the adjacent property or hazard to public safety. We should review the slope grading and retaining wall design when available and prior to construction. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please call our office. Sincerely, HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEO CFINICAL, INC. Steven L. Pawlak, P. 1 5 2 2 2 �o.gJ2-IJ01 Rev. By: DEH �PJ•. "O"OVAL ,T` OF Cok��k` SLP/ksw cc: Theodore K. Guy Associates - Attn: Ted Guy HUU-.]G-CGYJG lYJ•JO rnui m.ia .., ... . i..". ._ --------------- .a'Jl.pia GEOTECHNTCAL STUDY PROPOSED SNOWMASS MAINTENANC E FACILITY THE DIVIDE, LOT 44 SNOWMASS VILLAGE„COLO DO Prepared For: z tiT R; HAIRABEDIAN ARCHffEC7r r. jam ' 21OG VENTNOR AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 f I i JOB NO. 3290 HUU--)U—G000 IU-If -- - _ . 466 G Lawndale Drive.Sell Lake Gm/,lllah Bd115 Tale.(871)487O754 FAX(801)4847941 1125 West 1190 North,St.George,Utah Bd770 Tole.(Bill)628.9536 FAX(801)628-9589 89282 Golden lantern,Suite 121,bans Point.CA 92629 Tele.(714)259.1992 ' FZ/" CLOTECHNK.AL CONSULTANTS INC. t �� �(,t 1� y,• �� r iY = ' May 20, 1994 .,,�•.r�s�-°--�—�.,,�'� Mr. Varouj Hairabedian Hairabedian Architects 2100 Ventnor Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Varouj: We have completed our geotechnical study for the p oposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility located at Lot 44 in the Divide Subdivision of Sno pass Village, Colorado. Details of our findings and recommendations, along with the sup rting field and laboratory data, are presented in the attached report. Nine test holes were drilled at this site. The si bsoils, vary across the site but generally consist of stiff to very stiff clay-silt with gravel u iderlain by medium dense silty, clayey sand or weathered to sound claystone. Test ho s located near the 9orthwest property boundary encountered dense, dry silty sandy gravelwith c4bbl.R�s4+ �ld�'tm '•°*•°'� ' l f not encountered in the test holes during drilling. a►t ' " _:�-�� The site is suitable for the proposed development f the recomniendattonsurf this-- report are properly implemented during design and const Lion. Spread footings founded on structural fill are recommended for support of the p. -oposed maintenance building. Spread footings on recompacted native subsoils or strucl iral fill are recommended for support of the restaurant storage building. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to yc i on this project. Please call us if you have any questions or need additional information. Very truly yours, DELTA GEOTECHNI AL CONSULTANTS, IN Q�OBS310 Preside ��'t'IIGSAIC d �BAGHOOWAN HB/fg Submitted in 3 Copies 1 c3aotechnical • EnvirOnmewkil •oua!ity Conlrol LaboratoN Teslin(l TABLE OF CONTEll TS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . 1 SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SUBSOIL CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F a" y , tIR ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . �.r SLOPE STABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 FLOOR SLABS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 CUT SLOPES AND EXCAVATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 RETAINING WALLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 APPENDIX A: FIELD EXPLORATION, VICINITY MAP, SITE PLAN, AND LOGS OF TEST HOLES APPENDIX B: LABORATORY TEST PRO CEDUR AND RESULTS RUIi�SI�—Gldl4b 1V9 by rKUJ�l HH I KHJ=1)l HIY HKlNi ICi-�, Geotechnical Study Page 1 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechni al study conducted at the site of the proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility located at ot 44 in the Divide subdivision of Snowmass Village, Colorado. The purpose of our st idy was to provide information on subsoil and groundwater conditions, recommendations r foundation types and depths, soil bearing capacities, anticipated total and differentialtl6�il1 nylYStoA � �1s " idl►�'► walls, and other design and construction considerations flueAped 1?y .l� eJsuisy The study included site reconnaissance, subsur cc exploration and soil sampling, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, client consultal on, and preparation of this report. The general location of the site is shown on the icinity Map, Figure A-1, presented in Appendix A. A geotechnical study for this site was previously c nducted by Chen Northern (Chen Northern, Inc. 1989). Data obtained from Chen's study i ras used to supplement information used in the preparation of the design and construction recommendations included in this report. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand the proposed development will co sist of an 80- by 154-foot one story maintenance building, a restaurant-storage building to igbly 40 by 160 feet in size, and several retaining walls. The maintenance building will have precast ext . 'or bearing and interior masonry C QA& HULO-JU-LGYJb 1C -10 rMUL I nn a i�nu�✓a nn n..a a �.. ..+ . + -�•- "'•r •-� Geotechnical Study Page 2 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 p �� .ncFa p partition walls. Maximum structural loads will be on he order p 2AA lµ 5 WIplhyjau#1 columns and 9 kips per lineal foot for continuous walls. The e restaurant storage building will also utilize precast walls with a double "T" concrete r f slab. The western portion of the roof for this building will function as a snowmobile storage facility and the rear walls will act as retaining walls. Structural loads for the restaura it storage building were unavailable but are expected to be on the order of 3 to 5 kips per lineal foot for continuous walls. To provide adequate space for snowcats, delivi ry trucks, and automobiles, several retaining walls will be required northwest and southea t of the maintenance building. To accommodate the proposed restaurant-storage building nished floor elevation, and because of the height of the existing slope, two or three tiers o e a a11c�;.11i lsorl,P ne�drla �r4_* south and east of the storage building. Our understanding of the project is based pa .'ally on our discussions with Mr. Varouj Hairabedian of Hairabedian Architects and 1 .1r. Kit Hamby of the Aspen Ski Company, and our review of the site plans provided by F airabedian Architects. The surface topography map provided at the commencement of this s udy,and subsequently used for our preliminary recommendations given in a letter dated A )ril 12, 1994, proved to contain an error; a revised topography map was later provided t us. The new map was used to prepare the recommendations provided in this report. SITE CONDITIONS J The site is an irregularly shaped, approximately ree acre parcel lo&6d'in a small l BRIM a � Geotechnical Study Page 3 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance facility May 20, 1994 drainage above Snowmass Creek. Surface topography lopes steeply down to the site from the west, south, and east at 20 to 45 percent. A sn all ridge flanks the site along the northwest property boundary, whereas the central port on of the property forms a shallow bowl that channels drainage across the site in a northit t dll'e tla two dirt roads that enter the site from the northeast. East Snowmass and Brush Creek Ditch is located on the slope immediately south an east of the site. This ditch has reportedly been recently replaced by two conduits and iubsequently backfilled. At the time of our field investigation, the site wa covered with about 2 feet of snow; however, based on the site topography and vegetation, surface drainage is expected to be good in the steep areas and fair to poor 'in the shallow bowl in the center of the property. Large patches of aspen and occasional evergreen trees I re located around the perimeter of the site, with scrub brush concentrated in the central a ea. The site is bound to the west, south and east bk steep to modgrat 1P lle r tut ya, northwest by a 10- to 15-foot high ridge that drops ab _Rke ' Snowmass Creek, and to the northeast by a retention b . in, dpg jrpjj)r,1�gp .taur fit„ ` SUBSOIL CONDITIONS Nine test holes were drilled across the proper to study subsurface conditions. Subsoils were generally consistent across the site. Tes Holes 3, 4, and 5, located at the proposed maintenance building area, encountered rougl ly 18 to 24 inches of topsoil, 21 to 23 feet of medium stiff to very stiff, slightly moist, brcvn gravelly clay-silt, underlain by 1'11J.] JYJ GVVV 1V .ice i i.�.• •n .........��..... ....�.. �� . � ' S Geotechnical Study a p Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility ' �`�� LL ='�' ` '�a .�,• May 20, 1994 medium dense, clayey brownish-red sand with some g vel. Test Holes 1, 7, 8, and 9 were located in the vicinity of the proposed restaurant-storE a building and retaining wall areas and encountered 12 to 18 inches of topsoil, 12 to 17 f et of stiff to very stiff, moist, brown gravelly clay-silt underlain by weathered to sound c183 tone bedrock. Test Holes 2 and 6 were located near the proposed retaining wall northw t of the maintenance structure and encountered dense, dry, brownish-red silty gravel with fine sand and cobbles. Groundwater was not encountered in any of a test holes during drilling. The previous geotechnical study by Chen Northern indicate shallow ground�yYyyyjAle '+ �.. ; 4 .F. . 1989. The absence of water during our field work m -beiduexto We tiiiiooci. §F(tlite ° �.s- ! winter/early spring) and/or the replacement of. the t Suowmass'ditcli with enclosed conduits. Ground water levels should be monitored b prior to and during construction. Systems for control of ground water will generally dept d on the amount of water moving through the subsurface and will have to be addressed ring construction. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS Considering the proposed maintenance building, inish floor slab elevations of 8,875 and 8,870 feet, and site topography, up to 12 feet of 511 11 be required to raise the building Wi pad. Similarly, to reach the proposed finished floo elevatgo of ,$$�rf^°«yin. restaurant-storage building, 1 to 2 feet of fill and cuts t i to Further, cutting and filling varying from 2 to 10 feet wil. be necessary for the roadway and parking areas adjacent to these structures. �B�Cd Geotechnical Study Page 5 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 Swell-consolidation tests conducted on clay silt samples from the proposed maintenance building area indicate these subsoils are i ioderately compressible. The near- surface subsoils at depths of 3 to 7 feet appear to be ov iCOgsgaldatedqsc to 0.9 percent when saturated under a load of 1 ksf. Th deeper subsoilss ate `)4e y pprinally consolidated and did not exhibit expansion when satur I ed. Please refer to Appendix B for laboratory test procedures and results. The subsoils are expected to possess moderate: o high bearing capacity; however, total and differential settlement of these soils under th building load and site grading fill will be controlling factors for foundation design. C ir analysis indicates that, for the proposed finished floor elevations of 8,870 and 8,875 fe" t, the building will experience total settlements on the order of 1.5 to 2 inches. Differentiai settlement across the building pad will likely be on the order of 0.5 to 0.75 inches. Chai ges in the building elevation, and consequently changes in the thickness of underlying st C' r increase or decrease these settlements. s We believe that estimated settlement for the pr osed finished floor elevations will be within tolerable limits for the structure. However, i order to provide uniform bearing conditions and reduce differential settlement, we recc rimend the subgrade beneath the maintenance structure be overexcavated to a constant el vation as detailed in the following sections. At the proposed restaurant-storage building ele lion of 8,886 feet, the building is expected to bear partially on loose, near-surface soils, a Id partially on deep, stiff clays. To 1 Geotechnical Study Pa e 6 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility , May 20, 1994 reduce the potential for large differential settlement as ociated with variable bearing layers, and to provide a uniform subgrade, we recommej d the top 3 feet of subgrade be overexcavated beneath footings and replaced, where iecessary, with structural fill. This recommendation will automatically be met where cu for the building exceed 3 feet, SLOPE STABILITY The slope stability of the terraced retaining wall and cut areas gpq'h proposed restaurant storage building was analyzed with heT CSTA"BI:SlVr(Cnrpenter, Siegel, 1975) computer analysis package. PCSTABL51 4 analyzes user-defined subsurface profiles (2-D)with both the Simplified Janbu and Simpl fied Bishop's methods. Subsoil and bedrock parameters used in the program include unit.1 eights, cohesion, internal friction angle, and pore pressure parameters. Since the resence of ground water during construction is generally not known, the stability anal Ises was conducted both with and without the influence of water. Soil and bedrock pars tern used in the program included best-estimates and conservative values to determine a p Bible range of safety factors. Slope geometries analyzed included a construction scenario of successive cuts for top upper, middle and lower retaining walls, and a scenario that it hided,the,,, d . retaining wall with downslope cuts for the middle wall nd pro osej- $g�yJ the analysis are retained in our files and can be presen ed in detail, if requested. Safety factors for slope stability during construe ion ranged from a low of 1.3 to a high of 1.7 based on both circular and random failur surfaces. Safety factors for the OPJ/� HUU-610-2000 11;1010 rKU'I MH1KHDCU1h1V MMIM1IMl IJ iu �u•io r� r. 11 Geotechnical Study Page 7 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 scenario that included the upper retaining wall average 1.3 to 1.4 for both circpia(faiaurgs and block-sliding failures along the clay-silt subsoil a d .tYp rid1 Y ! .�ti Based on these results,the slope is expected to remain able dunpg�R� aftehSAIIStrrl .- However, it should be noted that this conclusion is b sed on a simplified slope stability model using assumed subsurface conditions and characti ristics. It is strongly recommended that one of our geotechnical engineers be on-sited aring construction to observe cut operations, identify subsoil conditions, and verify the a umptions used in our analysis. Our analysis does not consider localized spril s or seepage areas which could completely alter cut-fill stability. Further, our analysis ci nsiders gross stability of the cut-fill sections rather than localized failures. SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING All deposits of topsoil, organics, and other deletc rious materials 'asjudged) Delta" Geotechnical Consultants,Inc.,should be stripped from I he proposed building and pavement areas prior to site grading operations. The depth of tol.soil requiring stripping is expected to be on the order of 18 to 24 inches. Localized pockets of topsoil may require stripping to greater depths. Following site stripping, the subgrade beneath t ke maintenance building should be uniformly overexcavated to elevation 8,861 feet. La rally, undercutting should extend beyond the building perimeter for a distance equal to the total depth of fill beneath the building. As previously discussed, the subgrade bene h the proP9§rrd ;pit N DB//ii► HUU-JYJ-GYJYJYJ 11•uJ rMU1 1 nn a mnDC.1 nn 1 : Ilium�j`�Fdit,�PaA ail{(� Geotechnical Study Page 8 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 building should be overexcavated a minimum 3 feet be Dw existing grades. In order to key structural 511 to native subsoils, overexcavation of t a subgrade in this area should be conducted in benches parallel to the slope. These bei ches should be a minimum 10 feet wide and should be sloped down into the hillside by 8 it hes in a lateral distance of 10 feet. Benches should be not more than 4 feet high. Prior to the placement of any fill, all expose I pavement areas should be scarified to a depth of 10 in es mgisttlr� pd' ' 2 percent of optimum, and recompacted to the require rients for structural fill. Pockets of loose soils detected during the recompaction of the su rade should be removed to firmer subgrade and replaced with structural fill. Structural fill should be used to raise the ma i tenance building pad and, where required,beneath the storage building footings. The na ve gravelly clay-silt will be suitable for use as structural fill; however, these soils will be diffj ult to place and compact if natural moisture contents are more than 5 percent over optim m as determined by the Modified Proctor moisture-density relationship (ASTM D 1557) or the soil PO p be req uired. Imported structural 511, if required, sh uld meet the oowrnrmum specifications. i Oel/a HUU-dU-eUOU 11•Ul rrtun � l Geolechnical Study Page 9 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 Guideline S eclficat'ons for Inivort . Structuralfflil Sieve Size EM b Passine 3 Inch 100 3/4 Inch 70 - 100 No. 40 15 - 70 No, 200 15 - 25 Liquid Limit 30 Maximum Plastic Index 15 Maximum These recommendations are intended as guide nes to specify a readily available, prequalified material. Adjustments to the recommendei I limits can be provided to allow the use of other granular, nonexpansive material. Any su h adjustment$ mWk 4pdf approved by Delta Geolechnical Consultants, Inc. in. rtq ..fill o the _Ai- site. Structural fill should be placed to required grad4 s in 8-inch maximum loose lifts, at the moisture content optimum for compaction, and ompacted to at least 95 percent modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557-78) density under a building. Ninety (90) percent modified Proctor density is recommended under exteri ,i slab and pavement areas. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Spread footings placed on structural fill or re ompacted native subsojjs should provide adequate support for the proposed structu es. The 1'ot. I31Pw n Y p construction details should be observed: 3. i Q M& Geotechnical Study Page 10 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 1. For the proposed maintenance building, read footings on a minimum 2 feet of structural fill should be designed for a maximum net allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. For the restaurant torage building, spread footings on either structural fill or recompacted nati a subgrade should be designed for a maximum net allowable bearing pressu. of 3,000 increased by one-third for short-term tra isient will.1. %�g1i113i 518S�S:xs m 2. For the maintenance building, as previous y noted,total settlement is expected to be on the order of 2 inches, includij g the effects of the structure and underlying fill. Differential settlements a ross the building pad are expected to be about 0.5 to 0.75 inches. For the restaurant storage building, total ttlement under the design bearing pressure should be about 1 inch. The diff ential settlement between adjacent footings or for a 25-foot span of continuot g wall footing should be about one- half this amount. .ii � :'1'� tiL. _ �Iil•aY�)Y.' .h 3. Continuous (wall) and individual (column footings should be at least 6 ru5xrpa 24 inches wide, respectively, and should bi placed a minimum of 2 feet below the lowest adjacent final grade. 4. Continuous foundation walls should be a 1equately reinforced both top and bottom. As a guide, we suggest an az iount of steel equivalent to that required for a simply supported span of I feet. • - r Geotechnical Study Page 11 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 5. All exterior footings should be placed be w frost depth which is expected to be about 4 feet in this area. 6. Footing excavations should be kept dry nd guarded against flooding at all times. FLOOR SLABS The interior floor slabs are to be placed o structural fill. Four inches of free-draining gravel should be placed directly undernea h the slabs to distribute floor lva4s ti o and break the rise of capillary water. The base thickn S y�hplllA fit,° ro�� M �� cic x .s,';snay. under the maintenance building and where heavy load are involved r,T.hr.slghs'Sltswld provided with frequent joints to minimize damage dt e to shrinkage cracking, and they should be adequately reinforced for the loads to be imp ised on the slabs. The slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and partitions v ith a slip joint. A coefficient of subgrade reaction (k) of 120 pci may be used for desil i of the floor slabs. ,. The floor slabs in the buildings such as proposed are a very important feature in the operational life of the structures and require speciaJ consideration. We suggest that Portland Cement Association's guidelines on the consti Liction of warehouse floor slabs be observed. y.. dRN Pxz CUT SLOPES AND EXCAVATIONS Temporary, unrestrained cuts in the stiff graven{ clay-silt and weathered claystone i f RAI" t , ----- 1 • Geotechnical Study Page 12 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 may be conducted at 1:2 (horizontahvertical) provided f ee water is not encountered during excavation. In a dry,stiff condition as encountered durii g our field exploration, the gravelly clay-silt may hold a vertical face of up to 8 feet. Deep r cut slopes *peuld n , However, if wet subsoil conditions are encountered, erticali and/or°steep cuts ria be unstable. Since the exact condition of the subsoils an ground water catinot`be predicted'" prior to construction, we strongly recommend that one f our engineers be present during excavation. Modifications of the cut slopes may be required, depending on soil and moisture conditions at the time of excavation. Permanent, unretained cut and fill slopes sboul I not be steeper than 2:1. Slopes should be protected from erosion by using erosion resi tant vegetation and/or an erosion- control geofabric. SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE Adequate surface drainage must be maintained d iring the coltrso f�J1 TpG1�DIl gA1� -: after construction has been completed. Backfill again t the exterior face of footings and foundation walls should be moistened and compacted to t least 85 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D 1557 metho The ground surface surrounding the exterior of buildings should be sloped to drain away om the buildings in all directions. We recommend a minimum slope of 6 inches in the fir 10 feet. Roof downspouts should discharge into splash blocks extended beyond the limi of all backfill. We recommend that subdrain systems be install d around the building perimeters. ,���- vr' �Cai/14 Geotechnical Study — t'Page"73�°"" Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 Subdrains should consist of a 4-inch PVC collector F pe, perforated above the flowline, embedded in clean gravel and wrapped in filter fabric Collector pipes should be located near the bottom of footing elevation and should be sl ped at 0.5 to 1 percent to daylight downslope of the structures. RETAINING WALLS The on-site soils, devoid of organics, deleterio material, and roa�s I lh aq 6 ti .0 V�L S inches, may be used as backfill behind the retaining ails. The-fill-should pla A cedn�' 8-inch maximum loose lifts and compacted to at leas 85 percent but not'more"than`90` percent of modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) maximun dry density. For horizontal backfill extending behind the wall for a distance equal to the w 11 height, the imposing soils may be assumed to act as a fluid with an equivalent unit weight, A 45 pcf if the wall is free to rotate, and 70 pcf if the wall is restrained. Alternatively, cle .► sands and gravels imported from off-site could be used for wall backfill, in which case Me equivalent fluid pressure can be reduced to 30 and 55 pcf for free and restrained w Ils, respectively. Equivalent fluid pressures for retaining walls with sloping backfill and/or concentrated or continuous backfill loads within 10 feet of the wall should be individuall evaluated by l?��t � Consultants, inc. For uniform backfill surcharge to percent of the load should be included in the design o the wall. We recommend a drainage system such as Enk drain, Miradrain, or equivalent be used behind the walls to prevent build-up of hydros. tic pressure. The mats or other o�� t, — -- _--- -- -- Geotechnical Study Page 14 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility i. May 20, 1994 drainage system should be designed and installed to all free drainage of subsurface water through weep holes or collector pipes installed at the ase pf Retaining wall footings founded on native grave ly clay-silt ma be ro ortioned for wpc a net allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf for ;ustained loads and up to 4,000 psf under the toe at full amount. Wall footings should Ill kept horizontal and stepped down where necessary to meet grade changes, and should bi placed a minimum of 4 feet below the lowest adjacent final grade. Lateral loads on the restaurant storage buildin 1 retaining walls can be resisted by friction developed between the bottom of the footings ad underlying soils and by passive earth pressure of compacted back011 placed against the ootings. The recommended coeffi- cient of friction between concrete footings and natives ibgrade or structural fill is 0.5. The recommended equivalent fluid pressure for passive r istance againstihe fenting` s'350sL...i` pounds per cubic foot for well-compacted backfill. TI upper 24 inches-of the.bickfill,:U_ not protected by pavement or floor slabs, should not I e included in the lateral resistance determination. PLANS AND SPECIFICA,riONS REVIEW This report is based on the design of the propos 'd structures and loading conditions as they were submitted to Delta Geotechnical Consult ints, Inc., at the commencement of the preparation of this report. It is recommended that i a provide the opportunity to review the final design and specifications in order to determin hethet any chap.&% l� C >tgjty �.:iu -1hL. rTs *if IYUU—JCJ GfIYJ[J 11 flJ U . . v�v.•ii• •n....... �.-.-. Geotechnical Study Page 15 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 have had any affect on the validity of our reco rimendations, and whether those recommendations have been properly implemented in t e design and specifications. Review of the final design and specifications will be noted in writing by Delta Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION There is the possibility that variations in subsoillind ground water conditions will be encountered during construction. In order to permit i orrelation between the preliminary soil data and the actual soil conditions encountered du ing construction and so as to insure conformance with the plaits and specifications as origim ly contemplated, it is recommended that Delta Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. be retainec to perform inspections during the excavation and foundation construction phases of the we 7k. Delta Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. assumes no responsibility for construction con liance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations unless we have peen retained to perform on-site inspection during the course of construction. LIMITATIONS The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from nine test holes drilled at the locations iii licated on Figure A-2. This report does not reflect any variations which may occur betty n the test holes. The nature and extent of variations may not become evident until t e course of construction and are 0R1!d Geotechnical Study Page 16 Proposed Snowmass Maintenance Facility May 20, 1994 sometimes sufficient to necessitate changes in the d igI15, 1ht1S, 1t;1�.11llp�(Li1,I11af.lY� _.� b'iaatl�l observe subsurface materials exposed to take advanta e Qf -sill qpp differing conditions which would affect the performan e of the facility being planned. This report has been prepared in order to assi t the architect and engineer in the design of this project. In the event that any changes a planned in the design, location or elevation of the buildings as outlined in this report, thi conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid i fless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this report modified or approved i writing by Delta Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. The report should be available to prospective ME ractop for iltformali% 01lipal data only as interpreted from the test holes and not as warranty of subsurfa e'conditiotis" ` DELTA GEOTECI NICAL CONSUC'!'ANTS'JNC HN MAN .INI roject Engineer ,a IA president No. 3215 0 JM•I-IB/fg HO1/1K � BAGH00M IAN r' 'T$ OFD h t De1%a P.O. Box 5517 Snowmass Village Colorado 81615 970-923-3953 Fax: 970-923-0246 This letter acknowledges and approves of the offsite improvements required for the Divide VMF recently submitted through the PUD Amendment application provided by Aspen Skiing Company. Krabloonik acknowledges that the Divide Final PUD, approved via Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1989, authorized Aspen Skiing Company to construct a 28,000 square Vehicle Maintenance Facility on Divide Subdivision Lot 44. Krabloonik also acknowledges that Aspen Skiing Company has applied for the PUD Amendment to modify the original VMF plans. The offsite improvements include: 1) Road improvements to 800 feet of Divide Road, to include a 20-foot wide paved surface with 2-foot graded shoulders mandated by the Snowmass Village Fire Department. These improvements will require cut and fill excavation of existing slopes, which will be revegetated, and some tree removal in accordance with the road improvement plan submitted with the application. 2) Sewer and water line improvements as necessary, mandated by Snowmass Water and Sanitation District. 3) Grading required to maintain the skier access from the TOSV Town Parking Lot E. 4) Grading required to relocate the dog sled egress route from Krabloonik. 5) Grading and erosion control measures, including a detention pond, on the Krabloonik property. 6) A realignment of the existing Krabloonik access through the VMF paved yard area. As an adjacent propery owner, Krabloonik recognizes and agrees with the above off-site improvements. Sincerely, ' Dan MacEachen rue October 4, 2001 D I V I D E Mr. Chris Conrad Planning Department Town of Snowmass Village P.O. Box Snowmass Village, CO 81615 RE: Aspen Ski Company VMF Dear Chris: This letter acknowledges and approves of the offsite improvements required for the Divide VMF recently submitted through the PUD Amendment application provided by the Aspen Siding Company. he Divide Homeowners Association acknowledges that the Aspen Skiing Company has applied for a PUD Amendment to modify the original VW plans. The offshe improvements include: 1. Road improvements to 800 feet of Divide Road, to include a 20-foot wide paved surface with 2 foot graded shoulders mandated by the Snowmass Wildcat Fire Department. These improvements will require cut and fill excavation of existing slopes, which will be revegetated. Some tree removal is required and is in accordance with the road improvement with the application. 2. Sewer and water line .improvements gs necessary and mandated by the Snowmass Water and Sanitation District. 3. Grading required to maintain the skier access from the TOSV Town Parking Lot E. 4. Grading required to relocate the dog sled egress route from Krabloonik. 5. Grading and erosion control measures, including a detention pond. an adjacent property owner, The Divide Homeowners Association recognizes and grees with the off-site improvements listed above. Sincerely, U "C Rtc and V President Rv/dcb/offsiteskioo I Divide Vehicle Maintenance Facility Aspen Skiing Company Access Road Design Specifications October 2, 2001 Class IV: Rural Access 2" chip seal orwsphalt / 6.. bast 24' Desi;n Capacity: 7150-800 V.P.D. Suggested Speed: 25 m.p.h. S . 03 SITE PREPARATION This item shall consist of the excavation, transportation, placement and compaction of material from locations indicated on the plans, or staked by the County as Q necessary to achieve road subgrade elevations . 5. 03 . 01 GENERAL Colorado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction dated 1991, Q or most recent edition, special provisions and revisions thereto and as amended by the Pitkin County Roadway Design and Construction Standards shall apply to roadway testing and inspections requirements . j All tests and inspection results performed by the testing agency in the employment of the owner/developers shall be submitted to the County or his field representative at the time of testing or within seven working days after the testing or re-testing date. Any work performed inside Pitkin County R.O.W. and associated easements shall be tested by an approved materials testing firm. Materials testing firms shall be approved by the county on an annual basis and must employ a full time registered professional engineer who directly supervises work of the firm. The costs of testing and associated reporting are paid by the owner/developer. The testing of all materials and construction shall be in conformance with the appropriate AASHTO or ASTM specifications. A partial list of approved testing methods i, includes: TEST PROCEDURES AASHTO ASTM Atterberg Limits (LL 6 PL) T 89/ T 90 D 4318 Gradation Analysis T 27 D 422 (except hydrometer) R-value (subgrade 6 base) T 190 D 2844 R. Value T 246 D 1560 Compaction Curve (standard) T 99 D 698 Compaction Curve (modified) T 180 D 1557 Compaction Curve (CTAB) T 134 -- Field Density (Sand Cone) T 191 D 1556 Field Density (Nuclear) T 236/T 239 D 2922 Field Densitv (Balloon) T 205 D 2167 Strength of Soil-Lime Mixtures T 220 -- A. Clearing Job Site The Contractor shall remove all trees, brush and rubbish before fill placement is begun. The Contractor shall dispose of the cleared material in areas approved by the County to provide a clean, neat appearing job site . Cleared material shall not be � 75 placed in areas to receive fill or where the material ` a will support structures of any kind. B. Scarifying Area to be Filled All topsoil and vegetable matter shall be removed from the ground surface upon which fill is to be placed. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other uneven features, which would prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. C. Compacting Area to be Filled After the foundation for the fill has been cleared and scarified, it shall be disked or bladed until it is free from large clods, brought to the proper moisture content (see item E) and compacted to not less than 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D 698 . D. Fill Materials Fill soils shall be free from vegetable matter or other deleterious substances . Rocks greater than four (4) inches in diameter should be removed from fill. Fill materials shall be obtained from cut areas shown on the plans or staked in the field. Concrete, asphalt, organic matter and other deleterious materials or debris shall not be used as fill. E. Moisture Content For fill material classifying as CH, CL or SC (with more than 35% passing No. 200 sieve) , the fill shall be moisture treated to between 2 percent below and 2 percent above optimum moisture content . Non-expansive soils classifying as SM, SW, SP, GP, GC and GM (or SC with less than 35 percent passing No. 200 sieve) shall be moisture treated as required to achieve specified dry density. Sufficient laboratory compaction tests shall be made to determine the optimum moisture content for the various soils encountered in borrow areas . Should too much water be added to any part of the fill, such that the material is too wet to permit the desired compaction from being obtained, rolling and all work on that section of the fill shall be delayed until the material has been allowed to dry to the required moisture content. The Contractor will be permitted to rework wet material in a manner to hasten its drying. F. Compaction of Fill Areas Selected fill material shall be placed and mixed in evenly spread layers . After each fill layer has been placed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than the specified percentage of 76 maximum dry density. Fill shall be placed in accordance with the following table : TABLE 5. 03 . 01 PLACEMENT OF FILL Unified Soils ASTM 698 ASTM 1557 ASTM 4253 Classification Minimum Minimum Minimum (ASTM 2487) Compaction Compaction Compaction (percent) (percent) (percent) CH,CL,ML, SC (clays, silts and clayey 95 sands) SM, SW,GM, SP, GP,GC 95 (sands and gravel) 70 Cohesionless sands F'LI (<5% -200) r � I Fill material shall be placed such that the thickness of loose materials does not exceed 10 inches and the compacted lift thickness does not exceed 6 inches . G. Placement of Fill on Natural Slopes Where natural slopes are steeper than 20 percent in grade and the placement of fill is required, cut benches shall be provided at the rate of one bench for each 5 feet in 4 height (minimum of two benches) . Benches shall be at least 10 feet in width. Larger bench widths may be required. Fill shall be placed on completed benches as outlined within this specification. H. Inspection and Testing of Fill Inspection by the testing agencv shall be on a daily basis during the placement of fill and compaction operations so that it can be declared the fill was placed in general conformance with specifications . I . Seasonal limits No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled while it is frozen, thawing, or during ii unfavorable weather conditions . When work is interrupted 77 d - i� by heavy precipitation, fill operations shall not be resumed until the testing agency indicates that the moisture content and density or previously placed materials are as specified. J. Reporting of Field Density Tests Density tests by the testing agency shall be submitted progressively to the County and Owner. Dry density, moisture content, of each test taken and percentage compaction shall be reported for each test taken. 5 . 04 ROADWAY SUB-GRADE PREPARATION This item shall consist of compaction and moisture conditioning of the road surface prior to placing the sub-base course, aggregate base course or other subsequent layer of the pavement section. A. Placement and Compaction The subgrade shall be free of organic material and shall be scarified to a depth of 8 inches, moisture treated to within 2 percent of optimum moisture content . All soil types require a 95%-100% compaction. B. Testing Field moisture-density tests using acceptable methods will be required at random locations at the rate of approximately one for each 300 lineal feet of road for each travel lane. C. Final Proof Rolling After the subgrade has been compacted, tested and found to meet specifications, the entire subgrade shall be proof rolled with a heavily loaded vehicle. Subgrade which is pumping or deforming must be reworked, replaced or otherwise modified to form a smooth, stable, non-yielding base for subsequent paving courses . County and testing agency personnel shall be notified at least 48 hours before final proof rolling. D. Acceptance The results of field density tests and proof rolling shall be submitted and reviewed by the County. Provided all tests are acceptable, compaction will be approved for the placement of the next paving course. Should testing indicate unsatisfactory work, the necessary reworking, compaction or replacement will be required prior to continuation of the paving process . The approval is valid for 24 hours . Changes in weather such as freezing or precipitation will require re- approval of the subgrade. 78 5 . 05 SUB-BASE PREPP.PATION Sub-base material shall conform to the lines, grade, cross-sections, and thickness shown on the approved plans and shall be finished and maintained in an acceptable condition at least one day prior to base construction. Sub-base material shall be well mixed, free of vegetable matter and lumps or balls of clay, and shall consist of sound aggregate particles and . suitable filler binding material which when placed and compacted will result in a firm, dense, unyielding foundation. Sub-base material need not be crushed, but may be of the pit run variety providing it is graded within the following limits : TABLE 5 . 05 CLASS 1 AGGREGATE BASE CDOT Class 1 Aggregate Base or equivalent Standard Sieve Size % by Weight Passing Sieve 2-1/2 in. 100 2 in. 95-100 No . 9 30-65 No . 200 3-15 Liquid Limit 35 maximum Plastic Limit 6 maximum Deviation from the grading limits above will be permitted on approval of the County Engineer or his representative for unpaved roads in mountainous terrain where it can be adequately demonstrated that the proposed sub-base material can fulfill the intent of these specifications . A. Placement and Compaction Sub-base shall be deposited and spread, without particle segregation, in loose layers not to exceed 8 inches in depth. Materials shall be placed on an approved subgrade which has been proof rolled within the past 24 hours and found to be stable and non-yielding. Should weather conditions change, such as freezing, precipitation, etc. , aggregate base materials shall not be placed until the subgrade is re- approved. Sub-base shall not be placed on soft, spongy or frozen subgrade or other subgrade, the stability of which is unsuitable . Each layer shall be thoroughly and individually compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by AASHTO T 180 . Moisture should be within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content . Moisture and density should be checked during construction. B. Material Testing As least one sample of sub-base course for each 2, 000 tons of materials placed shall be 79 tested to determine gradation and Atterberg limits . Should these tests indicate the material does not meet specifications, the materials shall be removed and replaced. C. Acceptance The results of field density and material tests shall be submitted to and reviewed by the County Engineer or his representative . Provided all tests are acceptable, the sub-base course materials, placement and compaction will be approved and the next paving course can be placed. Should testing indicate unsatisfactory work, the necessary reworking, compaction or replacement will be required prior to continuation of the paving process . 5 . 06 AGGREGATE BASE PREPARATION Aggregate base material shall conform to the lines, grades, cross-sections, and thickness shown on the approved plans and shall be finished and maintained in an acceptable condition at least one day prior to the placing of the prime coat. Aggregate base material shall consist of hard, durable, particles or fragments of stone or gravel crushed to the required size and filler of sand or other finely divided mineral matter. Aggregate base material shall be free from vegetable matter and lumps or balls of clay. When placed and compacted it shall result in a firm, dense, unyielding foundation. Base material shall meet the following grading requirements : TABLE 5 . 06 CLASS 5 OR 6 AGGREGATE BASE CDOT Class 5 or Class 6 Aggregate Base Sieve Size %Passing by Weight Class 5 Class 6 1-112 in. 100 -- -- 1 in. 95-100 -- -- 311 in. -- -- -- 100 No. 4 30- 70 30- 65 No. 8 -- -- 25- 55 No. 200 3-- 15 3-- 12 Liquid Limit 30 maximum Plastic Limit 6 maximum In general, the lower portions of the base course may be constructed of Class 5 material, except that a minimum of the top 2 inches of all aggregate base courses shall be constructed of Class 6 materials . Full depth of Class 6 material is also acceptable. 80 Aggregate bases shall be crushed stone, slag, crushed gravel or natural gravel which conforms to quality requirements of AASHTO M 147 except that the requirements for the ratio of minus 200 sieve fraction to the minus 40 sieve fraction shall not apply. The liquid limit shall be as shown in the table and the plasticity index shall not exceed 6 when the aggregate is tested in accordance with AASHTO T 89 and T 90 respectively. f A. Placement and Compaction Aggregate base shall be deposited and spread, without particle segregation, in loose layers not to exceed 8 inches in depth. Materials shall be placed on an approved subgrade which has been proof rolled within the past 24 hours and found to be stable and non-yielding. Should weather conditions ifs change, such as freezing, precipitation, etc. , aggregate ! base materials shall not be placed until the subgrade is re-approved. Aggregate base shall not be placed on soft, spongy or frozen subgrade or other subgrade or sub-base, the stability of which is unsuitable. Each layer shall �= be thoroughly and individually compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by AASHTO T 180 . Moisture should be within 2 percent of optimum moisture content . Moisture and density should be checked during construction. B. Material Testing As least one sample of aggregate base for each 1, 000 tons of materials placed shall be tested to determine gradation and Atterberg limits . Should these tests indicate the material does not meet specifications, the materials shall be removed and replaced. C. Acceptance The results of field density and materials C1 C tests shall be submitted to and reviewed by the County. Provided all tests are acceptable, the aggregate base course materials, placement and compaction will be cl approved and the next paving course can be placed. E Should testing indicate unsatisfactory work, the necessary reworking, compaction or replacement will be E required prior to continuation of the paving process . 5. 07 DRAINAGE STRUCTURES Culvert pipes are to be installed by trenching after the results of subsurface investigations for pipeline construction have been reviewed by the County Public Works/Engineering Office . The trench is to be 1 foot wide on each side of the pipe and the bottom of the trench is to be "F smooth and free of isolated load-bearing surfaces . A shaped �F--_ uniform bedding, free of rocks three inches or greater in E diameter, will be required for pipes larger than 48 inches in CE I 81 diameter. Backfill shall consist of pervious material free of 3 inch or larger rock and shall be placed in maximum 8 inch lifts . Each lift is to be compacted to 95% (ASTM D 696) before the next lift is installed. Backfill material is to extend to 6 inches (minimum) above the top of the pipe. Culverts shall be cambered when necessary in order to produce a uniform descending grade from inlet to outlet after backfill has been completed. 5. 08 PAVEMENT MATERIALS 5 . 08. 01 Prime Coat for Street Improvement Projects A. Description All previously prepared bases or existing surfaces shall be primed with a cutback asphaltic oil in accordance with the requirements of these specifications, at the locations shown on the plans or as directed by the County Public Works/Engineering Office . B. Surface Preparation Prior to placing the prime coat, the base and/or existing paving shall be thoroughly cleaned. Loose materials shall be removed from the existing surface, as directed by the County Public Works/Engineering Office. C. Asphaltic Oil The cutback asphaltic oil for the prime coat shall be MC-70 and shall meet the requirements found in Section 702 of the CDOT Standard Specifications . D. Placing Prime Coat The prime coat shall be placed by means of an approved pressure distributor. Before application, the asphaltic oil shall be heated as directed by the County Public Works/Engineering Office. However, it shall not be heated to more than 180 degrees F. In general, the rate of application shall be 0 . 10 to 0.20 gallons per square yard, as directed by the County Public Works/Engineering Office. The prime coat shall be carefully applied, particularly around curbs . If excessive amounts on curbs, sidewalks and other structures are sprayed with asphaltic oil, they shall be cleaned as directed by the County Public Works/ Engineering Office at the contractor' s expense. After placing the prime coat shall be allowed to cure for at least 24 hours before any asphalt concrete is placed. In no case shall prime oil be placed later than 9 p.m. of the day before paving operations commence . 82 tz • 5. 08 . 02 Bituminous Tack Coat A. Description The work includes furnishing all labor, equipment and materials, and performing all operations in connection with the application of a bituminous tack coat on a previously prepared bituminous binder course in strict accordance with this section of the specifications and the applicable drawings . B. Surface Preparation Immediately before the tack coat is applied, all loose material, dirt, clay, or other objectionable material shall be removed from the surface to be treated with a power broom or blower supplemented with hand brooms as directed. After the cleaning operation is completed, and prior to application of the tack coat, an inspection of the area will be made to determine its fitness to receive the bituminous coating. That portion of the surface prepared for immediate treatment shall be dry and in satisfactory condition. C. Emulsified Aso_ halt Emulsified asphalt shall conform to AASHTO M 140 and M 208 for the designated types and grades. Emulsified asphalt for tack coat, Grade CSS-lh shall conform to AASHTO M 208 except that the penetration requirements of the residue shall be a minimum 40 to maximum 120. D. Placing Tack Coat The application of the bituminous material shall be made by means of a pressure distributor at the pressure, temperature, and in the amounts directed by the County Public Works/Engineering Office. 5. 08 . 03 Ast)halt Concrete Pavement All items relating to construction of pavements shall comply with the latest edition of: State Department of Transportation Division of Highways State of Colorado "Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction" Copies of this book may be obtained from the Colorado Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, Office of Bid Plans, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, Denver, Colorado, 80222 . Addenda to these specifications may be issued by the Department to suit its needs . Any such addenda will be available for purchase at prices established by the Department . 83 ---------- A. Job Mix Tolerances Job Mix Tolerances shall be as shown in Table 5. 08 . 03. TABLE 5 .08.03 JOB MIX TOLERANCES �i Passing the Nominal Maximum Sieve +5% Passing the 3/8" Sieve . +5% Passing the No . 4 Sieve +4% Passing the No. 8 Sieve +4% Passing the No. 30 Sieve +30 Passing the No. 50 Sieve +3% Passing the No. 200 Sieve (washed) +2%, shall not exceed 7 . 0% Asphalt Cement Content (% of Total Mix) +0 . 30 Temperature of Mixture at discharge +20°F B. The asphalt cement used shall be a viscosity graded MC- 70 meeting the requirements found in Section 702 of the CDOT Standard Specifications. C. Mix Design Method The Asphalt/Aggregate job mix formula shall be designed using the Hveem Method and all samples shall be compacted using the Texas Gyratory compaction method as described by CP 5105 Samples shall be made two (2) inches in height. Mixing and compacting temperatures shall correspond to viscosity' s of 150 - 170 centistokes for mixing and 250 - 310 centistokes for compacting. D. Additives Mix designs must be performed with the addition of lime, anti-oxidants, anti-strips or any other additive to be used in the mix and all physical properties must be met . A minimum of 1% lime shall be added to the mix as an anti-strip. E. Mix Designation and Hot Mix Properties The mixture for hot mix bituminous pavement shall have as a minimum the following properties as shown in Table 5 . 08 . 03A. 84 - h d. - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,■ -; - - - - - - - 9 000• - • --r � O - - , + 8984.3 - . - x _ _ ♦ - - - - +' 0 0 - - - Lot E' - 8940 ?I X893 a9 �QZ � - _ 1 1 V I �- ids \ x 0 +/ '+� � - 8900 - r • R °d ! ! +� �8885J Sh 8886.8 X • gyp' • , ), .. •,. •' � J� a + �/ - - - .+ .,. � , , . +- -' .•? • • / '^' 8847.9 9t� 8844.6 ° / 885 � ` /',• � , '' a -nf 88$07 � � a / • / 1, ! PA , krabi oor' -- ' �• ASPEN ti :SGmetlt ' CKONTANY ki Eas ose�{ I:ef E. Iti �aseMertt _` - f; ; Theodore K guy Associates PC Architects And ,�- -' '-' -��.- ,�•'P�- , -Rtr-e_ " Qfy'= :y`n}q''ht Structural Engineers /ry w - P.O.box 1640 ' 26260 Tw 111 Rood pdak,Colorado 81621 '-t Phom(970)927-3167 lw1r..�.T��t!�"h��. ,-. - ,�♦�1�"�. It.� 1 Fax(970)927-4816 ,' - •_ .- r . 1 , � S ` i 'x r , Key: rf�' •' i 1S �' I r 1 ' eJr. /- i3 e �� (� ® Paved Road % 0$ VIr{. f,� ��,,. , 7•, ® Non-PavedRoad fl %' / .,,�i ` s` *` '. - "- � r�J• ,,. r Deciduous Tree ZZ ` \ . _ f r' ,• i' ! '; ® Coniferous Tree ;.� x 00 9,,,--�-J. IV ._,!�" Date Description /�iIA Receiving to 0. 1 '�. ♦• ,' "!, ,�' ♦ t - . y r ,�- --------------_ malntenan + ,,� ♦ I - + '� f ♦ - �, 'yee Housing ♦ • " I ., - I V r 1 '\\\ I --------------- �.. �f.err` . �.,"�.' "o,�,adg ; rs 'Sted gsa' Divide , � .,_;,�,,_` Maintenance ' '� M n f ,• - ' - f V�^ �%� , t � Center �ro017'� -.'- �i� - �++4i�1��, ' �-'- .Snowmass Village. ♦ ♦..�`'l�, ,• ,,.,, ,, , i' , ,,- ,t ♦ , . r Colorado ,. '• -_ w -• , ,,. ,• -- • Ii$ ,• �r',e y1- --- Job R: xxxx 11 • I' ^. , ' ,- ' ,'" ,� .^r, ,- by Site Plan ,•. " mot`; - .�" `:�< ;>, �r �✓ (includes Phase I At II) ' - Illustration E • ' No pel'lnanent,b}lttlde htntarinl star aie r�epalrc�MPk pF�mlttpti, amk:r 40 ' ' onird � � y `-i : • AI pled as part ],' ,' • - Pware esa bra l if"Sllgeftvwifoil, nt ditto sad ' 's ' eururY�►tiM4r"f� ¢ w --------- ........ ........... I - ------ .., li i it _ II i � ' I" . ... I-J-T t 7 L L ecyc ------- H,-- H7-------- ------------------- 11 Ohipping ---- --------- Ar5 Ing s-r AN U, 7 Loading IIE]1 2 a 4 6 e Platform –T-- –7— 1 PIG rOOrWV?RaT LNEL 9009f. ailMG P��Z W�LLKL<11661. GFIiE.RALHOiEa L "O°•' "O°";vwsu:`-;wroro.tic;'�.e�_ � SCCIIOWZe IG 000 ,0.0 s.]�cacrwo wm ..... .. .. .....: SEGd�LEVEL YR .J UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN wwn n et-+o• wa v�• � cm PerLe ROOM cl en ck - M1 Rm MGInLe oe Bao moblles/Equlpmen[ w.o_w..r-.. w.w-s� PI 9COrepe ono; eeeeeee �e o� on�rv.uYn. MCnS kere �^ ww KG Lobby .yl� PvVtlC2TR ,. b .._............... PIVIVE � MAINT MAINTENANCE FACILITY 6NCNMA70 VILLAGL' G^LORADO. wuo, .rep meeiiIIlL FLOOR PLANS MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ILLU5TRATION F —;.e wseau •c ®®=E9 �1 D ------------- ----- as r�wrse ELEVnnoN �I I, HE I�IhI ' III Ilflill, I IIIIII' Is'I '111,1, `' 11,111 I,,it III 1 ,11111 IIIIII I ! �''., 1111'111 II h' '.'.I 4b I li I I I nI I I I I I _ IIII I -,�i I , I VII I LI,I l,lrylIl'I l,IId bi II.j I I II I I I ' I I•i'I I , II 111 II I I„ II r� I I I I�,I I o I I .I 'III I I..�. •I I III ICI u I I I I I 1�. �J a III I 111. ® _� FEE]r ��' '111111 VIII 11' ❑ I I I 111Ii111 ill j1141 II,�P � .II� j11I I,1 IIIIII 1,.,11 i1.l III 111...1 Ili -- ® ��II I'I 1�IIh 11 II^li I1 11 I � II;I.IYI1 I 1111,IIII'I Ti1 I, I IEB !IIW 1411111 III I T-7 L y. ------ ---- TIII� ----------- ��Sa ELEVATION EF ®® E3 ®® ®® ❑® 111:31❑® �I _ a, ----- — — — — — — — ❑® -- • I o 'o 1 I ELEVATION To T ZopoR!K our A SOGAT •c AAC,wr=ID AHD enxuc•viuL eNSmeeee aaeom o�as�a� ew�r� eras I h I V t I i 11 l I III II. I Iliil I ' ®® Illlilll II I li II"iii it ill li 111 li li Ill .I Ilia i .. III I'll �. l�'�II ffl I��' u Ili iilrl �I gill III li �.,i� 1 I� till I��ii' .'ll dill EHili'� III I rill". I I I�jl r!i_i; — IiY` I � �j _► _____ _ /l SOUTH ElEVAT10N ______ as �e owu..w. Ylamo x0!._............. +ao� uncm.w u. ....... .._...... ........ DIVIDE MAINTENANCE PAGILITY ®® _®® ® ®® ' DNOYMAY..VILLAGG !.rs W—_ li P,l GOLOISADO. i ail ' hill it I�I li 'lyl j ''.I um�. Ili ELEVATIONS - "_ 1/8 _ 1.-a ILLUSTRATION G ro.+s.. s....a.oc.m.c 1 _ - .- - - - -- 9000' - - - - - - _ - _ . : . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- wo - - - - - 8940. r y 0 l ° — 1 ♦• ' �s°s 1 r ��� •. '-, 4, �pn �O0 ,f- •8940- . { LO / ke. \ Y 4 ,. , t v �� .• _ -- - 8900 pSvide {load -_ .r c� • - �� � � �... _ S ,,, �♦ ,'- .. I' ', -..',' � cam;- �Ov rablooni ' ASPEN SKIING V091Ii _ - COMPANY if Theodore K Guy Associates PC 0 ell i r Architects And ./ '� ♦ - - ~r - - ' +� % �� Structural Engineers - - ♦ �+Qrt'� - - .- -r. ♦', ♦ ♦ P.O.Box 1640 j♦' ♦'' - ,• e BaO;,� ♦ e - } - �0,'y� ♦. 28280 7YND ki~e Rood ♦ r� '0, #001��-,0 � -' , 5rryr Ary 1��� `O' y ;n♦: 9.wit.worado 81621 ,,���! ♦'' ,r''-. "�' L. . - - - .,r i` ♦♦ ♦.r. ' Phom(970)927-3167 �, - 0 Fax(970)927-4818 d i. fi �' ' �/7 "♦ ♦� �r �'• .�y EM k r ♦ 1 r �, I '! � / ' "�� ♦♦ '. Paved Rood 1 �.t�♦ �)' , a' ® Non-Paved Road ♦- . r -r,♦ 1 ., ' rr,�-� �'!�!=;, pl Vp Deciduous Tree �. �', s� > f •' ,'.�� ♦ ,', ® Coniferous Tree It - � - � baa.a Sd �♦ , �y ♦„ �� ,% i♦♦�.�, ♦, ", ♦r .r�. j� ,! .F. ' - � ° �♦ ,� �� ,' . ♦'`�` Date Description . ♦ -�' ♦___'1111 ' L- e.� {J� :,♦ 5`i1ei�S�►orFs�e"�♦K.,/♦�- r}',.._( , - -' 'l•;`' ',, , ' ?= " . Divide Maintenanc ♦ , + Center Snowmass Village ♦ ♦ ' Colorado — r , ♦.- ,♦ I ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦. .��, '�} ' Checked: xxxx - r ' - , ♦ ♦ >,<' ♦ I ♦ ♦. ' hinted: xxxx , Grading Plan �'' Illustration J e- i ♦ ,. Soak:Pa M' ell IMMANNIhmammi ;, -8780' ,' I ♦' �•', ,fir ,�- rLti.t��'p�' ' A� �,i k'G,^�,-�?t�is .kr�,ts�,,�f�'ay, yr'dY?x,i, ,,♦'. E 6 M' - i _ POS E Ski Ea ' rr� n Lof--E- - - 8940 ♦/,, ,.- ,;- ;- ,/ � ♦'�ge��rexel Barpell Road p ' • ` — ' FO ' l• - - - - - . Proposed . . ^��' !" �';,♦= - - ` �4•1 F `�ed'Englneer�r►y.. � .. ,. ♦�` %'/ � �� -8920 ILA - - - 8900 - - } J-f 1 •, � 9 s ^ � f L'l - -♦ _ �/ -_ / TON 1181 ' / r � 1 T.Fl. 8677 Jol Oe ♦ G- le ♦�',_ ( .. / / � �V� ,', , - - -�G�✓\./NUJ/Y / / , Ile i "Oor� SSPEN r �' ,• �.- ' � k � • �' �-��, � COMPANY B Theodore K Guy , Associates PC _i- - ` _:'` •�, d r; ELI ; '>� ;%� Architects And It Structural Engineers ,. ♦ 1r , ,r 1 1 � ..� - I I 'V P.O.Box 1640 ♦ 1 1 1'` ,'> 26280 Two Riwm Road -• ♦ ( 1 fY BoAalt,Colorado 81621 / - ! 1 1 /' , .,• �/ Phole(970)927-3167 - 4 Fox(970)927-4816 low" `� ,�, . ♦� ' ' - '� ,- ♦� ® Paved Road ' J `♦ . �' v!~� ! Yw ® Non-Paved Road Deciduous Tree ♦ .,.., \\ �- Edge of Pev Coniferous Tree �` l •�/' ,- .,!' ,- �i i rsWnAO Spmca W-12' Aspen 2'-ramI. F ; 71 - -�,/ Date Descrlptlon [ �,-� , , r , :-' -, i �' - / , ♦ , - , i • - Divide '., �- �, � ,- ��'. �- /, ,- , . 1; . , ,- `: - Maintenance Center -' -' -' ,'' , ``7' /•-, i r� Snowmass Villa g Pr0PQS 1*54 �1 � Colorado - - , ,, T F , - Job R: xxxw Landscape Plan )' Illustration K Scale:P.36' l ! r , 1. , - / �♦ ,� - �, �/ 777' - yy - - - - . .moo/ - - - - 90 �~ - - c°) op F y� fit- , _ _ . - 77 - -89 80 J EGA - , . \ - - - - - - - - - - ' 8960 r _ - Loft E- - - - - - ��r� �� �, -_ /' T�y V73 ,9,. .�: ` � l.ti/T�-Y���A� f r':.a✓',.�;,..�v,t..h.�.. 'rya �'�f�fl•✓� I ✓ , ♦ i ode 01. goad� ,; " , r. < . • I ' � / ♦v,. / / ,. � off ♦ ♦0..r y • p/ $ � 1 ♦ ♦ ♦ , ,tiff.,... . .�■ E / q 1p ♦ , , , , / d I / , ,. . . ,- rablooni , ' ' -'�.,i ASPEN SKIING LI Ski Ecceernep'h' , `� y; /,' l COMPANY IDSr�#Lb Theodore K Guy Associates PC ' -'`1(( ";• 1 _ �� � _k , a Architects And , i r ,i Structural Engineers ♦ .' /..l.r ,r r. .�.- = . ^�l� 1 O ' r -, P.O.box 1640 ♦ ♦ �� ... ♦. , ! , QoVA� �.y'IC � jrl. .�; S�^ A 26280 Tvo Rlvsre Road ' ' ' ♦ ♦ ., 4ry , '7'y,"i v ''�' ,1'I r'if, �,�; r,'� '_ e �-f �r' n,a ♦ \�a�f ia� ' y/ borolt.Colorado 81621 Phone(970)927-3167 Y M- Fox(970)927-461 5 et +� 4 �• ♦, �,. ..c r,• ♦♦'�% `' �r E � d�"� ..Y�' Key: y Paved Road ' / �Y M' �'' ® Non-Paved Road ♦'' �x lir` y' ' /- Deciduous Tree �•, -.. �' '� ♦, ¢• ,' ,'r.1 is e, ® Coniferous Tree , j ,�'N� Date bescriptlon ' r /li1d9rallnd t rf --------------- ,,t I 1. ;♦♦ 4oYi • D�f '�/7��/ ♦ �♦ '♦F; ♦,•. --------------- ....r ,Y ,' ♦ F _ ♦ ♦ '.f ,r,f { ' ♦ --------------- 1 I \ ' r' ' ♦' ',' ,'.r+, { ,'-.♦' ' ------------- V /' ,. ,/,:,' ,' l' ,'� r' ♦ r;.y ,,. ) _ ♦ : . --------------- ;Pr0pn. ,c ;t ,� ' 1eci, Bass' Divide Maintenance � �, > � r, ,.�, ♦r' ;r ,v,,� .�,' ,r Center °a; 'fit--� ., ♦ . . . ,.: / : , , , +�. r♦',J YE ♦,- . ,,,,' ♦, ,, ,/ ,/ ,' " ,:; , r' ,J. Snowmass villag Colorado , Ii :�. Job iY: wxx ' ♦ .- , Y ♦ I ♦ "r. p , , `� ♦ ♦ ♦ z r . , , / ,r�' ,,I�... PrinfW: xxKx ` ♦ A . . , . , , r ,, ♦ , - ,,� : .;'- Skier Egress Plan Or I • ♦ ♦ , 0 I -' O 0 /'`1 Illustration L LI-P r ♦ , / -- - - - - - --- C) - --- ---- 90p0 �F \O J _ 8984.3 x C9! At*. . O l ------ 8980 , f 8960 �y 7 i'.`•f' r k(8442.7 C) . - •• Lo ' - a' - t E ........ -- ' S rr r>ti 931f5..� 3 0' �� sX0 ') '893 9 r h . — Zo yaveJ Ma rltiff" 920 8900 Bru�; ee -' '`ns • 20 Pa cd eudxc - x I �tosoce ', 8885.7 0��� l �E ft` PLO ; 30' 8886.8 X J 0, 7 f s . � !. -- $• ;` 847.9 x - ✓� 8Q449 �� 8844.6 88$0.7 t0 8 yi 1 4 — � Crablooni " --- . ASPEN per . L'' Ski EaSemen* — COMPANY tom; ed-.L-6+ E.,Ski Easement _ r;] Theodore K Guy �-• I Associates PC -f art .•,.- —"?��i •�^+ .- f/ it ti Architects And r �,.•-'` Structural Engineers rrY~/! Pagel--- P.O.Box 1640 aOund "'.. Qli Dj1'f - y� 25280 TYn Riven Road \ FF c a'Y �.1� -�d3 Basalt,Colorado 81621 J > ---. VI Phone(970)927-3167 ��.✓� "i - $. i � Fax(970)927-4815 / i Key: Paved Rood 7 A • ,, 85 r✓ � 1 Mks , \��� '� { `: / i' f �,• Non-Paved Rood an4e R �� 1 prea°i 1Oe$aW Wa�een0 ,—_I /��.r rte..,.}, Deciduous Tree g 1e\ocamUrn g too r .'• c �1nzx xir Coniferous Tree '8656 Date Description . ARCcelvin9 s Housing ;. ___ _ ___.._. _-. -- -- .•�: Ben "•,�,,. rT.- Pr.opose�J':Jo �5ied { gress"'�-. Divide Maintenance {� FVEe ;�4t 44 Center o - ,f pQrC,61,!C i Snowmass Village Colorado ; Acre _ Job p: xxxx ,. Drer,n By JHS I Checkd. xxxx - /-,v ! l Pflntad xxxx ' Road Alignment & Grading Plan nn oo . '�a(�'Y' Illustration M V� rtf �•r$ y'�,f , r S A. Yf :7RJ �1 *3'.1.� t.�^.' Noc rngnenr oy�fl sty r scale '-40 11 yl X11#pR d R9v!^9 wltlakrils+c aw�t x+f ,�I �PJoase seer,pnexc�.B�rrf�1141sf.�yptidn�' R�t.dara s i CUIrA�ey baU1k'fal'yr 15° Y, 1` �{ r yT �s,t,. r ! x __K [ w •VnA+ee rp—BMIv c. e rND b roo rae mu mn r+er r+ex h 1,01+.16 ]MI IO.N ]1H l Mir- c 0,w1. oa Uab ] ---C637 + r AW 1].D60. MLA x AVe Hi ARCH x Vb HT/MIA M6ry! I ]000 NOTC ND N.LGW MIGHT B MAx HCGHT N UNDCRLYNb ZOMG DBMTRCT IGT B 90'4' O" kL s d' z 1 �Y //s �"n.RUYerxby yru 19P0 f s SEMI DELVERY / I.:. 2: 'jars '5... .. ....yp,�p, / RAMP 27 wre�eo rocw�ewr.rrrw.u9a 0- •r.sen•wa H:w�.iaa-�o.e 1 -------------------------------------------- ROOF HEIGHT ROOF HEIGHT ABOVE 105'-O" ABOVE 6P-ADr: INDICATED THUS- INDICATED THUS- 161-31/2, la'-s 1/1" HIGH POINTS AND LOIN POINTS INDICATED BY UNDERLINE THU5- THEODORE K GUY ASSOCIATES PC, ROOF AREA = 12 558.86 50.FT. ARCHITECTS AND ROOF FOOTPRINT 56-o" ABOVE STRLCTURAL EN61NEERS FINISHED GRADE= 2.4 SG.FT. OR- 0.02% 1,-0 ROOF HEIGHT MORE THAN 25'-0" ABOVE FrN15H5C)GRADE ROOF HEIGHT UES5 THAN 25-0- ABOVE r1k5HED GRADE ■ ROOF HEIGHT MORE THAN 36,-0-' ABOVE FINSHED GRADE .... . ..... ... . . . . ... ....... .... . ...... . ...... . .... .............. ...... ....... ... ..... ..... ....... ...... ... 'A .. . ..... .... . it ... . .. .... ... . .. ..... .. ...... .. ..... ..... .. ......... ........ ....... ........ ........ ......... . .. ... ........ ... ......... Roopp.T� E. till XE :14-1 V; .................. ....... ................... ....... ......... ......... .. .... .................. ....... .......... ....... If4j&,A�, R(oXop PLAN DIVIDE I- MAINTENANCE �. - FACILITY SN(:IVWA,%VILLAGE OOLORADO. ucvn ON FINISHED GRADE TOPO. PLAN A13 MW[Bn4DiN1`DO*T L4!41100 rOe V<. m6+ l TIO III Mr f1.f Ill..9 ♦f.lL aa.lo e3 r I,�bvsl n 20 02.Z .n s I Ml XT NOTE HM AU6 4+8LE PUP NT YU9 96'-0' .. MM ME16MT M WOMLYIN6 Z E O Mr-T 19 964' .4 IAY 20' O„ 8888 ;!.: ..o... .. .. .. wv -. s,}It7�'V SEMI DELNERY 8886 8880 2 aps `>> a41r'0 8884 8878 30._6. 8876 RAMP 8874 887: 8880= 103'-0" ROOF HEIGHT ROOF HEIGHT ABOVE 103'-0" ABOVE GRADE INDICATED THUS- INDICATED THUS- 18'•9 Y;" HIGH POINTS AND LOW POINTS INDICATED 6Y UNDERLINE THUS- THEODORE K 6v 18'.e3e1/Z ASUXIATES PO ROOF AREA = 12,558.88 SOFT. ARCHITECTS AND ROOF FOOTPRINT 58'-O"ABOVE STRUCTVRN ENGINEERS ZT'-O 1/4" EXISTING GRADE= 2,291.2 so.FT. 14.O 2..9V WD OR- 16.2% ...moo:v4ro OF HEIGHT MORE THAN 78'0" . AS OVE EXIS TING GRAPE ROOF HEIGHT LESS THAN 28.d" 21-2" I ` All J e1 snN6 GRADE ■ ROOF HEIGHT MORE THAN 96'-0" 11'a'-1 3/8" /90'VE ExonN6 GRADE -.. .... _.. ...8880 17-1 5/8" I P} I AIIA ft \F WV �i+•Y'� A a t etv nA\ \ " r sZ . Kr pvb 21`-10" G •q• ..... 16'-1 SAY, 41'-6 5/8" 8868 �L.'.(T R/'8" ewi.. rwr.wwnraw,av 88'70 ....... ................... ....... ................... ROOF PLAN DIVIDE MAINTENANCE FACILITY 'SNOriMASO VILLAGE C/OLORADO. - w•: o000 o,vtm.. ue.y.e uerseo ROOF ON _ EXISTING TOPO. PLAN A1 .2 ,WCU'1R[OW NIYM,CYK ..Ietlrg e,aJ. site elewtlon eaeo as 0•tdag bleg el 1030 .1103 -0 / � e e.leting.grsae melnu.unce bide O0 blEg el 1030 � exbtl 69G0 blda e To / THMO Z K&V Ay ,MTM �G ARUIITlLTT AND ' J_� eTRULTLRA1 lNGiNGOC� G�pn I W - dpi VI-Oi�t rM(M191y1! ite Section through Restaurant Storage and Employee HouSing 1" = 0N0N .fr1e �^ � ETO IWYYN6 GQn�01'W alvlaE MAINTENANCE FACILITY SNO~^56 JILLMG COLORADO. weer nu- I-_ ____ SITE 5ECTION5 iite Section through Maintenance Area � 1N = 40 A4. 1 A* �� -k� `.� iii �. ��/�•�-_ - �- - - NOWNIP mdo- *4` ON - . . Al LM_ ��► , ;� �/ Qlt FOS PAO ��' •� •/ ' � ! .�y ire .. � � � /,C j /i p]mfAl i Ba I f t4` OB —�- si° ° i s i ° sit i w �I � � I ! Z r i a i �i t! � i t f 9 19-12-01 - 15: 21 COLDWELL HANKER ASPEN lU�yieryzr «oro � .,� „� )O — /S'— o l �� Joseph Wells Land PI,aiding 602 Midland Park Place Aspen,Colorado 81611 Phone.970.925.8080 Facsimile:97(X92OA378(rem)orary) e-mail Address:We1lsAsper Baol.com October 12,2001 Gary Suiter,Town Man iger Town of Snowmass Vil age 16 Kearns Road Snowmass Village, Colc rado 81615' Delivered by Facsimile t o 923-6083 Dear Gary: I am writing on behalf 4,f Seven Star Residential Partners, Ltd., Snowmass Land Partners,Ltd. and Snowmass Partners, Ltd., owners of Seven Star Ranch I believe that 0 tober 21, 2001 is presently the deadline for the Town Council to act on the Sc ven Star Ranch Final PUD Application. As you and I discussed during.our a eeting this morning, we now have a verbal agreement with the owners of Owl Creek Ranch Lot 9 to exchange parcels of land through a lot line adjuf tment procedure. Because Seven Star Ranch has not yet been annexed to the Town,it will probably be necessary to first obtain approval of the lot line adjustment from Pitkin County and then modify the previously submitted a inexation petition to reflect the revised boundary. The end result of the ik.just rent will be that the portion of the driveway presently located on O%71 Creek Ranch Lot 9 will then be within the boundary of Seven Star Ranch an+l will be subject to Town, as opposed to County, review. About six weeks ago,I s jas contacted by Fred Pierce,who has been retained by the owners of Owl Cret k Ranch Lot 10 to investigate the proposed driveway across their parcel. We view this as a positive development,but we cannot report at the present tit Ze that we have arrived at a verbal agreement with the owners of Lot 10. We re under the impression that members of the Board and the owners of Lot S have been in contact with the owners of Lot 10 to encourage them to resc lve an agreement with us on the driveway. As I reported previous]y, we have been told that the owners of Lot 1 through Lot 8 in the subdivision.have voted favorably on the agreement regarding the proposed driveway the t we previously negotiated with the Board of the Association. The addit on of Lot 9 indicates the support of 9 of the 10 lot owners at the present tare. 19--12-81 15: 21 COLDWELL HANKER ASPEN 10 October 12,2001 Gary Suiter,Town Man Eger Page two of three As I explained to Town Council during our last extension request discussion, the owners of Seven SU r Ranch are anxious to move forward and are prepared to break off fu-ther negotiatiolLwith Owl Creek Ranch Lot 10 if progress is not being m.ode. In anticipiM of moving forward with the alternative that I discus;-ed with you previously, we began to undertake further engineering woi k soon after our last extension was granted. I then delayed the engineering; for a period of time after I was contacted by Fred Pierce,but have re-autl orized that work in the event that we cannot resolve an agreement with Lot 10. The additional engineering will allow me to determine, in part, whe:her it is possible to re-route the road around the boundary of Lot 10 and still return to an alignment across Lot 9 which would allow us to preserve ou-proposed building site on Seven Star Ranch Lot Two. On the issue of whether we should continue to be reviewed under the old Code or be required to i nodify the application under the new Code,I would offer the following observations. Our pending Final PUD Application has been reviewed and rece mmended for approval by the Planning Commission. Following the Planning Commission' recommendation, we then had a number of meetings an i site visits with the Town Council to discuss and resolve various issues. My understanding as to where we left those discussions was that w+ had resolved all of the issues with the exception of the access issue. Town Council was reluctant at the time to sign off on the application even thong 1 we argued that the portion of the road which we had not yet established the egal right to use is outside of the Town's jurisdiction. This has been a lengthy process, to say the least. The owners of Seven Star Ranch have maintainer. its commitment throughout this process to exchange the Triangle parcel, wh ch is a designated building site under the agreement with the County, for a 1-arcel of similar size owned by the Town at the east end of Hidden Valley together with a payment of$250,000. We would hope that the Town Council -vould be as flexible as possible in considering what sorts of modifications t) the proposal currently on the table would be allowed to be considered under the standards of the old Code, and not require a redrafting under the re juirements of the new Code for the preliminary review stage, together Atli a remand to the Planning Commission. 19-12-,61 1522 COLDV7ELL BANKER ASPEN ID�97692B4:sYn moo.., �.t October 12,2001 Gary Suiter,Town Man,iger Page three of three The owners of Seven St it Ranch are requesting that the Town Council continue its review of t ie Seven Star Ranch Final PUD Application until December 18,2001, to p: ocess the Lot Vuw,,Adjustment request and to complete the necessary angineering work for the alternative. Si Jos Wel oe John Sullivan Gideon Kaufmw.. 1 1 1 ' APPLICATION TO THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO FOR MINOR PLAT AMENDMENT ' AND SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION ' BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP FOR ' THE OFFICES AT SNOWMASS AUGUST 11 2001 ' LAW OFFICES FREILICH, MYLER, LETTNER & CARLISLE ' A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS IN KANSAS CRY,MISSOURI IN ASPEN COLORADO 106 SOUTH MILL STREET FREluce,LErTNLR IS CAWUIs ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 202 DAVID I.MYLER,P.C.' � ATTORNEYS AT LAW ' E.MICHAEL HOFFMAN' ASPEN.COLORADO 8161 I ROBERT H. .wrtnuwm P.0° MARTIN L LEI RNE L P.C.' FACSIMILE RICHARD G.CARLISLE WHITE 970 920-4259 S.MARK��" TELEPHONE TYSON JASON M.DIVELDISS 9155' (970)920-1018 mnmwio.u•.Im,K•n• ' August 1, 2001 Town of Snowmass Village Attn: Chris Conrad, Planning Director ' P. O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 ' Re: Minor Plat Amendment Enclosure of Decks at Brush Creek Offices ' Dear Chris: This correspondence is an application from Brush Creek Office Partnership("BCOP") for a minor amendment of the SPA plan which currently governs use of The Offices at Snowmass,located at 25 Lower Woodbridge Road in the Town of Snowmass Village ("the project'). BCOP requests ' approval to enclose the decks located on the second floor of the building to resolve certain structural and leaking problems and to increase the interior space available for rent. In addition,the applicant seeks a lot line adjustment to accommodate a land swap BCOP wishes to consummate with ' neighboring property owners,to relocate certain parking spaces from an area east of the building on Lower Woodbridge Road to the west side of the building and to have additional flexibility in dealing with future parking needs. ' History of Brush Creek Offices ' In 1988,the Snowmass Village Town Council approved the conversion of the Woodbridge Office Building to the Offices at Snowmass.' The primary limitations imposed on the applicant under the ' 1988 Approval Ordinance were related to traffic impacts and the establishment of adequate parking. Paragraph 5 of the ordinance required a total of 45 spaces for the project. The necessity to build four 1 ' See Snowmass Village Town Council Ordinance No. 19,Series of 1988,which is enclosed with this application as Exhibit A, and referred to herein as the "1988 Approval Ordinance." 1 ' FREILICH,MYLER,LEITNER&CARLISLE ' Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 2 ' of those spaces was"suspended"under the ordinance and could have been required by the Town at any time through November of 1993 if there was a need for those spaces. The Town never found the need to require construction of the additional four spaces. All of the requirements of the 1988 ' Approval Ordinance (related to traffic, parking and other matters) were satisfied by the applicant. The 1988 Approval Ordinance also limited the types of uses which could be made of the project. ' Again the concern was to limit those uses which would create negative impacts on neighboring property. Only 18 commercial uses and no residential use was allowed in the project.' ' The Town Council subsequently relaxed the use limitations applicable to the project.' It adopted the 1992 Amendment because it found that the"project has not adversely affected the neighborhood," among other things. The list of permitted uses was broadened somewhat,'and the Council approved ' a mechanism by which the"owner of the Brush Creek Offices"could petition the Town's Planning Director to permit other uses "not on the list but that are similar in character to the" listed uses. ' In addition to the use restrictions,the Town Council identified two competing concerns as being of primary importance in staffs consideration of any change in the Brush Creek Offices—"viability 1 ' Allowed commercial uses included: "accountants/bookkeepers, lawyers, arghitects, engineers,physicians,dentists,property management company(limited to one such business at any ' one time), real estate, advertising agents, appraisers, surveyors, interior designers, conference services,art studio,photo studio,dressmaking,drapery work,and insurance agents." Any other use required "special review use approval by the Town Council." Exhibit A of 1988 Approval ' Ordinance, paragraph 5. ' Ordinance No. 7 of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado, Series of 1992 (the "1992 ' Amendment"). A copy of the 1992 Amendment is attached to this application as Exhibit B. '"Permitted use for the Brush Creek Offices may include accountants/bookkeepers,lawyers, ' architects, engineers, physicians and other medical professionals, dentists, advertising agents, appraisers,surveyors,real estate,interior designers,conference services,art studios,photo studios, dressmakers or seamstress, drapery works, insurance agents, financial advisors, travel agents, mortgage loan companies, one property management company, computer services and the administrative,management and/or bookkeeping offices of any business." 1992 Amendment,Section One,page 2. 1 FREILICH,MYLER,LEITNER&CARLISLE ' Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 3 of the project,"' and the "traffic, parking and related impacts" of the proposed change on the "adjacent residential neighborhood." ' The current proposal will have little if any negative impact on the project's presence in the neighborhood. These changes will, however, substantially improve the viability of the Offices at Snowmass in an increasingly competitive and demanding marketplace and will continue to offer ' office opportunities for community-serving businesses. Current Conditions. ' As it now exists,the office building consists of ten units in a total of 11,810 square feet of improved space,including decks which are currently unenclosed.' The users of that space include areal estate ' developer,three architectural firms,a food service company,two builders,a realtor,a landscaping company and one property management company. The units located on the upper floor of the building are relatively small and are "pie shaped." As shown in Exhibit E, the second story of the building is a hexagon with most of the units shaped as ' an isosceles triangle (One unit is made up of two of the triangles combined.) The size and odd shape of these units limits their utility and restricts the potential range of tenants which might lease this space. ' As established in the 1988 Approval Ordinance,there are 38 exterior parking spaces associated with the project. These are located in front of the building on Lower Woodbridge Road. In addition there ' are two parking spaces located within an interior garage. These are leased to one of the tenants for storage of vehicles used in its business. Usage of the parking spaces is not intense. Over a twelve-day period last fall the applicant compiled the information found in Exhibit D for the purpose of understanding current usage of existing parking. As shown in the exhibit, usage by building occupants and their guests ranged from three ' spaces or 7%of total capacity(at 8:30 a.m)to 25 spaces or 61%of such capacity(at 9:30 a.m.). As was anticipated, heaviest usage of the parking area occurs during the middle of the workday. The applicant's study suggests that a substantial amount of unutilized parking now exists on the project. The study also reports that a few Woodbridge residents use the project's parking spaces as well. ' 1992 Amendment, Recital No. 3. ' b 1992 Amendment, Recitals Nos. 1 and 2. ' See Exhibit C, attached hereto, which tabulates the square footage of the project. 1 1 ' FREILICH,MYLER,LEMER&CARLISLE ' Town of Snowmass Village August 1, 2001 Page 4 ' Buildings 1 and 2 of the Woodbridge Condominiums("Woodbridge")substantially encroach on the eastern boundary of the project as does the concrete walkway serving those buildings. In addition the concrete walkway serving Woodbridge currently ends abruptly at BCOP's property line. As part ' of this application, BCOP plans to connect that walkway with the concrete path which links the project to its parking lot. ' To deal with the encroachment of Buildings 1 and 2 of the adjacent condominium project, the applicant and the Woodbridge Condominium Association have tentatively agreed to exchange the affected portion ofBCOP's land for real property of the Association located on the project's western boundary. See Section B of"The Proposal,"below and Exhibit H, attached hereto, for additional information concerning the proposed land swap. ' The Proposal ' A. mansion of the Second Floor Units As shown in Exhibits F and G,BCOP proposes to expand the"radius"of the hexagon on the second ' story of the Project by approximately eight feet as shown in the exhibits. To accomplish this expansion,the applicant will remove the existing exterior walls,build the new space (including an extension of the existing roof,although at a more gradual pitch)and create new exterior walls. The ' renovation will have no effect on the calculated floor area within the structure, but will expand its enclosed square footage by approximately 12.5%. ' An expansion of the building requires the Town to revisit the parking requirements for the project. BCOP believes that the Town's current Land Use Code should be used determine the amount of parking required for the expanded project. The land to be gained in a land exchange with ' Woodbridge (as described below) will be used to create replacement parking and to provide additional parking if it is required in the future, or is required as a condition of the approval of this Application. ' B. Lot Line Adjustment. ' To finally resolve the encroachment issue described earlier,the applicant has tentatively agreed with Woodbridge to exchange the land now owned by BCOP on the eastern boundary of the project, ' which is burdened by Woodbridge's encroachment, for land currently held by the Woodbridge condominium association at the office building's western border. Please see Exhibit H for a depiction of the exact location of the parcels proposed to be exchanged. This application seeks approval of the new lot line which will result from the applicant's land swap with Woodbridge. FREILICN,MYLER,LEITNER&CARLISLE ' Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 5 ' BCOP also seeks approval to create replacement and additional parking on the land it is acquiring from Woodbridge. The approximate location of the six new spaces is shown on page 1 of Exhibit J. ' C. Recalculation of Parking.Requirement. The 1988 Approval Ordinance established a development parameter for the project of one parking ' space per 235 square feet of gross floor area. This parameter was determined by dividing the allowed floor area of 9,650 square feet (as established using the of floor area calculated in 1988) by the required 41 parking spaces. It is the applicant's understanding that at the time of the 1988 Approval ' Ordinance the Town had no minimum parking requirement based on floor area. It has since adopted such regulations. For projects of this type, the requirement is for one parking space for every 300 square feet of commercial floor area.` Review Reouirements ' Because the project is zoned SPA-1,proposed amendments of the 1988 Approval Ordinance"shall be submitted and reviewed pursuant to the procedures and standards [which govem] Planned Unit ' Development[s].s9 Those procedures and standards are found in Section 16A-5-300 of the Code. Table 5-3, found on page 16A-124 of the Code, identifies this application as being one for a Minor PUD modification because it does not involve the creation of any residential units and does not increase the existing floor area or footprint of a nonresidential building by more than ten percent (10%). In fact,this application does not involve any increase in developed floor area. The plan is to simply enclose the deck space now located outside of the second floor units and which is included in the calculation of floor area established in the Code.10 1 Section 16A-4-310 and Table 4-3 report that I space is required per 300 square feet of ' commercial space in the MU, MU/PUD, CC and CC/PUD zone districts. Use of the Brush Creek Offices is consistent with these districts, although the project is zoned SPA-1. ' 'Code, § 16A-3-40(5)a. 10 The area to be enclosed is already included in the floor area attributable to the building ' because Section 16A-3-210(2)d(2) of the Code requires such inclusion for uncovered decks in commercial and nonresidential structures when they"are more than six(6)feet in width." The decks to be enclosed here are a minimum of eight-feet wide. See also Exhibit C. ' FREILICH,MYLER,LEITNER&CARLISLE ' Town of Snowmass Village August 1, 2001 Page 6 A. General Restrictions Applicable to all PUDs. The Code's review standards require the application to be consistent with the general restrictions ' applicable to all PUD proposals - major or minor. The general restrictions which have relevance to this application are listed below: I. Maximum buildout of parcel as described in the Comprehensive Plan or Request to Modify Dimensional Limitations of PUD. The allowable floor area for the project is defined by the 1988 Approval Ordinance,not by any parameter described in a zone district regulation. The maximum floor area described in the ordinance excluded exterior decks from the calculation. The 1988 Approval Ordinance did, however, permit construction of the project as actually built. The Town's floor area calculations for commercial properties now include the square footage of decks having a width greater than six feet. The"maximum buildout potential"and "maximum allowable floor area"of this project should reflect the current definition of floor area as established in the Code. In addition, enclosure of the deck area will advance the Town's"community purposes for PUDs" by encouraging(1)sustainable development and (2)better design." More intense use of the Brush Creek Offices is consistent with the Town's ' goal of allowing Town residents to work where they live without creating discernible impacts on the community. The addition of more usable area to this project improves, rather than reduces, the quality of the design of the building. Please see the elevations of the ' improvements proposed for the project found in Exhibit G. The new design is also more compatible with the design of the Woodbridge condominiums. ' 2. Parkin . Section 16A-5-300(c)(8)requires the"number of parking spaces in the PUD[to]be that required for the underlying zone district." As mentioned earlier (1) in an SPA the approval ordinance describes the zoning requirements for the parcel and (2) the parking ' requirement set forth in the 1988 Approval Ordinance was established not through application of the Town's parking space regulation(it did not have one),but rather by working backward from the"answer'established in the review process. (See"The Proposal,"Section C on page ' 5, above.) BCOP proposes to establish only the number of parking spaces required by the Town's current Code for similar property — one space per 300 square feet of commercial space. The project includes 1 1,810 square feet of floor area. "Dividing that number by 300 produces a parking requirement of 39.37 (or 40) spaces. The applicant plans to provide 36 of those on land it now owns(excluding those spaces which will be conveyed to Woodbridge As required by Section 16A-5-300(c)(6) of the Code. '= Code, § 16A-5-300(c)(6)(b)and (d). " 5gg Exhibit C. 1 1 FREILICH,MYLER,LEMNER&CARLISLE 1 Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 7 ' in the land swap and the two parking spaces located in the garage)and the remainder will be located on the land it will receive from Woodbridge. The applicant's parking study(Exhibit D)indicates that this plan more than fully addresses the parking needs of the building's users. ' Finally,the applicant plans to hold in reserve additional parking spaces it may create on the land provided by Woodbridge in the land swap. Those spaces are identified on Exhibit J as the hatched area located to the north of Lower Woodbridge Road and west of the driveway ' to the project's garage. BCOP will voluntarly institute a monitoring program in which it will provide parking permits to tenants within the building for use by their employees. B. Section 16A-5-310. Review Standards. ' The applicant's response to the review criteria set forth in Section 16A-5-310 are found below: 1. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan. Increasing the utility of the Offices at Snowmass ' complex is consistent with the Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan as follows:" a. Little if any open space will be destroyed as a result of the implementation of the applicant's request. b. Improvement of the SPA is consistent with the long-range goals of the community. ' Snowmass Village is benefitted by gaining more utility from an existing resource. No sprawl will result from more intensive use of the project. ' C. Because there will be no change in the footprint of the building and little modification in the bulk and mass of the structure, the character of Lower Woodbridge Road will be preserved. ' d. The sixth objective of the Town's Future Land Use Plan is to "[c]eeate a compact, ' clearly defined and well-connected Town Core with services and housing in proximity to each other." BCOP's request clearly promotes this goal by allowing more use of existing commercial space located in close proximity to housing and other services. ' 2. Preservation of Community . Enlargement of the second-story units by enclosing the decks will have cause no appreciable change in the impacts of the project on the ' community. f ' 14 See Town of Snowmass Village Comprehensive Plan, Chapter Six, pages 1 and 2. 1 FREILICH,MYLER,LErrNER&CARLISLE 1 Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 8 ' 3. Creative Ap rp oac_h. Enclosure of the decks is a creative solution to the limitations created by the size and shape of the existing second-story units. ' 4. Landscaping. No changes in the project's landscaping are contemplated. If the Town determines that additional parking spaces are necessary to effect its plan to enclose the ' second-story decks,BCOP will submit a landscaping plan identifying the location of the new parking spaces, as well as other features located on the additional land. ' 5. Compliance with Development Evaluation Standard. Most of the development evaluation standards which will be impacted by this application have previously been discussed in this application (especially parking). Employee Housing Mitigation. As a redevelopment project,the enclosure of the decks on the second floor of the Offices at Snowmass is entitled to"a credit of one hundred fifteen percent ' (115%)of the housing mitigation that would be required on the existing square footage and use of the building to be redeveloped."16 Pursuant to the formula described in the Code,16 BCOP is not required to provide employee housing mitigation beyond that required and ' satisfied in the past. 6. Suitability for Development. Development of the existing second story of this building is ' entirely suitable. It will allow greater utility from a 30-year old structure with few negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. ' 7. Adequate Facilities. None of the changes requested in this application will appreciably affect the quantity or quality of the public facilities used by the project. ' 8. Efficiency of Spatial Pattern. Greater utilization of the second story of an existing building is efficient use of space. ' 9. Phasing. Not applicable. ' 15 Code, § 16A-4-410(d). ' 16 Code, § 16A-4-410(e). That calculation is summarized here: (Number of total post- redevelopment jobs generated x448 square feet x.65)less(Existing pre-development jobs generated x 448 square feet x 1.15). Table 4-5 indicates that 4.83 jobs are generated per 1,000 square feet of ' commercial space. Therefore,the existing building generates 50.68 jobs(10,492 sq.ft./1000 x 4.83) and the completed building generates 57.04 jobs(11,810 sq.ft./1,000 x 4.83). Plugging these figures into the formula yields a negati ve 556 square feet, indicating that no additional employee housing ' mitigation is required. 1 ' FREiLICH,MYLER,LEITNER&CARLISLE 1 Town of Snowmass Village t August 1, 2001 Page 9 ' C. PUD Review Standards Summary. ' In general, the approvals sought by BCOP only modestly affect the use and impacts of the project. The number of units within the building will remain unchanged and the intensity of use is not ' expected to change materially. For these reasons and because more efficient use of an existing building makes sense for the owner and the community, the application meets the Town's PUD regulations. ' Request for Lot Line Adjustment. ' To accomplish the exchange of land with Woodbridge described previously in this application,BCOP and Woodbridge must submit and process a lot line adjustment pursuant to the Town's subdivision exemption regulations." Unlike the multiple reviews required for a minor PUD amendment, a ' subdivision exemption application is reviewed once by staff and once by the Town Council. Although this correspondence represents BCOP's request fora subdivision exemption to accomplish the lot line adjustment, the applicant asks that the request not be considered by the Town Council until the Council considers final approval for the minor PUD amendment. This will allow BCOP time to create an exemption plat which fully reflects its agreement with Woodbridge according to a written contract between the two parties memorializing that agreement. The applicant plans to submit ' an exemption plat in the form attached hereto as Exhibit H, unless changes are required as a result of the Town's review of that document. ' The following exhibits required by the subdivision exemption regulations18 are enclosed with this correspondence: ' Exhibit K: Existing Conditions Improvements Survey Exhibit L: Letter of Authorization to Representative from Applicant ' Exhibit M: Letter of Authorization to Representative from Woodbridge Exhibit N: Power of Attorney from Applicant to Representative including name, address and telephone number of Applicant ' Exhibit O: Legal Description of Project Exhibit N: Title Insurance Certificate Evidencing Ownership of Project Exhibit O: Vicinity Map 1 ' "Code, § 16A-5-500, et seq. ' "Code, §§ 16A-5-520, 16A-5-40(b). 1 FREILICH,MYLER,LEITNER&CARLISLE Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 10 ' The review standards shown below are to be used by the Town in evaluating this request for a lot line adjustment under Section 16A-5-530 of the Code. (The text of the Code is shown in italics,BCOP's response follows each excerpt.) ' (1) Exemption is necessary. The exemption shall be necessaryfor the preservation and enjoyment ' of substantial property rights of the applicant. BCOP plans to enter into a land exchange agreement to finally resolve the encroachment of ' Woodbridge improvements on its property. Without the lot line adjustment neither party can consummate the agreement. It is important that this issue be resolved to both parties' satisfaction as the alternative is a judicial action which might not work as well for the landowners and which would ' not allow the Town a right to review the proposal. (2) Consistent with subdivision. The exemption shall be consistent with the preservation of the ' goals, objectives and standards of the particular subdivision or land area involved. The lot line adjustment requested here promotes neighborhood harmony by finally resolving the issue of the encroachment of Woodbridge Buildings 1 and 2 onto the Offices at Snowmass property. The applicant's use of the land to the west of the project for future parking needs provides an outlet if use of the building ever necessitates the creation of additional spaces. That"reserve parking"will keep ' future users of the project from parking in Woodbridge lots. (3) No new lots created. Granting of the exemption shall not create any new lots in any ' single-family subdivision. No new lots will be created. The lot line adjustment will simply effect a reduction in the size of the ' lot to the east and an increase in the lot to the west. ' (4) Comply with Development Code. The exemption shall comply with the standards ofthe zoning district in which the property is located and all other applicable standards of this Development Code. With respect to an applicationfor a lot line adjustment, ifany ofthe lots ' or structures thereon are nonconforming prior to the adjustment, then no adjustment shall be allowed that increases the nonconformity of the lot or structure. ' As discussed at length under "Review Standards" on pages 6 through 8, above, this application (including all of its subparts) is consistent with the applicable standards of the Development Code. The lot resulting from the boundary line adjustment will be`conforming"as the zoning for the parcel ' is unique to it (i.e. as an SPA-1 parcel it need not meet the constraints of any pre-defined zone district). 1 1 ' FREILICH,MYLER,LErrNER&CARLISLE Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 11 (5) No adverse impacts. Granting of the exemption shall not be detrimental to the public welfare and shall not affect in a substantially adverse manner the enjoyment of land abutting upon or within the area in which the subject property is situated. No negative impacts will result from the granting of this subdivision exemption. (6) Not increase total allowable floor area. Granting ofthe exemption shall not increase the total ' allowable floor area on a lot or lots affected by the proposed exemption beyond the total ' allowed without the exemption, and any change in allowable floor area permitted by the exemption within those totals shall be consistent with the surrounding area. As discussed in the first three-quarters of this application, BCOP's request to enclose the decks located on the second floor of the building is entirely independent of and separate from this request for a lot line adjustment. The applicant understands and acknowledges that no additional floor area ' will be permitted as a result of the granting of approval for the lot line adjustment. (7) Special circumstances. In the instance where the Town Council is unable to find that an application is consistent with any of the above standards, the exemption may only be granted if the Town Council finds that there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the subject property such that the strict application of these standards would result in undue ' hardship and deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the land. BCOP believes that each of the preceding standards are met by this application. Even if Council and ' staff were to disagree, the applicant believes that the existence of the Woodbridge encroachments (and the surrounding dispute) establishes the "special circumstances" required by this standard. Granting of a lot line adjustment allows BCOP and Woodbridge to utilize their land in each party's ' individual best interest. For Woodbridge it provides the owners and condominium association to maintain and improve the property surrounding their improvements in a manner consistent with an ' upscale residential resort community. For BCOP, it allows the owner to provide for future parking needs. Both goals are consistent with the interests of the Town itself. Conclusion. The concerns expressed by previous Town Councils have continued resonance today. Any changes ' in the land use plan for the Offices at Snowmass parcel must balance the needs of the owner for a project with continuing vitality with the impacts that vitality has on surrounding property owners. The proposal contained in this application fully addresses those concerns by(1)seeking approval for ' enclosure of existing decks and (2) mitigating the impact of any increased usage onsite. The ' additional second floor square footage will have only a moderate impact on the intensity of project utilization. The"expanded"project's parking requirement will be fully satisfied,even as calculated FRE:mi ,MYLER,LEMER&CARLISLE Town of Snowmass Village ' August 1, 2001 Page 12 under the current Land Use Code. Finally,the proposal solves a long-term problem in this area of Snowmass Village. The encroachment of the Woodbridge Condominiums onto Offices at Snowmass land will be alleviated in a manner which meets the approval of all parties directly affected. Sincerely, ' FREILICH,MYLER, LEITNER& CARLISLE E. Michael Hoffman ' Table of Exhibits Exhibit A - Ordinance 19, Series of 1988. Exhibit B - Ordinance 7, Series of 1992. Exhibit C - Floor Area Table ' Exhibit D - Parking Study Exhibit E- Floor Plans (existing) Exhibit F - Floor Plans(proposed) ' Exhibit G - Elevations (proposed) Exhibit H - Land Exchange Map Exhibit I - Existing Parking Map ' Exhibit J - Proposed Parking Map Exhibit K - Existing Conditions Improvements Survey ' Exhibit L -Letter of Authorization to Representative from Applicant and Executed Fee Agreement Exhibit M - Letter of Authorization to Representative from Woodbridge Exhibit N - Power of Attorney from Applicant to Representative including name, address and ' telephone number of Applicant Exhibit O - Legal Description of Project Exhibit P - Title Insurance Certificate Evidencing Ownership of Project ' Exhibit Q - Vicinity Map 1 . AIN TOWN_ OF SNOWNIASS VILI,a(;E ` TOWN COUNCIL i ORDINANCE NO. 19 SERIES OF 1988 ' A ORDINANCE APPROVING THE STAGE II LAND USE PLAN FOR THE BRUSH CREEK OFFICE BUILDING IN AN SPA-1 ZONE DISTRICT WHEREAS, Steve Parmelee (Applicant) has applied for Stage II Land Use Plan approval of a project known as the Brush Creek ' Office Building, previously known as the Woodbridge Office Building (Project) ; and ' WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned SPA-1; and WHEREAS , the Town Council granted conceptual approval of the ' Project in Resolution No. 47 , Series of 1988 ; and WHEREAS , the Planning Commission has reviewed the ' application for Stage II Land Use Approval and has recommended conditional approval of the Land Use Plan; and ' WHEREAS , the Town Council has reviewed the project and liar. heard presentations by the applicant and the recommendations of the Town staff ; and WHEREAS , the Town Council has made the following findings on the Project: ' 1 . The application was submitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 , 050 ,a of the Land Use -and ' Development Code . 2 . That only minor changes have been made to the Project ' since the Stage I approval . 7 . That no changes have been made since Stage I approval which would make the Project inconsistent with the ' Snowmass Village Master Plan. 4 . The applicant has presented changed to the proposal ' since the Planning Commission ' s review of the application. In accordance with Section 10. 050. B. 6, the Town Council finds that the proposed changes do not ' substantially change the proposal as reviewed by the Planning Commission. The application should be permitted to proceed . without additional Planning ' Commission hearings . I Ord. 19, 1988 , Pagc Two ' S . The Town Council is most concerned about Master Plan policy objectives 2a, 5b, 8b, loc. The Snowmass Village Planning Commission has recommended restrictions on the size and use of the property which the Town Council finds are adequate to make the Project consistent with these Master Plan policy objectives. ' 6 . The Project is in conformance with the development evaluation standards and constraints to development contained in Chapter 12 of the Land Use and Develop- ment Code, ' 7 . The Project is in conformance with the Town ' s design standards contained in Chapter 13 of the Land Use and Development Code. ' 8 . The Project is in conformance with all other applicable codes and ordinances of the Town. 9 . The Town Council recognizes that zero lot line construction is proposed on the East property line. ' This situation is acceptable under Town Codes provided construction meets fire safety requirements. 10. There are traffic impact mitigation measures which must be implemented to negate the impacts of the project. There are existing poor road and safety conditions in this area . Additional impacts will place these ' conditions beyond a level which should be tolerated. A left turn lane from Brush Creek Road is an improvement which should be undertaken but is not absolutely critical for maintaining adequate traffic circulation in the area . 11 . The privately owned sign and parking located at the Northeast corner of the intersection may also need to be relocated in the future . Each now presents a public safety problem by blocking sight distance at the intersection. WHEREAS , a public lic.irilig was hold before the Town Council on November 7 , 1988 at which time public comments on the project were received . ' NOW, THEREFORE, L3E IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village , Colorado; 1 I . The Town Council her approves the Stage II Land U3e Plan e Brus ree O ice Building, as more particu ar v described in Exhibit A attached hereto, subject to the ' conditions stated in section Two below. 2 . The Town Council hereby approves the Public improvements Agreement, attached herewith as Exhibit B, and the Mayor and ' Town Clerk are hereby authorized to execute said agreement. Section Two: Conditions 1 . The applicant shall deliver a Land Use Plan in a form suitable for filing for recordiin the Office of the Pitkin ' County Clerk and Recorder, that is in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Ordinance and the Land 'Use and Development Code. 1 2 . The applicant shall execute the Public Improvements Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit B. ' ] . The zoning conferred by the Land Use Plan shall not become effective until compliance with conditions number 1 and 2 ' above and the applicant has made payment to the Town for all costs of recording . ' 4 . That the applicant shall make the following traffic mitigation improvements. The public improvements agreement shall establish security for each of these improvements in an amount defined by the Town Engineer and as described below. ' a . A stop sign shall be located on Lower Woodbridge Road near its intersection with Upper Woodbridge Road in a manner approved by the Town Engineer. The improvement t cost is hereby estimated to be $175 . 00 . b. A stop sign shall be located on Upper Woodbridge Road near its intersection with Lower Woodbridge Road in a manner approved by the Town Engineer. rlie improvement cost is hereby estimated to be $175 . 00 . provided an easement can be obtained from the adjacent property owner, improvements shall be made to Lower Woodbridge Road near its intersection with Upper Woodbridge Road in a manner approved by the Town Engineer, including alignment, grnde and sight distance improvements . The improvement cost is hereby ' estimated to be $5, 200 . 00 . if necessary , the applicant, , r .shall .iodify the park.-.g areas at the expense to ensure that the parking are is with the grade and drainage of Lower Woodbrid: improved. d. A right and left turn lanes from Woodbridge Road c. Brush Creek Road shall be placed in a manner appr by the Town Engineer in order to improve traffic f. turning movements and vehicular stacking. improvement cost is hereby estimated to be $2, 900.0( e. Should the Town elect to improve Brush Creek Road include an eastbound, left turn lane onto Woodbrir Road from Drush Creek Road, the applicant shi reimburse the Town in an amount equal to the proportl 1 of traffic turning from Brush Creek )toad on Woodbridge Road that is associated with the Projec This amount, as determined by the Town Engineer, eighteen ( 18) percent . The total estimated cost c this improvement is $16, 800. 00. Therefore, ti applicant shall establish security in the amount c ' $3 , 024 . 00 for this improvement. If the Town has no undertaken this improvemont within three ( 3) years fro the date of this Ordinance, the secured amount shall b• release to the applicant . 5 . The project is intended to require a total of 45 parkin; spaces . however, the applicant may withhold the provision of four (4 ) parking spaces at the East end of the property, as shown in Exhibit C. At any time within five years from ' the date of this Ordinance, the Town Council may, at its sole discretion, require the applicant to provide said four spaces . The applicant shall within thirty (30) days of notice by the Town Council provide these parking spaces. The improvements agreement shall establish security for the parking spaces. G . That the revised landscapiny for the area between the South side of the parking area and the property line shall include and adequate number of Colorado Spruce in order to help block the view of the trash dumpster and the parking lot from Brush Crack Ituad on a year round basis . 7 . That all Spruce trees be a minimum of 20 feet in height. 8 . All landscaping shall be completed by October let of the year in which construction begins . 9 . That the applicant shall ndhere to the construction' management plan attached herrwiLh as Exhibit D. INTROp ED, READ, AND ADOPTEU on first reading by 1 Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the . of November, 1988 by a vote of _I,. •. to I - COU)1CilAlt Tippett opposed. Councilmember Aiken abstained. Councilmem ' Bedford absent. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on second reading by the Tow Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 21st da ' of November, 1988 by a vote of ^4_._ to Councilmembe Tippett opposed. Councilmembers Aiken and Bedford absent. 1 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO Richard G . Wall , Mayor Attest : Amber Marmon, Town Clerk 1 1 1 1 1 ' iN wnwESS wiiFnEOF, tho parties hereto liavo hereunto ' executed their hnnds and seals on the elates and year respectively indicated, in full understanding and agreement to the terms and conditions herein contained. ' ATTEST: TOWN OF sNowMAsS VILLAGE, a home-rule Colorado muni.cipa ity i�d�luuv!_Wv?_I, Qti^--r... Sy ' Town Clerk Rici rd G. Wall, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: DEVELOPER: ).ARTNERSHIP Ba(- I1REEK OF S Town Attorney Steven F. Parmelee ' A O ; A�LCONTENT: 41 Town lanner ' STATE OF COLORADO) ) ss . ' COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ' SL day of -.tA N., --_, 198% by Richard G . Wall as Mayor, and A,,,�xrp_1_{�� , R� , as Town Clerk of THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, a home-rule Colorado municipality WITNESS my hand and official seal . My Commission expires: /olaaJ91 Notary Public ' STATE OF COLORADO) ss. COUN'T'Y OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this I �r•. day of December, 1988 , by Steven F. Parmelee as General Partner of BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP, a Colorado general partnership, on behalf of said partnership. ' ':IITNESS my hand and official seal . fly Commission expires : Ilolnry Public \parmelee\improve . agr ---------------- ---- ----------------------- Ora. 19 , 1988 r Continuod Exhibit A. 1 Land Use and Development Parameters Lot Area: 37 , 685 S. F. Maximum Building Ground Coverage: 12 , 300 S. F. Minimum Amount of open Space : 25, 385 S . F. Maximum Building Square Footage: 9 , 650 S . F. , excluding 600 square foot ' garage, 600 square foot storage area a. n d r o o f ' overhangs. Minimum Garage Square Footage 755 S . F. Minimum Storage Square Footage 800 S . F. Minimum Number of Parking Spaces : 1/235 S. F. of Gross Floor Area, Excluding all roof overhang areas and 600 S. F. Garage Maximum Building Ileight: 28 Feet Use Limitations Any use Of the L)ropertY which generates orfensive noises v1 rations , smoke , dust odors heat electrical ' in er erence, or are be and the ro ert line shall be pro i 1te . ' . y be used for the storage of vehicles of 4 . The garage stall onl business (s) actively aperatiny in the building . 3 . There sliall be no exterior commercial activity associated with any use Ot tlle grope ' 5 . With the above e ldint�loma xncludemaccountants/bookkeepers ♦'rea" ..�.... , n, nns`_ dent-st6 , law ers architects en llimited to oneysuch bus ness et ' property management c4n� y ( oraisers, any one time) , rcal� advertising aucnts, sury interior desl roc Ors, conference servwaar art ' studies_ p Jtoto studio, dressmaking , drapery 1 insiira� n X45 s . A11 use no s ecificall ,den�fied n this list a e allowed onl b s ecial review use ap rova ' by the Town council . + Awuc.� ,Q.�✓il!✓l 7(A VC1 /`.,..�^` A#mac .OS �K �� ew�_i• �1`'Ll�A . /.it✓il ��MM'�� .. ..... . . T s. lnrnuvtHENT_ ----------------------- � EHENT MOH Cj;E&QFUQE.Y This Improvements Agreement is made and entered into this 2�= day of December, 1988 , by and between the TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, Colorado, a home-rule Colorado municipality (hereinafter referred to as "Town") , and BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP (hereinafter referred to as the "Developer") . WITNESSETIi: WHEREAS , Developer has submitted to the Town for approval execution and recordation, the Land Use Plan ("Plan") of a tract of land situate within the Town of Snowmass Village, ' legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and Incorporated herein by this reference, and designated as "8rush Creek offices" ; and ' WHEREAS, Town has fully considered the Plan, the proposed development, the improvement of the land and the effects of the proposed development and improvement of land included. in the Plan on other adjoining or neighboring properties ; and ' WHEREAS , Town has imposed certain conditions and requirements in connection with its approval , execution and recordation of the Plan, such matters being necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public welfare : and WHEREAS, Developer is willing to acknowledge , accept, abide by and faithfully perform the conditions and requirements imposed by the Town in approving the Plan; and WHEREAS , under the authority of 11o . 055A ( 14 ) (d) and 11 . 050A(7) of the Land Use and Development Code of Snowmass Village , Town is entitled to assurance that the matters hereinaf ter -agreed to will be faithfully performed by the Developer. ' NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants herein contained , and the approval , execution and acceptance of the Plan for recordation by Town, it is mutually agreed as follows : I . 1 GENELtI�L� �:i ?T P�H Brush Creek Offices , as shown on the Plan recorded in Book _ at Page �, of the F'itkin Comity records, includes - 1 1 ..,�■ and conference str• -ture wlhicl , - -.Lily d,�ined Town Council Or .ance 19, Seri -- 1988 (' ._dinance") . II . CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROyE)1ENTFr ' A. Water and Seweg ysteM. Existing facilities can supply water and sewer service to the project. The project shall be served by the Snowmass Water and Sanitation 1 District. B. Forty-One_(41)._Parkinggaces. Existing facilities allow for the provision of thirty-nine (79) exterior surface parking spaces. The Developer shall provide two (2) parking spaces in a garage. This parking meets the ' requirements of the Ordinance. In the event such installation is not substantially completed by the Developer within the applicable schedules defined in the Ordinance, the Town shall have the right to cause such additional work to be done as is necessary to eomilete tho installation, thereby fulfilling the Developer's r ligation under this Agreement. ' The security shall be relea: d at such time as all proposed improvements are completed e+iid approved by the Town Engineer, In no event shall this security be required for more than 1 five (5) years from the effective date of the zoning. Within five ( 5) years of the effective date of the zoning , the Town council , at its sole discretion, may require the Developer to 1 install an additional four (4 ) parking spaces The agreed cost of such improvement is $1, 520. 00 . C. Lanosca'ping . Developer shall provide landscaping improvements on the site in accordance with the Landscaping Plan submitted with the Land Use Plan and conditions of the Ordinance . The agreed cost of such improvements is $7 , 200. 00 . D. Traffic and R'q&! ImI)I•ovemgj _s. The Developer is required to pay for and provide security for the following improvements to be completed by the Town, in accordance with ' the terms and conditions of the Ordinance and with paragraph 111 , below. 1 . A stop sign on Lower Woodbridge Road at Upper Woodbridge Road . The agreed cost of the improvement is $175 . 00. 2 . A stop sign on Upper Woodbridge Road at ' Lower Woodbridge Road . The agreed cost of the improvement is $175 . 00 . 3 . Lower l+oodbridc3e Road improvements , ' including alignment, grade and sight distance improvements. The agreed cost of the improvement is 55, 200. 00. 4 . Right and left turn lane improvements from Woodbridge Ro;,d onto Brush Cree). Road. T)ie agreed cost 2 1 of the _.mprovement is $2 , 900 . 00. 1 $ - Brush Creek Road 'turn Lane . Should the 'Down elec to undertake an eastbound turn laitie from Brush Creek Road onto Woodbridge Road within three ( 3 ) years of the effectiv, date of zoning, the Developer's share of the construction shall be eighteen percent ( 181) of a total project cost of said improvement of $16, 800. 00. The agreed cost to the ' Developer is $3, 024 . 00. III . FINANCIAL. 9 YA1T.Y FOA—ULP-ROX=MU The guaranties to be provided by Developer, as set fortt below, shall be in the form of an irrevocable bond, letter of credit from a responsible financial institution, or other guaranty satisfactory to the Town Attorney . The guaranty ' shall give the Town the uncunditional right, upon default by Developer, or its successor or assigns, to withJraw funds upon demand to partially or fully complete and/or pay for any improvements or pay any outstanding bills for work, done thereon by any party. As portions of the improvements are completed, the Town Engineer shall inspect them, and upon ' approval and acceptance, he, shall authorize the release from the guaranty delivered by Developer of the agreed estimated cost for that portion of the improvements . e A. L&•nOsa?iPjDg . , Developer hereby agrees to provide guaranty in the sum of $7 , 200 . 00, which sum represents the estimated cost of 1001 of that portion of the Landscaping Plan for which Town, through the 'Town Engineer, has requested financial assurance . ' 8. Larkins •-gaaces . Developer hereby agrees to provide a guaranty in the sum of $ 1 , 520 . 00 which is the agreed cost of the four ( 4 ) additional spaces which may be required by the Town within five ( 5) years after the effective date of the toning . If the Town has not required said spaces, in writing, within this five ( 5) year period, ' Developer's obligations related to this improvement shall terminate, - and the secured obligation in the amount of $1 , 520 . 00 shall be released. C. TLalfjc--AaL-B2s?a—LmI>Y2vRMe,. ts. I . Developer hereby agrees to provide a guaranty in the sum of $350 . 00 which is the agreed costs of the Town installing the two (2 ) stop signs required . 2 . Developer hereby agrees to provide a guaranty in the sum of $5, 200 . 00, which sum represents the agreed cost of the Town' s construction of the Lower Woodbridge Road improvements, including alignment grade and sight distance improvements. In the event construction of this improvement has not begun within one ( 1) year of the - - — ._— . ... . . .... . sue,-.-,. - . .._ .. .... . ATTEST: TOWN OF Stc LSS VILLAGE, a home-rule Colorado municipa ity 1 amLy�.d an% , p�- ay— 1. . . .. Town Clerk Ric 1 r G. Wall , Idayor 1 APPROVED AS TO FORM: DEVELOPER: 1 /USif CREEK OF I S/PARTNERSHIP 1 Town Attorney Steven F. Parmel a A APFQOVED A TO G LATENT: Town lanner 1 SPATE OF COLORADO) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) iThe foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of �� , 198q , by Richard G . wall as Mayor, 1 and �&-&It as Town Clerk of THE TOWN OF SN01iMASS VILLAGE, a home-rule Colorado municipality 1 WITNESS my hand and official seal . My Commission expires: lolaa-f91 Notary Public. STATE OF COLORADO) 1 I . ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) 1 - The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this (*1E4-. day of DecemUer, 1908 , by Steven F. 11armelpe as General Partner of BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP, a Colorado 1 -jenc•ral partnership, on behalf of said partnership. :11TNESS my hand and official Scal . aty Commission expires : f NuLary Public \parmelee\improve . agr ' q. J ', 1 ! ., r ! ! n )�� //'�� J7c'i�' 7f +i !A � ry`(L f• f r ! rr! �;. ! A .l 11•R 1 1�•'. t] r wL 41 Y �u�• � A.yr�w ' K�j'.�.i4. .1'.• C � 0((�} TxIX l:�! .. 4y � r 14 rOr ]�Y'�p�J � y/ r iw ti VI ----- -------------- - Exhibr-_ D. _------- --------------- Construction Ma.,agement Plan 1 . That construction hours shall be limited to 9 : 00 F 5 : 00 P.M. Monday through Friday. 2 . Parking will be maintained on-site for constt personnel . 3 . Access through the Project to residential areas shall be maintained at all times. ' 4 . No exterior construction shall be permitted before close of the ski area and must be completed no later ' December lot of the year 'in which construction is star_ 5. The applicant may only stage construction material it ' parking between the close of the ski area and June 15t after Labor Day. Between Ju:ie 15th and Labor Day applicant shall have all materials stored within- , building or visually screened from the roadway . 6 . The applicant shall be responsible for controlling any or debris on the site. The site shall be kept clean of ' such materials during non-construction hours . 7 . The applicant shall promptly remove all mud, dirt ' debris resulting from the project construction from Lo Woodbridge Road and any other public roads. 8 . The applicant shall agree to meet periodically with t Town Manager to monitor and adjust construction manageme plans as necessary. 1 1 1 1 !-LEGAL DESCRIPTION LANG USE PLAN J:, S. IIRU]M CREEK OFFICES �_ �' •� OWNER'S CERTIFICATE _ ,?�"'a• ,1'-• g_, T17LE CERTIFICATE -. ° • ' �, ... ..... --.�t�a_ �-� .nK►....-. 1.._.dill SURVEYORS—CERTIFICATE Y_• _ ��L { _ ..... -�.► 1—�. -_._ --.-.+rte .A'i::i,'�.':u�.'.'.:' CLERK O RECORDERS• AC¢EPTANCE 1 T LEGEND AND NOTES 1 ` A .�-•. ��� TOWN ENGINEER] ♦P/ROVAL , t ...........+. . ...» emu. '.. iwJx '•_Y..1•�I "• ` . 'i-.YJi�."•••.IGMu.'�r.i�r •�Tf Y l . ZONING APPROVAL 1,;•' '1•'t' k41`y� '� / '`• �' -- NE/ TOWN COUNCIL APPROVAL l''%,;!c•."s..' #•%•..;f• . - "-•a- / ��• / •TOwN TO ATR APPROVAL f"f• Op06P�0 .� ' `. PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL _-- SAN—NOTES ��^^ - - • �'� DEVELOPER OWNER ---- _ __ _ ay'�:•. . •per =.•V yi �.�-- -- _. "._fir-_ 1. .. DESIGNER iy •r %'- SURVEYOR'..-.y •-.-a --�-'��.."...,�• I' III;3u IL1.41 JWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNC. ORDINANCE NO. 7 ' SERIES OF 1992 / PQ,C re AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL LAND USE PLAN FOR THE BRUSH CREEK OFFICE SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA. �J d WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village approved the Final Land Use Plan for the Brush Creek Office ' Specially Planned Area in Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1988; and WHEREAS, the Brush Creek Offices Partnership has made application to the Town to amend the provisions of the Land Use ' Plan approved by Ordinance No. 19 , Series of 1988 the use limitations described in the Exhibit A thereto; and ' WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed amendment and recommended approval subject to a limitation on the number of property management companies permitted and a provision ' stating specific procedures for determining whether a use not specifically identified in the permitted use list is generally consistent with the intent of the use list; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held in accordance with notice given as required by the Land Use Code, on April 6, 1992 , to receive public comment; and 1 WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed the proposed application and has made the following findings: ' 1. In 1988, when the Final Land Use Plan was approved, the Town Council was very concerned about the traffic, parking and related impacts of potential uses in the project. 2 . In order to ensure that impacts would be minimized and ' that traffic, parking and the exterior characteristics of the uses would be consistent with the adjacent residential neighborhood, the Town Council required a ' very detailed and limited use list for the project; and 3 . The Town Council finds that the limited use restrictions ' may adversely affect the viability of this project. Because of the nature of small businesses in Snowmass Village, many maintain several functions, making it difficult to show complete consistency with the limited ' use restrictions. 4 . The Town Council finds that the project has not adversely ' affected the neighborhood, but new use restrictions that are consistent with the restrictions approved in ordinance No. 19 , Series of 1988 are still important. ' 5. The Town Council finds the circumstances relevant to the request but have changed since the original approval ' because the Town Council was very concerned about the associated traffic and parking impacts of the project. Over the past two years, the Town Council has experienced the operating conditions of the project and finds that ' there are other similar uses not contained in the IKIV Tc Ord 92-7 ` Page 2 ' original use list that would be appropriate at this location. ' 6. The proposed amendments will not increase any * of the maximum limits or decrease any of the minimum limits established in Section 10. 030 of the Land Use Code. The ' proposed uses are similar in nature to the originally approved and, therefore, the impacts are mitigated through measures already approved in Ordinance No. 19, 1988. ' 7 . The proposed amendment, because it is consistent with the uses originally approved, will not adversely affect the enjoyment of land abutting the Brush Creek offices property. ' 8 . The proposed amendment will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The new uses are consistent with the intent of the originally approved use limitations. tNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado: Section One: Action ' y The Town Council hereby approves the following amendments to Exhibit A of the Final Land Use Plan for the Brush Creek Offices Specially Planned Area: ' Paragraph 1, Use Limitations, is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. Any use of the property which generates offensive noises, ' vibrations, smoke, dust, odors, heat, electrical interference, or glare beyond the property line shall be prohibited. In addition, no tenant of the building shall utilize the property for the ' storage of building materials, building equipment, or construction vehicles not to include pick-up trucks. Paragraph 51 Use Limitations, is hereby amended to read as follows: 5. With the above exceptions, the permitted use for the Brush Creek offices may include accountants/bookkeepers, lawyers, ' architects, engineers, physicians and other medical professionals, dentists, advertising agents, appraisers, surveyors, real estate, interior designers, conference ' services, art studios, photo studios, dressmakers or seamstress, drapery works, insurance agents, financial advisors, travel agents, mortgage loan companies, one property ' management company, computer services and the administrative, management and/or bookkeeping/accounting offices of any business. The owner of the Brush Creek Offices may submit to the Town Planner other businesses not on the list but that are ' y similar in character to the above listed uses. Before the Town Planner may approve any use, the owner of the Brush Creek Offices shall notify the Woodbridge Condominium Association 1 IIVY U_ 73 li• J• i:9i •f�+r..0 u .., . ___ __ �, . TC Ord 92-7 Pages 3 ' ("Association") in writing of the request. The written notice shall inform the "Association" of the specific nature of the proposed use and that the "Association" shall have up to fifteen (15) days from the date notice is mailed, known as the response period, to provide comments regarding the proposal to the Town Planner. The owner of the Brush Creek Offices shall ' submit to the Town Planner a certificate of mailing to the "Association" which shall state the date of the mailing and a copy of the information mailed. At the end of the response ' period, or sooner if the "Association" waives objection in writing, the Town Planner, without further notice, shall approve or deny the property owners request. Approval shall ' only be granted if: 1. The proposed use(s) is similar in character, both in terms of operations and related impacts on an individual ' and cumulative basis, to those uses specifically listed as a permitted use, and 2 . The exterior impacts associated with the use, such as traffic generation, parking needs, and generation of non- residential types of 'vehicles are not greater than would ' be the case for the specially listed uses. • The decision of the Town Planner shall be the final action required unless an appeal is filed pursuant to this section. ' The Town Planner shall provide notice to the owner of the Brush Creek Offices and the "Association" within three (3) days of the response period. The applicant or any other party ' in interest may appeal a decision by the Town Planner to the Town Council provided said appeal is filed with the Town Planner within ten (10) days of the decision by the Town Planner. An appeal will be scheduled at the next reg4larly scheduled meeting of the Town Council for its consideration. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on first reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 16th day of March, 1992 by a vote of 6 to 0. Council member Unger absent. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED on second reading by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 6th day of Aprml,,...1992 by a vote of 6 to 0. Council member Unger was absent. ,• .. G TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE ' . :OFFICInL RICHARD G. WALL, Mayor ATTEST;• �r QIYYInrm ' AMBER HARMON, Town Clerk 1 ' Exhibit C Floor Area Table ' Original SPA Existing Space Requested in sq.ft. After 1992 Approval Floor Area First Floor ' Leasable 6,911 7,711 7,711 Common 1,508 1,508 1,508 Second Floor ' Leasable 1,136 1,136 2,454 Common 137 137 137 Non-Leaseable(1) 1,318 1,318 0 Garage 0 0 0 Storage(2) 800 0 0 Roof Decks/New Space 0 0 0 ' Adjusted Area (3) 11,810 11,810 11,810 Mechanical ' First Floor 109 109 Second Floor 14 14 Roof Deck 0 0 Covered Walk 0 0 Total 11,810 11,933 11,933 ' 1. The non-leasable space described on this line is the deck space which is now uncovered, but which is included in the calculation of floor area by Section 16A-3-210 of the Snowmass Village Land Use Code. ' 2. According to Steve Parmelee, the project's property manager,the conversion of 800 square feet of designated storage to leaseable space was approved by the Town Council in 1992. ' 3. Adjusted Area excludes mechanical covered walks and garage area. 1 1 , 1 C). C ' OFFICES AT SNOWMASS - PARKING LOT REPORT (No. of cars) ' Date Building Tenant/Guest Woodbridge Residents 11/18/00 8:30 a.m. 3 3 11/18/00 11 a.m. 7 1 11/20/00 9:30 a.m. 14 0 11/20/00 1 p.m. 15 0 11/20/00 5 p.m. 12 0 11/21/00 9:30 a.m. 18 0 11/21/00 2:15 p.m. 23 0 11/22/00 11 a.m. 23 0 ' 11/22/00.m. 11 aa.m. 23 0 11/24/00 10:30 a.m. 6 2 11/26/00 ' 10 a.m. 4 1 11/27/00 ' 10:30 a.m. 21 1 11/28/00 1 P.M. 22 0 1 11/29/00 11:15 a.m. 24 0 ' 11/30/00 9:30 a.m. 25 1 1 1 �f 30 1 iL - r j X30 1 � L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 o 1 I - I - - I i C Y,rr�.. 3 . .- •pip XMTING WA E .. .. ...... Cl f i 3 r f � •� ' f t t l � r j� {? t•r �� .0 2 ! _�.! n f"J i Li3 d � r r sl 7' �.:{ S rl �. bvc-?• . i vfrf �� �� r¢ �}�..�y1 ' ' ,� ? a i ^,ei var' �'�"�e r � �.i��� r � ! i.:'i o •° g • i -f : .max 8. C S _ i . �f Nou I I I I J II /M�YWVi "II O �fMwaVi I � D i © O •++ ,' «.& 1. es'q i I 6 Of(7Gf.PI.JILJ-'�YhtN- 1 III i 1 1.. 1 I I k l�—� I n l u � T. Michael Manchester Offices ces at Snowmass i1w & Associates, mcoRaoRATm E u Woodbridge F,#a=� �8 J Lower Woodge Rd p t . ........ .�...... ... .,.�. . ............� Snowmaca Village,Colorado !IRj utu wvr —__ W SOtlfN ELEVMu I —�%I o I f xu 411- 4W Mbf t i r i 1 �\ � 4 � `1 Y-L- Wi g _ �-A [ filial, T. T. Michael Manchester • .11M 94 r r rr .+rr '•r Offices at Snowmass g rja I�IP,2� ` J 1 & Associates aco,irau,� 25 Lower Woodbridge Rd �'�aiP�� �E�9�� • r.• rr• • • •rr�•ra •�r• • Snowma55 Village,Colorado Sqa}E � li • •rr+•1r• •I��r�r. i • •�• • IAFrrMrll • i` a7 3.3 • ue•�+•+rrre • �r+rru•• • rr�r•�r• • �� 1] a a a mp ws v • 4 ~ e•�o p4� 5,ti'yq6 ffW,P, /DGa CVNDOY/N/OYS Ngyee,�•6 G �\ !1 . 0 TG D � O!'LL Iq-s ova bi` eyDD aBN• pwr rm rusnr nr � u une � ��Irumaere D�g13�G ) IOODBR/I d r OF cfs At SNO]WASS II(IO P 1019 NOGG MNDONIN/DYS av � - NBe'e/•Oe' v LplYanc ua ODDgaDGL II \ seor / ne rrur %OslG Its.9s, .a i ,' �4 rvYna wr GR66N SPACC w. X7I.I i i GRAPHIC SCALE i i � IwrYrl l ) T LINE ADJUSTMENT 'ART OF TRA CT 42, SECTION I rNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 86 WEST THE 61H P.M. , PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO A PK J MN Is. 8 uw //. r.- /O leuY, - CVNDON/N/DNS rePpry NPM,nwbi PL M rlI IYm/lY/� R �u, , /eW«N YV I. 1Mf.1L can PKf/eft . .$ ,r Br/lm .1•Pro(bw .A/Rl1 AV/r Poal / J 11x,1 N NKa N/IW'147. "".N J IJN.N h.l ml U.NKY.uf.,(r Aqh PN.(J P./«I A fw,n MNW'/I_S. la . ✓940..18!NC a.N =WY/7/K. ailw« ✓IN.N Mf" 0, F.(.NYaIK�N.r ✓PKaa/A h .p l m ar p.,. MN Wr; YYN m0'/I'mT M. a,l. ✓/I/.m M 1 m WI Snm NI(4.. (o m .. mf.. m xII." MI Y roll Ir«. W(an I..Pahl m ar w,lrn Nml J/a. J P.n./4' Yd NCOI.I .d M IYh.N J fII.PO/rol m roll WIK. Mmlp ✓P.nW/h.. .VIr pWl a rN Iou.I.rr a..N NNW 7/7/K• aiW«N I L lI/u f w Y. MY.Nq Na. ✓lVMW I x I .Vh PN.1 h WI MY.I.p; M.NTl/'N7 hr• .x J MW .r. h,l m WI".di,✓P.I«/• 9.fs Y.P.le'✓ IN/../V. SJO MIe,/N.YI.I f>,N1 qaw h,L AND /rwR Iyhsb�.l a.AeYagl corer✓.JI Palelt YmN 49V N7 M• 0 W. ✓M.N M4' YmN NITl4IST M. IYW«✓N.m/r.4' Ymn N.CN'N7 M. N,h.N J N./I/N4 a.N oPl/Ft ha. N.IYN Jo.N . h•pa1m a. Irof Ns.J roll Pa«L /ell N..W. M/V a. r.lra(r Mml J✓1.,e,1 4' YroN AooeISIT m Yr ( Awl 1. Y.AW✓/bhl Aler/I/K.I6 ✓ N."M ✓MSIea/V. Naha/V 4NI qYN MR xM K/M. Ig/nnJ.hVS.( Yr NKY,rI NwK✓ II/.L M IWI P.I.m a Y,aN 8S/Y/YI'S M. a.WN J ( a, q.(K. MmIKP Ne,✓.W PKeY. WI W.✓w bow.Nerfd.,(,Inm Nn.: awN dOP.fIUO'I f \ M. PWW N IW /NI Y.✓I I m YwN XM'N iIT h,. awY«✓Isa//M4 Yr.w \ / NIPN7)I'I ha. WIYw J m.N/wl h Y. Narflab.Vl�pl.l J r/f We4' amw MI'IObV ro Y,.Verlf(for J xN !K. I4fm«J N.tl \ � � m roa Mms. u..!«t�o n.l.l✓4h.lV. \ � � N.l.h/w tN7mn Mc rK. K hro Amu r»v L nn�v/..rat /.w worm/m®mu 1/m wsmr w m an r w1..1.A w®r raver/rr fm ar nr.w/msrr r aar Am/aslar w�Nr m rerr r.ne.Ir Nr em n�T ravin..uv/m.w mrar asn.Ira1 w IevY.s w.avv.lwe.rII.end./ r VIII a r R t1YSYN aqO.b)v14 40 IN,IY/u, oni.r Au R w.eullsa Aqf—n aam.../a ama a-ro..s rm a..1N ALiIIPr(e.Iaemu w lams R rla EXHIBIT H ------- --------------- ------ ----—-- ------ - -- -- -- —.- I _ I � I i I I � I I � i I i I I � 1 1II/I I , I , i \ \ I! o FIc I I \ OODBRIDGE CONDOMINIUMS GARAGE I \\ I \ 39 401 \ I \ I \ I i \ I i I — I I I 1 I 39 �� 31 S 30 32 b, 33 36 35 37 wo i L WE o I / i I / ' 4�, i , m I b m � W Z \\J \ s D � � N \ O O � \ O \ b ;fir regElij' T. Michael Manchester Offices at Snowmass 9'�FiIF Associates, wcoxrowm — tqE C t 25Lowcr Woodbridge Rd $�tr �iy�=lie • ........ .r. .... .a. .r•r. • o•�......rr • SDowma55 Village,Colorado jZRIi3e� I I / ' I / i I i I \\ 0 FIC I - I � WOODBRIDGE CONDOMINIUMS I GARAGE I \ I 41 42 \ NEW LAND AR A 34 / 2 29 8 3 32 33 1 All 2 i/ � EXISTING TRASH SHED REMOVED 1 d11•ab�w CD \ \CY) \ o , a O / \ J / O \ m J J X \N To SL `� \ Z \\ s \ D \ \ r tv7 n \ mm O O > Z T. Michael Manchester t �. Offices at Snowmass i 'a i; °F 'l9 & Associates, inconrowAreu • 25 Iowa Woodbridge Rd :. e s r . ........ .�...... ,.. �.�. �.......,. soowmass Village.Colorado 111 1,11 art lul� RUN s WIC w 1:.1911 1y KY % al. \ 'i y • y. LOT / \ ar,a1.so.rr. e » 4 r SINGLE STORY FRAME nun BUILDING \y a yOy bJ 11an 11111 ' ;p�:" 1WI� '• nuu OO WIN 1u1 • Y.P .11.111 •off' � ��i�Y,y .�\ G� � nIR � � • 1IP O 0 ' ow °16 / O PWIN �- •/ QIVn %N Y19•i�.; .. r.�r w r ' CARMICH.A •URVEYINY�IMC. sw P.O. boIT �1ot) 0111f 1 FiOD-�q-o�071 1 N 0 R T R OT ? • ^® nn eD.Fr. I ' - 20' •�•'✓• LFOEMD: ' 1. • OFNDT[S FgID M.•RFMP AM YWOHT PLASM W LB 1IT10 f. 0 DEMYFS M.E PERM AM PW TIC W M HOMO tO EE BEi j NOTES 1 1.THE WWNO ENVELOI!M S19L0N ON nE RECORDED MT YI MT WMwrYNLY TWO TO THE SQILy11Y LMEE Of THE LOI.SO R Y NOT KMTEO d YME YM. 1.n W M WALK)AS A LE"OOCUNEM AM PMSEEYCN OR USE OF TARS"it ONAUn10 O BY 1NIt SWYEYOR IYFY R WARS nE ORIOINLL IWD4A END WEl STINT OF V N C/AWCLNEL ILI NI OT AEPROd1LT B W A RAY ON W PREIMED SY THIS M OR NO WTNDUT NI ORNOIMI WNITLME AM MET STNY' WY COITAW FAYDLLENT. EPPONEOA OR WBLSACMD NORXkT . DOCLAENTS PREPARED BY THE RITnEVOR NO W THOU!A YbNTUNE AND NET STAMP ARE TO BE NENEO AS REIMHNIY AND ALL NORLIATION MOML T MOH SVSIECY TO CHOTIIE. t TN{M HAS SEEN PREPARED FOR RENEW AND PROPOSAL NRPOYES My AT THIS YW.I D WLL IE LPOMOED 70 A COMFLEIE APRO.EMENT NRYEY MY M SOCK N KTMWTS 10• P, I TED R.OY 1 P� LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS T AND 1.MUSK CREEK OFIR;t.ADCORpNO 10 THE MT TEAEOF RECORDED W RAT WOL NAT PARE TE OF COL MADO WARTY RfQ1LTp1 Ly SEPTEMBER E1.IYi. Cg1NN OF RIgN,STATE Of C4011M0 i I SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE HEREBY CEATFY THAT TIM MAP ACCURATELY DEPOTS AM DYETMi OONOITI AND WLa1D KPYI SWYEr ""OWNED LNLER MY EDPEM/m AND CmM R W N ult . TEAR. OF nE THREW MICgSEO'PROD OF LAM. 1N(LOaTOTI AM I WMENSONS Of NL YAOROS.WRp1ELMN11.EABEMENTS.RION ~W MOENOE OR RMDM TO w ND ENaOYHMNTI BY OR W THESE MfN,,3 NLE ACO My 1 11OLMI.nI1 LTV i1 MBED W Y1E REWPOEO vLAr MTFD ABWf AM M IIEN.MLRI i YYV DO11F PEO.NpM'1 OF THE IQDITIOMNHE I rLI WT(fIKNE W�LN wr1MYf BfEN raa0 ArTER TM alE Os FAWO u DAA A ��.• RS lYDI • aTE'.SGEMSEK El A.TB11 II+TY by EA76t�b Obsu H:o 0¢6 _ EXHIBIT K II•M 11nd" T6Y EEISTIN6 CONDITION? 6UILDIN6 PERMIT SURVET UEb MI 66.67 11.66 LTTNB MANCHESTER uuini-ru01 magpo from-=INE0 INVESTMENTS +141 111 8095 T-186 P.003/004 F-116 ...._... ... ...i, r..i,6AWL& MV. 1�4 Y. 4 1 Brush Creek OlSoes Pwmarship ' 361 Forest Avenue.Suite 200 Lagcma Beads, California 92651 ' July 23,2001 Town of Snowmass Village Planning Department ' Ann Chris Conrad and Jim Wahlstrolm 016 Kerns Road Snowmam Villagai Colorado 81615 ' Dear Chris and Tan: ' As the General Parmer of Brush Cheek offim Part=51up, I hereby entilm Fre Hd% Myler,Lehner&Carlisle,and T.Michael Manchester&Assooaatms,Inc,to submit and process the application for modification of the SPA Plan for the Offioas at Saowmass parcel and for a ' subdivision ettemptiou in the form which arxm4mmies this letter.The mores and relevant c =m at these two fans are as fellows: T.Michael Manchester&Associates,ilm T. Michael Manchester and Jeff Dahl P.O.Sour 6573 25 Lower Woodbridge Road Snowmws Village,Colorado 81615 970-923-4411 Frzilidr,Myles,Leiner&Carlisle David J.Myler and E.Michael HoSman ' 106 South Mill Street, Stria 202 Aspen, Colorado 81611 ' 970-920.1018 Thank you for your cmdderatlon in this Application,if you have any questions or require any additional information,please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP 1 By: A z Jae Hanauer ' Partoar r Jul-23-2001 04:26as Frae-COMINED INVESTIENTS i040 404 3065 T-166 P.002/004 F-736 SNOWMASS Ma AGM , COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ' Snowmass Village Development Application Fee Policy ' The Town of Snowmass Village has established a fix struetsrre for the processiAS of land use applicati ons as described an the revase side hereof A flat fee is collected for land =a applications bated on the type of application subanitted, Referral flees for other Clty departments ' reviewing the application will also be collected. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the payment of required fee. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for all land use applications. The fees vary dependent upon the land use application type and the complexity of the case. The base fee is not refundable. ' More extensive staff review may be ngmred, boyond the hourly rata and time allotted by the ' base fee, as the review time is likely to very substantially ftom one application to another. Actual staff and consultant review time of the application will be charred when the hourly rate and review time exceeds the base fee. A summary report of the obarpe for review time actually ' iucuaed will be provided to the applicant upon request After the base fee has been exceeded, the applicant will be bMad monthly in twea s for actual ' review time ineunrA Current billings must be paid within 30 days or processing of the application will be suspended An applicant may accrue end be billed additional edminishative or review time following the Anal lend use approval up to issuance of a Certificate of Completion ' or a Certificate of Oocupaacy. If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new of additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. In no ease will Building Permits be Issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO: Brush Creak�Offfiew ;,artzteroup ' Joe HwWlar, Ce:=I l Partnw Applicant billing address: c/o i•l i eh. ph?l.r, ra;=.r 8 Carlisle al ' 106 S. Mill Street? Suite 202 Amen, CO 81631 1 1 , ' a•�ttiM&u?hOnictl lSoePalF�Mpeanat4mnlOSVdx 07/23/2001 10:30 9709237860 WOODBRIDGE CONDOS PAGE 02 jUL. 1U. (UU ! IL:9i°M iXULIIA MVLth AlAn LA{LlSLt fli. 3P1, e. 1 ' Woodbridge Condominium Aseociadon 100 Elbert Ln Snowmess Village, Colorado 81615 July t0, 2001 ' Town of Soowmass Village Plemning Depart meo Atm:Chris Conrad and Jim Wahlanobm ' 016 Kan Road Snowmass Village,Colorado 81615 Dear Chris and Jim: As die President of the Woodbridge Condominium Assoelation,1 bereby t atdwrin Frvilich, Myler,Reimer&CarWk,and 1'.Michael Manchester&Associates,Inc.,to subm dt and process the application for subdivision =mwfion which accompanies this letter. The na nes and relevant contacts at these two fame areas ibllows: ' T.Michael Manchester&Associates,Inc. T. Michael Manchester and Jeff Dahl P.O.BOX 6573 ' 25 Lower Woodbridge Road, Snowmw Village.Colxado$1615 970-923.4411 Freilich,Aiyla,I, 1tear&CatlWe David J.Myles and S Michael Hoffman ' 106 South MiU Straet, :suite 202 Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-920-1018 ' Thank you for your coasideruion in this Application, if you have any qt catim or squire any additioml information,plaue do not hesitate to coma me. Vey tr%'y yam, WOODIMDOE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION.IN 1 ' By: 7 arofe rafideat 1 ' SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY ' KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,THAT I,Joe Hanauer,on behalf of myself and as General Partner of Brush Creek Offices Partnership, whose address is 361 Forest Avenue, Suite 200,Laguna Beach,California 92651,telephone number(949)4942333,reposing specialty ut and confidence in David J.Myler and E.Michael HoMM of Freilicb,Myler, Leitner& Carlisle, an Aspen, Colorado law firm whose address is 106 South Mill Street, Suite 202,Aspen, Colorado, 8 161 I, hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Attomays-in Fact", do hereby make, constitute and appoint said David J. Myler and E.Michael Hoffman,each as my true and lawful Attomey-in-Fact in my name,place and stead, for the following purposes: ' To execute,submit,process and record any and all documents related or required to submit an application for land use approval(including,without limitation,minor plat amendment and subdivision exemption)to the Town of Snowmass Village,Colorado ' for the Property described in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Further,I hereby warrant the said authority granted above and I ratify and confirm all that my ' Attomey*in-Fact shall do or cause to be done. My Attorneys-in-Fact may act together or alone in the exercise of the authority delegated herein. This Power of Attorney shall not be affected by my disability. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and seal this_day of August, 2001. Joe Hanauer As an Individual and as General Partner of Brush Creek Offices Partnership STATE OF a COUNTY OF % << 4L The foregoing document was acknowledged and sworn to me before me this z day of August, 2001 by Joe Hanauer, as an individual and as General Partner of Brush Creek Offices Partnership. ' WITNESS my hand and officinal seal. ' My commission expires: �( r ' Notary Public 1 1 1 ' Exhibit O of Application to Town of Snowmass Village ' Legal Description of Property ' Lots 1 and 2, Brush Creek Offices, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 23 at Page 44 in the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. 1 1 1 1 J 1 An. I. not 4.U4rM I 1`11KIN LUUNJY T[1LE 1i0. 2963 P. 1 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE I SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: July 2. 2001 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT16217 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a)ALTA Owner's Policy-Fprm 1992 Amount$0.00 Premium$0.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: ' (b)ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1 1992 Amount$0.00 ' Premium$0.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: I ' Tax Certificate. $10.00 i 3. Title to the FEE SIMPL estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment Is at the ' effective date hereof vested in: BRUSH CREEK OFFI6ES PARTNERSHIP I ' 4. The land referred to In tjlis Commitment Is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: ' LOTS 1 AND 2. BRUSH CREEK OFFIOES, according to the Plot thereof recorded September 28, 1989 in Plat Book 23 at Page 44 as Reception No. 315323. 1 � I 1 I PITKIN COUNTY TFTLE,INC. Schedule A-PGA ' 6UI L.HOPKINS This Commitment Is Invalid A,SPL•N,CO. 91611 I unless the Insuring 97(�y25-1766 Provisions and Schedules ' 970.925.6527 FAX A and B are attached. AUTI-10RIZED AGENT I 1 1 1 NUU. 1. JUU1 4:u4rm rl IAIN 6UUflrr ttrLL NU I9-63 Y. 1 1 � SCHEDULE B-SECTION 1 ' REQUIREMENTS The following are the requi�ments to be complied with: ITEM (e)Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or InteresIt to be insured. ' ITEM (b) Proper instru ent(s)creating the estate or interest to be Insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: THIS COMMITMENT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED,INSURED IS NAMED THE COMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ' MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS AS DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THE COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION ' CONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE. 1 I 1 ! 1 1 I i 1 1 I I 1 AUG. 1. 2001 4: U4YM 1`11K1N COUNTY TITTE -- ----------- ' SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be ssued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Com any: ' 1. Rights or claims of part as In possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts)in boundary lines,shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct ' survey and inspection QQf the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4 Any lien, or right to a lieln, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, Imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbi ances, adverse claims or other matters. If any, created, first appearing in the public ' records or attaching su mquent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 5. Taxes due and payable: and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer ' service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or Intersect the premises hereby granted and right of way for ditches or canals constructed by ' the authority of the United States as reserved In United States Patent recorded July 10, 1895 in Book 55 at Page 59. I 8. Undivided interest in all oil, gas adn other mineral rights, as reserved by Snowmass American Corporation in Deed recorded Dec mbar 30, 1970 In Book 252 at Page 795 and any and all assignments thereof or interests therein. 9. Easement and right of y for road easement and right of way as granted to Benedict Land and Cattle Company In instrument)recorded September 20, 1971 in Book 257 at Page 864. ' 10. All of the roadways as Constructed and in place lying within subject property as granted to Town of Snowmass Village by instrument recorded July 9, 1986 in Book 514 at Page 219. 11. Easement and right of way for the following ditches insofar as they may affect subject property. 1. East Snowmass 2. Brush Creek 12. Conditions, covenants nd restrictions as set forth and reserved in Deed recorded December 30, 1970 in Book 252 at Page 795. NOTE: Release of Deed restriction was recorded July 13, 1989 in Book 597 at Page 292 and re-recorded July 20, 1989 in Book 597 at Page 584. i ' 13. Utility easements, rtgh>s of way and all matters as shown on the various Plat maps of the Inns of Court Condominiums. ' 14. Terms, conditions, proLsions and obligations as set forth In Improvements Agreement recorded January 5. 1989 in Book 582 at Page 830. ' 15. Easements. rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Land Use Plat of subject property recorded December 30, 1988 in(Plat Book 22 at Page 8 and Plat of Brush Creek Offices recorded Setpember 28. 1989 in Plat Book 23 at Page 44. ' (Continued) I AUG. 1. 1001 4:04PM i PITK]N COUNTY TITLE N0. 2963 P. 4 1 1 ' SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS-(Continued) 16. Deed of Trust from : BRUSH CREEK OFFICES PARTNERSHIP To the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN ' For the use of : THE BANK OF ASPEN Original Amount : $ 15q,000.00 Dated : November 9, 1990 ' Recorded : November 15, 1990 in Book 634 at Page 207 Reception No. : 328006 The above Deed of Trust wjas amended by instrument recorded March 29, 1996 as Reception No. 391296. 1 i i I I i I I i ,. t f C WoodBridge Condos G Offices At Snowmass own Center O 000 El s � , o � p ❑ q O O 0 c\ o � a Q � � O CD Q � � EXHIBIT "Q"