Loading...
12-10-01 Town Council Packet PYT J/nUA--)d.r SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA December 10, 2001 CALL TO ORDER AT 2:00 P.M. Item No. 1: ROLL CALL DISCUSSION AGENDA Item No. 2: 2:00 — 3:30 JOINT MEETING TOWN COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION - SNOWMASS CENTER SKETCH PLAN PUBLIC HEARING AND DISCUSSION - NEW APPLICATION MATERIAL AND INFORMATION - Jim Wahlstrom .................... Page 1 (Tab A) Item No. 3: 3:30 — 3:45 SNOWMASS VILLAGE SHUTTLE ROUTE 7 DISCUSSION - Hunt Walker........................ Page 21 (Tab B) BREAK 3:45 — 4:00 P.M. REGULAR AGENDA— 4:00 P.M. Item No. 4: PUBLIC NON-AGENDA ITEMS (5-Minute Time Limit) Item No. 5: SECOND READING -ORDINANCE NO. 20 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDEFINE PROJECTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 4 ARTICLE 6 -- Hunt Walker/Steve Connor............................ Page 22 (Tab C) Item No. 6: FIRST READING — ORDINANCE OF 21, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18, SECTION 18-240), BUILDING PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE -- Craig Thompson....................................... Page 26 (Tab D) 12-10-01 tc Page 2 Item No. 7: RESOLUTION NO. 47, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR BUDGETED CONTRACTS TO CULTURAL ARTS AND RECREATION ORGANIZATIONS -- Gary Suiter............................................... Page 31 (Tab E) Item No. 8: RESOLUTION NO. 48, SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR BUDGETED CONTRACTS TO CHARITABLE AND SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS -- Gary Suiter............................................... Page 31 (Tab E) Item No. 9: RESOLUTION NO. 54 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION LEVYING GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2002 TO HELP DEFRAY THE COST OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO; AND TO PAY GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL, INTEREST AND RELATED COSTS AND FOR THE TOWN'S ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FOR THE 2002 BUDGET YEAR. -- Marianne Rakowski .................................. Page 38 (Tab F) Item No. 10: DISCUSSION COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL COMMENTS Item No. 11: CALENDARS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 41 (Tab G) Item No. 12: 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 OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Date: Monday, December 10, 2001 Time: At a meeting which begins at 2:00 p.m. The exact time of the Hearing will be determined by the agenda. Location: Snowmass Village Town Council Chambers 0016 Kearns Road 2nd Floor Snowmass Center Building Subject: To receive public comment on: A public notice that the Planning Commission and Town Council will hold a Joint Hearing to consider the resubmittal of new application material and information concerning the Snowmass Center Redevelopment Proposal Info: Telephone: 923-3777 Internet access to Council e-mail: http://www.tosv.com Citizen feedback hotline: 922-6727 Rhonda Coxon, Deputy Town Clerk Posted and Published in the Snowmass Sun on November 28, 2001 clerk @tosv.com TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 10, 2001 Agenda Item: Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission: To consider the resubmittal of new application material and information concerning the Snowmass Center Redevelopment Sketch Plan PUD proposal. Presented By: Jim Wahistrom, Senior Planner Core Issues: • Usage - Square footage breakout by use - FAR limits • Comprehensive Plan consistency - Buildout allocations (3/4 vote required by Town Council for buildout over 100%) - Unit equivalency - Boundary line change (encroachment farther into draw) - Elements of the CPA needed in plan - Employee housing needs • Architecture and Landscaping - Height variance (3/4 approval by Town Council) Photo simulations/view plane analysis needs - Architectural design - Defining open space percentage on the developable site • Natural Resource and Hazard Areas - 30% slope impact areas (cross-sections, road upgrades, retaining walls, %vote required by Town Council) - Drainage concerns (behind Woodbridge Condominiums, pond improvements, adequate capacity of ponds) - Off-site impacts related to Brush Creek (enhancement of creek, participation by applicant to continue Mayfly trail) • Access and Circulation - Town shuttle route - Pedestrian circulation (parking areas/structures,west access road, adjacent sites, internal connections) - Par course - Off-site impacts (access drives to Brush Creek, proportional share of intersection improvements, regional bus stop shelter) - Vehicular cross-access provision - Aerial connection and proportional cost sharing • Parking - Reduction of required parking amount - Cantilevered parking arrangement(clearance, design, screening) - Parking arrangement/design behind Woodbridge Condominiums • Timetable - Concurrent development of single-family units with Center redevelopment • Community welfare - Improving utility line service - Identifying restroom locations on each level WEA \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass Center=Memo 12-10-01 S'mass Gtr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc ] EGen,erallnfo: Handouts: Updated application booklet dated November 29, 2001 AttachmentLetter from the Fire District 1) Continue the joint meeting discussion to January 7, 2002; or 2) Remand back to Planning Commission for review beginning in January; or 3) Forward the application for review by Town Council following the joint meeting discussions. 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 presentation of the proposal or detailed aspects of the design in response to the core issues; 3) Questions to staff or the applicant by Town Council members with subsequent response by applicant and/or staff; 4) Accept comments or questions from the public; and 5) Provide direction to the applicant and staff considering the options noted above. -3 - \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 12-10-01 s'mass CV Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 2 Snowmass Center Redevelopment Sketch Plan Resubmittal November 30, 2001 Project Summary: Regarding the draw area behind Woodbridge Condominiums the applicant Proposes the following changes since the application proposal in September 2001: The proposal for the draw area behind Woodbridge Condominiums changed from eight single-family houses/lots, accessed from the Center, to four single-family houses accessed from a proposed driveway between Woodbridge Condominiums and Snowmass Mountain Condominiums from Upper Woodbridge Road. The proposed driveway also accesses through 30% slope areas. The size of the single-family units equates to 16 unit equivalents. The Buidout Analysis Chart allocation for this area is 30 units. Also proposed is a detention pond and parking for 48 spaces behind Woodbridge Condominiums. See the table below for a summary of changes from the last Sketch Plan review. o iit . s ►Se y' Draw:A��a��higd . yy. Allocated per Bulldout Number of SF Units Number of SF Units Category Analysis Chart or per Previous Proposal Current Proposal Zonin Code Acrea a N.A. 8.53 acres 8.53 acres SF Lot with 4,500 s.f. house N.A. 6 (18 U.E.) SF Lot with 5,500 S.T.house N.A. 2 tiz U,rq IV U.E. Total Residential units: 30 units 8 30 U.E. 4 22 U.E. Lot Sizes and For Igts 30.000 to 45.000 Lot size range: Lot size range: Floor Area Ratios(FAR) s_f: Maximum of 0.13 FAR 35,800 s.f.to 61,500 s.f. Lot 1: 91,600 s.f. Tr 4,500 s.f.; Lot 2: 37,000 s.f. Lot 3: 83,900 s.f. For lots>45.000 s.f.: Lot 4: 85,250 s.f. Maximum 0.10 FAR or . 5,500 s.f. House size range: House size range: 6 at 4,500 s.f. and 2 @ 4,500 s.f.and 2 @ 5,100 s.f. 2 5,500 s.f. Buildm Hei hl 28 feet 28 feet 28 feel O en Spec No minimum standard N.A. N.A. Parkin for Condominiums None None 48 spaces SF = Single-Family UE= Unit Equivalents Reciardinq the Center site the applicant proposes the following changes since the application proposal in September 2001: Increasing the total unit count from 51 units from the previous proposal in September to 63 units with the current proposal. The total unit count includes an increase of units from 20 to 26 units above the Center and an increase from 31 to 37 units behind the center. The 63 units proposed does not change from the last presentation by the applicant on November 19, 2001, but the square footage increased by roughly 2,000 square feet and the unit equivalency increased from 77.40 to 79.11 unit equivalents. The Buildout Analysis Chart allocates 45 units to this area, including 15 units at the Center and 30 units behind the ^ y - \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Cenler\TC Memo 12-10-01 s'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 3 Center in Parcel B of the Faraway Ranch North Parcel Map. The unit equivalency increases from 45 to 79.11 unit equivalents per the current proposal. • The residential building height behind the Center is increasing from three to six levels of livable space. This equates to a height limit of 75 feet. • Building D, on west end of Center, is proposed to be replaced with a new Building E. This building incorporates five levels of residential units, instead of the previous four levels, above the commercial/office space on the first level. The sixth floor will be level with the proposed pedestrian bridge which accesses the people mover station. • The mid-portion of the Center is proposed to be remodeled without additional levels above the current three levels. However, the existing office space to remain reduces from 9,430 square feet, per the proposal on November 19, 2001, to 9,355 square feet. • A new Building F, located east of the center, proposes two levels of offices space with underground parking and covered service areas, plus one level of residential units (instead previous three levels) above the two levels of office space. Building F also connects to the mid-portion of the Center where amenity areas are proposed. • The application proposes to increase the total amount of office space from 20,970 to 29,280 square feet. • The application proposes to add approximately 12,270 square feet of retail space in front of the existing Center. Total commercial spaces increases from 32,115 to 44,385 square feet. The arrangement includes an internal pedestrian corridor between the proposed grocery store space and the west end of replacement Building E, where the Post Office is proposed to be located. • The total gross floor area, combining the commercial and residential square footage increases from the allocation of 53,997 square feet per the Buildout Analysis Chart and from the previous proposal of 143,044 square feet to a total of 277,015 square feet. • The total number of parking spaces in front of the Center is increasing from 144 to 170 spaces. A cantilevered parking deck in front of the center is proposed. This will increase the amount of parking on the grocery and post office level from 50 to 81 spaces. A total of 48 parking spaces would be positioned below the cantilevered parking structure. Another 41 surface parking spaces are proposed between the Alpine Bank/Conoco sites and the Center. • The application proposes to reduce the parking ratio for commercial and office space areas from one space per 300 square feet to one space per 350 square feet. The demand, assuming all the tenants operate at the same time, would then be 211 parking spaces. • An underground parking structure is proposed behind the center to mainly serve the proposed residential units above and behind the Center. The parking structure will be even with the third level of the Center. The parking count in this area increase from an existing 38 spaces to 59 spaces. • A total of 51 underground parking spaces are proposed in Buildings J, K and L behind the Center for residential units. This parking along with the 59-space underground parking structure behind the Center and three surface parking spaces provides a total of 113 parking spaces for the 63 residential units above and behind the Center. • The application proposes to reduce the parking ratio for residential units from the standard one space per bedroom. The application proposes 1.4 spaces for 2-bedroom units, 1.7 spaces for 3-bedr000m units and 2.0 spaces for 4-bedroom units. • The application proposes the widening of the access road, located on the west side of the Center, to 24 feet. The road serves as the access to the proposed multi-family area. • The application proposes the relocation of the people mover station farther uphill with a pedestrian bridge accessing the sixth level of the Center and then accessing the vertical connection to the retail space on the first level. S \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNMSnowmass Center\TC Memo 12.10-011 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 4 The application proposes the relocation of the shuttle stop about 100 feet to the west of the previous proposed location. See the table below for a comprehensive summary of the updated application proposal: At Center Site(Center and,portlon oar} . pfP P"r °osa flioritn to`l�i Category Existing Conditions or Previous Proposal Current Proposal Standards Acreage 4.269 acres existing 10.0 acres 11.29 acres at the Center +513,000 s.f.+/-in Parcel B Residential Breakdownt Allocated per�µlt #� i+tumb,Qr.�t �Unik>l �ei;9fF ynits, Anal �s[§Che : .,. orevloue ,ro oset; en proposal 8 (4 U.E.) 1-bedroom unit N.A. [0 at the Center and 8 behind the Center 33 (30 U.E.) ) 2-bedroom unit N.A. [14 at the Center and and 19 behind the Center nter 1 0 (11 U.E.) 36 (39.95t1.E.) 3-bedroom unit N.A. 16 at the Center and 116 at the Center and 4 behind the Center 20 behind the Center 21 (35.38 U.E.) 4-bedroom unit N.A. None [4 at the Center and 17 behind the Center 45 units allocated 51 (45 U.E.) 63 (79.11 U.E.) Total Residential units: [15 at the Center and [20 at the Center and [26 at the Center and 30 behind the Center 31 behind the Center 37 behind the Center 79,080 s.f. 125,575 s.f. Total Residential Floor Area: N.A. [30,420 s.f,at the Center& [46,675 s.f.at the Center& 48,660 s.f.behind the Center] 78,900 s.f. behind the Center] Commercial Breakdown: Ex1stl -C nidltlQld� Prevlti4e`Prolio� t .' t S�tanda�i . .: Building overage 33,092 s.f. 43,990 s.f. Floor S uare Foote e: 53,084 s.f. 63,964 s.f. 77,165 s.f. Retail 32,114 s.f. 42,680 s.f. 44,385 s.f. Office 20,970 s.f. 18,119 s.f. 29,280 s.f. People Mover S ace 0 s.f. 3,165 s.f. 3,500 s.f. Total Net Commercial and 53,084 s.f. 143,044 s.f. 202,740 s.f.+/- Residential Floor Area (53,997 s.f.allocated per Usage the Bulldout Analysis Chart Total Gross Floor Area,not 53,084 51 N.A. 277,015 s.f. including decks,balconies and ark in structures. Total Floor Area Ratio(FAR) 0.285 FAR existing; 0.33 FAR 0.56 FAR for entire Center 1:1 FAR allowed Other Parameter8 L o pa: ot�"� rP�r? Building Height 38 feet per proposed PUD Height variance proposed to a Height variance proposed up Mixed-Use 2 Zone maximum of 50 feet for the to 75 feet to permit 6-story Center and 40 feet for the MF buildings units behind the Center Open Space 25%required 39% N.A. r \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Cenler\TC Memo 12-10-01 S'mass CV Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc $ Parking Breakdown fo}n Frxtlstin�; Q diti, , :Pr�y7 u�Propps l CMrrsn�Pf4�o f the Center S,fandari�8� f .' Required: 177 spaces per Required: 306 spaces(202 Required and provided per 1:300 ratio; spaces for the retail center, parking ratio reduction: and 104 spaces for the 323 spaces- Provided: 191 spaces residential units)—does not (210.5 spaces for the include the people mover commercial and office uses at space. 1:350 ratio, including 30 Provided with proposal: 306 underground spaces; spaces, including 87 112.5 spaces for the 63 underground spaces,26 residential units, using parking garage spaces for the ratios of 1.4 spaces/2-bdrm. townhomes, 185 regular Unit, 1.7 spaces per 3-bdrm. spaces south of the center, Unit,and 2.0 spaces per 4- and 8 handicap/short-term bdrm.unit, Including 140 spaces—but doesn't include underground spaces of which the loading spaces. 59 of those spaces are directly behind the Center and 30 are underneath new Building F)— Figures do not include the people mover space or the assumption that loading spaces will be needed. MF= Multi-Family UE= Unit Equivalents Applicant's Request: Approval of the PUD Sketch Plan (applicable Code Sections 16A-5-300(b)(2)(a), 16A-5- 300(c), and 16A-5-310), including a rezoning to Mixed-Use 2 and SF-30, a height variance, and encroachment into 30% slope areas. History and Background (for public record and information purposes only): The applicant previously submitted a Sketch Plan application on May 7, 2000 for expansion of the commercial and office spaces. Subsequent review occurred by a joint Town Council/Planning Commission meeting on July 26, 2000 and by the Planning Commission on August 16, 2000. Discussion items included: • Vitality of the community center • The character of the center compatible with mountain setting • Functionality of interior spaces • Pedestrian circulation improvements • Revisions to the development standards • Defining the development planned in the draw areas • Identifying traffic and transportation impacts overall • Shuttle bus circulation needs • Sufficiency of parking for the existing and proposed center expansion • Connectivity to the Mall and the Base Village area, including a people mover link • Adequacy of service and truck loading capabilities • Clarifying whether or not employee housing mitigation requirements have been met The application was later withdrawn by the applicant. ___7,.. \\NT—SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 12.10-01 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 6 The applicant submitted a revised Sketch Plan application on March 27, 2001 and subsequently revised it on May 21, 2001 addressing comments from Town Departments and outside agencies. A joint meeting between the Town Council and Planning Commission occurred on June 11, 2001. Below is a summary of the discussion points: • Town Hall site -- Questions concerning an appropriate Town Hall site. • Parcel C —whether it was restricted for employee housing. (please reference Town Council Resolution No. 34, Series of 1988, in the application booklet). • Employee housing -- as fulfilling a Community Purpose criterion • Lodging seems appropriate for this site, but it should be provided with no exclusion from the rental of units. • Bedroom mix. Address appropriate relationship of bedroom mix to retail space provided • Office space -- shortage • Appropriate access —access issues to the draw areas behind the Center and Woodbridge Condominiums • Road widths—Address appropriate access road widths and Fire District concerns Development restrictions. Address impacts upon and the development restrictions in the parcels within the draw areas • 30% Slope impacts —Address impacts upon 30% slopes and compliance with review criteria • Transit route. Work on transit route issues • Off-site impacts. Respond to issues outside of property boundaries- - Access to pad sites, - Intersection improvements, - Pedestrian/bridge connection, and Roadway access Landscaping Improvements. Periphery landscape upgrades need to be addressed Gondola/People Mover Issues -- - Financial commitments concerning the installation of the people mover/gondola connection - Determining and clearly defining the correct alignment for the people mover/gondola • Other connections. Provision for other connections to Base Village other than vertical connection • Parking allocation —determine what's really necessary for commercial/office and for residential uses—expansive parking lot surfaces should be avoided. • Height limitation — seems like this site could develop with higher density and height limit, because it would have minimal impact, and the site offers good views of the ski mountain. • Architecture -- looks good, but it should remain that way throughout the review process. • Construction phasing. Eventually address construction parking and staging areas and its impacts on existing tenants Woodbridge Condos concerns/issues/comments at the June 11. 2001 joint meeting: • Grade for road access to single-family area • Height of retaining walls for the access road, construction materials and landscaping • Length of access road • Address flooding problems • Address lighting •-Q • \\NT m SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass CenteATC MeoGV1122-10-01 S'mass CV Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 7 I At the Town Council meeting on September 4, 2001, direction was given to the applicant to redesign the application proposal pursuant to the following comments: • The applicant needs to demonstrate that the development in the draw area behind Woodbridge Condominiums is unable to avoid the steep slopes in the area. • Find another way to get project started and which makes sense economically in order to get the redevelopment of the Center going. Provide information as to how else could a "seed" be germinated to economically get the Center redevelopment started. • Transfer of the development rights in the draw area behind the Woodbridge Condominiums to another area is desirable. In other words, can the single-family area be avoided? • Applicant raised questions as to whether the height of the Center area could be increased and the possibility of renegotiating the parking ratios. • Town Council will consider the unique character of the site and consider possible height increases and reductions in parking ratios at the Center site. Applicant indicated they would study these options. • It was further stated that Town Council would rather deal with height variance and reduction of parking ratios on the Center site versus dealing with the road on 30% slope areas. • A Woodbridge Condominium representative stated preference for no development behind their site in the draw area. If development is proposed, they'd prefer single- family homes over multi-family development. If single-family development is proposed, they'd prefer less single-family homes than the 8 units proposed. Drainage problems also need to be addressed. • A Snowmass Mountain representative stated the acceptability of the single-family development, and preferred single-family versus multi-family development, but with less single-family units. They are concerned about the lighting and traffic impacts associated with multi-family development. • Town Council members expressed the following observations: - The road cut on 30% slopes has too much of a visual impact. - Council is concerned about the extent of the development in the draw area behind Woodbridge Condominiums; - It is far better to create additional density, scale and character on the Center site similar to how Base Village might develop, provided there are good connections between the two sites. This is better than cutting a road across 30% slopes to access the proposed single-family area. - Overall, there is a question as to the appropriateness of single-family housing on the draw site behind Woodbridge Condominiums. • Concerning the Center site: - Parking is a huge waste of money and space. - Connection and mobility to the Base Village site and the Town Core area is important. • The applicant stated that there is a possibility to create a mixed-use project with an economic engine, similar to the single-family homes, and create It at the Center. • The applicant stated that the plan may get consolidated, but that the height restriction, parking ratios are an impediment, including a certain amount of employee housing. The applicant is willing to explore. • There is a need to evaluate mass, scale and architecture with the increase of density at the Center site. 400 ow 4q \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\snowmass Center,TC Memo 12.10-01 S'mass Gtr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 8 • If the proposal is for 100% buildout or beyond, then employee housing may come into play as a Community Purpose benefit. T • he Center has priority with the current Sketch Plan applications in process. Re- notice of public hearing will be eventually required. At the Town Council meeting on November 19, 2001, the following items were discussed: • An amenity package was needed • Units are larger—the 3-4 bedroom units may be troublesome. Size may not be an issue but the management of the units will be an issue. • Architectural design is important • Need other perspectives from Brush Creek Road • Additional height may be okay because the site is in the emerging Town Core area and it has appropriate backdrops • There is a concern about Building F being up to 6-stories tall • Post Office access is important • There were questions as to whether the gondola/people mover connection will work. The cost of this aerial connection needs to be defrayed. • The parking rate reductions are in the right direction • Alternative transit systems need to be thought out versus an excess amount of parking Intersection redesign needs to be worked on At least two joint meetings with Planning Commission seem to be needed, beginning on December 10, 2001 Core Issues following Staff Review of the Submittal of new application material and information submitted November 30, 2001: Usage. The proposed mixed-use redevelopment project appears to be somewhat consistent with the preferred plan elements of the Town Core and the CPA for the area. However, the density and the building heights proposed exceed the current standards as explained below. The "Mixed-Use 2" zone district proposes a FAR of 1:1. The proposal, following the gross floor area figures, equates to a FAR of 0.56. Staff's view is that the current height standard of 38 feet and the FAR of 1:1 per the existing "Mixed-Use 2" zone district are in conflict. The 38 foot height limit could never be met unless a majority of the floor area were constructed several stories below grade in order to accommodate required open space and parking requirements. The breakdown of floor area square footages within the project is as follows: Total commercial/office: 73,665 square feet (not including people mover space) Total residential uses: 125,575 square feet (not including about 77,000 square feet for common hallways, elevators, mechanical rooms and amenity areas) Total gross floor area of project: 277,015 square feet (including the people mover space) r 10 000 \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass center\TC Memo 12-10-01 S'mass ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 9 • Comprehensive Plan consistency. Per the Comprehensive Plan's Buildout Analysis Chart, a maximum allocation of 15 residential units are noted for Parcel A (part of the center site), 30 for Parcel B (located behind the center), and a total of 30 for Parcels H and H-1 combined (located northeast of the center behind Woodbridge Condominiums). The list below identifies the titles of the affected areas on the Buildout Analysis Chart: • B21 "Faraway North (Center)"for 30 DU -thought to be applied to the draw area north of the center or Parcels B & F; • B34 "Snowmass Center"for 15 DU and a limit of 53,997 square feet of commercial space - thought to be applied to the actual center site, also known as the amended Parcel A replat area; and • B56 "Faraway North (Woodbridge)" for 30 DU -thought to be the area proposed for four single-family units or Parcels H & H-1. The updated application also proposes further expansion of Parcel B into Parcel F, because the multi-family development seems to be encroaching about 50 feet farther up into the draw area. Parcel B allows parking and multi-family dwellings per the SPA-1 zone and an allocation of 30 units per the Buildout Analysis Chart. Parcel F doesn't outline a list of permitted uses per the SPA-1 zone, but the SPA land use plan permits rezoning of the parcel. The Comprehensive Plan designates multiple-family uses for Parcel F on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use map. The applicant is proposing a boundary line change and rezoning to"Mixed-Use 2" to accommodate the proposed multi-story, multi- family development with amenities and underground parking facilities. After applying the unit equivalency ratios against the unit sizes proposed in the development, the application requests beyond 100% buildout of the future maximum allocation, being 45 units, by 18 units (a 140% increase). The unit equivalency amount of 79.11 units exceeds the 100% buildout by 34.11 units (a 176% increase). Please see the previous table for information concerning the unit equivalency conversion information broken out for each unit type. Per Code Section 16A-5-300(c)(4), "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 3/a of the Town Council members present and voting, amending the future buildout analysis chart and identifying the reasons why the amendment is warranted." Staff recommends that the applicant commit to the following in an effort to comply with Community Purpose criteria stated above: • Cost sharing of the Brush Creek Road and Wood Road intersection improvements that will likely be needed. A Transportation Impact Analysis would be required with the Preliminary Plan application to verify the impacts and to assess the appropriate cost share percentage. • Cost sharing of the people mover connection to Base Village • Improvements to the off-site drainage pond located near the southeast corner of the property �' I .. \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useN,AASnowmass center=Memo 12-10-01 s'mass ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 10 ■ Participation by the applicant to extend the Mayfly trail up Brush Creek in Parcel I, including creek enhancements • Construct a regional bus stop shelter along Brush Creek Road • Provide cross access to the Conoco site from the Center for the purpose of eliminating access to the pad site from Brush Creek Road • Provide or document cross access to the adjacent property to the west (Parcel C) The Snowmass Center redevelopment and expansion proposal are also part of the Faraway Ranch North Comprehensively Planned Area (CPA). The CPA identifies elements which shall be provided and elements that could be considered. These elements are listed below. In addition, there is a vision statement from the BTA plan concerning the center. Reference the affected sections below for a list of the desired elements in the plan. Elements that shall be provided per the CPA: • Improved vehicular/pedestrian connectivity and mobility to Base Village and the Mall as well as surrounding properties Employee housing Preservation of open space in the upper and middle part of the draws behind the Snowmass Center • Preservation of trails and other recreation areas Elements that could be considered per the CPA: Enhanced access to surrounding properties • Continued mixed use — including community commercial, office, public uses (post office, grocery, Town Hall) and residential Redevelopment of the Snowmass Center • Creation of an informal meeting place for the community Clustered residential dwellings at the base of the draw Following the BTA Plan of September 1992's Dream Vision Statement for the Future: "The shopping center has been remodeled, some of it replaced by smaller buildings with apartments on the upper floors. A stone bridge with a covered pedestrian walkway has replaced the culverted earthen causeway." The preferred plan for the Town Core per the Comprehensive Plan: • Creation of a Town Core which effectively Integrates a new Base Village with Snowmass Center and the Mall; • Improved pedestrian vehicular/pedestrian connectivity and mobility to Base Village and the Mall as well as surrounding properties Public spaces and amenities • Year-round activity Increased conference space; • Mixed use: commercial, office, restaurant, lodging, residential and public uses, including Town offices; • High occupancy residential units; Opportunities for individual business ownership of commercial space; Redevelopment of the Snowmass Center; Informal and formal community meeting place; • Preservation and enhancement of trails and other recreation areas; • Preservation of the ski area view from Brush Creek Road; • Access to the Brush Creek riparian corridor; is r \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 12-10-01 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 11 • Enhanced transit facilities; • Redesigned parking to better access commercial shops, lodging, skier and other services Staff finds that many, but not all, of the above preferred plan elements for the Town Core are being incorporated into the redevelopment plans for the Snowmass Center. The elements that seem to be applied include, redevelopment of the Center, provision of mixed- uses, planned aerial connection to Base Village, plaza spaces, pull-off areas for shuttles, more convenient parking on the grocery store/post office level, amenities for the residential units, and residential units at the base of the draw (whether or not they're considered clustered residential units). Employee Housing. Even with the increase of floor area and residential units for the project, employee housing is not required, due to the 115% redevelopment credit calculation allowed by the Code. The employee housing generation was calculated using the gross calculable floor area of commercial/office space, per the Code definition, of 73,665 square feet, including 41,544 square feet of existing space to be redeveloped. However, employee housing could still be an issue since the plan proposes 100% buildout and a height variance. Employee housing is also a required element per the CPA as noted above. With the suggestion for more density, Planning Commission previously felt that some of the recommended additional floor area could be utilized for employee housing despite the redevelopment credit for this project and the previous credit (Parcel C)that was given to the Town to construct 51 employee housing units versus the developer in 1988. Parcel C, containing 4.8 acres, was previously given to the Town as past credit for employee housing in Faraway Ranch North including employee housing requirements for Ridge Condominiums Project, Phases I and Il. However, Planning Commission previously recommended that the use restrictions regarding community facilities be removed on the affected Parcel(s) comprising the "Draw" area and that access provisions to the site, via a cross-access agreement or by easement, be provided or documented. Below is a summary of the restrictions associated with Parcels C, D and E: Parcel C. Town Council Resolution No. 34, Series of 1988, states in Section One that, "The Town shall accept from Mount Baldly Investors, a Colorado joint venture, a conveyance of the fee title to Parcel C, Faraway Ranch SPA, according to the Gross Parcel Plat thereof recorded of Pitkin County, Colorado, together with perpetual, non-exclusive easements and right-of-way for access and underground utility purposes over and across (1) that certain "Easement 1" as granted and described in the Deed of Easement recorded in Book 254 at page 545, and (2) that portion of the 60-foot wide "reserved easement" in Existing Snowmass Center Parcel, Faraway Ranch SPA, which continues in a northwesterly direction to a point of intersection with the common boundary between Parcel C and the Existing Snowmass Center Parcel, Faraway Ranch Subdivision." Further, in Section Two it states, "That upon the delivery of such conveyance to the Town and the recording thereof in the Pitkin County, Colorado real property records, Mount Baldy Investors and its successors or assigns in the ownership of all of any potion of Faraway Ranch North SPA shall be deemed automatically, fully and forever relieved of any obligation to build 51 mixed employee units as approved on said Parcel C, Faraway Ranch SPA Final Land Use Plan recorded in Plat Book 17 at Page 4), which 51 units are hereby acknowledged to include i i \\NT_SERVER\BLD_PLN\usegw\snowmass Center\TC Mem 1 -10-01 S'mass Clr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 12 any remaining employee housing commitment or responsibility arising our of the Ridge Condominiums project (Phases I and II)." Section Three states, "That upon the recording of such conveyance to the Town, the Town itself shall thereafter be responsible for the construction of the subject 51 units or such other employee housing units as the Town may determine to be appropriate on Parcel C." Lastly, Section Four states, "The Town hereby expressly recites and acknowledges that following the recording of such conveyance to the Town, the only remaining employee housing obligations associated with Faraway Ranch SPA are the 50 seasonal rooms and the 8 mixed employee units on Parcel N, Faraway Ranch Subdivision. It is hereby acknowledged that these units shall be provided upon commencement of any construction on Parcel K of the Faraway Ranch SPA." Parcel D. Parcel D contains 3.4 acres and was deeded to the Town in 1985. The deed indicates that the Town shall not have the right to use the subject property for any purpose other than employee housing or open space and that the rights, title and interest would revert back to Snowmass Center Limited Partnership, successors, or assigns should a violation of this restriction occur. Parcel E. Parcel E contains 8.6 acres and according to the Faraway Ranch Gross Parcel Plat, general note no. 4 states, "Do hereby dedicate Parcel E, Faraway Ranch Subdivision, tot he public use for purposes of open space and community facilities. In consideration thereof, the Town of Snowmass Village hereby acknowledges that such dedication satisfies all public open space and community facilities dedication requirements for all of Faraway Ranch Subdivision, expressly including Parcels A, F and H thereof for which specific uses have not yet been identified or approved." Overall, Staff recommends that some of the units above the center be deed restricted for employee housing for the benefit of the Town, especially with the proposed increase in density beyond 100% buildout. As a matter of information, Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1984, for the Stage Two SPA Plan for Faraway Ranch Project also conditioned that the applicant provide plans for"comfortable and affordable employee housing." Architecture and Landscaping. The height variance from 38 feet, per the proposed "Mixed-Use 2" zone, to 75 feet triggers the Community Purpose criteria. The height variance requires % approval by the Town Council. Per the General Restrictions Section in the Code, "In exceptional and unique circumstances, a building structure or group of structures may, however, be permitted to exceed the fifty percent limitation if the applicant is able to sufficiently demonstrate that the views from surrounding properties will not be adversely affected and that the proposed structures will be compatible, in terms of height, mass, scale, orientation and configuration, with other buildings in the PUD and with surrounding uses." The applicant should demonstrate during the Preliminary Plan application whether or not fifty percent of the structure or group of structure's footprint above existing grade will meet the 38-foot height restriction. Although, previous discussions by Planning Commission and Town Council seemed to indicate that this was a non-issue due to the desire to create additional mixed-use density within the Town Core area. The application indicates, via the building elevations and cross-section, that units would be placed within the roof structure portion of the building in order to maintain the maximum 75 foot height limit proposed. In addition, h: application was amended, since the presentation 1 60 \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 12.10-01 S'mass ctr Sketch Plan•Joint Mtg..doc 13 on November 19, 2001, to reduce the number of stories in Building F (east side of Center) from three to one level. This reduces the height of the building from six to four levels along the west end of Woodbridge Condominiums. Staff recommends that the applicant prepare photo simulations and view plane analysis with the Preliminary Plan application to demonstrate the visual impacts from the following locations: 1) Fanny Hill near the Village Mall 2) Wood Road area general between the Enclave, Crestwood and Chamonix 3) Deer Brook along Assay Hill 4) Faraway Road above the Ridge Run condominiums 5) West side of Woodbridge Condominiums 6) Vantage points along Brush Creek Road Staff also recommends that the open space area be defined within the developable area planned for the Center, Parcel A and expanded Parcel B, which now totals 11.29 acres. Natural Resource and Hazard Areas. There are three general areas that need to be evaluated when addressing this criterion. These areas include, 1) Thirty-percent slope impacts, 2) Drainage impacts, and 3) off-site impacts related to Brush Creek. 30% Slope Impacts and Access Issues. The proposal impacts 30% slopes in three areas: 1) The widened road, located on the west side of the Center, accessing the multi-family and underground parking areas behind the Center, 2) the building additions toward the east, which are mostly manmade, and 3)the driveway between Woodbridge Condominiums and Snowmass Mountain Condominiums which accesses the proposed single-family area from Upper Woodbridge Road. A previous report from a professional geotechnical engineer previously indicated that the bedrock formation in this area is favorable to construction within the 30% slope areas. It is anticipated that retaining walls for the affected roadways would be needed. Development within 30% slope areas requires 4 out of 5 approval votes by the Town Council documented by an ordinance. In addition, the Fire District previously requested that the roadways be widened to 24 feet for adequate emergency access to the residential units. The applicant indicated that the roadways would be improved to 24 feet in width. Staff recommends that the plans dimension the widths of the roads and show cross- sections of the roads in the affected areas. Sidewalks and street trees should be provided along the roadway west of the Center in the event residents and visitors wish to use that connection versus accessing through the Center. These improvements would also improve the visual appearance of the roadway. Drainage Concerns. The applicant is proposing a detention pond located in the lower portion of the draw area behind Woodbridge Condominiums. Staff believes this is appropriate, and the applicant should construct and landscape said detention pond area. The detention ponding should be located in a common tract area, owned and maintained by a separate entity such as a homeowners association. Concerning the drainage at the Center site, the existing off-site drainage/detention pond located near the southeast corner of th iteennext to Brush Creek Road should be improved. .7 4=0 \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass center\TC Memo 12-10-01 s,mass ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 14 In addition, due to the increase in impervious surface areas, detention pond capacity at the Center needs to be expanded. However, there is limited space for additional detention ponds, unless the applicant proposes underground drainage vaults in the lower parking level areas. Detention ponds are not shown on the Sketch Plan drawings, and staff believes sites for detention ponds should be shown on the plans or at least with the Preliminary Plan application when the drainage and grading report is required. Off-Site Impacts related to Brush Creek. Planning Commission previously recommended that the applicant participate with the Town to extend the Mayfly trail through Parcel I, including creek enhancements. Such improvements could be considered fulfilling part of the Community Purpose criteria for encouraging better design. Such improvements could also be coordinated with the required drainage improvements for the site. Access and Circulation. Access and circulation for the site relate to four main components: 1) The Town Shuttle route, 2) Pedestrian circulation, 3) Off-site improvements, and 4) Cross-access arrangements. Town Shuttle Route. Previous staff concerns indicated that with the lack of convenient parking on the upper level for the retail space, a Town shuttle route on the upper drive would cause potential delays for the transit routes. The current proposal shows that the upper drive directly accesses high-demand parking spaces on both sides of the driveway. This could still create potential delays for the transit routes. By creating an upper driveway without perpendicular parking on both sides, this would result in a reduction of the amount of parking provided for the site considering the current building coverage proposal. Therefore, staff recommends that the shuttle route be located on the Kearns Road loop only where the demand for parking would be less. There should also be adequate clearance underneath cantilevered parking structure for Town shuttles and emergency vehicles. The Town's Transportation Division, previously requested that a combined uphill and downhill transit stop be provided centrally on the site (e.g., between Alpine Bank and the west entry into the Center) to better serve existing and future uses on adjacent properties. The current plans still show the combined uphill/downhill stop, but it has been relocated about 100 feet to the west of the previous location. The new location is directly south of the new Building E on the west side of the site. Pedestrian Circulation. The pedestrian plaza environment with street trees in front of the Center will be a substantial improvement. Staff recommends, 1) that improved pedestrian walkway connections be provided from the parking areas to the Center, especially from the parking area underneath the cantilevered parking structure, 2) that a pedestrian sidewalk along with street trees be provided along the widened driveway leading to the multi-family area behind the Center, 3) that pedestrian connections be created to adjacent pad sites (Conoco, BJ Adams and Alpine Bank), and 4)that an internal pedestrian hallway connection be provided on the second level between the Center and the amenity area next to Building F. Concerning the recreational par course trail in the draw areas, where the residential uses are proposed, it should be noted that Planning Commission Resolution No. 2, Series of 1979, addressed trails related to the development of the Benedict Land and Cattle Company property. It states under Section 9, Trails, "That adequate easements be granted to accommodate the trails network to be development in the forthcoming trails plan, and that W4 to v \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\user\w\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 12-10.01 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 15 easement accommodate a variety of trails to include use by pedestrian, par course users and bicyclists. It is understood that easements shall not be selected in locations that would obviously pre-empt use of lands necessary to achieve the building program identified in (1) above (i.e., the proposal at that time). The existing par cours course will be restored and any future relocation of the course to accommodate development will be at the expense of the developer." Staff and the Trails Committee recommend that the applicant find a way to maintain and/or relocate the par course behind or through the development. The course is identified on the Town's trails map and on the Comprehensive Plan's Trails and Open Space map. In addition, trail connections from the development to the par course should be provided. Off-Site Impacts. Staff recommends the following to address off-site impacts: 1) Both off- site driveways leading to Brush Creek Road should be improved with new paving and street trees along its edges in coordination with adjacent property owners; 2) The applicant should contribute a proportionate share of the costs associated with potential Brush Creek RoadlWood Road intersection improvements that might be needed pursuant to the results of the Transportation Impact Analysis with the Preliminary Plan application. The analysis will like reveal that the expanded retail and office space, along with the increase in residential density, will impact the intersection; and 3) The increase in retail, office and residential units will also increase the ridership for regional buses, and therefore, the applicant should construct a new regional bus shelter for this intersection, at least on the north side of Brush Creek Road. Cross-access provisions. Staff recommends that the applicant dedicate or document the provision of vehicular cross-access easements for the purpose of accessing Parcel C to the west and the pad sites in front of the Center. This is a public safety and convenience matter in that it will improve traffic safety and circulation for the general public by accessing these areas from Kearns Road versus from Brush Creek Road. In addition, a public access easement should be defined for the entirety of the Kearns Road loop on the plans, including book and page reference of the recording information which documents the access easement location. Parking. The application proposes reduction in the parking ratios for the site. Commercial/Office parking. The application proposes a parking ratio reduction for commercial/office areas from one space per 300 square feet to one space per 350 square feet. The 1/300 rate requires 245 spaces. The 1/350 rate requires 211 spaces. This results in a 14% reduction. However, the parking calculations are using gross calculable floor area measurements of retail/office uses, following the Code standards, versus a true net floor area figure. Therefore, staff does not have a significant concern about the commercial parking rate reduction. A total of 211 parking spaces are proposed south and southeast of the center, including 48 covered spaces within structured parking areas. Staff previously recommended that since an underground parking facility was proposed behind the center, that a cantilevered parking structure be constructed in front of and level with the center, and over the existing lower level parking areas. This would improve the equitable distribution and convenience of parking next to the center, especially considering the proposed expansion of the post office .. v \\NT SERVER\BLO_PLN\useNw\Snowmass Center\TC Mem 12- 0-ot S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 16 and grocery store. The updated application includes the cantilevered parking area as recommended. Staff is in favor of the cantilevered parking improvement, but recommends the following: 1) That there be adequate clearance below the structure for emergency vehicles and shuttles; 2) That the parking structures be designed with exterior finishes and colors to complement the Center redevelopment; and 3) That year round plant material screening be provided on the south side of the structure next to the trail to help conceal the structure and vehicles from Brush Creek Road and cross-valley views. The application also requests reduction in the parking ratios for the residential units. Instead of applying the standard one space per bedroom per the Code, the applicant proposes 1.4 spaces for two-bedroom units, 1.7 spaces for three-bedroom units, and 2.0 spaces for four-bedroom units. A 59-space underground parking area is proposed behind the center to serve the multi- family units. An additional 51 underground parking spaces are shown below proposed Buildings J, K and L along with three surface parking spaces. Therefore, a total of 113 parking spaces are provided for the 63 multi-family units. Assuming two spaces per unit might be needed, the parking provided anticipates an 88% occupancy rate. This assumption seems reasonable. In addition, staff believes the parking provided for the residential portion of the project is adequate considering that some of the units, no matter the size and number of bedrooms in the unit, may not need two parking spaces. The proposed 48-space parking area behind Woodbridge Condominiums is intended for construction and usage by the adjacent property owner. However, the application isn't clear as to which condominium association or both would benefit from the extra parking. Staff believes the applicant should construct the detention pond, parking and landscaping in the area, perhaps as part of a separate agreement with the adjacent owner. The adjacent owner(s) or homeowner's association(s) could maintain the parking lot per an agreement.. However, staff has not received confirmation or consent from affected homeowner's association(s) and adjacent owner(s) concerning these proposed improvements. Staff believes the visual impact from such an expansive parking lot area next to condominium buildings may be too stark. Staff recommends that the parking area be split into two separately configured and arranged parking areas connected by a driveway, or that 10 foot by 20 foot landscaped parking islands be added. Heavy landscaping around the parking areas and berming on the south end, next to the trail, would also be appropriate. • Timetable. The construction of the single-family area and the redevelopment of the Center should be done concurrently with a series of triggers. This would enforce completion of center's construction phases in lieu of having the single-family area constructed first. • Community Welfare. There are utility line connections and existing sewer problems within the building that should be addressed. The applicant plans to address these issues and the recommendations of the Water and Sanitation District, including how the sewage r 1 - \\N7 SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass Center`TC Mem 10-01 S'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 17 lines within the building may be improved with the redevelopment of the center at the time of the Preliminary Plan review. Planning Commission previously acknowledged that the existing sewer line problems within the Center should be remedied concurrent with the infrastructure upgrades with the Center expansion. Planning Commission also noted that additional public restrooms would also provide a community benefit. Staff recommends that the plans identify the restroom locations on each floor similar to the previous plan submittals. �1 • r \\NT SERVER\BLD_PLN\useryw\Snowmass Center\TC Memo 12-10-01 s'mass Ctr Sketch Plan-Joint Mtg..doc 18 Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District P.O. Box 6436 Snowrrioss ViIloge, Colorodo 81615 970-923-2212 Date: 11-29-01 To: Chris Conrad and James Wahlstrom Town of Snowmass Village Community Development Department From: John T. Mele, Fire Marshal Subject: Proposed Center Redevelopment Sketch Plan Please accept the following concerns that will need to be addressed for the newly Proposed Center Redevelopment Sketch Plan: 1. All subgrade or underground parking areas will require fire sprinkler protection and Class I fire standpipe provisions for fire protection. 2. The applicant may wish to refer to N.F.P.A. 88 (Underground Parking Structures) for additional requirements concerning emergency lighting and ventilation. 3. Clarification of road width and end of road turning circle radius for parcels 11 and H1 will need to be verified. 4. The fire department connections for the Center building's fire sprinkler system are currently located at the truck loading docks. Most likely, any redevelopment will require these connections to be relocated. 5. Fire sprinkler system upgrades may be required to existing sections of the Center Building due to the extensive redevelopment and connected exposures. 6. A final and complete emergency access review by the Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection District will be performed after we receive a complete and detailed set of plans with scaled dimensions. RECEIVED DEC - 4 2001 Snowmoss village Community Development 00 4�0 I i TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: 12/10/01 Agenda Item: Snowmass Village Shuttle Route 7 Discussion Presented By: Hunt Walker David Peckler Core Issues: • Village Shuttle "On Time"performance • Mountain View Ridership patterns • Budget impacts General Info: At the 12/3/01 Council Meeting, Council asked staff to develop a $35,000 Route 7 Option and an $18,000 Route 7 Option. Essentially, $35,000 funds eight hours a day of service for the ski season while $18,000 only covers four hours a day of winter service. The recently approved 2001 Revised and 2002 Transportation Budgets include the elimination of backup shifts on Route 1 (Snowmass Mtn, Seasons 4, Woodbridge), Route 3 (Snowmass Club and Two Creeks), and Route 4 (Rodeo Lot). Staff assumed that the primary shifts on these routes could accommodate the anticipated reduced passenger loads. Staff is currently monitoring ridership and "on time"performance on all the Village Shuttle routes. In addition, we are tracking Mountain View ridership on Routes 1 and 2 that was previously served by Route 7. Council Options: 1) Route 7 $35.000 Solution - Implement it as soon as possible on a split shift basis: 7:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. 2) Route 7 $18.000 Solution - Implement it as soon as possible on a split shift basis: 7:30 a.m. - 9:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. 3) "Wait and See" Approach - Monitor the performance of all routes through Christmas. After Christmas, assuming the budget can fund additional bus service, implement the $35,000 Route 7 Solution or add back up shifts to Routes 1, 3, or 4 based on the performance analysis. Staff Option 3. Staff feels after Christmas, when the performance Recommendation: analysis is completed, we can determine the most beneficial bus service to implement. ago TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 10, 2001 Presented By: Stephen R. Connor, Town Attorney Hunt Walker, Public Works Director Subject: ORDINANCE No. 20, SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDEFINE PROJECTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 4 ARTICLE 6 Overview: The modifications to the exemption of a Project discussed at the December 3, 2001 meeting by Bob Purvis have been added to the Ordinance. The Ordinance now expands the definition fo an exempt road project to the "maintenance, repair, replacement or upgrade of an existing Town road and appurtenances." Otherwise, the Ordinance is unchanged from first reading. Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance on second reading. I TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 2 TOWN COUNCIL 3 4 ORDINANCE No. 20 5 SERIES OF 2001 6 7 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE 8 REDEFINE PROJECTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPPTT ER 9 4 ARTICLE 6. 10 I1 WHEREAS, Initiative Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2000 was approved by the 12 electors of the Town on November 7, 2000; and 13 14 WHEREAS, the Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2001 to 15 specify the manner in which the Initiative Ordinance was codified in the Municipal Code; 16 and 17 18 WHEREAS, Section 5.6(c) of the Home Rule Charter states as follows: 19 20 Repeal or Amendment. An ordinance adopted by the registered electors 21 may not be amended or repealed for a period of one year after the date of 22 the election at which it was adopted, and an ordinance repealed by the 23 registered electors may not be reenacted for a period of one year after the 24 date of the election at which it was repealed; and 25 26 WHEREAS, greater than one year has passed since the approval of the Initiative 27 Ordinance by the electors; and 28 29 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that Snowmelt Road is an important 30 component of the Town road system and is in need of immediate repair to maintain it as 31 a safe roadway; and 32 33 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the definition of Project in Section 4- 34 152(4) of the Municipal Code should exempt Snowmelt Road as being a Project; and 35 36 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that this Ordinance must be adopted to 37 facilitate efficient operation of the Town government and to insure the proper and 38 prudent expenditure of public funds; and 39 40 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinance is 41 necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. 42 43 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of 44 Snowmass Village, as follows: 45 46 1. Amendment to Definition. Section 6-2(d) of the Municipal Code is amended 47 and restated as follows: 48 49 Sec. 6-2 Definitions. The following definitions are established for application in 50 this Article: 51 52 (4) Project means the total of any activity or group of activities, which are 53 properly, usually, or best planned or executed together to achieve an 54 objective or related objectives A Project does not mean the maintenance, 55 repair, replacement or upgrade of an existing Town road and 56 appurtenances that is funded by the expenditure of money, the source of 57 which was previously approved by the electors. 58 59 2.3. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or application hereof to any 60 person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect any other provision 61 or application of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or 62 application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. 63 64 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 65 Snowmass Village on First Reading on December 3, 2001 upon a motion by Council 66 Member Mordkin, the second of Council Member Virtue, and upon a vote of 4 in favor 67 and 0 against. 68 69 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 70 Snowmass Village on Second Reading on December 10, 2001 upon a motion by 71 Council Member , the second of Council Member , and upon a 72 vote of_ in favor and _ against. 73 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 74 75 76 -;au r 77 78 79 T. Michael Manchester, Mayor 80 81 ATTEST: 82 83 84 85 86 Trudi Worline, Town Clerk TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: DECEMBER 10, 2001 Agenda Item: ORDINANCE NO. 21, SERIES OF 2001 —AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18, SECTION 18-420), BUILDING PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE. Presented By: Craig Thompson, Community Development Director Core Issues: At the October 30, 2001 Council budget meeting, the Community Development Director presented a Department cost recovery analysis. As part of the presentation, projected building revenue for 2002 was anticipated to be $44,830.50 short of 2002 building program expenses. Council subsequently directed the Community Development Director to increase building permit fees. General Info: 1. In a comparison of Pitkin County and TOSV building permit fees, staff has determined that Pitkin county building permit fees are higher than the Towns' from $0.00 to $1,000,000 in building valuation. Based on an analysis of the actual TOSV building permit revenue in year 2000, approximately $80,303.38 in additional building permit revenue would have been realized in year 2000 under the Pitkin County building permit fee schedule. However, the $80,303.38 is based on year 2000 revenues. Projected building permit revenue for 2002 is approximately 56% of year 2000. Therefore, the additional building permit revenue for 2002 would be $44,973 ($80,303.38 x .56). 2. Based on the analysis above, the revised building permit fee schedule as provided in Ordinance 21, Series of 2001 is the same as Aspen/Pitkin County's building permit fee schedule ($0 to $1,000,000 in valuation). 00 3. At a regular meeting held on Thursday, November 29, 2001, the Board of Appeals and Examiners discussed the proposed building permit fee increase. The Board recommendation to Town Council, by unanimous vote, is to approve the revised building permit fee schedule as provided in Ordinance 21, Series of 2001. Council Options: 1. Approve first reading of Ordinance 21, Series of 2001 with any amendments. Second reading scheduled for December 17, 2001. 2. Not approve first reading of Ordinance 21, Series of 2001. Staff Staff Recommends Option 1. Recommendation: TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 21 SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SNOWMASS VILLAGE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18, SECTION 18-420), BUILDING PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has reviewed the building permit fee schedule and has determined that projected building revenues do meet anticipated building program operational costs; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommends that building permit fees be increased to offset building program operational costs; and WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals and Examiners reviewed the proposed building permit fee increase and recommends approval to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, the TOWN COUNCIL finds that building permit fees should offset building program operational costs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado, as follows: 1. Municipal Code Amendment. Section 18-420) Fee schedule of the Municipal Code is hereby amended and restated, as follows: a. The building permit fees shall be as follows: BUILDING VALUATION FEE $500.00 or Less $23.50 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $23.50 for the first $500.00 plus $3.05 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 BUILDING VALUATION FEE $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $69.25 for the first $2000.00 plus $14.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $391.25 for the first $25,000.00 plus $10.10 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $643.75 for the first $50,000.00 plus $7.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $993.75 for the first $100,000.00 plus $5.60 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $3,233.75 for the first $500,000.00 plus $4.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on First Reading on December 10, 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 by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village on Second Reading on December 17. 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 T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk ..30 . TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: DECEMBER 10, 2001 Agenda Item: RESOLUTION NO. 47, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR BUDGETED CONTRACTS TO CULTURAL ARTS AND RECREATION ORGANIZATIONS RESOLUTION NO. 48, SERIES OF 2001 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR BUDGETED CONTRACTS TO CHARITABLE AND SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS. Presented By: Gary Suiter, Town Manager Core Issues: The CGRB originally recommended a $10,000 grant to Anderson Ranch. Council is awarding $2,500 to Anderson Ranch. Council also requested that $1,500 from the Grant Funds be reallocated in the General Fund. The remaining $6,000 in savings has been awarded to all the other agencies on a pro-rata basis. General Info: • The budgeted totals have been changed to reflect the deduction of$1,500, which will be reallocated in the General Fund. The total grant allocations for both resolutions is now $89,500 Council Options: 1. Approve the Resolutions 2. Deny the Resolutions 3. Amend the Resolutions 4. Table the Resolutions Staff Approval of the Resolutions. Recommendation: TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 47 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR BUDGETED CONTRACTS TO CULTURAL ARTS AND RECREATION ORGANIZATIONS WHEREAS, the Town Council has allocated $21,299 to be distributed to cultural arts and recreation organizations in 2002; and WHEREAS, the Town Council is committed to supporting and promoting cultural arts and recreation programs; and WHEREAS, the Citizens Grant Review Board has carefully reviewed the grant request submitted by arts and recreation organizations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado that the following donations be made: Section One: Grant Awards Anderson Ranch Arts Center .......................................................$ 2,500 Aspen Ballet Company & School ................................................. 1,075 Aspen Choral Society................................................................... 2,148 Aspen Community Theater........................................................... 1,075 Aspen Dance Connection............................................................. 537 Aspen Film Festival...................................................................... 537 Aspen Historical Society............................................................... 1,611 AspenJunior Hockey ................................................................... 2,148 Aspen Music Festival & School .................................................... 2,148 Aspen Skating Club...................................................................... 537 Aspen Theater in the Park............................................................ 806 Aspen Valley Ski & Snowboard Club............................................ 4,296 Project Graduation ....................................................................... 1,075 Roaring Fork Baseball.................................................................. 269 Spellbinders .. ... ................. .. ................................................ 537 Total $21,299 0003�~ TC Reso 01-47 Page 2 Section Two: Disbursement The expenditure of funds will be made in full on or before March 31, 2002. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED as amended, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 10th day of December, 2001 with a motion made by Council member and seconded by Council member . The motion was approved by a vote of in favor to opposed. Council Member abstained. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 48 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR BUDGETED CONTRACTS TO CHARITABLE AND SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS WHEREAS, the Town Council has allocated $68,201 to be distributed to charitable and service organizations in 2002; and WHEREAS, the Town Council is committed to supporting community services that the Town is not staffed to proved; and WHEREAS, the Citizens Grant Review Board has carefully reviewed the grant request submitted by charitable and service organizations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado that the following donations be made: Section One: Grant Awards Asistencia Para Latinos (APL)......................................................$1,611 AspenBuddy Program ................................................................. 1,611 Aspen Camp School for the Deaf................................................. 2,685 Aspen Counseling Center ............................................................ 3,222 Aspen Valley Community Foundation .......................................... 1,075 AspenYouth Center..................................................................... 2,148 ChallengeAspen.......................................................................... 4,833 Columbine Homemakers For Independent Livings ...................... 2,148 Community Health Services.........................................................10,740 Independence Pass Foundation................................................... 1,075 LeadershipAspen ........................................................................ 537 LittleFeet Day Care ..................................................................... 3,222 Little Red Schoolhouse**..............................................................10,740 Pitkin County Senior Services ...................................................... 3,222 Response ..................................................................................... 3,759 Roaring Fork Hospice................................................................... 5,370 Sopris Therapy Services .....................:........................................ 2,685 Valley Partnership for Drug Prevention ........................................ 4,296 Women's Foundation of Colorado................................................ 537 Youth Zone (Garfield Youth Services).......................................... 2.685 Total **Plus in-kind bus service 68,201 owl 00 TC Reso 01-48 Page 2 Section Two: Disbursement The expenditure of funds will be made in full on or before March 31, 2002. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED as amended, by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 10th day of December, 2001 with a motion made by Council member and seconded by Council member The motion was approved by a vote of in favor to opposed. Council Member TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE T. Michael Manchester, Mayor ATTEST: Trudi Worline, Town Clerk GRANTS AT A GLANCE For 2001/2002 Budget Town of Snowmass Village CULTURAL ARTS & RECREATIONAL 2002 2002 2002 2001 2000 1999 Ke Requests Recommend Donation Donation Donation Donation Anderson Ranch Arts Center W Ib 15,000.00 10,000.00 2,500.00 11,000 10,000 12,000 Aspen Ballet Company& School 3,500.00 1,000.00 1,075.00 3,000 -0- -0- As en Choral Socie 10,000.00 2,000.00 2,148.00 2,000 -0- -0 tenHistoriGal Community Theater 2,000.00 1,000.00 1,075.00 2,000 -0- -0- e Connection 1,000.00 500.00 537.00 1,000 -0- -0- estival 5,000.00 500.00 537.00 -0- -0- -0- rical Socie �blb Ib 3,500.00 1500.00 1611.00 2,500 1,00 0 -0- r Hocke ' 10,000.00 2,000.00 2,148.00 -0- -0- -0- Festival & School lb Ib 3,000.00 2,000.00 2,148.00 3,000 3,000 3,000 Aspen Skating Club FoR 2,000.00 500.00 537.00 -0- 1,000 500 Aspen Theatre in the Park FbFb rb 1,750.00 750.00 806.00 3,000 2,000-Aspen Valle Ski/Snowboard Club W Fb 10,000.00 4,000.00 4,296.00 6,000 6,000 3,500 As en/Snowmass Council for the Arts* 18,000.00 -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- Project Graduation 20011bfb fb 1,500.00 1,000.00 1,075.00 1,000 1,000 1,000 { —Roaning Fork Baseball 1,000.00 250.00 269.00 -0- -0- -0- S.P.A.R.C.* 50,000.00 -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- Spellbinders FbFb Fb 1,500.00 500.00 537.00 1,250 1,250 1,000 2001/02 BUDGET= 138,750.0 27,500.00 21,299.00 35,750 41,250 $39,100 0 Kevs: * = First time applicant Ib= Rec'd financial account. statement for 2000 on Time Fb= Rec'd financial account. statement for 2000 I GRANTS AT A GLANCE For 200112002 Bud et Town of Snowmass Villa e CHARITABLE AND SERVICE 2002 2002 2002 2001 2000 1999 ORGANIZATIONS Key Requests Recommend Donation Donation Donation Donation Asistencia Para Latinos (APL) WOO.00 1,500.00 1,611.00 3,000 3,000 As en Budd Pr ram* .00 1,500.00 1,611.00 -0- -0- -0- Aspen Camp School for the Deaf .00 2,500.00 2,685.00 5,000 4,000 4,000 Aspen Counselin Center .00 3,000.00 3,222.00 3,000 3,000 3,000 As en Institute .00 -0- -0- 2,000 -0- 1,000 Aspen Valley Communi Foundation .00 1,000.00 1,075.00 1,250 Aspen Youth Center .00 2,000.00 2,148:00 4,000 3,50AspenBasalt Care Clinic 0.00 (NO SHOW) -0- 2,500 2,500 2,500 -0- Challen a Aspen 0.00 4,500.00 4,833.00 4,500 8,000 8,000 Columbine Homemakers for Independent 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,148.00 -0- -0- -0- Livin * Community Health Services Ib 13,000.00 10,000.00 10,740.00 12,000 11,000 10,000 G, Healthy Mountain Communities* 3,000.00 (NO SHOW) -0- -0- -0- -0- f -0- v Independence Pass Foundation (b 1,500.00 1,000.00 1,075.00 1,000 1,000 1,000 Leadership Aspen 500.00 500.00 537.00 -0- 600 550 Little Feet Day Care 5,000.00 3,000.00 3,222.00 -0- 3,000 5,000 Little Red Schoolhouse (**Add'] Request- Ib 15,500.00 10,000.00 10,740.00 13,900 10,000 9,500 Bus Service) + in kind in kind services services W nior Services (b 4,000.00 3,000.00 3,222.00 3,500 3,000 2,000 (b 3,500.00 3,500.00 3,759.00 3,500 3,000 3,000 spice ib 5,000.00 5,000.00 5,370.00 5,000 5,000 - Services 5,25000 2,500.00 2,685.00 3,000 2,000 hip for Drug Prevention {b 6,000.00 4,000.00 4,296.00 5,000 4,000 6,000 White River Conservation Project* 2,000.00 -0- -0- Women's Foundation of Colorado Fb 500.00 500.00 537.00 -0- 500 -0- Youth Zone Garfield You Services 3,500.00 2,500.00 2,685.00 2,500 2,500 1,500 2001102 BUDGET= 108,940.00 63,500.00 68,201.00 78,150 1 76,850 $66,300 Kevs: = First time applicant ** _ (Add'I Request for In kind Service) Ib= Reed financial account. statement for 2000 on Time rb= Reed financial account. statement for 2000 TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 10, 2001 ' i Agenda Item: I Resolution No. 54, Series of 2001 — A RESOLUTION LEVYING GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2002 TO HELP DEFRAY THE COST OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO; AND TO PAY GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL, INTEREST AND RELATED COSTS AND FOR THE TOWN'S ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FOR THE 2002 BUDGET YEAR. Presented By: Marianne Rakowski, Finance Director Core Issues: ➢ The mill levy must be certified to Pitkin County by December 15, 2001. ➢ Added the mill levy for the Rodeo Purchase Bonds. i The 2002 estimated debt service is $133,355. I ' General Information: Resolution No. 54, Series of 2001 establishes the property tax , mill levy for the year 2002. The Pitkin County Assessors Office provides the Town with the estimated assessed valuation in August of each year for use in the budget process. By December 10`h of each year, the County Assessor must recertify the assessed valuation to each entity. By December 15`h of each year, the Town must certify the mill levy to Pitkin County. This resolution meets that deadline. Council Options: ➢ Adopt Resolution No. 54, Series of 2001 ➢ Do not adopt Resolution No. 54, Series of 2001 and hold a special meeting prior to December 15, 2001 to adopt a new resolution. Staff Recommendation Adopt Resolution No 54 Series of 2001 SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 54 SERIES OF 2001 A RESOLUTION LEVYING GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2002 TO HELP DEFRAY THE COST OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO;AND TO PAY GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PRINCIPAL,INTEREST AND RELATED COSTS AND FOR THE TOWN'S ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM,FOR THE 2002 BUDGET YEAR. WHEREAS,the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village has adopted the annual budgets in accordance with the Local Government Budget Law on November 12, 2001;and WHEREAS,the amount of money necessary to balance the 2002 budget for general operating expenses is$232,426;and WHEREAS,the amount of money necessary to pay General Obligation Bond principal, interest and related costs for the Operations Facility,Road Bonds and the Droste Conservation Easement is $1,024,913;and WHEREAS,the amount of money necessary to fund the Road Mill Levy Fund is$1,694,071;and WHEREAS,the amount of money necessa $133,493;and Obligation Bond principal, interest and related costs for the Rodeo Property purchase WHEREAS,the 2001 valuation for assessment for the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado,as certified by the County Assessor is$338,814,130. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village,Colorado: Section One: Action I, That for the purposes of meeting all general operating expenses of the Town of Snowmass Village during the 2002 budget year,there is hereby levied a tax of.768 mills less a temporary mill levy reduction of.082 for a net mill levy of.686 mills upon each dollar of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable property within the Town for the year 2002. 2. That for the purpose of paying General Obligation Bond principal, interest and related costs for the Operations Facility,Road Bonds and the Droste Conservation Easement, there is hereby levied a tax of 3.025 mills on all taxable property within the Town for the year 2002. 3, That for the purpose of funding the Road Mill Levy Fund,there is hereby levied a tax of 5.000 mills upon each dollar of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable property within the Town for the year 2002. _3a 01-54 4, That for the purpose of paying General Obligation Bond principal,interest and related costs for the Rodeo Property Purchase,there is hereby levied a tax of.39min the Town each dollar of the total valuation for assessment of all taxable property for the year 2002. 5. That the Finance Director is hereby authorized and directed to immediately certify to the County Commissioners of Pitkin County,Colorado,the mill levies for the Town as hereinabove determined and set. INTRODUCED,READ AND ADOPTED on the first reading by the Town Council of the Town of ended by Village, Colorado The motion was approved by a December, with a torn opposed, and seconded by TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE T.Michael Manchester,Mayor ATTEST: Truth Worline,Town Clerk O r 'December Packet Calendar Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sot 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. g 10 11 12 13 14 15 TOSV Holiday 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. Party Stonebridge Inn 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2:00 P.M. T.C.MTG. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Christmas 30 31 New T Eve OOD 1 January Packet Calendar Sun FMonTue Wed Thu Fri Sat l 2 3 4 5 New Years Day 6 7 g 9 10 11 12 2:00p.m. Council Mtg 13 14 15 16 17 1H 19 2:00p.m. Council Mtg 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2:00p.m. Council Mtg 27 28 29 30 31 TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: November 5,2001 Agenda Item: Transportation Budget Challenge's#1 &#2 Presented By: Hunt Walker David Peckler Core Issues: • Level of Service • 2002 Transportation Budget General Info: On Tuesday, October 30, during the Budget review process, Council issued two challenges to the Transportation Division: Challenge 1: to provide for the Level of Service (LOS) contemplated in the 10/10/01,2002 Transportation Budget plus a modified LOS for Route 8, late night service, and Dial-a-Ride (DAR) for$1.776 million. Through reevaluating the route structure and ridership patterns, analyzing our equipment and manpower resources, and realigning our supervisory staff, staff is able to provide for the Challenge#1 LOS at a net operating cost of$1.773 million($1.790 million Transportation Budget less $17,000 in DAR revenues). This Budget includes the following adjustments in LOS: • Route 8 from 7 a.m. - 7 p.m. • Late night service -two buses on demand response service from 10:30 p.m. - 12:30 a.m. • DAR- Option#1 (see attached sheet), one van from 8 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. and 4 p.m. - 10 p.m. Challenge#2: develop the additional incremental cost to provide for the Village Shuttle's "typical" LOS. It would cost an additional $197,355 to provide this service. This cost also includes DAR Option#2 which provides for service from 8:30 a.m. to 10 p.m. with one van and a second van for the peak afternoon hours. Note:At this late date it would be very difficult to provide for the typical LOS because we would need to have 6-8 new drivers in the CDL licensing and training process now. Council Options: 1. $1,773,118 Budget—Challenge#1 LOS. 2. $1,970,473 Budget-Challenge#2 LOS. 3. $1,799,065 Budget—Challenge#1 LOS plus Option#2 DAR. Staff Option# 3. Recommendation: o . DIAL-A-RIDE PROGRAM OPTIONS: 1. $54,103 for DAR service during the historic peak hour of demand for the service: 8:00 AM to 1:30 PM and 4:00 PM to 10:00 PM. One driver would be available for the service, being able to make 2.5 to 3 trips per hour. A. Drivers time $34,692 B. One 4 wheel drive minivan spread over four years of life$8,474 C. Vehicle operating cost$6,580 D. Communications $2,657 E. Advertising$1,700 2. $80,050 for DAR service running from 8:30 AM to 10:00 PM,with two vans available from 3:OOPM to 4:30 PM.Two drivers in the peak hour could be able to make 5 to 6 trips in the peak hour. A. Drivers time$49,560 B. Two 4 wheel driver minivans, one meets ADA requirements, spread over four years of life$16,948 C. Vehicle operating costs$9,185 D. Communications$2,657 E. Advertising $1,700 3. $170,000 to contract with High Mountain taxi to provide 21.5 hours of service at$55 per hour, which Is under negotiation at this time. REVENUES: $17,200: Revenues from a $2.00 charge from 8,600 passengers(highest winter utilization of Dial-a-Ride)would be$17,200. DP,revised 11/01/01 TOWN COUNCIL COMMUNIQUE Meeting Date: December 10, 2001 Presented By: Stephen R. Connor, Town Attorney Subject: ORDINANCE No. 30, SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE TECHNICALLY CORRECTING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 10 ARTICLE V OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING THE REGULATION OF SMOKING BY PROHIBITING SMOKING TO CONFIRM THAT A PUBLIC PLACE INCLUDES A PLACE OF WORK. Overview: I have been contacted by an organization that follows the adoption of nonsmoking legislation. With the amendment to the nonsmoking provisions of the Municipal Code enacted by Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001 smoking is prohibited in all public places. The definition does not include an express statement that a public place includes a place of work. The nonsmoking organization expresses concern that the policy of the Town has changed. I have also reviewed the compatibility of the definitions in the Municipal Code and those in the Colorado Statutes. Although 1 do not believe that the definition of a public place excludes a place of work, I suggest that the Ordinance be adopted to preclude any misunderstanding as to the area where smoking is prohibited. Additionally, the Municipal Code definitions tract more closely those contained in the Colorado Statutes with the adoption of the Ordinance. This Ordinance was not included in your packet for this meeting as I anticipated that it would adopted as an emergency ordinance on December 17, 2001. However, after speaking with Michael Manchester this morning, he informed me that he preferred that the Ordinance not be processed as an emergency matter. Therefore, the only procedural way to have the technical correction adopted and effective without delay was to add it to your agenda for this meeting. Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance on first reading. i TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE TOWN COUNCIL ORDINANCE No. 30 SERIES OF 2001 1 AN ORDINANCE TECHNICALLY CORRECTING CERTAIN PROVISIONSOF CHAPTER 2 10 ARTICLE V OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING THE REGULATION OF 3 SMOKING BY PROHIBITING SMOKING TO CONFIRM THAT A PUBLIC PLACE 4 INCLUDES A PLACE OF WORK. 5 WHEREAS,the Town Council enacted nonsmoking regulations by the adoption of 6 Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1989; and 7 WHEREAS,the Town Council amended and restated the nonsmoking regulations 8 and extended the area of prohibition of smoking to all enclosed public places by the 9 adoption of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001; and 10 WHEREAS,the Town Council finds that it intended that the smoking prohibition be 11 extended to all enclosed public places and did not intent to exclude places of work as an 12 area where smoking is prohibited; and 13 WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that a clarification to the language contained 14 in Chapter 10 Article V of the Municipal Code will avoid a misinterpretation of the provisions 15 of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001; and 16 WHEREAS, the Town Council ratifies and reaffirms the recitals and findings 17 contained in Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2001; and 18 WHEREAS,the Town Council finds that the adoption of this Ordinanceisnecessary 19 for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare. 20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Town Council of the Town of 21 Snowmass Village, as follows: 22 1. moking Prohibition. The provisions of Chapter 10 Article V Smoking Regulation 23 of the Municipal Code that are hereinafter italicized are amended as follows: 24 Sec. 10-81 Declaration of Policy. Smoking and environmental tobacco 25 smoke have been established to be Group A carcinogens that cause cancer 26 in humans. It is the express policy of the Town Council that abstention from 27 smoking occur in public places and In the work place. As a public policy 28 objective, the Town Council desires that smoking not occur in enclosed 29 public places and that the public effectuate this policy to the greatest extent 30 practicable. 1 1 Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2001 Page 2 31 Sec. 10-82. Definitions. As used in this Article,the following words shall be 32 construed to have the meanings defined below: 33 34 (1) Public place means any area where the public is invited or 35 permitted or an area that serves as a place of work. 36 (2) Smoking means the combustion of any cigar,cigarette,pipe or 37 similar article, using any form of tobacco or other combustible 38 substance in any form, other than for theatrical performances 39 by an employee of the establishment. 40 Sec. 10-83. Smoking Prohibited. Smoking is prohibited In all enclosed 41 public places. 42 Sec. 10-84. Signs. All enclosed public places shall be posted with signs 43 that clearly and conspicuously recite the phrase "No Smoking" or use the 44 international no-smoking symbol. The signs shall be of sufficient number 45 and placed in prominent locations to convey the message that smoking Is 46 prohibited to the public clearly and legibly. Those enclosed public places 47 that are used solely as places of work are exempt from the requirements of 48 this Section. 49 Sec. 10-85. Violation and penalty. The following acts constitute violations 50 of this Article: 51 (3) Smoking in an enclosed public place; 52 (2). Failing to post signs as required by this Article; 53 (3) Willfully destructing or defacing signs required to be posted by 54 this Article. 55 2. S v ra . If any provision of this Ordinance or application hereof to any 56 person or circumstance Is held invalid,the invalidity shall not affect any other provision or 57 application of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or 58 application, and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. 59 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 60 Snowmass Village on First Reading on December 10; 2001 upon a motion by Council 61 Member.,the second of Council Member.,and upon a vote of Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2001 Page 3 62 in favor and_ against, Council Member Mercatoris recused. 63 READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of 64 Snowmass Village on Second Reading on December 17,2001 upon a motion by Council 65 Member.,the second of Council Member ,and upon a vote of_ 66 in favor and _against, Council Member Mercatoris recused. 67 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE 68 69 T. Michael Manchester, Mayor 70 ATTEST: 71 72 Trudi Worline, Town Clerk r, Design Workshop.Inc. I andscape.4rchiiectme Land Planning Urban Design Tourism Planning November 29, 2001 Mr. Chris Conrad and Mr. James Wahlstrom Town of Snowmass Village Community Development Department P.O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Dear Chris and Jim: Re: Proposed Snowmass Center Redevelopment Sketch Plan Application Submission of Additional Information as requested by Town Council Thank you for all your help to date on the Snowmass Center Redevelopment Project. At the request of Town Council,we are submitting additional information to the sketch plan application for the Snowmass Center Redevelopment project. We have summarized Town Council's key concerns and directives as we heard them at the meetings,below. 1. Consider transferring density from the single-family area to the multi family area at and behind the Center. Town Council's major concern was whether the extent of single family development proposed on Parcels H and H-1 would be appropriate. Also,there would be impacts associated with the proposed road crossing 30%slopes to access those parcels. They reiterated the Planning and Zoning Commission's directive to study increased density at and behind the Snowmass Center. They considered the Center and the area immediately adjacent to it to be suitable locations for increased height and density. 2. Parking, service and circulation at the Center need to be further resolved. 3. Further consideration should be given to retail and office activities at the Center, including the impacts and phasing of construction. 4. Further consideration and coordination with neighboring properties should be pursued DESIGNWORKSHOP In response to these comments,we revisited our proposed plan. The following Is a summary of the main changes. 1. Snowmass Center Parcel Retail and Office New modifications to the existing building are proposed to enhance retail and office activities and to reduce the impacts of new construction. • Retail space has been added in front of the existing Center to provide outdoor and indoor oriented shopping experiences, and weather protected pedestrian circulation. The facade of the new building will provide the opportunity to express the new architecture for the Center. • An internal circulation area will be created at the Center to provide access to the new gondola location and transportation. • Building D (at the west end of the Center)will be replaced with a new building (Building E)to accommodate the raised grade of the access road behind and the increased height for residential development • The grocery store will expand using the existing location to allow it to continue functioning throughout most of the construction process. • The Post Office might be relocated to the west-central area of the building. • A new office building is proposed with two levels of office space. This might be a good location to accommodate the Town's offices. It also provides advantages for construction phasing as it can be built independently while the existing Center continues to operate. Residential • There will be a total of 26 new residential units at and adjacent to the Center. They include six two-bedroom, 16 three-bedroom and 4 four-bedroom units. • There is less residential development directly on top of the Center to assist with construction phasing and existing structural limitations. The top level of existing office space will be converted to two residential units. • Up to five levels of layered residential development will be located above the first level of commercial use in the redeveloped building at the west end of the Center(Building E) • Two levels of residential development will be located above the two levels of office use in the new building at the east end of the Center(Building F). There will be three to four levels of residential units above the service area. 2 Transit, Circulation, Parking and Drainage • The intersection of Kearns Road with Brush Creek Road is located in the same place as it is today. • The parking area has been reconfigured providing conveniently located structured parking at the entry level to the Center. Parking is also located in a below grade structure beneath the new office building and near the service area. • The structured parking deck is located to provide for shuttle access through the lower level. • Parking is calculated at a reduced ratio of one space per 350 sf retail/office use due to the mix of uses and activities proposed at the Center, as well as proximity to transit services. • The loading bay and service areas are reconfigured and will remain central to the retail spaces. • The proposed people mover is relocated so to be more central to the project and to have an unobstructed connection to the Base Village location. • The shuttle stop is located at the west end of the Center. 2. Draw behind Snowmass Center Residential Program • A series of buildings have been designed to accommodate the increased residential program for a total of 37 units in the draw. The mix is 16 three- bedroom, and 21 four-bedroom units. • Building heights will be increased up to a maximum of six levels of livable space. The building heights will vary to provide an attractive architecture. • There will be a homeowners office and indoor and outdoor amenities. Circulation and Parking • The access road will be 24 feet wide and the turning circle is increased to 110 foot diameter as per the Fire Marshall • The parking ratio is proposed as 1.4 spaces per two-bedroom unit, 1.7 spaces per three-bedroom unit and two spaces per four-bedroom unit. • The residential parking will be in structured parking below the residential buildings. 3 3. Parcels H and H-1 Residential • The single-family lots have been reduced in number and moved lower in the valley. • There will be four single family lots of 35,000 sf to over 80,000 sf in size. • There will be two 4,500 sf houses and two 5,500 sf houses. Circulation and Parking • The road access is proposed to be from the property line at Snowmass Mountain and Woodbridge Condominiums off Upper Woodbridge Road. There will be no road across the 30% slope ridge from the Center. A letter of consent from Snowmass Mountain Homeowners Association is included. • The Applicant will provide an approximately 38,000 sf site to accommodate the parking and drainage requirements of Woodbridge and Snowmass Mountain Condominiums. • A drainage easement is located between the lots to contain runoff on site and direct it to the proposed detention basin. Beyond the direct benefits from the proposed redevelopment of the Snowmass Center,the Applicant would like to clarify additional proposed contributions to Community Benefit in support of this development, as follows: 1. The primary community benefits of this project are increased economic vitality and provision of community services. Besides the increased economic vitality and provision of community services offered by the project, other critical community benefit areas are: 2. Provision of Employee Housing The Applicant proposes to remove the restrictions on Parcel C to allow for the Town to develop employee housing on that parcel. 3. Transit Improvements • Provision of a location and a clear alignment for a people mover connecting to Base Village. • Paying the project's share towards improvement of the Brush Creek Road Intersections • Providing for improved shuttle bus circulation and stops at the Center. 4 4. Dedication of Open Space and Trails • Improvement of the area along the stream • Provision of pedestrian connections throughout the project and linking to the projects 5. Coordination with adjacent Property Owners • Coordination with Woodbridge and Snowmass Mountain Condominiums for drainage and parking solutions The following information is presented in response to questions from the Community Development Department 1. Parcel Size and FAR As per the original application,the Snowmass Center Parcel,Parcel A, and reconfigured Parcel B are proposed to be rezoned to Mixed Use 2. Parcel B is proposed to be reconfigured (using part of Parcel F) to include all grading associated with the proposed residential development. The total size of the Mixed Use 2 Parcel will be approximately 11.29 acres. At this conceptual level of design, the gross square footage of the building excluding decks and parking structures is 277,015 sf. The FAR excluding decks would be 0.56. The allowable FAR is 1:1. 2. Building Height As represented at the meeting with Town Council on November 19,the maximum building height will not exceed 75 feet as measured per the Town's land use code. The applicant has developed the architecture to improve the visual effect. This includes lowering the roof on certain buildings so that the upper level of residential units are partially within the roof space. The number of levels of residential use in the proposed office building at the east end of the Center have been reduced. 5 We have attached 24 copies of the package of new information. The information includes reduced plans,memos and charts, describing our proposal. This is supplemented with the additional material requested by Staff. There are also eight sets of full size drawings. In addition we are enclosing copies of the section and perspective shown at the meeting, as well as the access agreement showing both ends of Kearns Road. Please contact us at your earliest convenience with any questions or requests for supplemental information. Thanks again for all your help. Yours truly, ,MWI & o&MAO iw �-i� Richard Shaw Principal-in-Charge, Design Workshop Attachments: Additional Information Report 6 FROM' : VPM SN"FISS MNTIOCONDOS FAX PHI. 9709233505 Dec. 17 2001 05:13PM P2 Snowmass Mountain Condominiums November 15, 2001 Town of Snowmass Village Town Council Town of Snowmass Village P.O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Dear Council Members: Re: Snowmass Center Redevelopment Sketch Plan Application Subject to the following paragraphs, the Snowmass Mountain Homeowner's Association consents to the Sketch Plan Application for the Snowmass Center Redevelopment dated November 2001, specifically for Parcels H and H-1 of the Faraway North PUD. It Is submitted by the Snowmass Land and Cattle Company and the Snowmass Center Limited Partnership. This application shows access to Parcels H and H-1 through land owned by Snowmass Mountain Condominiums. Snowmass Mountain Condominiums is willing to consider permitting Snowmass Land and Cattle Company access across Snowmass Mountain Condominiums property and that terms have yet to be negotiated, The Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Board of Directors on a conference call to discuss this matter has authorized Jerome Simecek to submit this letter on their behalf. Yours truly, J me Property Manager cc: Design Workshop P.O. Box 5124 Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 • ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C. A 605 E. MAIN A ASPEN, CO 81611 A TEL.: 970 925 4765 A FAX: 970 920 2950 To: Suzan Richman Cc: From: Dave Rybak Date: November 28, 2001 Enclosure: ❑ RE: Proposed Development Areas Snowmass Center Redevelopment BPA Job#2034 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS COMMERCIAL SPACE Existing 32,115 s.f. New 12,270 s.f. Total 44,385 s.f. OFFICE SPACE Existing 20,970 s.f. Existing to Remain 9,430 s.f. New 19,850 s.f. Total 29,280 s.f. RESIDENTIAL UNITS UNIT TYPE S. F./UNIT E. U./UNIT #OF UNITS E. U.'s TOTAL AREA T—2 Bedroom 1,250 s. f. .63 6 3.78 7,500 s.f. 'I 1'—3 Bedroom 1,690 s. f. .94 12 11.28 20,280 s.f 'III'—3 Bedroom 1,890 s. f. 1.14 8 9.12 15,120 s.f. 'IV'—3 Bedroom 1,900 s. f. 1.15 7 8.05 13,300 s.f. V—3 Bedroom 2,010 s.f. 1.26 5 6.30 10,050 s. f. VI'—4 Bedroom 2,125 s.f. 1.38 1 1.38 2,125 s.f. 'VII'—4 Bedroom 2,450 s.f. 1.70 20 34.00 49,000 s. f. VIII'—3 Bedroom 2,050 s.f. 1.30 4 5.20 8,200 s.f. Total 63 Units 79.11 E. U. 's 125,575 s.f. Equivilant Unit Ratio's are calculated via formula: Unit Type T .50 E. U./1,000 s.f. + .05 E. U./100 s. f. above 1,000 s.f. Unit Types 11—VII' .75 E. U./1,500 s.f. + .10 E. U./100 s. f. above 1,500 s.f. M E M O R A N D U M ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING, P.C. A 605 E. MAIN A ASPEN, CO 61611 A TEL.: 970 925 4765 A FAX: 970 920 2950 GROSS AREA CALCULATIONS BUILDING GARDEN LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 TOTAL A 27,585 9,430 5,730 42,745 s.f. E 16,800 8,100 9,130 9,130 9,130 4,955 57,245 s.f. F 9,925 9,925 11,105 12,660 6,785 3,605 54,005 s.f. G/H/I 8,165 8,165 5,680 22,010 s.f. J 5,615 5,135 2,860 13,610 s.f. K 8,310 6,720 6,720 6,720 6,720 6,310 41,500 s.f. L 8,310 6,720 6,720 6,720 6,720 6,310 41,500 s.f. Gondola 1,750 1,750 3,500 s. f. Bridge 900 900 S. f. Total 277,015 s. f. Note:These calculations do not include balconies and parking structures. These are gross square footage calculations, not calculated per F.A. R. regulations. UNIT LOCATIONS UNIT TYPE ON CENTER- BUILDING BEHIND CENTER- BUILDING 'A' 'E' 'F' 'G' 'H' 11' 'J' 'K' 'L' Total T-2 Bedroom 4 2 6 'II'-3 Bedroom 1 3 2 3 3 12 'III'-3 Bedroom 8 8 'IV'-3 Bedroom 2 5 7 'V'-3 Bedroom 2 2 1 5 'VI'-4 Bedroom 1 1 'VII'-4 Bedroom 3 8 9 20 VIII'-3 Bedroom 2 2 4 Total 2 15 9 2 3 3 5 12 12 63 PARKING STRUCTURES Location #of Spcs Under Center Expansion Building 'F' @ EL 40' 20 Under Center Expansion Building 'F' @ EL 60' 10 Under Buildings'G, H & 1' 59 Under Buildings'J' 14 Under Buildings'K& L' 37 Total 140 2 Snowmass Center Redevelopment Additional Information Program Analysis Commercial and Office Uses USE AREA IN SF Existing Sketch Plan Additional Information Center March,2001 November,2001 Commercial 32,114 42,680 44,384 Office 20,970 18,119 29,280 .....:.:.:.:.:.:...............:.:....:.:.:.::...:.: :.:6 .9':isi:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::73,...84:..............:............:.............................: l .:::i:_::��;084; iir;iis;;:i:::i:::,,:.:G..........:...............................:........................_._........._..... Gondola 0 3,165 3,500 Multi-Family Residential USE Sketch Plan Additional Information March,2001 November,2001 #UNITS E.U's #UNITS E.U's 1 Bedroom Unit 8 4 0 0 2 Bedroom Unit 33 30 6 3.78 3 Bedroom Unit 10 11 36 39.95 4 Bedroom Unit 0 21 35.38 Single-Family Residential USE Sketch Plan Additional Information March,2001 November,2001 #LOTS E.U'S #LOTS E.U'S SF Lot with 4,500 sf house 6 18 2 6 SF Lot with 5,100 sf house 2 12 SF Lot with 5,500 sf house 2 16 Parking for Condominiums 0 Spaces 48 Spaces E.0= Equivalent Unit Ratio Snowmass Center Expansion Parking Calculations Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2000,Section 4-300 8-Nov-01 . A. Predevelopment Commercial and Office Developmment total area parking at 1 space per 300 sf Existing Commercial 32,114 107 Existing Office 20,970 70 TOTALS 53,084 177 B. Proposed Commercial and Office Redevelopment and Developmment total area parking at 1 space per 350 sf Note: Reduced ratio due to variety of spaces and uses Redeveloped Commercial 44,384 126.81 Redeveloped Office 29,280 83.66 TOTALS 73,664 210.47 C.Multi-Family Housing Total Area No. Units No.Parking Spaces SF Proposed Multifamily 7,500 6 8.40 (1.4 per unit) 2 bed Proposed Multifamily 66,950 33 56.10 (1.7 per unit) 3 bed Proposed Multifamily 51,125 24 48.00 (2 per unit) 4 bed TOTALS 125,575 63 112.50 .. ._....:.... ... .............:.. ......:n..:.a::::...... m..w..:.... :. :. .w:...u..z.:;y:::....:.:cN>'x,y.....y.'.tlii+cx.!.yx<;.v.....n;.+.::.N. . : °> • .� .. .<�..�+^.�,,, ok�.< �.'�'&s !-.:.....:z5s :.a: z�SE$#.se�.,:,.�.:Y:��a...$§3':..`Aid a.:,.3...£»:$k 3,.��:5? u¢ `�' ta4.:£:t Snowmass Center Expansion Employee Generation Calculations Ordinance No.7,Series of 2000-Section 4400 29-Nov-01 A. Redevelopment and Proposed Development Housing Square Footage total area per 1000 job gen.rate square feet multiplic.factor total sf Redeveloped Commercial 44,384 0.001 4.83 448 0.65 62,426 Redeveloped Office 29,280 0.001 3.68 448 0.65 31,377 #units Proposed Multifamily 123,894 63 0.61 448 0.65 11,191 Proposed Single Family 4 1.58 448 0.65 1,840 106,834 B. Existing Pre Development Restricted Housing Square Footage total area per 1000 job gen.rate square feet multiplic.factor total sf Existing Commercial 32,114 0.001 4.83 448 1.15 79,913 Existing Office 20,970 0.001 3.68 448 1.15 39,758 119,671 C. Post redevelopment square footage minus existing pre-redevelopment square footage A B Total 106,834 119,671 (12,837) NOTE: Gondola space not included SNOWMASS CENTER REDEVELOPMENT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REPORT November 29,2001 Written: • Cover Letter • Letter of Consent from Snowmass Mountain Condominiums Charts: • Memorandum from Bill Poss Architects with Proposed Program, Unit Equivalencies and Areas • Comparison of Existing and Proposed Development Scenarios Chart • Parking Generation Chart • Employee Housing Generation Chart Drawings: • L-0 Proposed Redevelopment Illustrative Site Plan • L-1 Snowmass Center Area Site Plan • L-1 A Snowmass Center Area Enlargement of Lower Level Parking • L-2 Parcels Hand H-1(Single Family Residential) Site Plan • L-3 Proposed People Mover Alignment • Architectural Plans at the Snowmass Center: Level 1 • Architectural Plans at the Snowmass Center: Levels 2 and 3 • Architectural Plans at the Snowmass Center: Levels 4 and 5 • Architectural Plans in the Draw Behind: Level 1 • Architectural Plans in the Draw Behind: Level 2 • Architectural Plans in the Draw Behind: Levels 3 • Architectural Plans in the Draw Behind: Levels 4 and 5 • Architectural Plans in the Draw Behind: Level 6 • Architectural Concept Elevations • Architectural Conceptual Section • Rendered Conceptual Perspective View �pLv .t �(�i � '�`\`\ 'I `I it 11l ir• , - < � �yy{ , .' O O I \ , � �\ � \ \ \ � 1 ` \ t �-=r- -- �-____ l i n 1/ / r I I I I „ \n � I• \ I ` a -__� = - ' 1, _ 1 ' i\ iii �ii�i,'i/ii/(/i�'iii,,�•j�i'� [ `�`•\`, � `�` `, ` `, ::,`�_- y ;', ,i i' 11 I , r; r �✓\ 1 `,�`�`���:�.`.`�` �\ .`.`�`�`` iiliii i�rl I � \ � ' ii/ •�i'iii/i/iiii �� iiiii ��' iiii ii, '/'/'� /' I I DESIGN WORKSHOP , � 1]II E616W�6A61 , .srEn.w 6x11 1 l6x/W66M1 II , / Fnpipltlp xfl 1 T I i - � 66rynrp6. 1 1 1 ' � Avim.MFW.YbR .!1 _ LrOuT.. ,[[ 1 1 ; , \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r • ,,,111110♦", 1 ', r1 1 I 1 I I ' �- `` n 11 ' O 11111 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6aia 1 "11111 111 ``11'1\ �__ 1111111%111 ♦`• `11 1' 1 j 1 1 1 I ' ' � 1 �" ' IT' '!6'// 'O�2✓ ♦\� ___ W (nU .J ,11``\1• '111;11,1 iii ;i'ii ii;;i �, LOTS ♦ -" Z� p . \ `♦x ,11'%�1'll I ,ll , ,, ' , � � , 4i.. W J` 3 •;.;�-.;� 11`1\ \, ♦;:;\ 1111`% ' � ' O '' r"5' ♦1 0 PARCEL A ♦ _ 1 \ \, ♦ \ tea( `\\\_•♦"-���i' ' S; 1' 1 I\`I�I1;\1111111 1 6' W LL Z /\• — _ 1� , , , ,r r.l' %L0T 1`I Il i i 1111 i i Z W \ ,_-♦=_"- --� -�%X,i iii'%�-__�--_ - �CELB•-- F-1 � o o .m IMWi6Fl m.c.6 wi�ulkxa v.x...lq I Coalw.RN6 t Fd6r6n )30 Evil N 1M 0 A;M W 01611 30-iW 61RpIJr I Sn66mw6 L 4 'W Cemyw 0 Cci b— l6.W 61633 TW. 063-3301 6 4R 6�01lIxx O Q \ / wuewn 6^^6^1^6" 'PARCEL I it 0 i Il 1A ou ' PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT L-0 : 1 , 1 ; \ \ 1`I PARCEL F ------ its ,, 1 1 1 , , 1 , , 1 'it i i 1 11 % , \i \\\`\\ ,`\` ` \ \ \\1 i `J � BUILDIN6K ,` , .``__ ,..____■ 11 ; ; `\ `\1 � ; \; ; ; ; 11 ; ; ;/1111 �\``j1 � % ,\�` __�• -__ _ _ _ i�i , i 1 \ `, `\ \ \ %\ i BUILDING] ---- ---_ - / I I 1 ; 1� `\ `\ `\ \I is -----_- ---- _______-- '; —_ _- -------------------- - ------- - ------------------- ---_----- --- '- - "_____ `•��`-___ ___�r / '\, 'GONDOLA -- -;— ;`. --- — PARCEL C; --- — --- --- -- — — - --- ---- ------ — -- ------------------ __ -- — BUILDING E ` — __________ ' ; _____________Ip--- - — as o ---- w -- Q mufa 8 -\ \ I a s 1 /6 a ) a a 1a 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 , Q ALPINE BANK Y O O 1 , 0 % Q O �`. ` /•` i n ' ' �i : DESIGN— WORK,OP , ' i i' e696gmflen O 20 BUILDING O °PARCEL B ---- - O W 0 BUILDING I W Q Q ILDING � , _'/ ui UIlJ d BUILDING G Q� CJ" O O -- ----- n/ Q (1 65 1-I- --- W Z CI REST O ROOF DECK BULDING F f ao a DEVE Z a PARKING BEL O SERVICE AND PARKING BELO I U uj LL V cA o 0 W (� Z Y a I cQc REDEVELOPED BUILDING F I G SNOWMASS CENTER f BUILDING A 5 O 5s O ,M1Q O e a 4 0 so I Z Lo a ` Q O O O Op +' 84' e• u r � , sJf 1 aefee109121J f 15O 0 p A6PILe1 i40 4M1 ba t_b ,M1S ^^ S.ro.mm t., R JYA,W FOrNfrt ` 7 45 ` 220 Et INS V.5-etpw�,CO alt J f a e i a e 1 111 1 11 .}� • TN. aY \aW`` `M1 -0®6c e O 2 Sno.mo..La�id�a2nE�GlW Oa92. e e ] e e to 11 1 1 1 1 1 17 •b a Q ^ '%' OcroTW.963-32M -r f16V/6E6 eT LflFIM fW M17 4J ' >'Y.Af.[,59E:OW � ^ aMn Ys.VIM Itaae l l a S I IS a i d e 101112 40 PARCEL I =_ r r tw ' "6 cf PROPOSED ' ;iss°`� '�^^•'^ d DEVELOPMENT "ftem nL9 u.i B SN CREEK ROAD .tlm L-1 ril 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 c I � 50 i 45 i 21 SPA ES BELOW 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 35 ((I, DESIGN W ORKSHOP J t 'RRVex W YMII (W\ 55 �erolmm /� r Ivro)tiv up f� �n.ee..u�rwh 60 50 Z 2 tik a. o w ° �� Q a 0 V 45 �` W x( W zo a � �` ` 5 W g �g Q °* �5� z �� a Cb SQPG 00 U �v F- ell (jj LL z Y U) 30 30 bq�T W Y M Ole" 5 Rm.ma.W:Imu v , c>eo.�a.l.,aa m ale" )v. �-sam r i I / i _ ---- xOTtM Yaa•.b / - ----------------------- -um�r-wY�wl LOWER LEVEL - PARKING ENLARGEMENT L-1 A ``♦ `♦♦ ` - _ _---------------'._� ``` `M♦ -_ `_g•m.__`♦` `♦ �I 1 1 1 1 WY ------------------------- \ ---------- ------------'-` `` `'`♦ ------- ';'" -_------- ``♦ ♦` ♦' \' ``♦ `' \` '`, 1`, 4-------------- -------- --- `'- --- -- `♦` `O �-` _ -------------------------- - ---` C` T ---- ---------- --` ''-♦- -- ' ' ; 1~ -- , ___ __ 6 1 _ _ -------- ----- - - - - - , 1 ``♦ , 1 1 � \ l � � 1 1 � 1 I DESIGNWORKSHOP IlOEW M.h E..V ' /SPEF4 CO Flell FuetF)p)Fxp lxeF • ..,Y.n.IMw l�m.•u.um..w �Nw.a...l...r,.o Z wc fn LL O J Z I w o _p o to o O w a� U p i z w (6v d o -- Q i 0 z Z(q Q .-� o w *g Z ) Z �� a oo `� V) cA o w U) Y ,LOT 2_" . 37,000 of o o _ -- - ------ z i Cents.ROW k W= nv E«t Rtxs-u `oo so dell ° M1 \ / PARCEL Ao o E-�. a. , 38,880sf� �ov�" c>ETO.90s 3M M1° , Sp . [I ipR ylt MmYIMM °g boo 11 LOT 6IZF BIRO.F+n' NWBEiflE el,.m .goo '� PROPOSED x 83A KIM twos s es.ew KIM eso DEVELOPMENT e ssxw le.no aays L-2 84 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF NEW BASE VILLAGE 1 ®Q® 83`'0 K /',6 / ti ALPINE % colno�co / 4404 1 i o � ° iPROPOSED SNOWMASS CENTER ° REDEVELOPMENTS r / PROPOSED TERMINAL /X- i — --I 11\\1\\1 \1 1111\III I I I II I I I r ft \ DESIGNWpn�..l SHOP Izo ^zKKCO roll IebI R5.l4 •-maex.ar w Zr fQ z POSSIBLE TERMINAL w .r a O W o 0 vi0 J (A d �g Q g_ Z }J Z CO) d v7 Z Y U) z 183400 < O 8450 Z U7 8500 ce.m.x.a a aaa.n 8550 U3w1w�r.m 4p� 00.1.,1 �� 11.EY1e0p —� 1 ct 1M Y63-5301 8600 e.., 8650 1 PROPOSED PEOPLE MOVER ALIGNMENT a��__ E I MG 1 9430 S.F. Building'E' Building'A' Second Floor Plan Ekvation:a75 DRUGSTORE GROCERY S1 oKE Bullding'E' Bullding'A' First Floor Plan EkvHion:+60 Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Multi-family Residential Density Studies NOVEMBER 28,2001 I FARM Building'F' AC D3MGY •GARDEN LEVEL OFFICE Eknlim+50 ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL SPACE 6058 S.F. Buiiding'F' Subgrade Parking Elev�rion:+i0 I�O�{ i�i� v b Riil Pm and Auo iaw ArtM1ittvurt W%�nniny AWE^.fvbrvlu Building'E' Building'A' Fourth Floor Plan Elm6m:+95 Building'E' Building'A' Third Floor Plan ElevVim:+95 Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Multi-family Residential Density Studies November 38,2001 P � Building'F' Building IF' O Bill Pm ud Assmisks A.hia iI..M Pknni, Aq ,CObr b Building'E' Building'A' Sixth Floor Plan - Gondola Access Ekv.dit:+115 'o J Building'E' Bullding'A' Fifth Floor Plan Ekwi.n:♦105 Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Multi-family Residential Density Studies November 28,I801 L Building'F' - BuIlding'F O rmt--� Bill Pb"and Assmi. s Ar<hir«rurt.M P4nniry wrpm.CeMW 3 ,Y K( ding'K' Building'] Bull First el Plan (� Il- x i ISn iiiS Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Multi-family Residential Density Studies NOVEMBER 28,20D1 INSERT: PARKING LEVEL Building Ka Building L Building V x BuildingJ D w 11 n 61N Building T , \ Building'H' i ing'G' Buildings G,H and I i n O lT� IY ,0 M Bill Poss and Aumiatt s ArtM1l,c mend PM ning n,p�n.ceio,.eo ding'K' D Building'J Bull Second Level Pla D� ✓� i i Kuddhr(;'P.' Ruin Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Multi-family Residential Density Studies NOVEMBER 29.20DI Building'L' Building T Building'H' g'G' T— Ir'q' Buiidiny'F' any O Bill Pon end Asmoielne Amhe mw and Planning AM ,COlw ding W D Building'. Buildi Third Level Plan / L___/ 33viid}n;;'li' Ku11dGy Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Multi-family Residential Density Studies NOVEMBER 78,7001 Building W Building'[' Building'H' 9'G' --------- I /> > O Bill Fm and Auo ww Amhhecium and Planning F Building W D Building') Fourth & Fifth Level Plan Build l_.----- � f r' Bu[kiiol;']�'' liuildb Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Multi-family Residential Density Studies NOVEMBER Z8,]OBI Building'L' Building 7' Building'H' g'GI r �_i Imildirh�r Bill Poss W A.isks Am�i¢cWrt�M PWn'ry Ayan,CWwtli Building W D Building'J Build Sixth Level Plan l % / Jr .D B uikinl k('I?' t Mild 11 Snowmass Center Redevelopment Site Analysis - Alulti-family Residential Density Studies NOVEMBER 29.2001 Building ILI Building 7' Building'H' i r J -1 Rudd in;;'l ' O Bill Puss and Associs" A.biw...M Ph t,.., Building E Building A Snowmass Center Redevelopment Architectural Concept November 28,2001 m Building F Scala-P 50' Snowmass Village, Colorado Bill Poss and Associates Architecture and Plarming Mpen.CalOMa Snowmass Center Redevelopment Conceptual Section Through Proposed Project November 28,2001 L arw� M. M ti�M y .aa �6 Scale I" W Snowmass Village, Colorado Bill Poss and Assmiams Axbkm wm snd Planning Af ,C.l K t r k �} f � `047 rj: X, y�• F€4 ,�g"�'��'��t�,!it' e {£A td'S lsi+w'St}Y�.1 r f2r�,a .�'�33:�,iy��fv r /� .� ���{`"�`fi�i�'•�?�{.x�� r e$x4�,{� p� �r t�NS<,*�"x',it �<�d' e25��:,#ff'��{,�.�}��'N+ fr �. j'4 .py, n k � ,�'i rv`$ .h•rS.x 4j SCr �.� � .e +�bip jt .�`x� f`A '`�"VFIt �@}" tlr F t K p, } � i xy�:• is Snowmass Center Redevelopment Perospcetive Sketch November,2001 a� l' Y 1 I A �.' f✓�pp+,�.xrt �r �f�.?in t �y y1 y3,�n..'�,+c+.u*t �. x _,.'�.y.,..a ,pt y.Y't < t.� yv>'J,{'4; •y'44 �yi +;y}A tS+}�h�14y} "S� ¢ 'd Tj ',y �gif•.'r, �/a.� ,� Y, a :� r i» � .aa�r t \ ✓ �• t a � a 'q„a y f.. ti VYgy �y•nd F�y .�iy>,143 ��0: w� y'I� �q•}j��'G. .°: f ,Y � � I �.. e •l. �S �t •� l< '4 iiv '� Rl Ci j �g�, 4(if i9't3 P✓' •�+}bY�t 5�{..1f Y i1�1 7i .� g�y'°R' t. y ,.'i\��� '•. fi `C } 't��� Rr��y 4jy q l' eF�~/L�.�a%y�s#x�'}•�=fix ��°i�a''�'�agx�";"' �E��a�e'Y:s.v � r }FF 3 J `P!�``'� 1 J r..� fyr'R' .y S.. 5O Ra. +ra S e yt pA3�AtF+A�'^.0 V� �vS�rv,�l..t . SiY bira ] in i t 4 dT ad 'Ra H XC r F,aVC. . ra . fk'%'Cxegx"ri •.F 3 i gam" r'?i m 4t' ,.M� '¢"Wj1�� f � �• Y w.l"•`1.. �w' fl"'�'p!^Y�`'��i4- ,°gyp` r��+Yiar�jxi�a� �Al�'r .✓���r((l :�:t 'Y M a�'l4��" �#,',.� Q 11 {k b.'vv't �{i�,y..� s`f ..p.E. "t"` .v .. �y"•`�^��+. _ IS,