Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20080519MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~~ RE: Council Work Session -Multi-Family Replacement Program (combining condos) DATE OF MEMO: May 13, 2008 MEETING DATE: May 19, 2008, S:OOpm REQUEST OF COUNCIL: There is no formal action requested at this time. The purpose of this meeting is to provide an overview of the history of the Multi-Family Replacement Program, as well as the programs intents and applicability. DISCUSSION: City Council has been approached by private land owners to initiate code amendments that would permit the combining of multi-family units with less mitigation than is currently required, or with no mitigation. The sections below outline the impetus behind the program and program's history. Multi-Family Replacement Program History: Since the 1970s, the City of Aspen has attempted to regulate the loss of free-market housing that is attainable for low and moderate income individuals. Originally this was done through the condominiumization regulations, which required an owner who wanted to condominiumize their property to show that the condominiumization would not result in a reduction of the supply of low and moderate income housing. The Multi-Family Replacement program as we know it today originated in 1988 through Ordinance 47, Series of 1988 after City Council and City Planning Staff became concerned that the demolition of existing free-market residential dwelling units was resulting in the exclusion of working residents from the City's neighborhoods. The City Council at the time recognized that Aspen's neighborhoods were comprised of a mix of different housing types that served many of Aspen's working residents. They also recognized that Aspen's attractiveness as a resort and second home mazket placed pressure on older homes and condominiums to be redeveloped to serve these needs, rather than to continue to provide housing that was attainable by locals. In an effort to preserve the housing inventory and provide dispersed housing opportunities in Aspen, the program regulates the combination and demolition of multi-family dwelling units. The program is triggered any time construction, remodeling, or demolition results in the loss of a multi-family unit. The Aspen Area Community Plan establishes a goal of providing affordable housing for working residents by both the public and private sector. The multi-family Page 1 of 3 replacement program ensures that the private sector maintains an active role in providing housing that is affordable for local workers, and ensures a housing shortfall will not result from the destruction of existing units that have or do serve local residents. Legislative History: Ordinance 47, Series of 1988 created the Multi-Family Housing Program, which required that an applicant replace 50% of the units and 25% of the bedrooms as affordable housing. The units were required to be placed on the same site on which demolition occurred, unless it could be demonstrated that the replacement on-site would be incompatible with adopted neighborhood plans or would be an inappropriate planning solution given the site's physical constraints. This location requirement has not been altered, and remains in effect today. In 1990, the program was amended by Ordinance 1, Series of 1990, to require replacement of 50% of the square footage of net residential area demolished, and 50% of the bedrooms demolished. The Ordinance also added a new provision that required 50% of the replacement housing to be above natural grade. The next revision to the program came in 2003 with Ordinance 51, Series of 2003. The location requirement remained the same, but the requirement that 50% of the replacement housing be above natural grade was eliminated (this requirement was added back in by Ordinance 12, Series 2005). Ordinance 51, Series of 2003 amended the replacement requirements to provide three (3) options for homeowners to replace multi-family housing they wished to demolish: 1. 100% Replacement Without Unit Expansion -This requirement allowed an applicant to replace exactly what was demolished (i.e. a 1-bedroom is replaced with a 1-bedroom, etc), and did not permit an expansion in the amount of net livable azea. This option did not require any affordable housing mitigation; or, 2. 100% Replacement With Unit Expansion -This requirement allowed an applicant to replace 100% of the units and bedrooms demolished (same as above), and allowed the net livable area to increase only if affordable housing was provided equal to the expansion of net livable azea (i.e. if the applicant wanted to expand the original net livable area by 15%, then they would need to provide 15% of the original units, bedrooms, and net livable azea as affordable housing); or, 3. 50% Replacement -This requirement allowed an applicant to demolish dwelling units and replace 50% of the units, bedrooms, and net livable azea as affordable housing. For example, if two 2-bedroom units in 2000 total net livable space were demolished, this would be replaced by one 1-bedroom deed-restricted unit in 1000 sq. ft. of net livable space. Any new free-mazket residential units were required to be mitigated for through the regulaz growth management process (i.e. 30% of the net livable expansion). The discussion leading up to the adoption of Ordinance 51, Series of 2003 focused on the importance of maintaining density on parcels that underwent demolition of their multi-family units. This was the reasoning behind adding the Option 1, above (100% Replacement Without Unit Expansion). No projects were ever submitted under this provision. The 50% replacement Page 2 of 3 program requirements were amended to include units, again to maintain density on pazcels undergoing multi-family dwelling unit demolition. Current Multi-Family Replacement Provisions: As part of the recent Land Use moratorium, City Council amended the program with Ordinance 14, Series of 2007. This Ordinance eliminated Option 1, above (100% Replacement Without Unit Expansion), and amended the requirements for replacement of demolished multi-family housing. The Ordinance also moved the Multi-Family Replacement program to the Growth Management section of the Land Use Code. Thete aze now two options for Multi-Family Replacement, neither of which permits a net loss of density: 1. Replace all the former units as RO units and expand the remainder of the project with no mitigation; or, 2. Replace half of the former units with Category units and mitigate for any expansion. Previously, the program consisted of an administrative review. With the recent code changes, Council amended the program to require review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. In addition, the combination, conversion, or demolition ofmulti-family units cannot result in a loss of density (number of units) between the existing development and the proposed development. The previous version of the program permitted acash-in-lieu payment for a fraction of a unit by right. This ordinance eliminated this provision, replacing it with a requirement that City Council approve all cash-in-lieu payments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not recommend any changes be made to the Multi-Family Replacement program. This is a long standing program that is a cornerstone to maintaining housing choice and housing stock diversity in Aspen. The Multi-Family Replacement Program is a status quo program in that it focuses on maintaining the existing housing stock that has housed a local worker. This is in contrast to the Growth Management System, which focuses on new affordable housing to mitigate for the impacts of new commercial and free-mazket residential development. While the program has received minor modifications over the years, it continues to address the same problems the community faced 20 years ago, that is the attractiveness converting existing multi- familyunits into tourist accommodations or second homes at the expense of worker housing. Page 3 of 3 a) The proposed 'ts comply Housing A ority. A recon Authori shall be requue < Aut ty may choose oli Nrt he Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitki County ndation from the spen/Pitkin Co Housing tpis standard. g e Aspen/Pitkin ty Housin~ a ublic he wrth the Board Directors. b) ~kffordable Housi required for mill ion purposes actual newly b t units or buy-do units. Off-sit within the of Aspen city its. Units out ' e accepted mitigation by th ity Council, p uant mitiga ' n requirement is 1 than one full u ' , a cast acc led by the Planni and Zoning C fission m the Asnen/Pitki ounty Housine thority. If tt 'is one or more unit a cash-in-lieu pa pursuant to Se on 26.470.090. provided thro h a mix of these ethoc c) Each uni rovided shall be esigned s (50) p ent or more of unit's Net Fini ed Grade wtuche r is higher. ~ lent shall Required sl}~Il be in the fo of /orals shall be ovided the city li may be to 26.470 0.2. If the -in-lie ayment may be ipo a recommendation itigation requirement e City Council approval, dable housing rryty be the finished floor vel of fifty Area is at or ove Natural or d) ~ie proposed units all be deed tricted as "for sale" 'ts and transferred to qualified porch rs according the Aspen/Pitkin unty Housing Authority Guidelines. T owner may a entitled to select first purchasers, subj to the aforem Toned quali ations, with approv from the Aspen/Pitkin ounty Housin uthority. a deed restriction all authorize the As n/Pitkin Coon Housing A ority or the City o spen to own the unit d rent it to qu fled renters defined in the Affo able Housing Guideline established by Aspen/Pit ' County Housing ority, as amended. The prop d units may be ren units, including but n invited to rental un' owned an employer or no profit organization, if gal instrument in rrn acce able to the City A rney ensures penman affordability oft units. City encourages of rdable housing units r uired for lodge dev opment to e rental units assoc' ed with the lodge op lion and contribut' to the long- term viability of odge. Units owned b he Aspen/Pitkin Co Housing Autho ' ,the City of As n, Pitkin Co , or other similar ernmental or qu '-municipal agen shall not be subs ct to this mandatory for-sale" provision. •-----~~ S. Demolition or Redevelopment of Multi-Family Housing. The City of Aspen's neighborhoods have traditionally been comprised of a mix of housing types, including those affordable by its working residents. However, because of Aspen's attractiveness as a resort environment, and because of the physical constraints of the upper Roaring Fork Valley, there is constant pressure for the redevelopment of dwellings currently providing resident housing for tourist and second home use. Such redevelopment results in the displacement of individuals and families who aze an integral part of the Aspen work force. Given the extremely high cost of and demand for market-rate housing, resident housing City of Aspen Land Use Code. August, 2007. Part 400, Page 135 opportunities for displaced working residents, which are now minimal, will continue to decrease. Preservation of the housing inventory and provision of dispersed housing opportunities in Aspen have been long-standing planning goals of the community. Achievement of these goals will serve to promote a socially and economically balanced community, limit the number of individuals who face a long and sometimes dangerous commute on State Highway 82, reduce the air pollution effects of commuting, and prevent exclusion of working residents from the city's neighborhoods. The Aspen Area Community Plan established a goal that affordable housing for working residents be provided by both the public and private sectors. The City and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, has provided affordable housing both within and adjacent to the city limits. The private sector has also provided affordable housing. Nevertheless, as a result of the replacement of resident housing with second homes and tourist accommodations, and the steady increase in the size of the workforce required to assure the continued viability of Aspen area businesses and Aspen's tourist based economy, the City has found it necessary, in concert with other regulations, to adopt limitations on the combining, demolition, or conversion of existing multi-family housing in order to minimize the displacement of working residents, to insure that the private sector maintains its role in the provision of resident housing, and to prevent a housing shortfall from occurring. The combining, demolition, conversion, or redevelopment of multi-family housing shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on compliance with the following requirements: (See definition of Demolition.) 1. Requirements for Combining, Demolishing, Converting, or Redeveloping Free- Market Multi-Family Housing Units: Only one of the following two options is required to be met when combining, demolishing, converting, or redeveloping afree- mazket multi-family residential property. To ensure the continued vitality of the community and a critical mass of local working residents, no net loss of density (total number of units) between the existing development and proposed development shall be allowed. a. One-Hundred Percent Replacement. In the event of the demolition of free- market multi-family housing, the applicant shall have the option to construct replacement housing consisting of no less than one-hundred (100) percent of the number of units, bedrooms, and Net Livable Area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed restricted as Resident Occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.070.4 - Affordable Housing. When this one-hundred (100) percent standazd is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-mazket residential development with no City of Aspen Land Use Code. August, 2007. Part 400, Page 136 additional affordable housing mitigation required as long as there is no increase in the number of free-mazket residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.470.070.3 -Expansion of Free-Mazket Residential Units within a Multi-Family or Mixed-Use Development. b. Fifty Percent Replacement. In the event of the demolition offree-market multi- family housing and replacement of less than one-hundred (100) percent of the number of previous units, bedrooms, or Net Livable Area as described above, the applicant shall be required to construct affordable housing consisting of no less than fifty (50) percent of the number of units, bedrooms, and the Net Livable Area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed restricted as Category 4 housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.070.4 -Affordable Housing. When this fifty (50) percent standazd is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-mazket residential development as long as additional affordable housing mitigation is provided pursuant to Section 26.470.070.3 -Expansion of Free-Mazket Residential Units within aMulti- Family or Mixed-Use Project, and there is no increase in the number of free- market residential units on the pazcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.470.080.2 -New Free-Mazket Residential Units within aMulti-Family or Mixed-Use Project. 2. Requirements for Demolishing Affordable Multi-Family Housing Units: In the event a project proposes to demolish or replace existing deed restricted affordable housing units, the redevelopment may increase or decrease the number of units, bedrooms, or Net Livable Area such that there is no decrease in the total number of employees housed by the existing units. The overall number of replacement units, unit sizes, bedrooms, and category of the units shall be reviewed by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and a recommendation forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. Fractional Unit Requirement. When the affordable housing replacement requirement of this section involves a fraction of a unit, cash-in-lieu may be provided only upon the review and approval of the City Council, to meet the fractional requirement only, pursuant to Section 26.470.090.3. - Provision of Required Affordable Housing via aCash-in-Lieu Payment 4. Location Requirement. Multi-family replacement units, both free-mazket and affordable, shall be developed on the same site on which demolition has occurred, unless the owner shall demonstrate and the Planning and Zoning Commission City of Aspen Land Use Code. August, 2007. Part 400, Page 137 determines that replacement of the units on-site would be in conflict with the pazcel's zoning or would be an inappropriate solution due to the site's physical constraints. When either of the above circumstances result, the owner shall replace the maximum number of units on-site which the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the site can accommodate and may replace the remaining units off-site, at a location determined acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. 5. Timing Requirement. Any replacement units required to be deed restricted as affordable housing shall be issued a Certificate of Occupancy, according to the Building Department, and be available for occupancy at the same time as, or prior to, any redeveloped free-mazket units, regazdless of whether the replacement units aze built on-site or off-site. 6. Redevelopment Agreement. The applicant and the City of Aspen shall enter into a redevelopment agreement that specifies the manner in which the applicant shall adhere to the approvals granted pursuant to this Section and penalties for non-compliance. The agreement shall be recorded prior to application for a demolition permit may be accepted by the City. 7. Growth Manaeement Allotments. The existing number of free-market residential units, prior to demolition, may be replaced exempt from growth management, provided the units conform to the provisions of this Section. The redevelopment credits shall not be transferable sepazate from the property unless permitted as described above in Location Requirement. 26.470.080 MajoyPfanning and The fol~ng types of shall approved, by the Plannin and Zoning mmission, pursua res for Rev' ,and the crit for each type of as note all growth m ement applicatio shall ne of Section 2 0.050. Except noted, n growth mana ent approvals sh e deducted ment Allotme and Development tling Levels. , or New a or com new ommerciai ap ved, approved based on General Re The ~l portion of a mi d-use ~r commercial ion of a itions, or de ' by the Plaz outlined ~ ection 26.470!Q yt~to Section 26. .060, elopment desc ' d below. comply ~ the General all Pl ng and Zo fro a respective ual xpansi of an exist n the develop of . -use buildin all be and Zonin ommission City of Aspen Land Use Code. August, 2007. Part 400, Page 138 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Council Work Session -Development Pacing System a.k.a "Downstream" Growth management System DATE OF MEMO: May 14, 2008 MEETING DATE: May 19, 2008 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: There is no formal action requested at this time. The purpose of this meeting is to provide an overview of staff s previous analysis on managing the pace of redevelopment through a limitation on building permits. DISCUSSION: Attached is a memo prepared by staff during the '06-07 land use moratorium. At the time, City Council had reviewed vazious public policy options and requested staff draft legislation on one of the options. This was done primarily to foster additional Council discussion on the merits of pursuing a downstream growth management system. The additional discussion resulted in not pursuing a downstream system and a focus on amendments to the existing growth management system. Staff has not made any amendments to the legislation that was drafted. Staff will use the draft as well as the process charts to facilitate Council's discussion. Additional versions of the legislation can be prepazed at Council's option. ATTACHMENT: A - "Upstream" and "Downstream" Growth Management System charts B -January 29 & 30, 2007 Development pacing memo and draft legislation Page 1 of 1 ___. _._.._, ~~?cGII~JJ~ s ~~ w E a a ~ o_ > w "' :. p ' _..... ~_ ~ o - ~n ~! ~ m ~ i , U j O mN'N'+- w N N CO m p U° m _ O w ~ i 6 ~ ~ U N d = ~ ~ O y d ~ W 9 ~ .i '~_~.° r~ __.._... .... ..i ' /~ v / //~ ~ I ^~'~"~ 1..1... 5 W L f/~ ~`'W^/ O I..L Z ~ Q ~ J ~ V N T N u =) c , r°', u yf ~i y ° ! ~ N C_ ~ N a ~ o - N ~ V 9 o Z - U ,u; ~ ° -~ a - "' > o ` m 0 z 0 ~ L 0 ... ~ z f -~ - ~ a~ 0 J N N• N• w a N, O ~ ,"', < ~ _U Z '- ~ N. '~ ~ w _ ~- s < z O N• N m w 3 Q ' UB' N ~ w ~ H 3 [~ N C C ~ K H } Z N ~ W r Z d' G L w '~ ~ ~ O O ' ^^ V m ~ ~ ~ m w ~ _~ 3 z = a ~ J 3 ~ N J ~ J v 3 3 ~ 3 3 3 S CaCd ~ c. ~, w w, ~ . ~, i.. N w O j _ __... 0 U '- ° ~3 to O w ' L U i ' ~ ~' N. .. ._ :.. ` __. _. _. ,. CN < O w E ! N N N N. C O)p Ua' [ ~ ~I p I ra I ? 5 '. ~ ~' p .. m i .D { ~' i j'a'~ p w C I I C ~ _ i O O ~ C T I N 1 { ~ O ~ O ~i J ~ N T~ II ~ ' " o O 4 mf S +- I I !~ ~ V ~ ~ NI iC- 1 ' ~ a ~ N~ i~~' O ~ ' ~~ ° ~ ~ _ ~3 Q! I O ._ p ~~ L f G p O j U 9 i ; . ~~ ~ i U p ~(~ ~ _ ,., C i O r ' Q= w O' E , ' U 4 N , W ! Ol C~ ~_ ~ o ~ ~ o ~' ~ ~ ~ ~d> ~ m I-a phi ~ ' ' ^ v' W '° 'v a, •a a~ ~ o ;U.. m tom. ~t _.._ (1 2 ~ _ ' ~p ) 4 r m d , Q ~ ~ , I O I I ~~#t'C D O~ >. Ns T Ni . tD ~! N mi ~N O _ O iOiU-p cfQO~O. O~ Q~ H O.. T I~ O O.W ~W , ~' o S IY ~ O ~ ' i U ~ ._ .~ ~ I ~ O `. e O U ; ! N i m Ed mf i m ~ ~ ' ao,a i ~ m s E f o` me ~U+ ~' ~ U; ~_ ...____- _e N' N, N. ° N• w I- Q O N ~ _U Z " ~ w N. ~ z ~ w m _ '- 3 a _ < O N• N' J ~ Cw N E w ~ ~ 3 O N Z L ~ ~ ~ w " w I^ ti Z ~ h ° w Q O w (~ m O o o ~ N > ~ w ~ 3 w ~ w W a ~ 3 z ~ 3 w ~ ~ < = ~ a O a U' c~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 L /~ v`\I ~ V/ ~.~..~ W Z Q J Z m ` ~~ Z _O w ~_._, 3 ,, W ~ <. ~. H Q ', W ~_ W ,. ~. N ca _ G H U O f fn .._.__.1 G n ~ H ° ~. c a u ~~,a 'c ; t U i t ~ m C ~ ; t„~ 3 ~ 'a N a N' N U N a 0I o O) ;o a s . , a ~ ~ .o .~ ;a i:~~' ~ ~ ~.oa o ~ ~ a C N Oi V C, U _~ ' Ci d a: N ~. O L y N ~ N'., ~ Q~ Q ~ o`er m iZ JK ~ .~~ v o a: K;U 1n U ~ LL ~ ~ O U N LL ^ -~ ._. ~ a fl 1 a oa ~ ~° -~ N C. `o-~ a =~~ E o ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~, ~ a ~ _ O 3 ~ Z O [ ~ { ;~ .. . Z ~I O N• U z 2 w N. ~ ~ a < lX i O a ~ , ~ ~ . w N N O vWi ~ W m 3 w '- ~ z ~ ~ O W ~ C w W o ~~ V 3 W O] W ce W ~ ~' O W a ~ ~ ~ Q ~ 3 o ~ Q ~ Z S W m 3 v ~ 3 3 3 3 3 N. i" C a) C U cu. O C ~ a a~ W C i.EoZa"' ~~xm9o ~ l ~ ~ a ~ ? oa~a~N.i c ~ o `o ~ `o r. Q=w~Oj 1 r t ~ 3 w ~ ~ ~ t i LL ' ~ ~ Q ~~ ; ~. U '. N C -~i o ~ ~ ~ ~„ F ~ ~ ~ ~ N• `_ C N N i ~ O C O O D1 ice'- LL C i~ O Z U N .y= yQ-O O r W Q a a E v 5 ~9-°oO~s; .n v~ . r. yQ=W~o' L ~ •- N w J~ ' ~ __ o. ~~ ~ Qi ~ X vTi O ~ 'od U~ ~"- C~ d C~ u+ U d C x ~ ~U ~~ i° W N T~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ fri '' ~ 3 ! U~! ~o ~ iN ~ pC~ I J H j q 6 } i > ~_ ~ = i a. ~' E __ , m ~ _ 0 ~ Q U N ' O ~. N U y ° ~ N 9 w !.a oa-Oa ~= o ~ o ~~: Io~. C O ~, O H O U N C_ : d C; 3~°-° a ai E o E ~' o "' ~ •.> iZ ~~ ~ r~-U ~n'U ~ • N• N• N• w a U O ~- ~ h ~ ~ Z a ~ LL ~ z "' m x 3 U < O N• ~ N~ ~ W ~ ' d W 3 VJ / ~ LJ W N Z N W O O 'n V m Q ~ ~ 7 H J W W a ~ ~ m ~ w F- W 3 W F LL ~ 3 F ~ 3 ~ f ¢ a O a ~ c Ll U 3 3 3 3 3 ~ ~~~~~~ ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Helen Klanderud and Aspen City Council Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Planner RE: Land Use Work Session -Development Pacing System MEETING DATES: January 29`h and 30`h, 2007. 5 pm SUMMARY: For the work sessions on Monday and Tuesday, staff is recommending the following schedule: 1. Development Pacing System. This will cover topics of what types of development are included in the pacing system, the process For gaining an approval, timeframes for applying for a building permit, etc. This memo specifically covers the Development Pacing System. Objective scoringsystem for growth management allotments. This will cover the process by which new growth projects are first reviewed for substantive aspects (height, mass, mitigation, etc.) and then ranked on a set of community objectives prior to gaining allotments. Please refer to the Growth Management Memo and draft legislation. 3. The multi-family housing replacement policy. This will cover how the replacement policy has been integrated into growth management and the requirements for expanding amulti-family building. Please refer to the Growth Management memo and draft legislation. Draft Legislation: The proposed legislation is in draft form and is a work in progress. There are citations that are not complete, for example 26.475.###. There is text that is highlighted for one reason or another. There aze new terms used and occasionally the terms aze not used consistently. There are likely grammatical errors, etc. These will be corrected as the legislation moves forward. The legislation is also being used to facilitate policy discussion. In many circumstances, the proposed legislation is in response to City Council directing staff to explore a certain concept. In other words just because it apneazs in the draft legislation does not mean City Council has made a formal decision to implement a particulaz policy. Development Pacing System Memo -January 29`h and 30`h Draft. Page 1 Where would the Development Pacing Svstem be in the review process? The Development Pacing System (DPS) ~ 5~;~ would occur just prior to submission of a ~ ""' ~„„,~,,, building permit, after all substantive reviews of a project are complete. The ~/~~ current system allows a project to proceed \~ rj directly to the building permit stage once i substantive reviews are complete. With ~ ~~ this new system, a "reservation" would be required to submit for permit, so that the ~ ~~ amount of construction occurring in the city at any one time is paced. ~ No Fpeen~Yr-/ 6'^Y^'6Rmii ~ Submivm New Terms: The new chapter is called the Development Pacing Svstem. In certain places it is referred to as the DPS. Reservations are used to pace building permits. An actual reservation would be a document issued for the development by the city and this document would need to accompany the building permit for it to be accepted by the building department. There is a proposed Lottery for the issuance of reservations. This lottery would be random and likely involve drawing from a hat or a similar process. There are Annual Reservation Limits and Quarterl~Reservation Limits which specify the number of reservations available in a given yeaz or quarter. Numbered Staff Comments on Development Pacing Svstem The draft legislation contains colored numbers in the margin. These aze to bring attention to sections of the legislation for Council's review. The number relates to the Following numbered list of staff comments. Applicability -The types of development to .which the Development Pacing System applies was a discussion point at the previous work session. City Council directed staff to present the potential legislation for consideration. Staff will note that some concerns about the applicability may be lessened by other sections on the lottery and appeals. The first three applicability sections parallel the replacement requirements for single-family and duplex development that are in the growth management chapter. The Pacing System would apply to "scrape and replace" projects, development on existing townsite lots, and development on lot split pazcels (which have been traditionally been treated as existing townsite lots). 2. Section A.4 would affect all existing platted lots. For example, Mazoon Creek Club, Highlands, Moore PUD, Fox Crossing. These types of parcels have Development Pacing System Memo -January 29th and 30th Draft. Page 2 already been through a growth management review (as a subdivision) and have received a Development Order. 3. Provision A.5 would apply the pacing system to significant remodels. This term would need to be defined as well as a system to address change orders for projects that are initially small remodels and "grow" into lazger remodels. 4. The DPS would apply to Multi-Family development. This section also references the replacement requirements in growth management. 5. The DPS would apply to commercial, lodging, and mixed-use development. 6. The exemptions section could be used to rewazd exemplary projects. Councilmember Johnson raised this potential at the previous work session. For example, a project scoring a certain amount in growth management or comprised of a certain mix of uses could be exempted from the DPS. If a policy of rewazding exemplary projects by exempting them from the DPS is desired, then staff suggests using this section to implement such a policy. General Provisions -This section of provisions addresses basic rules of the pacing system. Notes 7 through 10 cover such items as how long a reservation is valid. 7. This section prescribes the length of time a reservation is valid. A short timeframe would probably reduce the amount of speculation -applicants applying for a reservation with no real intent of development. On the other hand, a short reservation timeframe could complicate an applicant's ability to prepare the necessary documents for permit application (such as construction drawings). 8. The ability to extend a reservation may alleviate some of the concern of point #7. The ability for City Council to extend a reservation for any amount of time (bank a reservation) may alleviate concerns about being "forced" to redevelop. Banking of reservations, if done with regularity, may also run counter to the purpose of the DPS by allowing construction impacts to accumulate 9. This section requires all land use approvals to be obtained prior to application for a reservation. 10. This section prohibits the exchange of reservations. The second pazagraph is recommended if the DPS applies to platted subdivisions. The reasons being that allowing reservations to be exchanged within a subdivision may facilitate a more logical sequence of development and may reduce impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Development Pacing System Memo -January 29`h and 30`h Draft. Page 3 Single-Fami[y and Duplex Development -Notes 11 through 14 are options for the pace and distribution of reservations for single-family and duplex development. There aze two variables: city-wide versus by neighborhood and a 1% rate versus a 2% rate used in the draft. Options 3 and 4 are simpler than optionsl and 2. 11. Option 1 disperses the allotments by neighborhood and has an overa112% rate. 12. Option 2 is also by neighborhood but uses a 1% rate. Due to the limited number of reservations available, this would work best with a bi-annual application system. 13. Option #3 uses a 1 % rate on a city-wide basis, not by neighborhood. 14. Option #4 is the same as #3 but uses s 2% rate of construction. Commercial, Mixed-Use, LodEin,2. Multi-Family, and Public Development -Notes 15 through 20 aze options For the distribution of reservations for all development that is not single-family/duplex. Staff suggests lumping these types of uses together as the impacts from these projects are very similaz, regardless of the use, and these types of projects all have a size component to them -the lazger the project, the greater the impact and the longer construction will take. 15. Option #1 treats all construction equally, regazdless of location or use. This strategy targets the amount of construction impact within the community. Notes 16 through IS address the mechanics of accounting. Staff is recommending a system whereby future reservations aze lessened by large projects. This is recommended in all three options. Staff feels this strategy is more equitable than having one project take all the reservations is a particulaz quarter and a more accurate representation of the timeline associated with large projects. 16. The proposed system for commercial, lodging, and mixed-use is based on square footage (not units). This section addresses how square footage is "converted" to reservations. 17. This section allows reservations to "carry-forwazd" to the next quarter if not used. The carry-forward is limited to the calendar yeaz and the accumulation could not grow over several years and become a lazge amount of construction. 18. This section addresses how lazge projects that take several quarters (and sometime several yeazs) to build would be accounted for in the DPS. Staff is recommending a system whereby the number of reservations available in future quarters is reduced according to the size of the project. The chart is one proposed way of doing this. 19. Option #2 would disperse construction between five neighborhoods. This system would focus on the amount of construction in any one location but Development Pacing System Memo -January 29`h and 30`h Draft. Page 4 would not allow for the lack of construction in one area to be "moved" to another azea. For example, if there were no projects in the lower Mill Street azea the extra construction "capacity" could not be used to develop on Main Street. 20. Option #3 is similar to #2, but manages the amount of construction by use. Again, the lack of activity in one use type could not be transferred or moved to another use type. For example, if there aze no public projects the extra construction "capacity" could not be used to develop a lodge. Lottery Process - In previous work sessions, Council directed staff to develop a "mechanical -lottery" system for the issuance of reservations. This was advised as the most simple and equitable system. Notes 21 through 23 address the procedures for granting reservations. 21. Section A describes the schedule for applying for development reservations. 22. This section C describes the random lottery process. 23. Section D provides a priority status for apnlicants who have not won the lottery in several consecutive tries. This section also addresses how to handle multiple priority requests. Anneals -Every Chapter of the Land Use Code has a process for appeals. In this case, staff is recommending two types of appeals, both of which would be directly to City Council. 24. This last section on appeals provide for administrative relief from either the random lottery process or a situation where a hardship exists. Background Information - At the last week's work session, Council requested a summary of some of the data that staff has provided as it relates to development occurring within Aspen. Below, a number of tables aze provided as they relate to building permits being issued, the types and numbers of lots existing in the community, the amount of square footage currently existing by category, and development that has been approved or is currently in the development review process. As shown in table 1, total building permit issuance for single-family and duplex development was at its lowest numbers in 2002 with a total of 16 permits being issued for individual lots. After 2002, the rate at which building permits were issued steadily increased. If a pacing system is developed for single-family and duplex development at a one percent rate of growth, the sixteen reservations will be the same as the number of building permits issued in 2001. At a two percent rate of growth, twenty-eight reservations would be allowed which is the same number of permits the city issued in 2006 for asix-month period. Development Pacing System Memo -January 29`h and 30`" Draft. Page 5 Tablel :Building Site Numbers, 2000 -June 2006 Type of Development 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 June 2006 New SFR or Duplex 35 20 11 13 19 22 17 Scrape and Replace SFR or 18 9 5 8 15 20 11 Duplex Total SFR/ Duplex 53 29 16 21 34 42 28 Development New Multi-Family 2 1 2 2 2 3 0 Scrape and Replace Multi- 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Family Mixed-Use Development 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 Lodge Development 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 Total Multi-Family, Mixed 2 1 4 3 2 9 1 Use, and Lodge Develo went Note: The projects listed above reflect the number of sites, not the number of building permits, associated with the categorized type of development. The Ch ristiana Lodge submitted building permits for structures in 2002, 2005 and 2006. Burlingame also is one site that pulled building permits for multiple structures in 2005 and 2006. In accounting for the ro'ect only the first ear in which a permit is ulled is counted. The following information on residential property classifications in table 2 were provided by the GIS Department based upon Assessor information. The City is delineated into "neighborhoods" as shown in Figure 1 of the draft legislation. Table 2: Residential Property Classitications Area Vacant Single laamil Duplex Other;. Condo Total:.:. Lots . West 55 199 0 112 127 493 Aspen/Highlands Cemetery Lane 5 152 151 85 39 432 West End 31 400 91 467 742 1,731 Smuggler/Riverside 36 385 64 189 645 1,319 East End 12 128 59 679 1,398 2,276 Totals 139 1,264 365 1,532 2,951 6,251 Table 3 currently shows the existing commercial and lodging squaze footage (2006 numbers) as tracked by the Assessor's Office. Additional work is being undertaken with the Assessor's office to refine the information. Development Pacing System Memo -January 29`h and 30`" Draft. Page 6 fable s: l;xtstmg l;ommerctal, Lodge, ana Yubtlc Levelopment ~ Pronertv Tvne Square Footsie in Class ~~ Commercial Forthcoming Lodging Forthcoming Multi-Family Forthcoming Public Forthcoming Total Squaze feet Forthcoming 2% Annual Construction Rate Forthcoming Note: Table 3 is being developed with assistance from the County Assessor. The figures they track are net of common space, parking garages, etc. and will be adjusted to represent a gross square footage of built development in Aspen. Finally, Staff has simplified the table below that shows projects within the City that are under construction, have received final approval or aze still in the review process. Table 4: Under Construction, Approved, or in the Pipeline Projects Project Cuirent Status Total Ftoor .:Area 1 Net Increase Innsbruck Inn Under Const. 17,504 5,534 Residences At Little Nell Under Const. 99,700 45,370 Burlingame Ranch Phase 1 For Sale 170,738 170,738 Galena/Main Under Const. 8,235 5,631 Motherlode UnderConst. 13,948 10,144 Dancing Bear Under Const. 35,631 28,131 Chart House Approved 31,896 25,731 Y ACSD Master Plan Approved 43,060 22,748 ~ 410 S. West End Approved 7,500 3,465 0 Hannah-Dustin Approved 20,400 8,400 719 E. Hopkins Approved 6,000 2,822 Boomerang Vacant Lots Approved 9,724 9,724 Ajax Mountain Building Approved 24,414 4,400 306 S. Garmisch Under Const. 7,334 4,077 Limelight Lodge Under Const. 147,844 97,844 South Aspen St. PUD (2) Approved 73,381 65,659 Stage Road PUD-Bar/X Approved 136,500 130,100 Connor Cabins Under Const. 11,717 9,187 .Sub-Total 865,526 649,705 Burlingame Phases II & Final Needed @ b III CC 222,400 222,400 P&Z for Final, ~' Lod e At As en Mtn. then CC ~~ 185,000 ~~ 160,000 ~~ Development Pacing System Memo -January 29~h and 30`h Draft. Page 7 Pcojecf Cutrenf Status TotalJ"Ioai'- NCt Increase I' COWOP, then Puppy Smith CC 4,400 3,400 Holiday House P&Z, then CC 24,790 8,140 Smugger Racquet Club P&Z, then CC 49,394 47,494 Jerome Professional CC for Final Bldg. Review 23,957 15,515 CC for Final Stage 3 Review 26,414 19,291 CC for final Wienerstube review 46,562 40,562 P&Z, then CC, Cooper Street HPC 9,724 2,781 COWAP then Fire Station COWOP CC ? ? Willoughby Park/ Lift 1 P&Z, then CC, Lodge HPC ? ? P&Z, then CC, LaComida HPC 16,080 9,189 .Sub-Total 608,721: 528,772 Totals 1,474,247 1,178,477 Notes: (1) In some instances, floor area may be a gross or net number. (2) South Aspen St. PUD is the existing vested approval for the proposed Lodge at Aspen Mtn. Development Pacing System Memo -January 29`h and 30`h Draft. Page 8 Chapter 26.475 DEVELOPMENT PACING SYSTEM Sections: 26.475.010 Purpose. 26.475.020 Authority 26.475.030 Applicability. 26.475.040 General. 26.475.050 Quarterly Reservation Limits - Single-Family and Duplex Development 26.475.060 Quarterly Reservation Limits -Commercial, Mixed-Use, Lodging, Multi-Family, and Public Facility Development 26.475.070 Accounting Procedure 26.475.080 Reservation Application Procedures 26.475.090 Reservation Issuance 26.475.100 Appeals 26.475.010 Purpose. This Chapter is designed to ensure that the rate at which new development and redevelopment occurs does not exceed the community's ability to cope with associated public facility and service demands, the level of disruption within existing established neighborhoods, and accompanying changes to community character. The City finds and determines that the pace of construction has a significant impact on neighborhoods. The impacts of excessive new construction activity include: A. Increases in traffic and congestion on local and arterial streets; B. Increased demands for emergency services and fire protection, resulting in slower response times for emergency and fire services; and C. Reductions in air quality resulting from increases in traffic, construction activities, and dust; and D. Increases in noise and disturbances in local neighborhoods; and E. A reduction in the quality of life and visual chazacter of local neighborhoods resulting from the storage and disposal of construction materials, heavy truck parking, and increases in human activity; and F. Increases in stormwater generation, erosion and sedimentation. The City further finds that controlling the pace of construction activity will minimize the impacts described above, balance the impacts of construction between the City's neighborhoods, and accommodate reasonable development and construction activities in January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page I a manner that is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and other established City land use policies. 26.475.020 Authority. The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter and of Common Development Review Procedures, Section 26.304, shall review and approve or disapprove a land use application for a Development Reservation. The land use application requesting a Redevelopment Reservation may not be consolidated with other land use requests. 26.475.030 Applicability. A. Single-Family and Duplex Development. This Chapter shall apply to the following types of development involving asingle-Family or duplex residence within the City of Aspen: 1. The replacement after demolition of an existing single-family dwelling, multiple detached residential units on one parcel, or a duplex dwelling, regazdless of when the lot was subdivided or legally described. (Also see definition of Demolition -Section 26.104.100.) 2. The development of a new single-family dwelling, multiple detached residential units or a duplex dwelling on a vacant lot that was subdivided or was a legally described pazcel prior to November 14, 1977, that complies with the provisions of Section 26.480.020(E) Aspen Townsite Lots. 3. The development of a new single-family dwelling, multiple detached residential units on one pazcel, or a duplex dwelling, or a dwelling unit on a on a lot created by a Lot Split or Historic Landmazk Lot Split approved pursuant to Chapter 26.480 - Subdivision. 4. The development of a new single-family dwelling, multiple detached residential units on one pazcel, or a duplex dwelling on a vacant lot, regardless of when the lot was subdivided or legally described. 5. The Significant Remodel (need to define) of asingle-family dwelling, multiple detached residential units on one parcel, or a duplex dwelling, regardless of when the lot was subdivided or legally described. B. Multi-Family Development. This Chapter shall apply to the following types of multi-family residential development: January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 2 1. The development of new, expansion of existing, or redevelopment of existing multi-family units or structures that has received a DevelopmenfOrder pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Remodeling of existing multi-family residential development which does not expand the amount of existing development, as measured by Net Livable Area, shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter. The demolition of any Resident Multi-Family Housing, as defined in Section 26.104.100, in the City of Aspen, is subject to the procedures and limitations of Chapter 26.470 -Growth Management. C. Commercial LodQinQ and Mixed-Use Development. This Chapter shall apply to the following types of commercial, lodging, and mixed-use development: Replacement after Demolition. The replacement after demolition of an existing commercial, lodging, or mixed-use structure provided that no additional net leasable square footage, net livable square footage, or lodge units are created and there is no change- in-use. (Also see definition of Demolition, Section 26.104.100) If redevelopment involves an expansion of net leasable square footage, net livable square footage, or lodge units, or the demolition of resident multi-family housing, the project shall first gain growth management approval, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Existing, prior to demolition, net leasable square footage, net livable square footage, and lodge units shall be documented by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer prior to demolition. Also see Reconstruction Limitations, Section 26.470.070, and definition of Net Leasable Commercial and Office Space, Section 26.104.100. 2. New Development. The development of new commercial, lodging, or mixed-use structure(s) which has received a Development Order pursuant to Chapter 26.470. 3. Exemptions. The remodeling of existing commercial, mixed-use, or hotel/lodge buildings and portions thereof that does not expand the amount of existing development, as measured by Net Leasable, Net Livable Area, or lodge units, as applicable, or involve a change-in-use shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter. 26.475.040 General. A. Reservations. Submission of a building permit application for the types of development identified herein shall require an accompanying valid reservation. Building permit applications for types of development identified herein which are not accompanied by a valid reservation shall not be accepted by the Building Department. Need definition of Reservation. January 29`s & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 3 B. Compliance with Requirements in Effect at Time of Building Permit implication. All aspects of a project shall comply with the development regulations in effect at the time of submission and acceptance of a complete building permit application, regardless of when a reservation is received, including, but not limited to, land use, zoning, and building codes, as may be amended from time to time, unless vested rights aze established through a Development Order. Certain types of development require growth management, land use, or Historic Preservation approvals be obtained prior to acceptance of a building permit application and applicants are encouraged to consult with the Community Development Department to determine if a project requires any special approvals prior to submission of a building permit application. C. Number of Reservations Required. One valid reservation shall be required and shall allow for the submission of a building permit for the construction of one project define on an individual lot or parcel, independent of the number of structures, units or squaze footage associated with the project. Submission of a building pennit for only one unit when more than one is permitted (for example, one unit of a duplex or one single-family on a pazcel allowing two) shall require one valid reservation. No partial reservations shall be allowed or shall be created. For the purposes of this Chapter, a building permit shall be considered the "Main" permit (a.k.a. the "number one" permit) for the project. Subsequent permits necessary to complete the project and change orders on a permitted project shall not require a new reservation. D. One Reservation Application per Parcel. No more than one reservation application for development or redevelopment on any one lot or pazcel shall be considered concurrently. Applications submitted by more than one applicant on any one lot or pazcel shall be combined and considered one reservation application. A property may only have one valid reservation at any given time. To submit a new reservation request, a valid reservation which has already been granted for the property need not be vacated. If a property which already has a valid reservation is granted an additional reservation, the first reservation shall be considered void upon issuance of the second reservation. E. Expiration of Reservation. Reservations shall allow the submission of a building permit for the quarter in which the reservation was granted, plus the quarter thereafter. By way of example, a reservation granted in the second quarter of the year shall allow the submission of a building permit during the second and third quarters of the yeaz. Failure to submit for a building permit within the prescribed timeframe shall render the reservation invalid. If the expired reservation is for a project which required the reduction of future available reservations, the Community Development Director shall increase the available reservations in future quarters accordingly. January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 4 F. Extension of Reservation. The Community Development Director may authorize aone-time extension of a reservation, for any time period not to exceed one quarter, upon demonstration by the applicant of legal, financial, contractual, or other circumstances which substantially hindered the prepazation of the building permit application and which could not have been foreseen by the applicant. The request shall be submitted in writing prior to expiration and the decision shall be in writing. City Council may authorize an extension of a reservation, for any time period, upon demonstration by the applicant of legal, financial, contractual, or other circumstances which substantially hindered, or may substantially hinder, the prepazation of the building permit application and which could not have been foreseen by the applicant, and upon a recommendation by the Community Development Director. The request shall be submitted in writing prior to expiration and the decision shall be by Resolution of the City Council. G. No automatic Continuation of Reservation Applications. Reservation applications shall only be eligible for reservations to be granted for the specific quarter for which the application is submitted. Applications must be resubmitted in order to be eligible for the next quarter's available reservations. H. All Growth Management Land Use and HPC Approvals Required. Prior to submission of a Reservation application for a commercial, lodge, mixed-use or multi-family project, all land use approvals, and Historic Preservation Commission approvals, as applicable, must first be obtained. Whenever Historic Preservation Commission approval is needed for a proposed single- family or duplex project, only the Historic Preservation Commission's Conceptual approval must be secured prior to submitting an application for a Reservation. Prior to submission of a building permit for asingle-family or duplex project, Final Historic Preservation Commission approvals, as applicable, are required. I. Reservations are not Assignable. Development Reservations obtained, pursuant to this Chapter, shall not be assignable or transferable independent of the conveyance of the real property on which the reservation has been approved. The Community Development Director may allow the transfer of a reservation to another property within the same Subdivision or Planned Unit Development if the transfer will result in a more logical sequence of development of the subdivision and will minimize impacts upon the surrounding neighborhood. Only needed if applicable to vacant platted lots. 26.475.050 Quarterly Reservation Limits - Single-Family and Duplex Development The Development Pacing System is designed to ensure that the rate at which development and redevelopment occurs does not exceed the community's ability to cope with associated public facility and service demands, the level of disruption within January 29`h & 30`" Development Pacing System Draft -Page 5 existing established neighborhoods, and accompanying changes to community character. To this end, the total amount of construction associated with single-family and duplex development is intended to be no more than two percent (2%) of the existing inventory per year. For a variety of reasons, it is possible that the community's actual construction activity or population growth might exceed the designated redevelopment rate percentages in some years. Previous approvals and in/out-migration, for example, can result in periods of construction activity and population growth that exceed the planned average annual rate of redevelopment. This Chapter minimizes the adverse impacts of these peak periods of activity. A. Existing Single-Family and Duplex Development The following table describes the existing (as of March, 2005) amount of single-family and duplex development used as a "baseline" in establishing the Available Quarterly Reservation. Single-Family and Duplex Residential Development within the City o s en (units) Pro e T e Pro ernes in Class Single Family 1,201 uplex or Triplex ~ 106 u lex Condos2 177 otal Single-Family and Duple esidential Pro erties: 1,484 Annual Development Rate for Single amity and Duplex Residentia 15 Properties = 1 evelo ment: 30 Pro erties = 2% B. Quarterly Reservations Available -Single-Family and Duplez Development Option #1- 2 % rate, Quarterly, by neighborhood In order to disperse the single-family and duplex construction activity within the City's established residential neighborhoods, the total annual development allowed within the City in any given year has been assigned to five sub-areas or neighborhoods. The annual development allowance has then been assigned a quarterly limit reflecting one-fourth of the yearly allowance. Applied to each neighborhood, the following number of reservations are available each quarter: ~ Single ownership duplex and triplex properties. For the purposes of this section, each of these properties was considered a duplex. z 354 condominiumized duplex units were recorded with the Pitkin County Assessor. To determine the number of duplex properties, this number was divided by two. January 29`" & 30`" Development Pacing System Draft -Page 6 Neighborhood Aunual Development Limit Quarterly Reservations Available West As en/Hi hlands 4 1 Cemeter Lane/Burlin ame 4 1 West End 8 2 East End 8 2 Smu ler/Riverside 4 1 Total 28 7 B. Bi Annual Available Reservations -Single-Family and Duplex Development Option #2 -1 % rate, Bi Annual, by neighborhood In order to disperse the single-family and duplex development construction activity within the City's established residential neighborhoods, the total annual development allowed within the City in any given year has been assigned to five sub-azeas or neighborhoods. The annual development allowance has then been assigned a quarterly limit reflecting one-fourth of the yearly allowance. Applied to each neighborhood, the following Bi-Annual Reservations aze available: Neighborhood Annual Development Limit Bi-Annual Reservations Available West As en/Hi hlands 2 1 Cemetery LaneBurlingame 2 1 West End 4 2 East End 4 2 Smu ler/Riverside 2 1 Total 14 7 For the purposes of this section, the following neighborhoods are defined as follows: ^ West Aspen/Highlands -All land within the City of Aspen south of State Highway 82 and west of Castle Creek. Cemetery Lane/Burlingame -All land within the City of Aspen north of State Highway 82 and west of Castle Creek. West End -All land within the City of Aspen west of Mill Street/Red Mountain Road and east of Castle Creek. ^ East End -All land within the City of Aspen east of Mill StreeURed Mountain Road and south of the Roaring Fork River, and including the Top-of--Mill Subdivision. ^ Smugg[er/Riverside -All land within the City of Aspen north of the Roaring Fork River and east of Red Mountain Road. January 29`h & 30`" Development Pacing System Draft -Page 7 If a property straddles more than one neighborhood, as defined, or if there is uncertainty around which neighborhood a property exists, the Community Development Director shall make a final determination. Figure 1 B. Quarterly Available Reservations -Single-Family and Duplex Development Option #3 -1 % rate, Quarterly, City-wide In order to limit the single-family and duplex construction activity within the City's established residential neighborhoods, the total annual development of single-family and duplex properties allowed within the City in any given year has been divided into a quarterly limit reflecting one-fourth of the yearly allowance. The following number of reservations aze available quarterly: 1%Annual Quarterly Development Limit Reservations Available 16 4 B. Quarterly Available Reservations -Single-Family and Duplex Development Option #4 - 2 % rate, Quarterly, City-wide In order to limit the single-family and duplex construction activity within the City's established residential neighborhoods, the total annual development of single-family and duplex properties allowed within the City in any given year has been divided into a quarterly limit reflecting one-fourth of the yearly allowance. The following number of reservations aze available quarterly: 2%Annual Quarterly January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 8 Development Limit Reservations Available 28 7 26.475.060 Quarterly Reservation Limits -Commercial, Mixed-Use, Lodging, Multi-Family, and Public Facility Development The Development Pacing System is designed to ensure that the rate at which redevelopment occurs does not exceed the community's ability to cope with associated public facility and service demands, the level of disruption within existing established neighborhoods, and accompanying changes to community character. To that end, the total amount of construction is intended to be comprised of no more than percent L%) of the existing inventory. For a variety of reasons, it is possible that the community's actual construction activity or population growth might exceed the designated redevelopment rate percentages in some years. Previous approvals and in/out-migration, for example, can result in periods of construction activity and population growth that exceed the planned average annual rate of redevelopment. This Chapter minimizes the adverse impacts of these peak periods of activity. A. Existing Commercial, Mixed-Use, Lodge, Multi-Family, and Public Development The following table describes the existing (as of March, 2005) update from Jen amount of commercial, mixed-use, lodge, multi-family, and public development used as a "baseline" in establishing the Available Quarterly Reservation. xisting Commercial, Lodge, and Mixed-Use Development within th Ci of As en roe T e Square foota a in class ommercial odging ---- _ fixed-Use ulti-Family ublic otal Square Feet of Commercial fixed-Use, Lodging, Multi-Family, and ublic Develo ment: Annual Construction Rate fo Commercial, Mixed-Use, Lodging, Multi anvil ,and Public Develo ment: January 29`" & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 9 B. Quarterly Reservations Available -Commercial, Mixed-Use, Lodge, Multi-Family, and Public Development Dption #1- 2% limit an ull construction, equally In order to disperse commercial, mixed-use, lodging, multi-family, and public facility construction activity within the City's established neighborhoods, the total annual development allowed within the City in any given year has been translated into increments of construction impact and then into a quarterly limit reflecting one-fourth of the yearly allowance. The following number of development reservations aze available within a single calendar year: 2% Annual Development Limit Annual Reservations Available 200,000 s uaze feet 20 The Community Development Director shall calculate the number of reservations available each quarter for commercial, mixed-use, lodging, multi-family, and public facilities as follows: Annual Reservations. The Annual Reservations reflects the acceptable amount of construction per year divided by 10,000. This enables projects to be measured according to their level of impact. Un-Claimed Reservations from Previous Quarter. At the conclusion of the first, second, and third quarters, the Community Development Director shall add any unclaimed reservations to become part of the Available Reservations in the next quarter. Any un-claimed reservations at the end of the calendaz yeaz shall not be added to the next year's reservations. Reservations awazded to a project which does not proceed and which aze considered void shall be considered un-claimed and shall be added to the next quarter's Available Reservations as prescribed above. Reservations shall be considered vacated by a property owner upon written notification from the January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 10 Where, the above terms are defined and established as follows: property owner or upon expiration of the reservation, pursuant to Section 26.475.###, Expiration of Reservations. Multi-Quarter Reservations Awarded in Previous Quarters. The impacts associated with the construction of commercial, lodge, and mixed-use projects vary according to the size of the project. The gross square footage under construction has a relationship to the intensity of the impacts and the length of time the project will be under construction. To account for the long-term impacts of a large project, the Development Pacing System reduces the number of available reservations for a certain period of time. Upon issuance of a reservation for a commercial, mixed-use, lodge, multi-family, or public project, the Community Development Director shall reduce the available reservations in future quarters according to the size of the project, as follows: Gross Square Foota a of Pro'ect Required Reduction in Reservations Available in Future Quarters U to 10,000 None 10,001 to 20,000 B 1 in following quarter 20,001 to 30,000 B 1 in each of followin 2 uarters 30,001 to 40,000 B 1 in each of followin 3 uarters 40,001 to 50,000 B 1 in each of followin 4 uarters More than 50,000 B 1 in each of followin 5 uarters B. Quarterly Reservations Available -Commercial, Mixed-Use, Lodge, Multi-Family, and Public Development Option #2 - 2% construction by neighborhood In order to. disperse commercial, mixed-use, lodging, multi-family, and public facility construction activity within the City's established neighborhoods, the total annual development allowed within the City in any given year has been assigned to five sub- areas or neighborhoods. The annual development allowance has then been assigned a quarterly limit reflecting one-fourth of the yearly allowance. Applied to each neighborhood, the following Quarterly development Limits are established: Neighborhood Annual Reservations Quarterly Reservations Downtown 4 1 Main Street 4 1 Lod e Base 4 1 Multi-Famil Districts 4 1 Lower Mill Street, Ski Base Area District, and all other areas 4 1 January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 11 For the purposes of this section, the following neighborhoods are defined as follows: ^ Downtown - All land within the Commercial Core, Commercial, Commercial Lodge, that portion of the Mixed-Use Zone District located outside of the Main Street Historic District, and that portion of the Neighborhood Commercial Zone District located between Cooper and Durant Avenues and Spring and Original Streets. • Main Street -All land within the Main Street Historic District. ^ Lodge Base -All land within the Lodge Zone District. ^ Multi-Family Zone Districts -All land within the Residential Multi- Family and Residential Multi-Family-A Zone Districts. ^ Lower Mil[ Street, Ski Base, All Other Areas -All land within the Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) Zone District, the portion of the Neighborhood Commercial Zone District located along North Mill Street, all land located in the Ski Area Base (SKI) Zone District, and the development of commercial, lodging, and mixed-use projects in areas not otherwise classified above. If a property straddles more than one neighborhood, as defined above, or if there is uncertainty around which neighborhood a property exists, the Community Development Director shall make a final determination. Figure 2 M. ......, ~ A x b „„ `~ e .. yyk„„ :~~ b ='~ a ° t ~ g vl U e &1 ' Lfl ~ ~ ~~ ~ P~ ,~ a'r ~ • ~ -, . ~"~ '~ nt_, ~ f ~.. ~ r ~ ' S ~ ~~~( rR '~ _+ N~N ors O~w Legentl canmemm Arw Rw0 [CFf Rrva ~ LW Wcan LCgH •~.. son CG4~ i 36B.A1 iue)YCmitmp. imw "GSCI 1W.i4B ro.: cw~.w.+ m..we~. wa .Y.. f...w. rtYYxa Imm N. visn cwmry U+.p emcee. m.w d Yx P.mM d..J[MOn m] .w "-` ~ww ne.eww~aenw~w~areer «w.c~...oo. .u xn cis aeu. u. e.mw ~~ mmnonvno.m ~-~NO~' Commercial Areas and Lodge Overlay Properties January 29`h & 30th Development Pacing System Draft -Page 12 B. Quarterly Reservations Available -Commercial, Mized--Use, Lodge, Multi-Family, and Public Development Option #3 - 2 % construction by use In order to disperse commercial, mixed-use, lodging, multi-family, and public facility construction activity within the City's established neighborhoods, the total annual development allowed within the City in any given year has been assigned to four land use types. The annual development allowance has then been assigned a quarterly limit reflecting one-fourth of the yeazly allowance. Applied to each use type, the following Quarterly Development Limits are established: Use Type Annual Reservations Quarterly Reservations Commercial & Mixed-Use 5 I Lod in 5 1 Multi-Famil 5 1 Public 5 1 For the purposes of this section, the following types use types are defined as follows: ^ Commercial and Mixed--Use -All development for which the majority of non-residential square footage is devoted to commercial uses. ^ Lodging and Mixed-Use -All development for which the majority of non-residential squaze footage is devoted to lodging uses. ^ Multi-Family -All development which is solely comprised of multi- family units with no commercial or lodging development. ^ Public - All development of Essential Public Facilities and the development of affordable housing by a public agency or quasi-public agency. For the purposes of this section, mechanical spaces, pazking azeas, internal corridors, and similar non-unit areas shall not be factored when determining the primazy land use category of a project. All projects subject to this Chapter shall be defined as one of the above types of development. If there is uncertainty azound which category a property falls, the Community Development Director shall make a final determination. 26.475.070 Accounting Procedure The Community Development Director shall maintain an ongoing account of Development Reservations updated afrer each quarter. After the conclusion of each calendar yeaz, the Community Development Director shall prepaze a summary report for the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 13 26.475.080 Reservation Application Procedures A. Development Reservation System Application Submission Dates. The Development Reservation System shall allocate the yearly rate of development by quarter, with one-fourth of the yearly allocation available each quarter. A reservation application may only be submitted to the Community Development Director on one of the following four application submittal dates in the month preceding the quarter: Quarter Dates A lication Deadline First Quarter Janua -March December 1 Second Quarter Aril -June March 1 Third Quarter Jul - Au ust June 1 Fourth uarter Se tember -December Au ust 1 When the application submittal date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the next business day shall be the application submittal date. Applications shall only be submitted within the quarter that follows the date in which the reservation is requested. Reservations may not be submitted for future quarters. B. Redevelopment Reservation Application Materials. Applications for Redevelopment Reservations shall include the following: 1. The legal description and street address of the property. 2. The property owner's name, mailing address, and phone number. 3. A letter signed by the applicant designating any representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant and the name, mailing address, and phone number of any representative. 4. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel proposed for development, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the reservation. 5. If the property is a Historic Landmazk, a copy of the final Development Order. If the property is a Historic Landmark and is proposed for asingle-family or duplex, a copy of the approved HPC Conceptual Approval resolution. 6. A copy of the land use approvals, as applicable. For single-family and duplex development, a specific plan depicting how the property will be developed is not required. C Reservation Lottery. Applications for Development Reservation shall be submitted to the Community Development Director on the submittal dates listed above. The Community Development January 29th & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 14 Director shall review the applications for completeness and any incomplete applications shall not be accepted and shall be ineligible to receive a reservation. If the number of reservation requests is equal to or less than the Quarterly Reservation limit established pursuant to Section ##, the Community Development Director shall issue a valid reservation to each of the applicants pursuant to Section ## -Reservation Issuance. If there are more reservation requests for a particular neighborhood than the Quarterly reservation limit, established pursuant to Section ##, Quarterly Reservation Limits, the Community Development Director shall randomly select from the pool of applications until the number of selected projects equals the Reservation Limit for the particular neighborhood. An affidavit, signed by a notary public, who is not an employee of the Community Development Department, shall demonstrate that the drawing was in-fact random. The Community Development Director shall issue a valid reservation to each of the selected applicants, pursuant to Section ## -Reservation Issuance. D. Requestiug Priority Status An applicant who has submitted an application for a development reservation, for the same property, and who has not been selected for a reservation in at least three consecutive lotteries may request priority status in the next quarter's lottery. The Community Development Director shall reserve the requisite number of reservations for the subject property up to the number of remaining allocations. The Community Development Director shall reduce the next quarter's Quarterly Reservation Limit accordingly. The subject property shall then be treated as a selected property in the next quarter's lottery for the purposes of reservation issuance. If the number of applicants requesting priority status exceeds the number of available reservations in the next quarter's lottery, the Community Development Director shall randomly select from the pool of applicants requesting priority status as provided in subsection C of this Section. Any applicant requesting priority status not selected for a reservation in a random drawing shall be guaranteed a reservation in the next quarter's lottery and shall not be required to be randomly selected. The Community Development Director shall reduce the Quarterly Reservation Limit accordingly. 26.475.090 Reservation Issuance. Following the selection process outlined above, the selection of each project to receive a reservation, afifteen-day waiting period to allow for submission of any appeals, and the conclusion of all appeals, the Community Development Director shall issue a Redevelopment Reservation to each application selected. The reservation shall include: 1. The legal description and street address of the property. 2. The property owner's name, mailing address, and phone number. 3. Effective date and expiration date of the reservation. January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 15 4. The process by which an owner may request extension of the reservation. After a reservation has been issued for a project, the applicant may submit for a building permit. The Community Development Department shall not accept any application for building permit that requires a valid reservation, unless the permit application is accompanied by a valid. reservation. A valid reservation shall not constitute asite-specific development plan or permission to proceed with any aspect of the development. A valid reservation shall only allow a building permit application to be submitted to the Building Department for development of the subject property. Notwithstanding avalid reservation, all aspects of a project shall comply with the development regulations in effect at the time of submission and acceptance of a complete building permit application including, but not limited to, land use, zoning, and building codes, as may be amended from time to time. Certain types of development require land use or Historic Preservation approvals be obtained prior to acceptance of a building permit application and applicants aze encouraged to consult with the Community Development Department to determine if a project requires any special approvals prior to submission of a building permit application. 26.475.100 Appeals A. Appeals of Random Selection. An applicant aggrieved by the Community Development Director's random selection of reservations may appeal the decision to the City Council, pursuant to the procedures and standards of Section 26.316, Appeals. City Council may uphold the selection order, remand the selection to the Community Development Director for reselection with or without direction, may choose to hold a random drawing to reselect the projects, or may choose to issue a reservation to the aggrieved party. The City Council decision shall be the final administrative action on the matter. Upon appeal of the Community Development Director's random selection for reservation, the Community Development Director shall not issue reservations for the particular quarter or accept or process any application for building permit requiring a reservation for the particulaz quarter until the appeal is concluded and the final selection is established. B. Appeal for Insufficient Reservations. Any property owner within the City of Aspen who is prevented from developing a property which has been granted a Development Order because that year's or quarter's development reservations have been entirely allocated may appeal to the City Council for relief. An applicant requesting such relief must first be denied a reservation and prevented from applying for a building permit due to lack of necessazy reservations. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether the hazdship represented by the denial of a reservation upon the property owner is beyond reasonable expectation and January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 16 represents a special circumstance unique to the property owner which is not applicable to other property owners subject to the provisions of this Chapter such that the property owner's rights aze being substantially deprived. If City Council finds that such a special circumstance exists, City Council may take any such action determined necessazy including, but not limited to, making a one-time issuance of a reservation to accommodate the application. C. Other appeals All other appeals shall be to a court of competent jurisdiction. January 29`h & 30`h Development Pacing System Draft -Page 17