Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.cu.725 E Durant #22A.0007-2007City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER PARCEL ID NUMBER PROJECT ADDRESS 1=1/\2121:17 CASE DESCRIPTION REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 0007.200.7ASLU 2735- 124 -69 -718 725 E. Durant 22A Jason Lasser Minor Application/Condo Use Jennifer Hall 8/13/07 CLOSED BY Amy DeVault ■ Fie Edit Record Navigate F,tn . Famat Tab Help Hide aX a 14 S 6 4 Jump 1 Group J2 —Aspen Land Use i i Action comdevlu 2 LAND USE REVIEW r-Schedule Request -- i Assigned by � '.� Sched startF—.j Sched end 1 i� I Contact Phone— Received .._.__�: ........ .. —. _....__....._ Result Inlomutiorr -.-.. _ - -. -. -__ .. Complete P Code Start date 102J2112007 09.1535 AM J Complete date 03121/2007 09:15:17 AM 3 Hours 9.5 Completed by jasonl r JASON LASSER I IVR Message r Comments Activity Check List i I [!e E& gecord PUavigate Fgrm Reports Fori jab yelp eT Men,, Custom FieW Fees Ac6om Pero* RVig Staus Fee Summary Routcg History :Atari rd ., Last Name _j Fnst NamejdENNIFER ,725 E DURANT AVE UNIT 22A HALL _ .ASPEN CO 81611 Phana (3701404 t09i � as, 11 ;P685A Lender Last Name _j Pnsl Name; PFmne I AscenGoH(bl Record 2 o12 .................'i" _.. .....__.....__. Permit Type laslu !Aspen Land Use 2004 .__.. ...._._,.. ._ .___ .. _........... , Permit U007.2007.ASLU y Address I E 6 ANT AVE _ A.pt/Suie �22A Coy ASPEN � Side CO , I zip 181611 %I Pamdl lrBerrndron .. o i Mastat Parrrel 0tl6.2065.AAU � .. Rouliig Queue 3aaNA6� Appled KfI3612U0J e Project Status rpendmy Appxaeed o Oescrif MINOR APPLICATION- GMQS EXEMPTION- CONDITIONAL USE Issued CHATEAU DUMONT 224 r Fi" { Submitted PENNIFER4ALL-404.10S1 _ Gock 16unrpg Days 0 Eupres P1111j L" Name jHAl.l Fist Name IdENNIFER ('7'2`55E DU�RANT AVE UNIT 22A ___ Phone (`pia) 404 iosl�"' �ASPEI N C081611 Omens Applicant? Last Name _j Fnst NamejdENNIFER ,725 E DURANT AVE UNIT 22A HALL _ .ASPEN CO 81611 Phana (3701404 t09i � as, 11 ;P685A Lender Last Name _j Pnsl Name; PFmne I AscenGoH(bl Record 2 o12 DEVELOPMENT ORDER City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order ", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders ", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights ", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site - specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three (3) -year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless the change is accomplished or a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site - specific development plan as described below. Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number: Jennifer Hall and 111 W. Hyman, LLC, represented by Jennifer Hall; 1 I 1 West Hyman, Aspen, CO 81611 970.404.1091. Legal Description and Street Address of Subiect Property: 111 West Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO, 81611. Legally described Condo: West Shadow Mountain Townhomes, Condo Unit 111. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and /or Attachment Describing Plan: Insubstantial Amendment to a Growth Management Order for 111 W. Hyman in exchange for deed restricting to Category 3, affordable classification to Unit #22A of Chateau Dumont Apartments, 725 E. Durant, Resolution No. 7, Series of 2007. Land Use Approval Received and Dates: Administrative approval granted June 11, 2007. Effective Date of Development Order: August 19, 2007. (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) Expiration Date of Development Order: August 19, 2010. (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) this 13th day of August 2007, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. Chris Bendon. AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen PUBLIC NOTICE OI DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL CM of Aspen Pu li. in the Aspen Times Weekly on August 19,2887.(555061) PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site - specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 111 West Hyman Avenue. Aspen, CO 81611. Legally described as; Condo: West Shadow Mountain Townhomes, Condo Unit 111. The approval is to grant an insubstantial amendment to a Growth Management Order for 111 West Hyman Avenue in exchange for deed restricting to Category 3 affordable classification to Unit #22A of Chateau Dumont Apartments, 725 E. Durant, Resolution No. 7, Series of 2007. The changes were approved pursuant to an administrative variance granted June 11, 2007, and the changes are depicted in the land use application on file with the City of Aspen. For further information contact Jason Lasser at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, Colorado. (970) 920.5090. City of Aspen Published in The Aspen Times on August 19, 2007. r^ L. MEMORANDUM TO: Housing Board FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing THRU: Tom McCabe DATE: March 7. 2007 RE: APPROVAL OF UNIT 725 E. DURANT AVENUE, UNIT 22A, TO REPLACE MITIGATIONREQUIREMENTAT111 WESTHYMAN Parcel ID No. 2737 - 182 -70 -005 ISSUE: If Unit 22A located at 725 E. Durant is approved as a RO unit, the applicant would like approval to redesignate the unit as a Category 3 employee housing unit by replacing the Category 1 rental unit located at 111 West Hyman with this unit. BACKGROUND: The unit located 111 West Hyman was deed restricted in 1995 per Ordinance No. 5 (Series of 1993) whereby the owner, William Snare, received a growth management allotment for one unit and a growth management exemption for one affordable housing unit. The deed - restricted was required to be a one - bedroom, Category 1 unit. At the time, City Council approved the 1992 GMQS application for the 111 West Hyman residence, there were no employee - housing mitigation requirements. Rather the unit located in the basement was considered in the competitive scoring of the application. According to Part VII, Section 2, paragraph 5, Buy -Down of Existing Units, of the Employee Housing Guidelines: If the employee units are proposed to be provided off -site through the deed restriction of existing units, the applicant shall be required to document the feasibility of this off -site location by demonstrating that they have an interest in the property or dwelling units and by specifying the size and type of units to be provided and any physical upgrade to be accomplished. Future buy -down requests for deed - restricted units shall be accepted only in existing complexes at Category 3 or above, if at all, and shall be reviewed on a case -by- case basis. In any new projects that consist of free - market and deed - restricted units, the homeowners' assessments shall be based on the value of the free - market units compared to the deed - restricted units. This language shall be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the project. No changes to these requirements would be allowed without APCHA's approval. The applicant is requesting a recommendation approving the request to release the deed - restriction on the unit located at 111 West Hyman and change the RO designation, if granted, to Category 3. The unit will be sold at a lesser value than the maximum Category 3 sales price of $147,000 for a newly deed - restricted one - bedroom unit. The applicant is proposing to set the price at $100,000, The current maximum sales price for a Category 1 one - bedroom unit is $45,000 and $97,000 for a Category 2 one - bedroom unit. The policy adopted by the Housing Board, City Council and BOCC, only allow buy -downs in mixed projects to Category 3. The unit is a subgrade unit; however, there is a big window in the main living area that provides adequate amount of light and the unit is located in town. Membership in the Chateau Dumont Association does allow the owner unrestricted use of the Sky Hotel pool and Chateau Dumont parking in the regular association fees. RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board reviewed this application at their Regular Meeting held March7, 2007 and after a long deliberation recommended approval of the unit only if the change in use in the previous application for 725 East Durant, Unit 22A to a deed - restricted unit is approved and under the following conditions: Due to the existing Category 1 unit located at 111 West Hyman containing 800 square feet and the proposed unit located at 725 East Durant, Unit 22A, contains 605 square feet, there is a loss of square footage of 195 square feet. The applicant shall provide to the Housing Office an additional mitigation fee based on the difference between the two units at the Category 3 rate as stated in the Guidelines at the time of recordation of the deed restriction. 2. The unit shall be deed - restricted prior to Certificate of Occupancy (CO) for the remodel to a Category 3 and listed through the Housing Office after obtaining CO through the lottery process. 3. The maximum sales price for the Category 3 unit shall be no higher than $100,000. 4. Upon recording of the deed restriction for 725 E. Durant, Unit 22A, a release of the deed restriction on the existing unit located at 111 W. Hyman shall be lifted upon approval from the Community Development Department. 36286 IN {ICI E KIII I�IIIC �I��I PIT IN COUNTY CO R II IIIIIIII III (IIII IIII IIII 16.00 D 0 3: t2 0 RESOLUTION NO.7 (SERIES OF 2007) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPROVALS FOR 111 WEST HYMAN AVENUE, A.K.A. "THE SNARE GROWTH MANAGEMENT APPLICATION," LOCATED AT 111 WEST HYMAN AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2735-124-69-018 RECEPTION #: 539260, 06/25/2007 at P8Z Resolution No. 7, 09:32:13 AM, Series of 2007. Page 1 1 OF 6, R $31.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 111 W. Hyman, LLC, the owners of property located at 111 West Hyman Avenue, and from Jennifer Hall, owner of a property located at 725 East Durant Avenue known as Chateau Dumont Unit 22A, for a substantial amendment to the growth management approvals for the property located at 111 West Hyman; and, WHEREAS, the application proposed to eliminate the rental affordable housing unit from the property at 111 West Hyman Avenue in exchange for deed restricting to Category 3 affordable housing classification Unit #22A of Chateau Dumont; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the request for a substantial amendment to the Growth Management approvals for 111 West Hyman vl Avenue, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.0.7 & 8 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code � and recommended to the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission approval with conditions; and, "�j WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.0 of the Land Use Code, Growth Management approval may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on March 20, 2007, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing, received a recommendation from the Community Development Director, considered the presentation of the applicant, took and considered public testimony, and reviewed the application according the applicable review criteria and approved the application by a four to one (4 -1) vote, with the conditions listed hereinafter; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and Zoning Commission approves a substantial amendment to the 111 West Hyman Avenue Growth Management RECEPTION #: 539260, 06/25/2007 at P8Z Resolution No. 7, 09:32:13 AM, Series of 2007. Page 1 1 OF 6, R $31.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO approval (also known as "the Snare Growth Management application "), subject to the conditions listed below. Section 1: 111 West Hyman Avenue Commensurate with recording of the deed restriction for 725 E. Durant, Unit 22A, a release of the deed restriction on the employee unit located at I I I W. Hyman shall be recorded. The structure shall be physically changed to prohibit separate occupancy of the employee unit by removing the kitchen in the unit. The former unit may by physically integrated into the remaining free - market unit. A building permit shall be required for such work. The property shall conform to all zoning building regulations of the City, as amended from time to time. Section 2: Unit #22 Chateau Dumont Commensurate with rescinding the deed restriction for the employee unit located at l l 1 West Hyman Avenue, Chateau Dumont Unit #22A shall be deed restricted as a Category 3 affordable housing ownership unit. Transfer of ownership of Chateau Dumont #22A shall be according to the Lottery process of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The maximum initial sales price for the Category 3 unit shall be no higher than $100,000. Section 3: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department or the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 4• This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and sliall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. [signatures on following page] 536286 100 .964o=� 3:17. P&Z Resolution No. 7, Series of 2007. Page 2 APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on March 20, 2007. APPROVED AS TO FORM: ames True, Asst. City Attorney ATTEST: jkic-Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING k Ruth Kruger, Chai 536286 IIIIIIIIIIIuDILL PiTKIIN COUNTY C1111111111004904t) e.00 3.12 III�IIII K y05 CPUDILL PITK jpNICE PU Resolution No. 7, Series of 2007. Page 3 a� NOTICE OF APPROVAL For An Insubstantial Amendment to Growth Management Development Order for 111 West Hyman Avenue, an Amendment to Resolution No. 7, Series of 2007 Parcel ID No. 2735- 124 -69 -018 APPLICANT: Jennifer Hall REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman SUBJECT OF AMENDMENT: Condominium Unit 22a, Chateau Dumont Apartments, 725 E. Durant Avenue, Resolution No. 7, Series of 2007 + SUMMARY: Jennifer Hall has requested an Insubstantial Amendment of a Growth Management Development Order for 111 West Hyman Avenue, an Amendment to resolution No. 7, Series of 2007. The application proposed to eliminate the rental affordable housing unit from the property at 111 West Hyman in exchange for deed restricting to Category 3 affordable classification Unit #22A of Chateau Dumont. The applicant/owner has requested permission to be allowed to select the initial buyer for Unit #22A instead of an open lottery process through Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority. APCHA approval was granted on June 6, 2007 to allow the applicant to proceed with amending Resolution No. 7 to allow for the owner to select the initial buyer. Existing Language in Resolution No. 7, Series of 2UU Section 2: #Unit 22 Chateau Dumont Commensurate with rescinding the deed restriction for the employee unit located at III West Hyman Avenue, Chateau Dumont Unit 22A shall be deed restricted as a Category 3 affordable housing ownership unit. Transfer of ownership of Chateau Dumont #22A shall be according to the Lottery process of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority. The maximum initial sales price for the Category 3 unit shall be no higher than 100,000. New Lan ua e in resolution No. 7, Series of 2007 Section 2: #Unit 22 Chateau Dumont Commensurate with rescinding the deed restriction for the employee unit located at III West Hyman Avenue, Chateau Dumont Unit 22A shall be deed restricted as a Category 3 affordable housing ownership unit. The initial transfer of ownership of Chateau Dumont #22A to a buyer selected by the applicant /owner, Jennifer Hall, shall be according to the requirements of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority. The maximum initial sales price for the Category 3 unit shall be no higher than $100,000. STAFF EVALUATION: In order to amend specific language of the resolution that approved the Growth Management allotment originally, an Insubstantial Amendment of a Growth Management Development Order must be approved. Staff supports the proposed amendment because it is minor in nature, has been approved by APCHA and meets the criteria for an insubstantial amendment pursuant to section 26.470.140 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. DECISION: The Community Development Director finds the Insubstantial Amendment of a Growth Management Development Order to be consistent with the review criteria (Exhibit C) and with approval from APCHA and thereby, APPROVES the amendment as specified below. APPROVED BY: Q V L Chris Bendon Community Development Director Date Attachments: Exhibit A — Resolution No. 7, Series of 2007 Exhibit B — APCHA minutes Exhibit C — Review Criteria APPROVED JUN 1 1 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITYOFASPEN EXHIBIT C 26.470.140 Amendment of a Growth Management Development Order. A. Insubstantial Amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an approved growth management development order may be authorized by the Community Development Director if: 1. The change conforms to all other provisions of the Land Use Code and does not exceed approved variations to the Residential Design Standards, require an amendment to the Commercial Design Review approval, or such variations or amendments have been approved. 2. The change does not alter the number, size, type or deed restriction of the proposed affordable housing units or those changes have been accepted by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. 3. The change is limited to technical or engineering considerations discovered prior to or during actual development that could not reasonably be anticipated during the review process, or any other minor change that the Community Development Director finds has no substantial effect on the conditions and representations made during the original project review. B. Substantial Amendment. All other amendments to an approved growth management development order shall be reviewed pursuant to the terms and procedures of this Chapter. Allotments granted shall remain valid and applied to the amended application, provided the amendment application is submitted prior to the expiration of vested rights. Amendment applications requiring additional allotments, or allotments for different uses, shall obtain those allotments pursuant to the procedures of this Chapter. MEMORANDUM TO: Jason Lasser, Community Development Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing DATE: March 7, 2007 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 725 E. DURANT AVENUE, UNIT 22A Parcel ID No. 2737 - 182 -70 -005 ISSUE: The applicant is requesting a change in use of Condominium Unit 22A to residential and to designate the unit as a RO employee - housing unit. BACKGROUND: The property is located in the Chateau Dumont apartments at 725 East Durant. In the course of the owner, Jennifer Hall, applying for a building permit, some questions were raised as to if this specific unit was legal. In March of 2006, the Community Development Department denied the building permit stating that they were unable to conclude that Unit 22A was a legally created unit. The Community Development Department did not deem this unit a separate unit from Unit 22, therefore, the applicant needs a growth management allotment to qualify the unit as residential. Also, the unit is located within the Lodge zone district and an employee - housing unit that does not house employees of the lodge is a conditional use. Under Section 26.470.050.A and Section 26.470.040.C.7, the applicant must mitigate; however, this application proposes a change to a residential use, therefore, no employees will be generated. Both sections relate to deed - restricting a unit at Category 4 or below. The applicant is proposing to designate this unit as a residential - occupied (RO) unit. RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board reviewed this application at their Regular Meeting held March 7, 2007 and due to the nature of the unit and that the unit is not being required for mitigation purposes, the Housing Board recommends approval of the unit with the RO designation under the following conditions: Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the current deed restriction that is required for all other employee housing limiting the appreciation of the unit to 3% or CPI, whichever is less, shall be recorded. At any time Ms. Hall would want to sell the unit, the unit would need to be sold through the lottery system via APCHA. 2. A price cap will be set and stated in this deed - restriction. The price cap will be set at the price Ms. Hall paid to purchase the unit, plus any other costs associated with bringing the unit into compliance (to include, but not be limited to, carrying and acquisition costs [loan r^ and interest], land use development fees [application fees, land planner fees, attorneys fees] and all remodeling fees). 3. Acknowledgement of the Chateau Dumont HOA of this request must be provided. Due to the public notice requirement established in the Code, this will act as notice to the HOA. 2 R MEMORANDUM 1A TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Allgaier�, Community Development Deputy Director 1jL FROM: Jason Lasser, Planner RE: 725 E. Durant, Condominium Unit 22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments — Growth Management Review for the development of affordable housing, Growth Management Review for Change in Use, Conditional Use to allow an affordable housing unit in the Lodge District— Resolution No. Oq , Series 2007 — Public Hearin¢ DATE: March 20, 2007 SUMMARY: EXISTING FLOOR PLAN APPLICANT /OWNER: _xistin Fioor_ ?Ian Jennifer Hal] ,(� yr °�- REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman Planning Services LOCATION: CONDOMINIUM UNIT 22 -A, CHATEAU DUMONT APARTMENTS, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado: CURRENT ZONING & USE — LODGE (L) A portion of the unit was developed as a lodge unit and the remainder was developed as common space (a laundry room) PROPOSED LAND USE: 1. Growth Management Review for the development of affordable housing. Demo Plan DGmolltion Pion Page 1 of 4 .1^ PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant, Jennifer Hall, has requested the approvals necessary to make changes to Condominium Unit 22 -A, the property located in the Chateau Dumont Apartments at 725 East Durant. During the process of submitting for a building permit, questions were raised about the legality of the unit. The Community Development Department denied the building permit, unable to conclude the Unit 22 -A was a legally created unit. The Applicant requested Growth Management Review for a Change -in -Use, Affordable Housing and for a Conditional Use Review. REVIEW CRITERIA: 1) Growth Management Approval for a Change -in -Use. The Applicant has requested approval to change an existing free - market unit to an affordable housing unit. The free - market unit is an illegal dwelling unit and was originally developed as a lodge unit and a laundry/common space. The review requires that the development proposal have sufficient growth management allotments, be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, mitigate for employees generated, and represent minimal additional demand on public infrastructure. The change -in -use does not require any growth management allotments, and does not generate any mitigation requirements. Legalizing this existing unit will not increase the demand on public infrastructure, as this unit has been operating as a dwelling unit for a number of years. The proposal is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. By legalizing this unit and making it an affordable housing unit, the application meets the goals of the Affordable Housing and Economic Sustainability sections of the AACP. Specifically, the unit will increase the number of permanent residents in the downtown. 2) Growth Management Approval for Affordable Housing. The Applicant has requested to establish this unit as an Affordable Housing unit. The review requires that the development proposal have sufficient growth management allotments, be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, comply with the Housing Authority guidelines, provide actual units or buy down units, and provide "for sale" units. There is no cap on the number of Affordable Housing units that can be built in any one year, so the Application meets this criterion. As stated above, the proposal is consistent with the Housing and Economic Sustainability sections of the AACP. The Housing Board provided comments in a memo dated March 7, 2007, attached as Exhibit D. 3) Conditional Use Review. This Application is in the Lodge (L) zone district, and proposes developing a residential unit through the consolidation of the existing unit and the laundry space. Affordable housing, not associated with a lodge, is a conditional use in this zone district. The review requires that the development proposal be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, be consistent with the character of the area and other uses in the zone district, minimize adverse effects on surrounding properties, represent a minimal demand on public facilities, and meet any affordable housing mitigation requirements. As stated above, the proposal is consistent with the AACP, and will have a minimal impact on public infrastructure as the site is fully developed. It meets the affordable housing requirements, as the Application is for an affordable housing unit. The proposal is consistent with the uses in the zone district and is compatible with the surrounding character. Because Page 3 of 4 the development makes internal changes only, there is a no visual impact on the area. The Chateau Dumont complex is residential in nature so this proposed conditional use is in keeping with the uses in the building and area. The proposal is therefore consistent with the surrounding uses and units. 4) Special Review for Parking. Staff supports the parking waiver because the required parking is short based on today's code. The parking supplied for the Chateau Dumont is not proposed to be amended and appears to function adequately. The property owners all share an undivided interest in the on -site parking and there's no practical ability to achieve additional parking on this site. In addition, the proposed affordable housing unit which already functions as a dwelling unit, is immediately accessible to downtown, shopping, recreation, employment, etc. Staff believes that this location avails itself to a lower parking requirement. Based on the practical difficulty of providing parking and the location of the unit, staff supports the Special Review request to maintain the existing parking deficit. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The Fire Marshal, Water Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Housing Department, Building Department, and Electric Department, have all reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the goals of the AACP as well as the applicable review standards in the City Land Use Code. Staff recommends approval of the Application. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. _&, Series of 2007, which is worded to approve Growth Management Review for the development of affordable housing, Growth Management Review for Change in Use, a Conditional Use and Special Review for Parking, to allow the newly expanded residential unit to be an affordable housing unit in the Lodge District. ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A — GMQS Change -in -Use EXHIBIT B — GMQS for Affordable Housing EXHIBIT C —Conditional Use EXHIBIT D — Housing Board Comments dated March 7, 2007 Page 4 of 4 RESOLUTION NO.1g._, SERIES OF 2007 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR A CHANGE -IN -USE TO RESIDENTIAL, A SPECIAL REVIEW FOR PARKING, AND A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT TO BE LOCATED IN THE LODGE DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 725 E. DURANT, CONDOMINIUM UNIT 22 -A, CHATEAU DU MONT APARTMENTS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-70-005 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Jennifer Hall, represented by Alan Richman Planning Services, submitted an application requesting approval of a growth management review for the development of affordable housing, a growth management review for a change -in- use to residential, special review for parking, and a conditional use review to allow an affordable housing unit in the Lodge (L) zone district located at 725 E. Durant, Condominium unit 22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the Application and determined that the application met the applicable review standards, and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the application under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at which time the Commission considered and approved the following land use actions as they found the application to meet the review standards of growth management review for an affordable housing unit, special review for parking, growth management review for a change -in -use and for a conditional use to allow affordable housing to be located in the Lodge district by a vote of to (_to _) for the Condominium Unit 22 -A, located at 725 E. Durant, Condominium unit 22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the � n development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a growth management review for the development of affordable housing, a growth management review for a change -in -use to residential, a special review for parking and a conditional use review to allow an affordable housing unit in the Lodge (L) zone district at a property located at 725 E. Durant, Condominium unit 22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, with the following conditions: 1. The applicant is required to file a deed restriction prior to transfer of ownership. 2. The Change -in -Use shall not be finalized until deed restriction has been approved and recorded. 3. Any applicable impact or mitigation fees shall be paid prior to deed restriction recordation. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on this 20th day of March, 2007. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney jasm9nuTya :e, Chair RuNn IGv,ger ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ce PLANNING COMMISSIONER NOTES: ..1 .t EXHIBIT A - GMOS CHANGE -IN -USE A change -in -use, of an existing property, structure, or portions of an existing structure, between the use categories identified in Section 26.470.020, (irrespective of direction) for which a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for at least two (2) years and which is intended to be reused, shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the change -in -use, pursuant to Section 26.470.030(D), Annual Development Allotments. Staff Finding The applicant would like to legalize the unit as an affordable housing unit. Part of this unit was originally developed as a lodge unit and the remaining portion was developed as laundry /common space (See Exhibit A). Annual Allotment in Section 26.470.030 D sets "No annual limit" for residential affordable housing that may be developed within the City. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding The applicant proposes an interior remodel to the unit so "it can be brought up into compliance with health and safety codes, in order for the unit to continue being used by a local resident as affordable housing." In the AACP, one of the Themes for the 2000 Community Plan is Revitalizing the Permanent Community, under which a goal is to increase resident housing. The proposal meets the AACP's goals with respect to Housing by providing a deed - restricted unit in town. The proposal also meets the intent of the Economic Sustainability section by helping provide for a critical permanent mass of residents. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c) Sixty (60) percent of the additional employees generated by the change, according Section 26.470.050.A, Employee Generation Rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash -in -lieu thereof. Any affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Staff Finding The proposed change from a lodge unit to a residential use does not generate any employees. Staff finds this criterion to be met d) No more than one (I) free- market residential unit is created through the change - in -use. The change does not reduce the number or quality of affordable housing Exhibit B — GMQS Review Criteria Pg 1 .� WN units on site or such change as been approved by the Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Authority. Staff Finding The applicant proposes to create one (1) affordable housing dwelling unit. There are no free - market units being created by the change -in -use. Staff finds this criterion to be met e) Affordable housing net livable space, for which the finished floor level is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to thirty (30) percent of the additional free- market residential net livable space, for which the finished floor level is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher. Additional net livable affordable housing space beyond this the Floor Area requirement may be developed below Natural or Finished Grade but shall not count towards this criterion. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Staff Finding The applicant proposes to designate the unit as a resident occupied (RO) affordable housing unit. 100% of the proposed floor area will be affordable housing. The Staff finds this criterion to be met. f) The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and road and transit services. Staff Finding The Applicant has stated that the existing unit has existed as a resident occupied housing unit for more than 30 years. If the unit has been functioning as a residential unit, then the impacts listed above will not increase. Ten (10) on -site parking spaces for the existing units are not assigned to individual owners, but are available as first - come, first -served basis with equal ownership divided among the ten (10) owners. Parking is not available to guests or tenants of owners. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit B — GMQS Review Criteria Pg 2 EXHIBIT B - GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING Section 26.470.040 C.6., of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Growth Management approval must comply with the following standards and requirements. a) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the new units, pursuant to Section 26.470.030. C, Development Ceiling Levels. Staff Finding As noted previously in Review Criteria A, adequate development allotments are available for this proposal. The City has not yet reached it's ceiling of 2,428 units. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding The project provides affordable housing within the city limits which meets one of the AACP's housing goals. In the AACP, one of the Themes for the 2000 Community Plan is Revitalizing the Permanent Community, under which a goal is to increase resident housing. Additionally, the proposal meets the AACP goal of Economic Sustainability by providing a dwelling unit that will contribute to the permanent critical mass of residents. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c) The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Staff Finding As outlined in the memo dated March 7, 2007, from the Housing Operations Manager, the Housing Board recommends approval of the application with conditions. Staff has included these conditions as part of the Resolution. Staff finds this standard to be met. d) Affordable Housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy -down units. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty (50) percent or more of the unit's net livable square footage is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher. Off -site units shall be provided within the City of Aspen city limits. Units outside the city limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to 26.470.040.D.Z Provision of affordable housing through a cash -in -lieu payment shall be at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from the Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. Staff Finding The unit is not required for mitigation purposes as outlined in the memo dated March 7, 2007, from the Housing Operations Manager. Staff finds this criterion to be met. e) The proposed units shall be deed restricted as `for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority or the City of Aspen to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority, or its Board of Directors, at its sole discretion, may authorize affordable housing units owned and associated with a lodging or commercial operations to be rental units if a legal instrument, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures permanent affordability of the units. Units owned by the Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, or other similar governmental or quasi - municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory `for- sale" provision. Staff Finding The Applicant has requested that the deed restricted units be "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers, in accordance with the APCHA Guidelines. The Housing Board has recommended the units be "for sale" through the lottery system. Staff finds this criterion is met. r� EXHIBIT C — CONDITIONAL USE Section 26.425 of the City Land Use Code - Conditional Use are those land uses which are generally compatible with the other permitted uses in a zone district, but which require individual review of their location, design, configuration, intensity, and density in order to ensure the appropriateness of the land use in the zone district. and which is intended to be reused, shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a) The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other applicable requirements of this title, and Staff Finding The consistency with the AACP has been addressed in both Exhibits A & B. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b) The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for the development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding The proposed development would create a residential dwelling unit in the Chateau Dumont. The Chateau Dumont is in the Lodge (L) zone district and includes ten (10) other residential dwelling units. The proposed development will be consistent and compatible with the other units in the Chateau Dumont and surrounding buildings on East Durant. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c) The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and Staff Findinz The proposed unit is located in an existing building, and will not create any new visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d) There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, Exhibit B — GMQS Review Criteria Pg 1 fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; and Staff Finding The proposed unit is located in an existing building, which the applicant has stated "should not affect the adequacy" of existing facilities and services to provide for an additional unit. Staff finds this criterion to be met e) The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and Staff Finding The applicant proposes to designate the newly created residential unit as a resident - occupied (RO) affordable housing unit. The proposed conditional use will provide one unit to address the need for creating affordable housing. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Exhibit B — GMQS Review Criteria Pg 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Jason Lasser, Community Development Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing DATE: March 7, 2007 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 725 E. D URANT A VENUE, UNIT 22A Parcel ID No. 2737 - 182 -70 -005 ISSUE: The applicant is requesting a change in use of Condominium Unit 22A to residential and to designate the unit as a RO employee - housing unit. BACKGROUND: The property is located in the Chateau Dumont apartments at 725 East Durant. In the course of the owner, Jennifer Hall, applying for a building permit, some questions were raised as to if this specific unit was legal. In March of 2006, the Community Development Department denied the building permit stating that they were unable to conclude that Unit 22A was a legally created unit. The Community Development Department did not deem this unit a separate unit from Unit 22, therefore, the applicant needs a growth management allotment to qualify the unit as residential. Also, the unit is located within the Lodge zone district and an employee - housing unit that does not house employees of the lodge is a conditional use. Under Section 26.470.050.A and Section 26.470.040.C.7, the applicant must mitigate; however, this application proposes a change to a residential use, therefore, no employees will be generated. Both sections relate to deed - restricting a unit at Category 4 or below. The applicant is proposing to designate this unit as a residential- occupied (RO) unit. RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board reviewed this application at their Regular Meeting held March 7, 2007 and due to the nature of the unit and that the unit is not being required for mitigation purposes, the Housing Board recommends approval of the unit with the RO designation under the following conditions: 1. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the current deed restriction that is required for all other employee housing limiting the appreciation of the unit to 3% or CPI, whichever is less, shall be recorded. At any time Ms. Hall would want to sell the unit, the unit would need to be sold through the lottery system via APCHA. 2. A price cap will be set and stated in this deed - restriction. The price cap will be set at the price Ms. Hall paid to purchase the unit, plus any other costs associated with bringing the unit into compliance (to include, but not be limited to, carrying and acquisition costs [loan 1 AVON AVON and interest], land use development fees [application fees, land planner fees, attorneys fees] and all remodeling fees). Acknowledgement of the Chateau Dumont HOA of this request must be provided. Due to the public notice requirement established in the Code, this will act as notice to the HOA. Ya APPLICANT: LAND USE APPLICATION Name: Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Location: '( `� 5 `�ttS� Q na pvje U , A pv Q5 e— co Historic Designation ❑ , (Indicate street address lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: a o - Vla $ �y //U a, .K �._4 a <F1 PROJECT: Name: Address: Phone #: TYPE OF APPLICATION: ■ ■ ■ ■ u A\` (AA v�C- , USC- � 7S i� 0�. ,. A /}- c- se check all that apply): Conditional Use Special Review Design Review Appeal GMQS Allotment GMQS Exemption ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane Lot Split Lot Line Adjustment EXISTING CONDITIONS: ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ❑ Subdivision ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes condominiumization) ❑ Temporary Use F] Text/Map Amendment PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings uses modifications etc.) 5 ec A U4Lf- ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Minor Historic Devt. ❑ Historic Demolition ❑ Historic Designation ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion ❑ Other H e you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ �35� Pre - Application Conference Summary Attachment # 1, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form i1 A Response to Attachment 44, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards RETMAI rti^ PE,rcl!i>jI` iIEHT RECORD r1 ft6W Rw Eax E613.40", eolaaado 81612 January 4, 2007 ;Vzwzl y .Smaee� Mr. Chris Bendon, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: HALL APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN USE Dear Chris, This letter is an application to change the use of Condominium Unit 22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments to residential and to designate the unit as an affordable housing unit. The street address of the property is 725 East Durant Avenue. The property is currently zoned Lodge (L). The application is being submitted by Ms. Jennifer Hall, who is the owner of the property (hereinafter, "the applicant "). Proof that the applicant is the owner of the subject property is provided in the warranty deed, attached hereto as Exhibit #1. The applicant is being represented by Alan Richman Planning Services for purposes of this application. A letter from the applicant confirming this arrangement is attached as Exhibit #2. I held a pre - application conference with you to discuss the applicant's proposal. According to the pre - application summary form you provided to me (see Exhibit #3), the applicant is required to address the following sections of the Land Use Code: Change in Use Growth Management Review (Sec. 26.470.040.C.5); Affordable Housing Growth Management Review (Sec. 26.470.040.C.7); and Conditional Use Review (Sec. 26.425). The following sections of this application address the applicable review standards for these review procedures. First, however, a brief description of the subject property is provided, including background information explaining the history of this unit. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Two Property Background and Proposal Ms. Hall purchased Chateau Dumont Condominium Unit 22A from Corduroy Cruisers, LLC on December 8, 2005. Unit 22A is a one bedroom unit that is approximately 605 sq. ft. in size which is located on the ground floor of the building. Shortly after she purchased the property, Ms. Hall submitted a building permit application to the City for an interior remodel of the unit to make it more livable as her dwelling unit. Ms. Hall had met with a member of the Building Department and with the City's Zoning Enforcement Officer prior to submitting the permit application and had been informed that there were no substantive issues associated with the proposed remodel. During the review of the building permit application, the staff began to raise some questions regarding the legal status of Unit 22A which might prevent the permit from being issued. In response to these questions, Ms. Hall provided the City with extensive information regarding the history of the original approvals granted to this property, (including a 1968 District Court case that required the City to issue a building permit for the project) and the documents which substantiate these approvals. Information was also provided demonstrating that: (1) many of the units in the Chateau Dumont have been and continue to be occupied as residences; and (2) all of the units, including Unit 22A, have been assessed and have paid property taxes for more than 30 years. Nevertheless, on March 31, 2006, you issued a letter formally denying the building permit, stating that you were unable to conclude that Unit 22A is a legally created unit for the following reasons: 1. You found that the original application for a building permit for the project stated that the building was to contain 24 units. Today, the building contains 26 units (numbered 1 through 24, 22A, and 22B), the latter two of which you believe the developer did not apply for, or obtain approvals for. 2. You concluded that because Unit 22A had been physically connected to Unit 22, it could not be considered a separate unit. Instead, you postulated that it was previously a laundry room or a manager's unit. 3. You stated that the City considers all of the units in the building to be lodge /short term accommodation units, not residential units. You found that the original approvals granted for the units were for this use, and that no change of use has ever been granted to allow any of the units to be occupied as residences. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Three Ms. Hall had originally considered appealing this decision to the Board of Adjustment. Ultimately, however, she decided not to pursue this course of action. Instead, following additional discussions with staff, she has decided to work with the City to obtain approvals to allow the unit to be occupied and to submit this application. As stated on the pre - application form, this application seeks to clarify the status of this unit in several respects. First, because the City believes a portion of the unit was originally developed as a lodge unit and the remainder was developed as common space (as a laundry room), it requires change of use approval to be designated as a residential unit. Second, since the City does not consider Unit 22A to be a separate legal unit, it needs a growth management allotment to qualify as a residential unit. Ms. Hall would prefer this to be a free market residence (since that is what she purchased) but it does not appear to be feasible for her to obtain a free market allotment for this unit. Therefore, she is prepared to compromise and designate this as a deed restricted affordable housing unit. Finally, since the subject property is located within the Lodge zone district, an affordable housing unit that does not house employees of the lodge is listed as a conditional use. Therefore, the applicant requests conditional use approval for this unit. The sections which follow below provide responses to the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code. Change in Use Growth Management Review Section 26.470.040 C.5 of the Land Use Code authorizes a change in use between the residential, commercial, and lodge use categories for a structure or portion thereof for which a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for at least two years. Following are the standards for a change in use and the applicant's responses to those standards. a. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the change -in -use, pursuant to Section 26.470.030 D., Annual Development Allotments. Response: Section 26.470.030 D. does not set an annual limit on the number of affordable housing units that may be developed within the City. Therefore, sufficient allotments are available to accommodate this proposed change in use. b. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Four Response: A fundamental theme of the AACP is to revitalize the permanent community" by increasing the amount of resident housing. Approval of this application will allow the applicant to complete an interior remodel of the unit so it can be brought into compliance with health and safety codes, so the unit can continue to be used by a local resident as affordable housing. C. Sixty (60) percent of the additional employees generated by the change, according to Section 26.470.050 A, Employee Generation Rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash -in -lieu thereof. Any affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040 C.7, Affordable Housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Response: The referenced section addresses employees generated by commercial and lodge development. Since this application proposes a change to a residential use, no employees will be generated. d. No more than one (1) free market unit is created through the change in use. Response: The applicant proposes to create just one dwelling unit e. Affordable housing equal to thirty (30) percent of the additional free market residential floor area is provided. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040 C.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Response: The applicant proposes to designate this unit as a resident - occupied (RO) affordable housing unit, so 100% of the proposed floor area will be affordable housing. f. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such demand is mitigated through improvements proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and road and transit services. Response: Unit 22A has existed for more than 30 years and has been occupied as resident housing during the majority of that time. Therefore, this proposal will not create any of the above - listed impacts. Please also see the response to the standards for conditional use review, below, with respect to parking. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Five Affordable Housing Growth Management Review Section 26.470.040 C.7 of the Land Use Code authorizes the development of deed restricted affordable housing. Following are the applicant's responses to the standards for review of this type of development. a. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the new units, pursuant to Section 26.470.030 C., Development Ceiling Levels. Response: The City has not yet reached the affordable housing ceiling of 2,428 units. b. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response: Please see the response to this standard in the prior section of this application. C. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen /Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Response: The applicant proposes that this unit be deed restricted as a Resident - Occupied (RO) unit. The applicant recognizes that the unit will need to be remodeled to comply with the Housing Authority's standards for deed restricting existing units (Section 14 of the Guidelines). Included with this application is a drawing illustrating the applicant's plans for remodeling this space so it will qualify as a 1 bedroom unit. d. Affordable housing units required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual units or buy down units. Off -site units shall be provided within the City of Aspen city limits. Units outside of the city limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.040 D.2. Provision of affordable housing through a cash -in -lieu payment shall be at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a formal recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. Response: This unit is not required for mitigation purposes. 3. The units proposed shall be deed restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority Guidelines. In the alternative, rental units may be provided if a legal instrument, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures permanent affordability of the units. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Six Response: The unit will be deed restricted as a for sale unit. Conditional Use Review Section 26.425.040 provides the standards for review of a conditional use. Following are the applicant's responses to these standards. A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the Zone District in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other applicable requirements of this title. Response: The consistency of this project with the AACP has been addressed in a prior section of this application. The intent of the Lodge zone district is to allow for construction and renovation of lodges and tourist - oriented multi - family buildings and ancillary uses that are compatible with and support Aspen's resort economy. Free market units in this zone are permitted (but not required) to be used as short term accommodations. The use of Unit 22A as long term affordable housing will be consistent with all of these principles. The applicant's intent in seeking these approvals is to be able to remodel the unit, so it may be brought into compliance with the City's applicable building codes. B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposed development will be consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity. Renovation of this unit will allow it to be occupied in the same long term residential manner as many of the other units in the Chateau Dumont and many of the other older multi - family buildings along this portion of East Durant Avenue. C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties. CO Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Seven Response: Since the proposed conditional use will be established within an existing building, it will not create any new visual impacts, nor will it create any unusual impacts in terms of trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations, or odors. Chateau Dumont provides 10 on -site parking spaces for the existing units. The spaces are not assigned to individual owners, but instead are available to all owners on a first - come, first -served basis. As a unit owner in the building, the applicant owns an equal share of this parking (10 spaces for 26 owners = 0.38 spaces per owner). The rules of the Condominium Association limit the use of the on -site parking spaces to unit owners only, not their guests or tenants. Because many of the units are only occupied by owners periodically and not full time, it has been the applicant's experience that these spaces are generally not fully occupied, except for the absolute peak times of occupancy in town, such as on July 4th or New Year's Eve. Given this set of facts, the applicant would ask that the Planning Commission find that the on -site parking is adequate for the proposed use and no additional parking is required. Because the applicant would be deed restricting this unit as affordable housing, at significant cost to herself compared to the free market value she paid for the unit, it would be unfair to ask her to also pay a cash -in -lieu fee to make up for the difference between the parking she owns (0.38 spaces) and the parking the Code requires (1 space). Such a fee would require a payment of $18,600 (0.62 spaces x $30,000 per space), which would be a significant additional burden for the applicant. If the fee does apply, then the applicant would ask that P &Z waive the fee, as authorized by Section 26.515.040 A. of the Land Use Code, Special Review Standards for Parking. D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools. Response: Chateau Dumont is already provided with the full range of necessary public facilities and services. The addition of 1 unit to this project should not affect the adequacy of these facilities and services. E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use. Response: The applicant proposes to designate the newly created residential unit as a resident - occupied (RO) affordable housing unit. Therefore the proposed conditional use will help to address the community -wide need for affordable housing. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Eight Conclusion The above responses provide the information you require to process this application and demonstrate the compliance of this proposal with the standards of the Land Use Code. Please let me know if there is anything else you require as you review this application. Very truly yours, ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES A—tAv", " Alan Richman, AICP EXHIBITS TV OF ASPEN "Y OF ASPEN HRETT PAID EXHIBIT #1 Co WRrTT PAID ,.ATE REP NO. DATE REP NO i2'01DSj W4 -2&3qp WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made December 7, 2005, Between CORDUROY CRUISERS, LLC of the County of Pt TK--A State ofco, GRANTOR, AND JENNIFER HALL, GRANTEE whose legal address is: P.O. BOX 11711, ASPEN, CO, 81611 of the County of PITKIN, State of CO WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration,.the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and confirm unto the grantee, Its heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate and lying and being in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows: CONDOMINIUM UNIT 22 -A, CHATEAU DU MONT APARTMENTS, A CONDOMINIUM, according to the Condominium Map thereof recorded in Plat Book 3 at Page 335 and Amendment thereto as defined and described in Action of the Board of Directors recorded December 2, 2005 as Reception No. 518036 and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration thereof, recorded December 9, 1968 in Book 238 at Page 1. TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, its heirs and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for Its, its heirs and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, its heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, its is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same In manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The grantor shall. and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, its heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed. SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2 1111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111 Page: 2 0S 02:521 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 11.00 D 27.00 n G I I SIGNATURE PAGE TO WARRANTY DEED PAGE 2 ROY CRUISERS, LLC STATE OF PT2l?:oru q ss COUNTY OF fy\itUc -opa 1 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 0`7 day of 2¢ �tz�o-r , 2005, by CORDUROY CRUISERS, LLC by LANETTE VALERIO, MANAGER WITNESS my hand and official seal my commission expires: 04.IS• Z00$ PCT20164F3 Notary Publ MELISSA FINLEY Notery Public - Arizona Maricopa County My commission Expires April 18, 2008 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII08205 page: 2 :521 00 EXHIBIT #2 Mr. Chris Bendon, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: HALL APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN USE Dear Chris, I hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as my designated representative with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for my property, Condominium Unit 22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments. Mr. Richman is authorized to submit an application to change the use of this unit and to designate it as a resident occupied (RO) affordable housing unit. He is also authorized to represent me in meetings with City staff and the City's review bodies. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review of this application, please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services, whose address and telephone number are included in the land development application. Sincerely, 7 Jennifer Han P.O. Box 11711 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 - 925 -3476 PLANNER: PROJECT: REPRESENTATIVE: OWNER: TYPE OF APPLICATION: EXHIBIT #3 CITY OF ASPEN PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY Chris Bendon, 429.2765 DATE: 11.15.06 Chateau DuMont Condominium #22A Affordable Housing Alan Richman Jennifer Hall One Step, Planning and Zoning Commission. DESCRIPTION: The owner of this unit would like to legalize the unit as an affordable housing unit. Pall of this unit was originally developed as a lodge unit (needs change -in -use and AH approval) and the remaining portion was developed as laundry/common space (needs AH approval). The affordable housing unit will not be accessory to the lodging operation (needs Conditional Use approval). Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Process 26.425 Conditional Use Review 26.470.040.C.5 Change -in -use — Growth Management, P &Z Review 26.470.040.C.7 Affordable Housing — Growth Management, P &Z Review 26.515 Off - Street Parking Review by: Staff, Planning and Zoning Commission. Public Hearing: Yes, P &Z. Referral Agencies: APCHA, Building, Fire, Water, Electric, Sanitation Planning Fees: Planning Deposit, Minor ($1,350 for 6 hours of staff time, additional hours are billed at a rate of $225 /hour) Referral Agency Fees: None. Total Deposit: $1,350 (additional hours are billed at a rate of $225 /hour) To apply, submit the following information (applies only to Lot Split application): I . Signed fee agreement. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Total deposit for review of the application 4. 15 Copies of the complete application packet. 5. Additional materials as required by the specific review. 6. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed amendment complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. Notes: The application shall demonstrate compliance with the parking requirements or include a response to Chapter 26.515. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. ( � � 1, &§ \fie 2` / §,9 \ - ! ! ! # TM # -- __� ; 725 F. Durant, UnIt \ h % >M � " y < mw |/ \ | March 18, 2007 Planning and Zoning Commission City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Support for Applications Relating to 111 W. Hyman Avenue and 725 E. Durant, Aspen, Colorado Dear Madame Chairperson and Commissioners: I am writing in support of that application submitted by 111 W. Hyman LLC pertaining to amendment of Growth Management Review for off -site mitigation and that application submitted by Jennifer Hall pertaining to a change in use, affordable housing growth management review and conditional use review for 725 E. Durant, Unit 22A. The location of affordable housing in the central core is essential to the City's goal of maintaining a critical mass of full -time residents in the City. Unit 22A is a particularly attractive unit because it is so centrally located that one does not have to own a car to access the City's and the Ski Area's services and amenities. I also believe the location of affordable housing in mixed - use buildings and areas is more appropriate than the location of affordable housing in the basements single family homes in a single family home dominated neighborhood. Allowing residents to interact with a variety of classes, cultures and users through a mixed in a mixed use area promotes a healthy and interactive community. If Unit 22A were approved as a Category 3 unit, I and a number of my friends would be eligible to participate in the lottery for the purchase of the unit. As a potential qualified buyer, and on behalf of my qualified buyer friends, I submit to you that the location and price of Unit 22A make it highly desirable and living there would be a step up in the community for any of us. Please consider the benefit that a Category 3 unit located in Chateau Dumont Unit 22A will provide to the community and to people like me and those similarly situated and approve the applications based on staffs recommendations. Sincerely, Freddan Ricard RESOLUTION NO. 8, SERIES OF 2007 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR A CHANGE -IN -USE TO RESIDENTIAL, A SPECIAL REVIEW FOR PARKING, AND A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT TO BE LOCATED IN THE LODGE DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 725 E. DURANT, CONDOMINIUM UNIT 22 -A, CHATEAU DU MONT APARTMENTS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737 - 182 -70 -005 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Jennifer Hall, represented by Alan Richman Planning Services, submitted an application requesting approval of a growth management review for the development of affordable housing, a growth management review for a change -in- use to residential, special review for parking, and a conditional use review to allow an affordable housing unit in the Lodge (L) zone district located at 725 E. Durant, Condominium unit 22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the Application and determined that the application met the applicable review standards, and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the application under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at which time the Commission considered and approved the following land use actions as they found the application to meet the review standards of growth management review for an affordable housing unit, special review for parking, growth management review for a change -in -use and for a conditional use to allow affordable housing to be located in the Lodge district by a vote of five to zero (5 to 0) for the Condominium Unit 22 -A, located at 725 E. Durant, Condominium unit 22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the 5 JIilll IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIl0 3 628 03:12 00 tl P�g 4- J development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a growth management review for the development of affordable housing, a growth management review for a change -in -use to residential, a special review for parking and a conditional use review to allow an affordable housing unit in the Lodge (L) zone district at a property located at 725 E. Durant, Condominium unit 22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, with the following conditions: 1. The applicant is required to file a deed restriction prior to transfer of ownership. 2. The Change -in -Use shall not be finalized until deed restriction has been approved and recorded. 3. Any applicable impact or mitigation fees shall be paid prior to deed restriction recordation. This shall not include a parking cash - in -lieu. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on this 20th day of March, 2007. 536287 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 004904p 0000 3.12 QITKIN C IIIIIIIII VOS CRUDILL APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ATTEST: ckie Lothian, eputy City Clerk N PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Ruth Kruger, ChairJ 536287 I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII004/04/2e@7 00 3.12 IIIIIIIII VOS CAUDILL PITKIN CO CITY OF ASPEN PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Jason Lasser, 429 -2763 DATE: 2/22/07 PROJECT: 725 E. Durant, Chateau Dumont Condominium 922 -A REPRESENTATIVE: Jennifer Hall, Alan Richman OWNER: Jennifer Hall TYPE OF APPLICATION: Growth Management Allotment DESCRIPTION: Growth Management Allotment for Condominium Unit #22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments (converted from a lodge unit and part of the laundry/common space to residential) to designate the unit as a free market unit. Applicable Code Sections: 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.470.030 (D) Annual Development Allotments 26.470.040 (C)8 Residential Development — 60% percent Affordable 26.515 Off- Street Parking 26.710.190 Lodge (L) Zone District Review by: Staff, Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing: Yes at P & Z. Referral Agencies: APCHA, Building, Fire, Water, Electric, Sanitation Planning Fees: $1410 Deposit for 6 hours of staff time (additional staff time required is billed at $235 per hour) Referral Agency Fees: $204 Total Deposit: $1614 (additional staff hours are billed at $235 per hour) To apply, submit the following information: ] . Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Completed Land Use Application. 3. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 4. Signed fee agreement. 5. Pre - application Conference Summary. 6. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 7. Proof of ownership. 8. Site plan or site improvement survey showing parking configuration. 9. Floor plans of unit to be legalized. 10. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. This should include the proposed code amendment language. ] 1. 15 Copies of the complete application packet (items 2 -10) 12. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. The GIS department can provide this list on mailing labels for a small fee. 920.5453 13. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)- preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. Notes: The application shall demonstrate compliance with the parking requirements or include a response to Chapter 26.515 Process: Apply. Planner will then check the application for completeness. Application is referred to applicable referral agencies and the Applicant is given a public hearing date by Staff. Staff writes a memo of recommendation. Planning and Zoning Commission reviews case and makes a final determination. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Jv MEMORANDUM TO: Plans were routed to those departments checked -off below: O ........... City Engineer O ........... Community Development Engineer O ........... Zoning Officer X ........... Housing Department O ........... Parks Department X ........... Aspen Fire Marshal X ........... City Water X ........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District X ........... Building Department O ........... Environmental Health X ........... Electric Department O ........... Holy Cross Electric O ........... City Attorney O ........... Streets Department O ........... Historic Preservation Officer O ........... Pitkin County Planning O ........... County & City Disaster Coordinator O ........... Police O ........... Transportation O ........... Parking O ........... Gary Beach* (Metro Districts: Highlands, Buttermilk, and Five Trees) FROM: Jason Lasser Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone - 429.2763 Fax - 920.5439 DATE: February 9, 2007 RE: DRC Review — 725 East Durant Ave Unit 22A• GMOS Review, Conditional Use Review The Applicant proposes a change in use of Condominium Unit 22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments to residential and to designate the unit as an affordable housing unit. DATE OF DRC MEETING: February 21st @ 1:30 Sister Cities Room `address: Beach Resource Management/715 W. Main / Aspen /925- 3475 /gary@beachresource.com r.aa AGA.- aft I' OFT g) a t aif J i• ^ III L� 3irl� : �'''�r� r _ ^s-.s' :�., is N APPLICANT: LAND USE APPLICATION 0 Name: -�Zv -1ge4, \A\, Location: J g5 �-7AS-k V A as Pr Ar, f-- c (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) REPRESENTATIVE: Name: \\ n �M_A �LLV M Rw C �ihv �v DLLs Address: Po 90X 36 \2 Co 'Ga \u k3 Phone PROJECT: Name: Address: Phone #: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Special Review ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development • Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Devt. • GMQS Allotment ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition 0 GMQS Exemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ Historic Designation ❑ ESA — 8040 Greenline, Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Blum condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use ❑ Other: ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment PROPOSAL: (descrioti S e� AAP, � U4-- H e you attached the following? FEES DUE: S Pre - Application Conference Summary Attachment # 1, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form 11 A Response to Attachment 44, Submittal Requirements - Including Written Responses to Review Standards RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD .146W Faz 3613 ,44A . e44wada 81612 January 4, 2007 ;V ww /�7" (970)920-1125 azCcluxa.c@aolvcia.cet Mr. Chris Bendon, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: HALL APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN USE Dear Chris, This letter is an application to change the use of Condominium Unit 22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments to residential and to designate the unit as an affordable housing unit. The street address of the property is 725 East Durant Avenue. The property is currently zoned Lodge (L). The application is being submitted by Ms. Jennifer Hall, who is the owner of the property (hereinafter, "the applicant "). Proof that the applicant is the owner of the subject property is provided in the warranty deed, attached hereto as Exhibit #1. The applicant is being represented by Alan Richman Planning Services for purposes of this application. A letter from the applicant confirming this arrangement is attached as Exhibit #2. I held a pre - application conference with you to discuss the applicant's proposal. According to the pre - application summary form you provided to me (see Exhibit #3), the applicant is required to address the following sections of the Land Use Code: Change in Use Growth Management Review (Sec. 26.470.040.C.5); Affordable Housing Growth Management Review (Sec. 26.470.040.C.7); and Conditional Use Review (Sec. 26.425). The following sections of this application address the applicable review standards for these review procedures. First, however, a brief description of the subject property is provided, including background information explaining the history of this unit. C Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Two Property Background and Proposal 0 Ms. Hall purchased Chateau Dumont Condominium Unit 22A from Corduroy Cruisers, LLC on December 8, 2005. Unit 22A is a one bedroom unit that is approximately 605 sq. ft. in size which is located on the ground floor of the building. Shortly after she purchased the property, Ms. Hall submitted a building permit application to the City for an interior remodel of the unit to make it more livable as her dwelling unit. Ms. Hall had met with a member of the Building Department and with the City's Zoning Enforcement Officer prior to submitting the permit application and had been informed that there were no substantive issues associated with the proposed remodel. During the review of the building permit application, the staff began to raise some questions regarding the legal status of Unit 22A which might prevent the permit from being issued. In response to these questions, Ms. Hall provided the City with extensive information regarding the history of the original approvals granted to this property, (including a 1968 District Court case that required the City to issue a building permit for the project) and the documents which substantiate these approvals. Information was also provided demonstrating that: (1) many of the units in the Chateau Dumont have been and continue to be occupied as residences; and (2) all of the units, including Unit 22A, have been assessed and have paid property taxes for more than 30 years. Nevertheless, on March 31, 2006, you issued a letter formally denying the building permit, stating that you were unable to conclude that Unit 22A is a legally created unit for the following reasons: 1. You found that the original application for a building permit for the project stated that the building was to contain 24 units. Today, the building contains 26 units (numbered 1 through 24, 22A, and 22B), the latter two of which you believe the developer did not apply for, or obtain approvals for. 2. You concluded that because Unit 22A had been physically connected to Unit 22, it could not be considered a separate unit. Instead, you postulated that it was previously a laundry room or a manager's unit. 3. You stated that the City considers all of the units in the building to be lodge /short term accommodation units, not residential units. You found that the original approvals granted for the units were for this use, and that no change of use has ever been granted to allow any of the units to be occupied as residences. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Three 0 Ms. Hall had originally considered appealing this decision to the Board of Adjustment. Ultimately, however, she decided not to pursue this course of action. Instead, following additional discussions with staff, she has decided to work with the City to obtain approvals to allow the unit to be occupied and to submit this application. As stated on the pre - application form, this application seeks to clarify the status of this unit in several respects. First, because the City believes a portion of the unit was originally developed as a lodge unit and the remainder was developed as common space (as a laundry room), it requires change of use approval to be designated as a residential unit. Second, since the City does not consider Unit 22A to be a separate legal unit, it needs a growth management allotment to qualify as a residential unit. Ms. Hall would prefer this to be a free market residence (since that is what she purchased) but it does not appear to be feasible for her to obtain a free market allotment for this unit. Therefore, she is prepared to compromise and designate this as a deed restricted affordable housing unit. Finally, since the subject property is located within the Lodge zone district, an affordable housing unit that does not house employees of the lodge is listed as a conditional use. Therefore, the applicant requests conditional use approval for this unit. The sections which follow below provide responses to the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code. Change in Use Growth Management Review Section 26.470.040 C.5 of the Land Use Code authorizes a change in use between the residential, commercial, and lodge use categories for a structure or portion thereof for which a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for at least two years. Following are the standards for a change in use and the applicant's responses to those standards. a. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the change -in -use, pursuant to Section 26.470.030 D., Annual Development Allotments. Response: Section 26.470.030 D. does not set an annual limit on the number of affordable housing units that may be developed within the City. Therefore, sufficient allotments are available to accommodate this proposed change in use. b. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Four Response: A fundamental theme of the AACP is to "revitalize the permanent community" by increasing the amount of resident housing. Approval of this application will allow the applicant to complete an interior remodel of the unit so it can be brought into compliance with health and safety codes, so the unit can continue to be used by a local resident as affordable housing. C. Sixty (60) percent of the additional employees generated by the change, according to Section 26.470.050 A, Employee Generation Rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash -in -lieu thereof. Any affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040 C.7, Affordable Housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Response: The referenced section addresses employees generated by commercial and lodge development. Since this application proposes a change to a residential use, no employees will be generated. d. No more than one (1) free market unit is created through the change in use. Response: The applicant proposes to create just one dwelling unit. e. Affordable housing equal to thirty (30) percent of the additional free market residential floor area is provided. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040 C.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Response: The applicant proposes to designate this unit as a resident - occupied (RO) affordable housing unit, so 100% of the proposed floor area will be affordable housing. f. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such demand is mitigated through improvements proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and road and transit services. Response: Unit 22A has existed for more than 30 years and has been occupied as resident housing during the majority of that time. Therefore, this proposal will not create any of the above - listed impacts. Please also see the response to the standards for conditional use review, below, with respect to parking. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Five Affordable Housing Growth Management Review Section 26.470.040 C.7 of the Land Use Code authorizes the development of deed restricted affordable housing. Following are the applicant's responses to the standards for review of this type of development. a. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the new units, pursuant to Section 26.470.030 C., Development Ceiling Levels. Response: The City has not yet reached the affordable housing ceiling of 2,428 units. b. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response: Please see the response to this standard in the prior section of this application. C. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Response: The applicant proposes that this unit be deed restricted as a Resident - Occupied (RO) unit. The applicant recognizes that the unit will need to be remodeled to comply with the Housing Authority's standards for deed restricting existing units (Section 14 of the Guidelines). Included with this application is a drawing illustrating the applicant's plans for remodeling this space so it will qualify as a 1 bedroom unit. d. Affordable housing units required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual units or buy down units. Off -site units shall be provided within the City of Aspen city limits. Units outside of the city limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.040 D.2. Provision of affordable housing through a cash -in -lieu payment shall be at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a formal recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. Response: This unit is not required for mitigation purposes. 3. The units proposed shall be deed restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority Guidelines. In the alternative, rental units may be provided if a legal instrument, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures permanent affordability of the units. Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Six Response: The unit will be deed restricted as a for sale unit. Conditional Use Review Section 26.425.040 provides the standards for review of a conditional use. Following are the applicant's responses to these standards. A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the Zone District in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other applicable requirements of this title. Response: The consistency of this project with the AACP has been addressed in a prior section of this application. The intent of the Lodge zone district is to allow for construction and renovation of lodges and tourist - oriented multi - family buildings and ancillary uses that are compatible with and support Aspen's resort economy. Free market units in this zone are permitted (but not required) to be used as short term accommodations. The use of Unit 22A as long term affordable housing will be consistent with all of these principles. The applicant's intent in seeking these approvals is to be able to remodel the unit, so it may be brought into compliance with the City's applicable building codes. B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposed development will be consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity. Renovation of this unit will allow it to be occupied in the same long term residential manner as many of the other units in the Chateau Dumont and many of the other older multi - family buildings along this portion of East Durant Avenue. C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties. C Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Seven Response: Since the proposed conditional use will be established within an existing building, it will not create any new visual impacts, nor will it create any unusual impacts in terms of trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations, or odors. Chateau Dumont provides 10 on -site parking spaces for the existing units. The spaces are not assigned to individual owners, but instead are available to all owners on a first - come, first - served basis. As a unit owner in the building, the applicant owns an equal share of this parking (10 spaces for 26 owners = 0.38 spaces per owner). The rules of the Condominium Association limit the use of the on -site parking spaces to unit owners only, not their guests or tenants. Because many of the units are only occupied by owners periodically and not full time, it has been the applicant's experience that these spaces are generally not fully occupied, except for the absolute peak times of occupancy in town, such as on July 4th or New Year's Eve. Given this set of facts, the applicant would ask that the Planning Commission find that the on -site parking is adequate for the proposed use and no additional parking is required. Because the applicant would be deed restricting this unit as affordable housing, at significant cost to herself compared to the free market value she paid for the unit, it would be unfair to ask her to also pay a cash -in -lieu fee to make up for the difference between the parking she owns (0.38 spaces) and the parking the Code requires (1 space). Such a fee would require a payment of $18,600 (0.62 spaces x $30,000 per space), which would be a significant additional burden for the applicant. If the fee does apply, then the applicant would ask that P &Z waive the fee, as authorized by Section 26.515.040 A. of the Land Use Code, Special Review Standards for Parking. D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools. Response: Chateau Dumont is already provided with the full range of necessary public facilities and services. The addition of 1 unit to this project should not affect the adequacy of these facilities and services. E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use. Response: The applicant proposes to designate the newly created residential unit as a resident - occupied (RO) affordable housing unit. Therefore the proposed conditional use will help to address the community -wide need for affordable housing. C Mr. Chris Bendon January 4, 2007 Page Eight Conclusion The above responses provide the information you require to process this application and demonstrate the compliance of this proposal with the standards of the Land Use Code. Please let me know if there is anything else you require as you review this application. Very truly yours, ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES AnAu." " Alan Richman, AICP EXHIBITS rry OF ASPEN "Y OF ASPEN HRETf PAID EXHIBIT #1 WRETT PAID .ATE REP NO. DATE REP NO, WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, made December 7, 2005, Between CORDUROY CRUISERS, LLC of the County of Pt Tl<G,� State of Co, GRANTOR, AND JENNIFER HALL, GRANTEE whose legal address is: P.O. BOX 11711, ASPEN, CO, 81611 of the County of PITKIN, State of CO WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration „the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and confirm unto the grantee, its heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate and lying and being in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows: CONDOMINIUM UNIT 22 -A, CHATEAU DU MONT APARTMENTS, A CONDOMINIUM, according to the Condominium Map thereof recorded in Plat Book 3 at Page 335 and Amendment thereto as defined and described in Action of the Board of Directors recorded December 2, 2005 as Reception No. 518036 and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration thereof, recorded December 9, 1968 in Book 238 at Page 1. TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, its heirs and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for Its, its heirs and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, its heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, its is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, In law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same In manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The grantor shall. and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, its heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed. SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2 1111111IIIII111111111111111111111111111111111111111115982 a5 02:521 JONICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 11.00 D 27.00 n 9—rtc Lit 1 &;I t`I)4eZ. co �, 1 SIGNATURE PAGE TO WARRANTY DEED PAGE 2 r (-- ROY CRUISERS, LLC STATE OF ReA �-, pr 40 ss COUNTY OF fY\WZkc -opp 1 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 0.7 day of 2005, by CORDUROY CRUISERS, LLC by LANETTE VALERIO, MANAGER WITNESS my hand and official seal my commission expires: 64-IT-Z009 PCT20164F3 Notary Publ MELISSA FINLEY Notary Public - Arizons Maricopa County My Commission Expires April 1 B, 2008 II�III VIII IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII VIIIIII CO O Pz982 0 5 2.521 00 EXHIBIT #2 Mr. Chris Bendon, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: HALL APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN USE Dear Chris, I hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as my designated representative with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for my property, Condominium Unit 22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments. Mr. Richman is authorized to submit an application to change the use of this unit and to designate it as a resident occupied (RO) affordable housing unit. He is also authorized to represent me in meetings with City staff and the City's review bodies. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review of this application, please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services, whose address and telephone number are included in the land development application. Sincerely, P9 nnifer Han P.O. Box 11711 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 - 925 -3476 EXHIBIT #3 e> CITY OF ASPEN PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Chris Bendon, 429.2765 DATE: 1 1.15.06 PROJECT: Chateau DuMont Condominium #22A Affordable Housing REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman OWNER: Jennifer Hall TYPE OF APPLICATION: One Step, Planning and Zoning Commission. DESCRIPTION: The owner of this unit would like to legalize the unit as an affordable housing unit. Part of this unit was originally developed as a lodge unit (needs change -in -use and AB approval) and the remaining portion was developed as laundry/common space (needs AH approval). The affordable housing unit will not be accessory to the lodging operation (needs Conditional Use approval). Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Process 26.425 Conditional Use Review 26.470.040.C.5 Change -in -use — Growth Management, P &Z Review 26.470.040.C.7 Affordable Housing — Growth Management, P &Z Review 26.515 Off- Street Parking Review by: Staff, Planning and Zoning Commission. Public Hearing: Yes, P &Z. Referral Agencies: APCHA, Building, Fire, Water, Electric, Sanitation Planning Fees: Planning Deposit, Minor ($1,350 for 6 hours of staff time, additional hours are billed at a rate of $225 /hour) Referral Agency Fees: None. Total Deposit: $1,350 (additional hours are billed at a rate of $225 /hour) To apply, submit the following information (applies only to Lot Split application): I. Signed fee agreement. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Total deposit for review of the application 4. 15 Copies of the complete application packet. 5. Additional materials as required by the specific review. 6. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed amendment complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. Notes: The application shall demonstrate compliance with the parking requirements or include a response to Chapter 26.515. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. C 7 � � !R §■ g, \\ To st, 3 / }R ��l dli ! ! � ! !R §■ g, ® ° To st, / }R ��l dli ! ! ! !� |`| |� � |. | o # e f � n 7 | k ,` A r a _ %gfI`1 ��_w , .! r s, CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and -3 Q` "'r A * ° \\ (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CrV an application foL. C,,.,&s -viw.+ Loy, -A. .w\ ` L, ir..a (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ \'3 5 ° which is for _ 6 hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid CITY OF ASP E APPLICANT p By: By: Chris Bendon \\ X10 Community Development Director Date: g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 11/30/04 Billing Address and Telephone Number: Required talc \ \''1 \\ P-% vp - CO S\G t-)- C\zs- -3-t -1 l RETAIN FOR PERMANENT F ECOW Fle 0,dt Record LJavigate. Form Reports Format Tab H4 $. Main}Cvtom Fre'lds -:Feed 'Actions Pam* Routtrg Status Fee Sunmmiay Roulmg FJisto•y A.tlachmerts, c3 perms, Type �aslu .,Aspen Land Use 2OC Permit WO7.2GO7.ASLU y Address 1725 E DURANT AVE Ap65ude 122A Dry ASPEN Sta[a lco -1 2:p j81611 E� Malta Peont DO06.2006.ASLU Routmg0ueue)esfu0� 6 Applied 0111672007 Propel. Status y7endin9 Approval F— ' -. Description MINOR APPUCATION - GMQS EXEMPTION- CONDIT1014AL USE Issued CHATEAU DUMONT 22A Fmel —J Submtted JENNIFER HALL .404,1091 �— � Clock R, g pays u i Eq.. 61J11)2008 "..', Owr_ Last Name JiA� LL — Fall 14.e IEN14IFEFI 1725 E DURA14T NVE UNIT 22A F'lune J970) 494 -1091 �ASPEN C081611 J Own %I3ApWIcaM2 .; Applicant i Last Name HALL Fast Name JENNIFER 725 E DURANT AVE UNIT 22A �A, PEIJ CO 61611 Phorr. 1970) 404 -1091 Cust k F2c853 _ E ? Last Nacre I J Ftt Name,— Pho e 3 AspenGoldb) - Record 2 of 2 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, March 20, 2007 4:30 p.m. SISTER CITIES, CITY HALL I. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public II. MINUTES III. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Chateau Dumont/Hall Affordable Housing GMQS -Jason Lasser B. Chateau Dumont/Hall GMQS -Chris Bendon C. Cooper Street Pier Redevelopment (cont. from 3/8)- Jessica Garrow D. La Cocina Redevelopment -Sarah Adams -(Open and continue hearing to April 17 -no hearing tonight) V. BOARD REPORTS VI. ADJOURN Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes — March 06 2007 COMMENTS............................................................................. ............................... 2 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .............. ............................... 2 MINUTES.................................................................................. ............................... 2 COOPER STREET PIER REDEVELOPMENT ....................... ............................... 2 SMUGGLER RACQUET CLUB CONCEPTUAL PUD ......... ............................... 2 ISIS THEATRE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ......................... ............................... 7 1 Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minuies — March 06, 2007 Ruth Kruger opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Planning Commission in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30pm. Dylan Johns was excused from the first and third items on the agenda; Brian Speck was excused. LJ Erspamer, David Guthrie, Elizabeth Atkins, Steve Skadron, John Rowland and Ruth Kruger were present. Staff in attendance: Jim True, Special Counsel; Joyce Allgaier and Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Ruth Kruger welcomed the new members and Jim True as Special Counsel. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Dylan Johns was conflicted on Smuggler Racquet Club and Cooper Street Pier Redevelopment. MINUTES MOTION: Liz Atkins moved to approve the minutes from February 6th and 20`h; seconded by Steve Skadron. APPROVED. David Guthrie and LJErspamer abstained. Public Hearing: COOPER STREET PIER REDEVELOPMENT Ruth Kruger opened the public hearing for Cooper Street. MOTION: David Guthrie moved to continue the hearing to April 3Yd; Liz Atkins seconded. All in favor, APPROVED. Continued Public Hearing: SMUGGLER RACQUET CLUB CONCEPTUAL PUD Ruth Kruger opened the public hearing for the Smuggler Racquet Club Conceptual PUD. Jessica Garrow said the applicant was Aspen Land Fund II, LLC represented by John Sarpa, Sunny Vann and Kim Weil. John Moore of the Smuggler Racquet Club was also present. Garrow stated this was a detailed proposal and a complicated site; there was a site visit earlier. Garrow said that there was county zoning of R15 on this property; it was annexed into the city in the 1950s with the Hughes addition but never rezoned to city zoning. There were approximately 4.6 acres, including the cabin near Park Circle and the Racquet Club off of Matchless Drive; the applicant submitted the proposal in July 2006 proposing subdivision to develop affordable housing mitigation for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain on the top part of the parcel and redevelop the Racquet Club in the existing location. The applicant proposed to N &C Zoning CommiSSion Meeting Minutes — dedicate the cabin historic, which would be final at Council; the minutes from the HPC Meeting were attached. Garrow said the broader picture of this site was subdivision of the parcel into 3 lots; rezoning of Lot 1 to AH PUD, Rural Residential for the Racquet Club and Historic Preservation for the cabin. A conditional use approval will be needed to accommodate some of the uses on the racquet club site. There will be a Growth Management Review for the Affordable housing and the Racquet Club site to determine the employee generation. A Special Review will be need for parking on both sites; Residential Design Standard Review for the Affordable Housing; Commercial Design Review for the Club redevelopment and an administrative determination to allow for the affordable housing unit on the racquet club parcel. Garrow utilized a map (exhibit B) to delineate the lots with different colors. There were 32 affordable housing units; 16 one bedroom units, 8 two bedrooms and 8 three bedroom units. There were 15 foot setbacks near building A, 10 foot setbacks near building C and side setbacks of 5 feet. Garrow said there were 35 parking spaces proposed for the affordable housing units with 1 space assigned to each unit; special review was needed for parking because it was located outside the Aspen Infill area so that the requirement was 56 spaces. Garrow said that staff felt that the design could do a better job relating to the cabin through the use of inflection and materials that differentiate the new development from the historic resource; staff would like to see the site opened up. Staff also wanted to see the circulation simplified to buildings A and C. Garrow said that Lot 2 (Racquet Club) was 2.97 acres including 2 indoor racquet courts, club facilities, an affordable housing unit for the manager and 5 outdoor courts. The setbacks include 20 feet along the West portion; there was a notch (20' by 50') owned by someone else (according to John Moore the racquet club will purchase this piece); along Lot 1 there was a 25 foot setback. Garrow said that there were 38 proposed parking spaces on Lot 2; 2 for the affordable housing unit and the rest for the club. Garrow said staff would like the building broken up more. Staff recommended approval of the conceptual. Ruth Kruger asked how we got from the first application design. Garrow replied that was part of the first conversations staff had with the applicant dealing with the way that the housing addressed the street, staff wanted a more pedestrian friendly design. Staff will address the sidewalk and an additional bus stop. Sunny Vann said the problem arises from the residential design standards; when this project was originally designed there was approval in the county for the type of units in the first plan; the property does not abut the street and was not on a high 3 pedestrian corner and the primary views were toward Aspen Mountain. Vann said that staff asked to meet with the applicant regarding the first design and the new design included the majority of units that abut the street. Vann said the historic preservation officer wanted the cabin preserved. John Sarpa introduced John Moore, Kim Weil and Sunny Vann. Sarpa said they evolved to the current plan for staff support. Sarpa said that ALF approached John Moore to purchase part of the land for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain housing mitigation. Sarpa noted they were in a partnership with Smuggler Racquet Club. Sarpa said that this was an extension of Smuggler Mine and the cabin drives a lot; HPC review was first and designated that the cabin historic. Sarpa said there was an old mine shaft located on the site; they hired HP Geotech and will stay away from the shaft with buildings. Weil said that HP recommended 50 feet away with all but one building. Vann stated that it was not an open mine but there were boulders pushed into it with top soil on the top during the superfund reclamation; they were told that they could drive over it. Sarpa noted they also have hired Tom Dunlop who was knowledgeable about the site. John Moore said the courts building was sunk down 10 feet to comply with the height requirements. Bill Lipsey, architect, said with the 2 indoor tennis courts the building starts out at 120 feet by 120 feet with the clubhouse and affordable unit it came out with a simple gable structure to accommodate the uses. Lipsey said the 1 story structures were subordinate to the big structure; one side had the clubhouse and the other an affordable housing unit. Weil stated with the influences of the cabin and the mine there were no places to have any more street presence for the affordable housing; there was simple design for the buildings. Weil said there were balconies, porches and the common element of the rusty metal roofs like the tennis building. Weil said the cabin would stand on its own and the architecture of the affordable units would be their own architecture. John Rowland said that he like the playfulness of the balconies. Weil replied that the balconies move at different elevations. Liz Atkins asked why staff wanted the street presence on the uphill side when the view was that way. Garrow replied that staff was taking a long term view of development in this area of town and the entrances were still off of the parking area; there was a street presence. David Guthrie asked if the slope reduction was based upon the old topo or the new topo. Sarpa said they were using the most current survey information and they have reviewed it with staff. Weil said that there was a field topo from Sopris Engineering in the packet. Vann said there was far more land area to accommodate the density than was needed. Guthrie voiced concern for the placement of the new bus stop and the decision would be at final. Guthrie said there was parking heading in on Matchless. Weil responded there was a grade change and a bit of a berm. Vann said there was a landscaping plan and at final there would be a comprehensive landscape plan submitted and reviewed with parks. Guthrie said that parking was a huge concern in this area. Atkins said that she had issues with parking. Steve Skadron asked why so much was happening at final in this case. Garrow replied part of it was the unique circumstances of the lot without zoning; the proposed zoning requires conditional uses. Skadron voiced concern for the bus stop also. Skadron asked the applicant's responsibility with the racquet club was. Sarpa replied that they approached the Smuggler Racquet Club to purchase part of the parcel for the mitigation for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain. Skadron asked who the Smuggler Racquet Club was. Moore replied it was 105 members with an equity club that you buy into with annual dues; it was a non - profit 501C7. Moore said it was laid back and the membership was limited; there were some social functions, brunches and pot luck dinners. Skadron asked how busy the club was. Moore said that the nets would be up in May and weather permitting people would book the courts. Skadron asked why this application came in as one rather than two separate applications. Garrow replied that it was one parcel. Vann said that they originally thought that it was in the county; council likes to see the big picture to see how everything works together and not parts of the puzzle. Vann said the projects were sufficiently interrelated that it made sense to process as one application. John Rowland asked for a summary of the HPC process. Garrow responded that the historic maps were reviewed by the historic preservation officer who determined the materials used on the cabin were historic as part of the old Smuggler mine used as an assayers office. Sarpa said the cabin has to be disassembled, a foundation built and reassembled; HPC said that it had to go back in the place exactly where the cabin sits now. Garrow stated staff was not certain the cabin would need to be disassembled and this would be addressed in the HPC. Liz Atkins asked if the outdoor tennis courts had lights and if they anticipated using the indoor courts at night. Moore replied there were no lights for the outdoor courts and do not anticipate any lights; conceivably the indoor courts will be used 5 at night, they can put a limit on but he did not think there would be any activity after IOpm. LJ Erspamer asked if this was a 100% affordable housing project. Vann and Sarpa replied 100% with no free market component on this site. Erspamer agreed that this was a pedestrian area; he asked who would be involved in placing sidewalks. Vann replied that they would cooperate with staff and engineering on sidewalks, street lights and a RFTA bus stop. Erspamer asked where the snow storage would be located. Vann replied that the final PUD would have designated snow storage areas. Erspamer asked if they were aware of the traffic count on the Spruce and Park corner. Vann said that Park Circle was adequate to carry the number of cars and engineering did not require anything from this applicant. Erspamer asked where they will park because 50% of the parking on Race Street was taken away. Liz Atkins asked why they needed 38 parking spaces for 7 tennis courts. Moore answered they have 8 or 9 functions a year and a tournament in the summer; they will use those parking spaces. Ruth Kruger asked what the categories were and if the affordable housing units were for sale or rental units. Vann replied they were all for sale units and the exact categories would be in accordance with APCHA prior to final approval. Kruger asked how many spaces would be eliminated on Park Circle. Vann responded none would be taken away as part of this project. Public Comments: Vince Galluccio, public submitted a letter and drawings into the record. Galluccio asked the commission to look at the plan and said that the cabin could be moved. John Rowland stated that he was perplexed with the cabin not being moved. This was a great piece of property for employee housing. Atkins said that she was concerned about the views; there were great views from that parcel and the parking should not separate the views. Kruger stated there were guidelines and regulations. David Guthrie said that the Park Circle should not be an artery to Smuggler; there was the whole point of design guidelines that this was part of the community. Guthrie asked if they need to make findings and objective standards for projects. Kruger said this was a great location for more affordable housing in town. Kruger voiced concern for the project being under - parked; she said that parking should be 2 C addressed at conceptual and that parking for this project should be more than 35 spaces. The commissioners supported more parking on the site. Skadron was not as concerned about the parking. The commission supported requesting HPC take another look at the placement of the cabin. MOTION.- Elizabeth Atkins moved to continue the hearing for the Smuggler Racquet Club to April 3rd; seconded by LJErspamer. All in favor, APPROVED. PUBLIC HEARING: ISIS THEATRE GROWTH MANAGEMENT Ruth Kruger opened the Isis Theatre Growth Management. Only 3 members could remain until 7:30pm. MOTION: Elizabeth Atkins moved to continue the Isis Theatre Growth Management hearing to Thursday, March 8th at noon is Sister Cities Meeting Room; seconded by LJErspamer. All in favor, APPROVED. Meeting adjourned at 7:04 p.m. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 7 ATTACHMENT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: l-ffCAYt Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: My C h _0 1200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) ` a F x` i ' `� (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner. Publicadon of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the-public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property, subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Piddn CeteatyZ they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning distr ct map is n any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. 1 ,e P� v C 'TAR arare The fore oing "A davit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this day TF F O C01 PP of 200�bY OA MY Commission Expires 09120!2009 s Rum Kruger, chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission W-11 N—rS S MIi HAND AND OFFiCUL SEAL my corgmission expires: ZOOR Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE P UBLICATION 70GRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) : Pubkshed m the Aspen Times Weekly on March 4,'P -S AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED 2M71(lwn) BY MAIL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: -7Z,5 E •,_ �uvr, -n+ , Aspen, CO M SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: arch 2-0 200 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1 3-e-n 1 4c Y Ao k (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: V Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 5-o'day of �/ 1 °f arri 1 , 200 --7-, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. V, Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on sucndments. / The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this c%breay of mpr c 12� , 2007, by Te ^jrl,J(e r W-fy�� J: . 0 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: ., TF '•........•O�PV ; Notary Public leoo r__ pF C0� ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL E m ABRAMSON LAWRENCE M ADAM P T AJAX INVESTMENTS LLC MARELL SARAJANE ABRAMSON PO BOX 9066 C/O FRIAS PROPERTIES 2315 ESPANA REAL ASPEN, CO 81612 730 E DURANT AVE WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33415 ASPEN, CO 81611 ALVARADO -RIOS HECTOR PALMIRA 151 CUERNAVACA MORELOS MEXICO, 62499 ASPEN ALPS 105 C/O R7A CPA 4542 E CAMP LOWELL DR #100 TUCSON, AZ 85712 ASPEN CLUB LODGE PROPERTIES LLC 1000 POTOMAC ST NW STE 350 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC PO BOX 1248 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN WINGS PARTNERSHIP 3481 SHORE DR EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 BARBATA ELENA ANDERSON 1/3 C/O CHARLES SKIPSEY PO BOX 2045 RANCHO SANTE FE, CA 92067 BARGE RENE 408 31 ST ST NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 BELSKY PETER 8955 KATY FRWY #215 HOUSTON, TX 77024 ANDERSON ROBERT M & LOUISE E 1021 23RD ST CHETEK, WI 54728 ASPEN ALPS CONDO ASSOC PO BOX 1128 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN KOEPPEL LLC 3551 ST GARDENS RD COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 ASPEN SQUARE VENTURES LLP C/O M & W PROPERTIES 205 S MILL ST STE 301A ASPEN, CO 81611 BAISCH BARBARA D PO BOX 2127 LA JOLLA, CA 92038 BARBATA LAURA ANDERSON 1/3 C/O JUDY NORMAN 2040 FRANKLIN ST #507 SAN FRANSISCO, CA 94109 BASLO A CO PARTNERSHIP C/O TERTIARY INC 600 E RIVER PARK LN STE 205 BOISE, ID 83706 BERKOW ITZ ALAN 25% PO BOX 35 BROOKLANDVILLE, MD 21022 AREP ASPEN SQUARE 406 LLC PO BOX 1546 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN B COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES EMMY LOU BRANDT C/O 1400 E VALLEY RD 101 BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN MOUNTAIN PARTNERS LLC C/O CHUCK FRIAS 730 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN VALLEY LAND TRUST PO BOX 940 ASPEN, CO 81612 BANKS LIVING TRUST 2004 STANOLIND MIDLAND, TX 79705 BARDSLEY DAVID PO BOX 4153 ASPEN, CO 81612 BECKER ERNEST & KATHLEEN TRUST 50 S JONES BLVD #100 LAS VEGAS, NV 89107 BERKOWITZ KAREN PO BOX 826 BROOKLANDVILLE, MD 21022 BERSCH TRUST BLISS ELIOT & ANN BLOCK 106 ASSOCIATES 9642 YOAKUM DR 19130 SYLVAN ST A COLORADO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 RESEDA, CA 91335 710 E DURANT AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 BONCZEK ROBERT R BOLTON REV TRUST BRADLEY EDWARD JR PO BOX 3854 C/O GARRETT BOLTON TRUSTEE 60 MINUTES C/O CHAPEL HILL, NC 27515 -3854 2375 BROADWAY 555 W 57TH ST SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115 NEW YORK, NY 10019 BRADLEY MARK A PO BOX 1938 BASALT, CO 8162' BROWN GORDON H & ANN 860 SODA CREEK RD EVERGREEN, CO 80439 -9646 BURSTEN GABRIELLA W/ DILLINGHAM 20 % PO BOX 2061 ASPEN, CO 81612 CARRILLO JOSEPH & ANNA MARIE 236 HENRY ST #6 BROOKLYN, NY 11201 CHAMBERS JOHN F & CHRISTINE J 830 E DURANT ASPEN, CO 81611 CHERAMIE ALAN A 1/22 INT 139 CHERAMIE LN GOLDEN MEADOW, LA 70357 CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 COLPITTS DR R VERNON M D 2202 STANMORE HOUSTON, TX 77019 BRENNAN ADRIENNE REV FAM TRUST 919 GARDENIA WAY CORONA DEL MAR, CA 92625 BURGESS JOHN & ELIZABETH 23 CHESHAM ST LONDON, UK SWX 8NQ CALGI RAYMOND D 134 TEWKESBURY RD SCARSDALE, NY 10583 CAVES KAREN WHEELER 1 BARRENGER CT NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 CHANG C C & ILING S C/O CHRIS SIEH 2775 GLENDOWER AVE LOS ANGELES, CA 90027 CHERAMIE CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC 21/22 143 CHERAMIE LN GOLDEN MEADOW, LA 70357 CLIFFORD MRS MARGARET JOAN 146 WILD TIGER RD BOULDER, CO 80302 COMBO VENTURE LLC 2100 MCKINNEY STE 1550 DALLAS, TX 75201 BRIDGMAN LYNNE C 710 E DURANT #C ASPEN, CO 81611 BURGESS JOHN K & ELIZABETH 25 CHESHAM ST LONDON, UK SWIXBNQ CARAS STACY JOAN PO BOX 266 PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CA 90274 CHAIKEN WILLIAM 2030 S OCEAN DR APT 1723 HALLANDALE BEACH. FL 33009 -6614 CHATEAU CHAUMONT CONDO ASSOC C/O CRW 720 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 CITY MARKET INC DILLON RE CO INC ATTN REAL ESTATE DEPT PO BOX 5567 DENVER, CO 80217 -5567 CMMM INVESTMENTS LLC 4937 HEARST ST #B METAIRIE, LA 70001 COOK ROBERT 50% 898 BAYER WAY #F16 SAN DIEGO, CA 92154 CORNELISSEN TOM CORREIA JOHN E COUCH CATHERINE ANNE 4753 N SHORE DR 6730 E NORTHWEST HWY 809 S ASPEN ST #9 MOUND, MN 55364 -9607 DALLAS, TX 75231 ASPEN, CO 81611 C> O COX JAMES E & NANCY CRAFT LESTER R JR CROCKETT RUFUS 3284 SURMONT 2026 VETERAN AVE PO BOX 3837 LAFAYETTE, CA 94549 LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 -5722 ASPEN, CO 81612 DALY CAROL CENTER DAMASO PAULA M TRUSTEE DANTE VICTOR F & CANDI 155 LONE PINE RD C -11 6969 SHADY NELS DR 19562 EMBASSY CT ASPEN, CO 81611 DUBLIN, OH 43017 N MIAMI BEACH, FL 33179 DAVIS FAMILY TRUST DAVIS PHILLIP R & AUDREY J DAY ARTHUR S & CYNTHIA A 2240 ENCINITAS BLVD #401 PO BOX 700 3007 BAY SHORE RD ENCINITAS, CA 72024 MAGEE, MS 39111 SARASOTA, FL 34234 DAYPART LLC DENNIS IRREVOCABLE TRUST DEUTSCH COMPANY PTRSHP 82 WILD DUCK RD C/O KENNETH DENNIS 2444 WILSHIRE BLVD STE #600 STAMFORD, CT 06903 77 MONTEREY PINE SANTA MONICA, CA 90403 NEW PORT COAST, CA 92657 RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275 DEVIN ENTERPRISE LIMITED DIBRELL CHARLES G JR & FRANCES DILLINGHAM DALE A W/ BURSTEN 20% PO BOX 8447 24 ADLER CIR PO BOX 2061 ASPEN, CO 81612 GALVESTON, TX 77551 -5828 ASPEN, CO 81612 DILLON ROBERT JAY III TRUST DIRKES PETER R DONOVAN CAROL SMITH 649 LOCUST ST 324 FOXWOOD LN 800 N MICHIGAN AVE #3603 WINNETKA, IL 60093 MILL NECK, NY 11765 CHICAGO, IL 60611 DURANT MALL PROP LLC ECCHYMOSIS LLC ELLERON CHEMICALS CORP C/O MOY JANE COLDW ELL BANKER 4802 E 2ND ST STE 2 720 NORTH POST RD #230 720 E DURANT ST LONG BEACH, CA 90803 HOUSTON, TX 77024 ASPEN, CO 81611 ENCLAVE UNIT 9 LTD ENSIGN BEVERLY C 50% ESPOSITO VINCENT A & JANET M C/O FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN 88 INDIAN SPRINGS DR TRUSTEES 730 E DURANT FORSYTH, GA 31029 6276 VIA CANADA ASPEN, CO 81611 RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275 FEHR EDITH B REVOCABLE TRUST FELLA HENRY J FLY MARIE N C/O DAIVD FEHR 117 4TH ST 7447 PEBBLE POINTE 717 PROMONTORY LN MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 W BLOOMFIELD, MI 48322 BASALT, CO 81621 FODOR BARBARA LOWE & PETER BELA- FRIEDMANN DEBORAH GABERMAN RICHARD M & PAVA 2280 CENTURY HL 199 E LAKE SHORE DR #4W JEREMY TRUSTEE LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 CHICAGO, IL 60611 WEST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01089 380 UNION ST STE 300 0 0 GILBERT GARY GLORY HOLE CONDOMINIUM ASSOC GLUCK CAROLE E 1556 ROYAL BLVD C/O FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN 176 E 71 ST ST GLENDALE, CA 91207 730 E DURANT AVE NEW YORK, NY 10021 ASPEN, CO 81611 GODBOLD EDMUND O GODFREY BRUCE GOLDBERG MARCY 524 COLONY DR 195 RUSSELL RD 131 E DURANT AVE #4 HARTSDALE, NY 10530 PRINCETON, NJ 08540 ASPEN, CO 81611 GREWALJASJIT SINGH GUILBEAU CAPITAL HOLDINGS LLC HAROLD GRINSPOON CHILDRENS ECHO RIDGE RANCH 151 CHERAMIE LN FAMILY TRST 1 ECHO CANYON RD GOLDEN MEADOW, LA 70357 380 UNION ST PAGOSA SPRINGS, CO 81147 WEST SPRINGFIELD, MA 01089 HARVEY CONSTANCE HE REINERT HOLDINGS CORP HEFFNER KRISTIN A 421 D AABC 161 MAC LAREN ST 3058 SCIOTO ESTATES CT ASPEN, CO 81611 -3548 OTTOWA ONTARIO CANADA, K2P OK8 COLUMBUS, OH 43221 HELLER STEVEN B HEMP SUZANNE LIV TRUST HENDRICKS SIDNEY J 4916 ROCKWOOD PKWY 15470 POMONA RD HENDRICKS YOLANDE EVERHARD WASHINGTON, DC 20016 BROOKFIELD, WI 53005 6614 LAKEVILLE RD PETALUMA, CA 94954 -9256 HO MARINA M Y HOFFMAN FRANCIS P HOPELY INVESTMENTS 4607 KOLONALA ST TRUSTEE OF HOFFMAN REV TRUST C/O ROY E HOFER HONOLULU, HI 96816 231 INVERNESS LN 455 N CITYFRONT STE 3600 SCHEREVILLE, IN 46375 CHICAGO, IL 60611 HUGHES CONSTANCE L HUNKE CARLTON J LVG TRST HURWIN DUFFY & RON REV TRUST 5580 LAJOLLA BLVD #511 4410 TIMBERLINE DR SW 558 TONAYA DR LAJOLLA, CA 92037 FARGO, ND 58103 TIBURON, CA 94920 HYDE MARY ANN REV TRUST IACONO FAMILY INVESTMENTS LLC JACOBY JON E M PO BOX 1557 5845 E PLACITA DE LA ZUERENCIA 111 CENTER S B ASPEN, CO 81612 TUCSON, AZ 85750 -1242 LIT CENTER ST BOX 3507 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72203 JALILI MAHIR & MARGARET A JOHNSON DON K L 77 CO INVESTMENTS LP C/O PWMG S BOX 4O 2243 PARK PL STE C 8807 W SAM HOUSTON PKWY N #200 ASPEN, CO 81612 MINDEN, NV 89423 HOUSTON, TX 77040 KANN RONALD KANTOR GARY L KEEFE DANIEL GARY IV & LIESL A C/O DR JULES KANN 2816 VISTA DEL SOL 805 E COOPER AVE 217 OHARA MANOR DR LAS VEGAS, NV 89120 ASPEN, CO 81611 PITTSBURGH, PA 15238 KLIKA YVONNE TRUST 5227 STONEVILLAGE CIRCLE NW STONEBROOK VILLAGE KENNESAW, GA 30152 KRAJIAN RON 617 E COOPER AVE #114 ASPEN, CO 81611 LANDL KARL G & EDELTRAUD 1 6 W RIDGE AVE PROSPECT HEIGHTS, IL 60070 LEBOVITS & MOSES 10318 GLENBARR AVE LOS ANGELES, CA 90064 LETTS W JACKSON & JOYCE H 5600 INLAND DR KANSAS CITY, KS 66106 LIVINGSTON DAVID R 1003 PARCHMENT DR SE GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49546 MAVROVIC ERNA 530 E 72ND ST APT 15 -C NEW YORK, NY 10021 MCKENZIE MILTON & ARETA 2003 REV TRUST 14860 MONTFORT #209 DALLAS, KS 75254 KOEPPEL KEVIN F TRUST C/O NEWMARK S M TRUSTEE 3551 ST GAUDENS RD COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 KUMAGAI GLORIA 332 WESTWOOD DR GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 LANDMARK AMERICA INC THE STABLES LES CHASSES LA RUE DE CHASSESS ST JOHN JERSEY CHANNEL ISLANDS, UK JE3 -4EE LEENEY JACK W 525 S ORIGINAL ST UNIT D ASPEN, CO 81611 LEVITT MADELYN M LEVITT JEANNE S TRUSTEE 6001 MONTROSE RD #600 ROCKVILLE, MD 20852 M & M INVESTMENTS C/O MAYER CHARLES 679 BRUSH CREEK RD ASPEN. CO 81611 MAYER WILLIAM E 399 PARK AVE #3204 NEW YORK, NY 10022 MCQUOWN ENTERPRISES LP 19330 CARRIGER RD SONOMA, CA 95476 KOVACH MARY SUSAN 7 ROCKY KNOLL IRVINE, CA 92612 KUTINSKY BRIAN 7381 MOHANSIC DR BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 LE CLAIRVAUX 5 LLC 2020 ARDMORE BLVD #250 PITTSBURGH, PA 15221 LEINER MICHAEL & ROSE ANN PO BOX 11539 ASPEN, CO 81612 LEW IN DONALD C TRUST C/O HOROWITZ MARTIN 541 BUTTERMILK PIKE #305 CRESCENT SPGS, KY 41017 MAREK JOAN & MICHAEL 3330 BENT TREE PL FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312 MCGARRY ALEJANDRA ANDERSON 1/3 C/O MARY DIANE ANDERSON PO BOX 1959 ASPEN. CO 81612 MELTZER - BRENNAN PARTNERSHIP C/O LANE M MELTZER 10 DUCKHOOK DR NEW ORLEANS, LA 70118 -2668 MICHELINI GABRIELLA W/ DILLINGHAM MJM AMENDED & RESTATED TRUST MOEN DONNE P & ELIZABETH A 20% 1776 S LANE 8 CABALLEROS RD PO BOX 2061 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 ASPEN, CO 81612 o KEENAN MICHAEL & NOLA 1075 DUVAL ST C -21 KENNEDY JUSTIN KLEIMAN SCOTT G PMB 238 11 EAST 68TH ST #6A 1216 TIMBERLAND DR KEY WEST, FL 33040 NEW YORK, NY 10021 MARIETTA, GA 30067 KLIKA YVONNE TRUST 5227 STONEVILLAGE CIRCLE NW STONEBROOK VILLAGE KENNESAW, GA 30152 KRAJIAN RON 617 E COOPER AVE #114 ASPEN, CO 81611 LANDL KARL G & EDELTRAUD 1 6 W RIDGE AVE PROSPECT HEIGHTS, IL 60070 LEBOVITS & MOSES 10318 GLENBARR AVE LOS ANGELES, CA 90064 LETTS W JACKSON & JOYCE H 5600 INLAND DR KANSAS CITY, KS 66106 LIVINGSTON DAVID R 1003 PARCHMENT DR SE GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49546 MAVROVIC ERNA 530 E 72ND ST APT 15 -C NEW YORK, NY 10021 MCKENZIE MILTON & ARETA 2003 REV TRUST 14860 MONTFORT #209 DALLAS, KS 75254 KOEPPEL KEVIN F TRUST C/O NEWMARK S M TRUSTEE 3551 ST GAUDENS RD COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 KUMAGAI GLORIA 332 WESTWOOD DR GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 LANDMARK AMERICA INC THE STABLES LES CHASSES LA RUE DE CHASSESS ST JOHN JERSEY CHANNEL ISLANDS, UK JE3 -4EE LEENEY JACK W 525 S ORIGINAL ST UNIT D ASPEN, CO 81611 LEVITT MADELYN M LEVITT JEANNE S TRUSTEE 6001 MONTROSE RD #600 ROCKVILLE, MD 20852 M & M INVESTMENTS C/O MAYER CHARLES 679 BRUSH CREEK RD ASPEN. CO 81611 MAYER WILLIAM E 399 PARK AVE #3204 NEW YORK, NY 10022 MCQUOWN ENTERPRISES LP 19330 CARRIGER RD SONOMA, CA 95476 KOVACH MARY SUSAN 7 ROCKY KNOLL IRVINE, CA 92612 KUTINSKY BRIAN 7381 MOHANSIC DR BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 LE CLAIRVAUX 5 LLC 2020 ARDMORE BLVD #250 PITTSBURGH, PA 15221 LEINER MICHAEL & ROSE ANN PO BOX 11539 ASPEN, CO 81612 LEW IN DONALD C TRUST C/O HOROWITZ MARTIN 541 BUTTERMILK PIKE #305 CRESCENT SPGS, KY 41017 MAREK JOAN & MICHAEL 3330 BENT TREE PL FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312 MCGARRY ALEJANDRA ANDERSON 1/3 C/O MARY DIANE ANDERSON PO BOX 1959 ASPEN. CO 81612 MELTZER - BRENNAN PARTNERSHIP C/O LANE M MELTZER 10 DUCKHOOK DR NEW ORLEANS, LA 70118 -2668 MICHELINI GABRIELLA W/ DILLINGHAM MJM AMENDED & RESTATED TRUST MOEN DONNE P & ELIZABETH A 20% 1776 S LANE 8 CABALLEROS RD PO BOX 2061 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 ASPEN, CO 81612 o N S N ASSOCIATES INC NAGEY DAVID A & ELAINE TRAICOFF NEUMAN MARK A & NANCY 11051 W ADDISON ST 3 BEACH DR 9 MCCULLOUGH PL FRANKLIN PARK, IL 60131 SHERWOOD FOREST, MD 21405 RYE, NY 10580 NEUMANN MICHAEL NORDAN JOSH PARADISE TRADING PTY LTD TRUSTEE 7381 MOHASNIC DR 433 PLAZA REAL STE 275 PO BOX 7795 GOLD COAST MAIL BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301 BOCA RATON, FL 33432 -3999 CENTER BUNDALL OLD 4217 AUSTRALIA POLICARO JOANNA POLLOCK PERRY 3/4 INT 61.7 -55- 387203, PARIS JAIME I PROPERTY TRUST PARLETTE R BRUCE 50% INT PARTRIDGE JAMES J & JEAN C PO BOX 2469 825 DEAN ST 140 COVINGTON DR BORREGO SPRINGS, CA 92004 ASPEN, CO 81611 BLOOMINGDALE, IL 60108 -3105 PEARSON REBECCA J PERRY JAMES H & MARGERY DEUTZ PETERSON CHRISTY & JAMES E 1610 JOHNSON DR 520 S ORIGINAL ST 867 HAVEN CREST CT NORTH STILLWATER, MN 55082 ASPEN, CO 81611 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 PETZOLD JOHN PIZZUTI WILLIAM J POINDEXTER WILLIAM M & JANI 536 1 ST ST 710 E DURANT - G JENNIFER MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 ASPEN, CO 81611 1040 AVONOAK AVE GLENDALE, CA 91206 POLICARO JOANNA POLLOCK PERRY 3/4 INT PORTE BROOKE 4311 RANDMORE RD PO BOX 950 3520 PADDOCK RD COLUMBUS, OH 43220 ASPEN, CO 81612 WESTON, FL 33331 -3521 R & R INVESTMENTS RAE PROPERTIES LLC RAHLEK LTD AT BANK OF AMERICA 15238 OAK VALLEY RD 121 N SHERIDAN RD HARDING & CARBONE INC RAMONA, CA 92065 LAKE FOREST, IL 60045 3903 BELLAIRE BLVD HOUSTON, TX 77025 RAINBOW TRUST RANDALL WILLIAM C 1/4 INT RED FLOWER PROP CO PTNSHP PAUL DUTZ JR TTEE PO BOX 950 545 MADISON AVE STE 700 PO BOX 2817 ASPEN, CO 81612 NEW YORK, NY 10022 RANCHO SANTA FE, CA 92067 REICH DANIEL S TRUST 20% REICH MELVIN L TRUST 80% RHODES MARJORIE S LLC 6 RINCON ST 4609 SEASHORE DR 1401 AVOCADO AVE IRVINE, CA 92702 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 RIEDEL JOYCE L TRUST ROCKETT BETSY ROCKY MOUNTAIN VENTURES LLC PO BOX 3006 377 C R 217 4510 NE DE LA MAR PL EDWARDS, CO 81632.3006 DURANGO, CO 81301 LEES SUMMIT, MO 64064 RUBY RICHARD L TRUST S & S REALTY PARTNERS LLC S A CO INC 3000 TOWN CENTER #1730 1040 FIFTH AVE #2C DAY WILLIAM A JR SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075 NEW YORK, NY 10028 10226 FIELDCREST DR OMAHA, NE 68114 SABLE LTD SANDIFER C WESTON JR & DICKSIE LEE SARICK SAMUEL & ESTHER C/O HARRIS G WALTER 240 LINDEN DR C/O EASTWOOD DEVELOPMENT PO BOX 11005 BOULDER, CO 80304 -0471 95 BARBER GREEN RD ASPEN, CO 81612 DON MILLS ONTARIO CANADA, M3CE9 SATKUNAS THOMAS P SAUNDERS ROBERT C ESTATE 50% SAVITT STEVEN 0096 HOPI 1710 RANDEL RD 332 WESTWOOD DR N CARBONDALE, CO 81623 OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73116 GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 SCHAEFER KEITH E 0 0 ROGENESS GRAHAM A & RUTH ANN RONLIM INC RONYA REALTY NV 3046 COLONY DR C/O ALICE NORTON C/O DAVID S ZWEIG ESQ SAN ANTONIO, TX 78230 1543 PINE ST 4425 BAYARD ST STE 200 SCHUBINER CRAIG E BOULDER, CO 80302 -4364 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 ROSS JOHN F ROSS LUCIANNA G RUBENSTEIN ALAN B & CAROL S 7600 CLAYTON RD 33 PORTLAND PL 57 OLDFIELD DR ST LOUIS, MO 63117 ST LOUIS, MO 63108 SHERBORN, MA 01770 RUBY RICHARD L TRUST S & S REALTY PARTNERS LLC S A CO INC 3000 TOWN CENTER #1730 1040 FIFTH AVE #2C DAY WILLIAM A JR SOUTHFIELD, MI 48075 NEW YORK, NY 10028 10226 FIELDCREST DR OMAHA, NE 68114 SABLE LTD SANDIFER C WESTON JR & DICKSIE LEE SARICK SAMUEL & ESTHER C/O HARRIS G WALTER 240 LINDEN DR C/O EASTWOOD DEVELOPMENT PO BOX 11005 BOULDER, CO 80304 -0471 95 BARBER GREEN RD ASPEN, CO 81612 DON MILLS ONTARIO CANADA, M3CE9 SATKUNAS THOMAS P SAUNDERS ROBERT C ESTATE 50% SAVITT STEVEN 0096 HOPI 1710 RANDEL RD 332 WESTWOOD DR N CARBONDALE, CO 81623 OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73116 GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 SCHAEFER KEITH E SCHEUERMAN JOANNE E SCHMIT CHAD 63.6% 76363 VIA MONTELENA 200 LOCUST ST #23A SCH MIT JAMES D TRUSTEE 36.4% INDIAN WELLS, CA 92210 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 805 E COOPER AVE #12 ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHUBINER CRAIG E SEAY GERALD R SEGUIN JEFF W & MADALYN B PO BOX 7067 853 VANDERBILT BEACH RD #300 PO BOX 8852 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48302 NAPLES, FL 34108 ASPEN, CO 81612 SEGUIN MARY E TRUST SHACKELFORD MARK SHIFRIN GEORGE 4944 CASS ST #1002 PO BOX 540 PO BOX 12280 SAN DIEGO, CA 92109 -2041 GLOUCESTER POINT, VA 23062 -0540 ASPEN, CO 81612 SILVERSTEIN SAMUEL C & JO ANN SIMECHECK FAMILY LP SKEGBY HOLDINGS LTD 110 RIVERSIDE DR 9B 741 W CREEKSIDE DR C/O OATES KNEZEVICH & NEW YORK, NY 10024 HOUSTON, TX 77024 GARDENSWARTZ 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 SLATER ALEXANDER B SMALLPAGE LEASING LLC SODERLING RONALD E TRUSTEE PO BOX 491 LOCUST VALLEY 6316 HUMPHREYS ST C/O RESCO LONG ISLAND, NY 11560 HARAHAN, LA 70123 901 DOVE ST STE 270 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 -3038 o 0 SOLHEIM J MICHAEL SOPRIS VENTURES LLC SOUTHEAST HARBOR FARMS LLLP 525 S ORIGINAL UNIT A PO BOX 572 14642 E CHERRY CREEK RD ASPEN, CO 81611 PAUMA VALLEY, CA 92061 LARKSPUR, CO 80118 SPAR CONSOLIDATED MINING & STUDENT ISAAC & NECHAMA UND 1/2 TADVICK THOMAS GARY & CAROL LEE DEVELOPMENT INT 713 CENTAURI DR C/O R L STEENROD JR & ASSOC PO BOX 457 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 2009 MARKET ST ASPEN, CO 81612 DENVER, CO 80205 -2022 TERMINELLO DENNIS J & KERRY L THOMSON FAMILY LP TRAVIS OMIAH K 656 RIDGEWAY C/O DONNA GORMAN HENDRICKS DEREK WHITE PLAINS, NY 10605 -4323 PO BOX 190 2655 OVERLOOK DR COLTON, CA 92324 BROOMFIELD, CO 80020 TRAVIS OMIAH K UNCAPHER BILL UNIT 7A CHATEAU CHAUMONT LLC 1863 WAZEE ST #1 E PO BOX 2127 C/O GERMAN DITTMAR DENVER, CO 80202 LA JOLLA, CA 92038 42577 HWY 82 ASPEN, CO 81611 V M W TRUST OF 1991 VALER10 JAMES VARADY LOTHAR M & CHERYL G 301 N LAKE AVE STE 900 VALERIO LANETTE 5036 MAUNALANI CIR PASADENA, CA 91101 PO BOX 1376 HONOLULU, HI 96816 ASPEN, CO 81612 VIEREGG ROBERT TODD TRUST W PROPERTIES II LLC W PROPERTIES III LLC 50% INT 2221 WYNDANCE WY PO BOX 31447 C/O THOMAS J WILSON NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 RALEIGH, NC 27622 4600 MARRIOTT DR #400 RALEIGH, NC 27612 WALDRON K BRENT & CONSTANCE K WALLEN- OSTERAA REV LIVING TRUST WALLING REBECCA 720 E HYMAN AVE 36 OCEAN VISTA 350 BLANCA AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 TAMPA, FL 33606 WARNKEN MARK G WATERS HOLDINGS ORIGINAL LLC WEIGAND FAMILY TRUST 23/100 1610 JOHNSON DR 822 E COOPER AVE 150 N MARKET STILLWATER, MN 55082 ASPEN, CO 81611 -2015 WICHITA, KS 67202 WELLS KATHERINE G WELLS RICHARD A & SUSAN T WELLS RICHARD A & SUSAN T TRUST 33 PORTLAND PL PO BOX 4867 C/O MOORE & VAN ALLEN/ THOMAS ST LOUIS, MO 63108 ASPEN, CO 81612 OBANNON 100 N TRYON ST 47TH FLR CHARLOTTE, NC 28202 WELSCH SUSAN FLEET TRUST WEST ULLA CHRISTINA WHITMAN WAYNE & FRAN UND 1/2 INT 10 UTE PLACE 3042 TOLKIEN LN PO BOX 457 ASPEN, CO 81611 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 CLEARWATER, FL 33757 -0457 0 WILSHIRE COMPANY WILSON JOSEPH B UND 50% INT PO BOX 828 MOY JANE W UND 50% INT ORINDA, CA 94563 720 E DURANT AVE STE 104 ASPEN, CO 81611 WRIGHT STEPHEN P W RIGHT TRUST 803 E DURANT AVE #2 1412 ANTIQUA WAY ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 -4914 0 WINE RICHARD A 65 E INDIA ROW #29D BOSTON, MA 02110 ZENSEN ROGER 313 FRANCES THACKER WILLIAMSBURG, VA 23185 CITY OF ASPEN PRE- APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Jason Lasser, 429 -2763 DATE: 2/22/07 PROJECT: 725 E. Durant, Chateau Dumont Condominium #22 -A REPRESENTATIVE: Jennifer Hall, Alan Richman OWNER: Jennifer Hall TYPE OF APPLICATION: Growth Management Allotment DESCRIPTION: Growth Management Allotment for Condominium Unit #22 -A, Chateau Dumont Apartments (converted from a lodge unit and part of the laundry/common space to residential) to designate the unit as a free market unit. Applicable Code Sections: 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.470.030 (D) Annual Development Allotments 26.470.040 (C)6 Free - Market Residential Units within a Mixed -Use Project 26.470.040(C)(7) Affordable Housing -- Growth Management Review 26.515 Off - Street Parking 26.710.190 Lodge (L) Zone District Review by: Staff, Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing: Yes at P & Z. Referral Agencies: APCHA, Building, Fire, Water, Electric, Sanitation Planning Fees: $1410 Deposit for 6 hours of staff time (additional staff time required is billed at $235 per hour) Referral Agency Fees: $204 Total Deposit: $1614 (additional staff hours are billed at $235 per hour) To apply, submit the following information: I . Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Completed Land Use Application. 3. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 4. Signed fee agreement. 5. Pre - application Conference Summary. 6. An 8 1/2" x l l" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 7. Proof of ownership. 8. Site plan or site improvement survey showing parking configuration. 9. Floor plans of unit to be legalized. 10. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. This should include the proposed code amendment language. 11. 15 Copies of the complete application packet (items 2 -10) 12. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. The GIS department can provide this list on mailing labels for a small fee. 920.5453 13. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)- preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. Notes: The application shall demonstrate compliance with the parking requirements or include a response to Chapter 26.515 Process: p 0 Apply. Planner will then check the application for completeness. Application is referred to applicable referral agencies and the Applicant is given a public hearing date by Staff. Staff writes a memo of recommendation. Planning and Zoning Commission reviews case and makes a final determination. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. © 0 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 725 E. DURANT AVE. CHATEAU DU MONT APARTMENTS, CONDOMINIUM UNIT 22 -A CHANGE IN USE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Jennifer Hall 725 East Durant Ave, Unit 22 -A, Aspen, Colorado 81611, owner of the subject property, represented by Alan Richman Planning Services. The applicant is requesting a Change in Use for Condominium Unit 22 -A, Chateau Du Mont Apartments to residential and to designate the unit as an affordable housing unit. A portion of the unit was developed as a lodge unit and the remainder was developed as common space (a laundry room). The property is currently zoned Lodge (L). The applicant is requesting the following development approvals: Change in Use Growth Management Review, Affordable Housing Growth Management Review and Conditional Use Review. The property is legally described as Condominium Unit 22 -A, Chateau Du Mont Apartments of Aspen. For further information, contact Jason Lasser at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2763, jasonl @ci.aspen.co.us. s/ Ruth Kruger, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 3, 2007 City of Aspen Account A PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 111 WEST HYMAN AVE. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 20, 2007, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted 111 W. Hyman LLC for the property located at 111 W. Hyman Ave. The Applicant is represented by Jennifer Hall, and is requesting a Growth Management Review to allow for off - site Affordable Housing mitigation to be located at 725 E. Durant Ave. The property is legally described as CONDO: WEST SHADOW MOUNTAIN, TOWNHOMES CONDO UNIT: 111. For further information, contact Jason Lasser at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2763, jasonl @ci.aspen.co.us. s/ Ruth Kruger, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on March 3, 2007 City of Aspen Account o — ffi '` LL T c N O �? P mq E Q LL fIJ S q 0 �sO�'j W{ xO Z�y t�$a •P6rl ^O� N(L 26 GNU mhW04(NV .y. NCC GG E b H _ O 5 t d _ z a' IW $ �oS 8 8 g 4 a � N �ia��G MEMORANDUM TO: Plans were routed to those departments checked -off below: O ........... City Engineer O ........... Community Development Engineer O ........... Zoning Officer X ........... Housing Department O ........... Parks Department X ........... Aspen Fire Marshal X ........... City Water X ........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District X ........... Building Department O ........... Environmental Health X ........... Electric Department O ........... Holy Cross Electric O ........... City Attorney O ........... Streets Department O ........... Historic Preservation Officer O ........... Pitkin County Planning O ........... County & City Disaster Coordinator O ........... Police O ........... Transportation O ........... Parking O ........... Gary Beach* (Metro Districts: Highlands, Buttermilk, and Five Trees) FROM: Jason Lasser Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone - 429.2763 Fax - 920.5439 DATE: February 9, 2007 RE: DRC Review — 725 East Durant Ave Unit 22A• GMQS Review, Conditional Use Review The Applicant proposes a change in use of Condominium Unit 22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments to residential and to designate the unit as an affordable housing unit. DATE OF DRC MEETING: February 21st @ 1:30 Sister Cities Room *address: Beach Resource Management/715 W. Main/ Aspen /925- 3475 /gary@beachresource.com APPLICANT: LAND USE APPLICATION Name: �\AN, Location: '( `015 `ttkS ! 0 u n�w� {:uc l V ,,, A ems- C. (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) REPRESENTATIVE: Name: �a1A^ I`�c�we ��ra� .w 42��•c�s Address: Q o 90X 3 b \ 3 ASS P.e._ Co 8x (n \ a Phone #: 0% 1° - \ \2S PROJECT: Name: A `` Address: ZS 't- 'k O v A.--A Ac- V _. ,k Z2 A Phone #: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Special Review ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Devt. ❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition © GMQS Exemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ Historic Designation ❑ ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use ❑ Other: ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: S,:: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) `` H e you attached the following? FEES DUE: S \35� Pre - Application Conference Summary Attachment # I, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form 11 I A Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD ;' y OF ASPEN yVRtTT PAID DATE REP NO. i 2f S1D6 (tV -2&3q P THIS DEED, made q;-T`/ OF ASPEN �^'" HRETT PAID EXHIBIT #1 0 L> t � �1 cc TE REP NO. IZo> WARRANTY DEED December 7, 2005, Between CORDUROY CRUISERS, LLC of the County of QtTKCrQ . State of CO GRANTOR AND JENNIFER HALL, GRANTEE whose legal address is: P.O. BOX 11711, ASPEN, CO, 81611 of the County of PITKIN, State of CO WITNESSETH, That for and in consideration of the sum of ten dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the grantor has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey and confirm unto the grantee, Its heirs and assigns forever, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate and lying and being in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, described as follows: CONDOMINIUM UNIT 22 -A, CHATEAU DU MONT APARTMENTS, A CONDOMINIUM, according to the Condominium Map thereof recorded in Plat Book 3 at Page 335 and Amendment thereto as defined and described in Action of the Board of Directors recorded December 2, 2005 as Reception No. 518036 and as defined and described in the Condominium Declaration thereof, recorded December 9, 1968 In Book 238 at Page 1. TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, its heirs and assigns forever. And the Grantor, for Its, its heirs and assigns, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the Grantee, its heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, its is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except those matters as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, its heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed. SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2 1111111!111111111111111111 lif 111111111111 CO IT 1111 e 5 18235 002.521 JANICE C 1 SIGNATURE PAGE TO WARRANTY DEED PAGE 2 (-- ROY CRUISERS, LLC STATE OF pnt q 1 ss COUNTY OF M2MAC.09g The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 0'7 day of Ra- C.aJmtz r 2005, by CORDUROY CRUISERS, LLC by LANETTE VALERIO, MANAGER WITNESS my hand and official seal my commission expires: 64-IT• ZOO$ PCT20164F3 Notary Publ M LEY rizona nty xpires 6 518235 111111111111111111111111 III111111111111111IIIII Ilfl Illl00 2//0812005992:521 EXHIBIT #2 Mr. Chris Bendon, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: HALL APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN USE Dear Chris, ^1 I hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as my designated representative with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for my property, Condominium Unit 22A, Chateau Dumont Apartments. Mr. Richman is authorized to submit an application to change the use of this unit and to designate it as a resident occupied (RO) affordable housing unit. He is also authorized to represent me in meetings with City staff and the City's review bodies. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review of this application, please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services, whose address and telephone number are included in the land development application. Sincerely, finifer Ha 1 .0. Box 11711 Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 - 925 -3476 PLANNER: PROJECT: REPRESENTATIVE: OWNER: TYPE OF APPLICATION EXHIBIT #3 10 CITY OF ASPEN PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY Chris Bendon, 429.2765 DATE: 11.15.06 Chateau DuMont Condominium 422A Affordable Housing Alan Richman Jennifer Hall One Step, Planning and Zoning Commission. DESCRIPTION: The owner of this unit would like to legalize the unit as an affordable housing unit. Part of this unit was originally developed as a lodge unit (needs change -in -use and AH approval) and the remaining portion was developed as laundry/common space (needs AH approval). The affordable housing unit will not be accessory to the lodging operation (needs Conditional Use approval). Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Process 26.425 Conditional Use Review 26.470.040.C.5 Change -in -use — Growth Management, P &Z Review 26.470.040.0.7 Affordable Housing — Growth Management, P &Z Review 26.515 Off - Street Parking Review by: Staff, Planning and Zoning Commission. Public Hearing: Yes, P &Z. Referral Agencies: APCHA, Building, Fire, Water, Electric, Sanitation Planning Fees: Planning Deposit, Minor ($1,350 for 6 hours of staff time, additional hours are billed at a rate of $225 /hour) Referral Agency Fees: None. Total Deposit: $1,350 (additional hours are billed at a rate of $225 /hour) To apply, submit the following information (applies only to Lot Split application): I. Signed fee agreement. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Total deposit for review of the application 4. 15 Copies of the complete application packet. 5. Additional materials as required by the specific review. 6. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed amendment complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. Notes: The application shall demonstrate compliance with the parking requirements or include a response to Chapter 26.515. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 0 3 T 3 rml t Jennifer Hail Resldeme f • Q g 925 E. Durant, Unit 22A EifiYy 1 Aspen, 0081611 [ �. Condominium Unit 22A Chato w Du Mont tj 1 i Book 256 Page 1 4 as Ammended t 1 ,pS Rd Y 7R F!t It i it 3C I u - js F t Jennifer Hail Resldeme f • Q g 925 E. Durant, Unit 22A EifiYy 1 Aspen, 0081611 [ �. Condominium Unit 22A Chato w Du Mont tj 1 i Book 256 Page 1 4 as Ammended t 1 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and —3 e", - &Ce, %4\ (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to C an application fo{T C>�ss i " CoyAI . \`-'� LVt,J (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to snake legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ \3 S ° which is for _ 6 hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid: p CITY OF ASP E L APPLICANT I By: By: Chris Bendon Community Development Director Date: g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 11/30/04 Billing Address and Telephone Number: Reauired kCSrt— L.o S \(a ( qzr --3 y-) l RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD 1Z� MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Chris Bendon, Director of Community Development Q RE: 111West Hyman Avenue Substantial GMQS Amendment - Public Hearing Reso. No. 4 Series 2007 DATE: March 20, 2007 PROJECT: 111 WEST HYMAN AVENUE GMQS AMENDMENT, REQUEST SUMMARY: This is a substantial amendment to a Growth Management approval of 111 West Hyman Avenue. This application was approved in 1992 and was known as the "Snare GMQS Application." The 111 West Hyman property is also know as Unit Ill of the West Shadow Mountain Townhome Condominiums. The 1992 approval required an affordable rental unit to be developed with the single - family residence. This application proposes to "move" the affordable housing mitigation off -site to an existing unrestricted unit in the Chateau Dumont building — Unit 22A. APPLICANT: 111 W. Hyman, LLC, owner of 111 West Hyman Avenue, represented by Jennifer Hall. Jennifer Hall, owner of Chateau Dumont Condominium Unit #22A. STAFF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS RECOMMENDATION: SUMMARY: In 1992, the City approve the "Snare Growth Management Application." This approval permitted the development of one free - market residence and an associated rental Category 1 affordable housing unit in the basement of a property located at 111 West Hyman Avenue. The property was developed according to the approvals. According to the applicant (and confirmed by the Housing Authority) the rental unit has not been occupied by a local working resident. The City's Growth Management System at the time required "scoring" applications. The project received the requisite score for approval and was granted an allocation for the one free - market unit. Although there was no "requirement" to provide this affordable rental unit, the application included it — likely as a way to "sweeten" the application. There are two ways to amend a GMQS application — an insubstantial amendment can be approved administratively but is limited to changing aspects of the development that have as