HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.Fractional Ownership.A046-02A046-0
Fractional Ownership Code Amendme
jrc:rnn2cA 5I9 1
0
FA
-0 0
PARCEL ID: DATE RCVD: 5/14/02 # COPIES: CASE NO A046-02
CASE NAME: Fractional Ownership Code Amendments PLNR: IJoyce Ohlson
PROJ ADDR: CASE TYP: Code Amendments STEPS:
OWN/APP: City of Aspen Comm ADR C/S/Z: PHNt
REP: ADR: C/S/Z: PHN:
FEES DUE: None FEES RCVD-1 None STAT: F
REFERRALS
REF: BY� DUE:
MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED
DATE OF FINAL ACTION:
REMARKS1
CITY COUNCIL:-
PZ:
CLOSED: F BY: BOA:
� � DRAC:
PLAT SUBMITD: �W PLAT (BK,PG): ADMIN:�
9
0
City of Aspen Community Development Department
CASE NUMBER A046-02
PARCEL ID NUMBER
PROJECT ADDRESS
PLANNER Joyce Ohlsen
CASE
DESCRIPTION
ll• ♦ ifi::ii::•.�r�i�r �wrrir��i 111l�lq. Jlrr..-. ! —...an 7!
REPRESENTATIVE Cuthbert L. Myrin, Jr.
DATE OF FINAL ACTION 4/24/02
CLOSED BY Amy DeVault
0
0
Section 1
That Chapter 26.590 be repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
Chapter 26.590
TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT
26.590.010 Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish the procedures and standards by which timeshare
development may be permitted within the City of Aspen. It is the City's intent to establish
timeshare regulations that provide for the protection of the character of Aspen as a resort
community, and that help to promote increased tourism and vitality within the City.
Specifically, the City intends that new timeshare projects in Aspen will implement the goals
of the Aspen Area Community Plan, and will help to achieve the following public purposes:
A. Increased Vitality. Timeshare developments can provide the opportunity for increased
tourism to Aspen, can add to the level of community vitality, and can help to create
a more sustainable local economy. This can be accomplished by expanding the
number and variety of "hot beds" available to visitors, raising occupancy levels in the
accommodations sector, and attracting "new trials" to Aspen, from persons who have
not previously visited this community.
B. Preserve and Enhance Lodging Inventory. Aspen's tourist accommodations inventory
has for some time included a significant percentage of traditional lodges. The
community would like to preserve and enhance this lodging inventory, by encouraging
timeshare units to be contained in projects that look and operate in a manner similar
to Aspen's traditional lodges. These regulations have been designed to accomplish
this purpose by establishing standards for the physical and operational features of
timeshare lodges, to ensure that new and re -developed timeshare lodges maintain
Aspen's lodging traditions.
C. Upgrade Quality of Accommodations. It is important to Aspen's tourist economy that
its accommodations are kept up-to-date. Timeshare development offers the
opportunity to infuse capital into the short term accommodations inventory, so
facilities can be modernized. It is equally important to ensure that once facilities are
upgraded, the facility is managed to provide a quality visitor experience over time.
These regulations are intended to ensure that timeshare lodges are properly
maintained over the life of the development.
D. Maintain Community Character. Aspen has a valued reputation as a quality resort
community. The City intends to regulate timeshare marketing and sales practices, to
ensure that the way timeshare units are marketed and sold is consistent with the
rl
character of this community, and to minimize the potential for practices that would
create an inappropriate image of Aspen.
26.590.020 Applicability and Authority to Grant Variations.
A. Applicability. The requirements of this Chapter shall apply to all timeshare
development within the City of Aspen. These requirements shall be in addition to
all other applicable requirements set forth in this Title 26, and those set forth in the
Colorado statutes.
B. Authority to Grant Variations. Variations from the provisions of this Chapter may be
authorized by the City Council. An applicant requesting a variation shall demonstrate
that the provision requested to be varied is not applicable to the proposed
development or cannot be met, and shall demonstrate that the proposed variation is
reasonable, would not be contrary to the public interest, and better implements the
purpose and intent of these timeshare regulations than the codified requirement.
26.590.030 Zone Districts in Which Timesharing Shall Be Permitted.
* Timesharing shall be allowed as a permitted use in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR),
Commercial Lodge (CL), and Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) zone districts.
26.590.040 Procedure for Review of Timeshare Application.
A. PUD Review Required. All timeshare development shall be processed as a Planned
Unit Development (PUD), pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of this Code.
B. Consolidated PUD Review. The Community Development Director may determine
that because a timeshare development is a conversion of an existing building, or
because of the limited extent of the issues involved in the proposed development, the
four step PUD review process should be consolidated into a two step review,
pursuant to Section 26.445.030 B.2, Consolidated Conceptual and Final Review.
Development of a timeshare lodge in the Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) Zone
District shall be processed as a two step review, pursuant to Section 26.445.030 B.3.
The Community Development Director is also authorized to waive those PUD
submission requirements from Section 26.445.060 and review standards from Section
26.445.050) that the Director finds are not applicable to a proposed timeshare
development.
C. Subdivision Review. Timeshare development shall also require subdivision approval.
Review of the subdivision application may be combined with final PUD review, as
authorized by Section 26.304.060 B., Combined Reviews, and by Section 26.445.030
B.4, Concurrent Associated Reviews.
3
D. Growth Management Quota System Review. Whenever a proposed timeshare
development is subject to review under the City's Growth Management Quota System
(Chapter 26.470), the development shall be considered a "Tourist Accommodation"
or a "Lodge" for purposes of competition or exemption from the System.
26.590.050 Contents of Application.
In addition to those application contents for PUD and subdivision, the development
application for timeshare shall include the following information:
A. Timeshare Use Plan. A detailed description of the basic elements of the proposed
timeshare use plan. The use plan shall describe the number of estates being created
in each unit, the total number of estates to be created, the expected price for each
estate, and whether a purchaser is buying a specific unit for a specific time, a specific
unit for a floating time, or whether there is no specific unit but just a specific time.
It shall also describe whether owners will be able to participate in an exchange
program, and if so, in which program(s) they will be eligible to participate. The use
plan shall also provide a specific description of how the development will comply with
the requirements of Section 26.590.060, Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge.
B. Summary of Disclosure Statement and Timeshare Instruments. A detailed summary of
each of the key points that will be included in the disclosure statement and the
timeshare development instruments (see Section 26.590.090) if the project receives
approval from the City.
C. Marketing Plan. The marketing plan for the timeshare development, including
information on proposed sales techniques (including a description of gifts, premiums,
or promotions to be offered), sales packaging, and whether a sales office will be
established off -site.
D. Budget. A thorough account of the proposed homeowner's/condominium association
budget, giving a true indication of proposed costs and expenditures.
E. Upgrading Plan. For any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a
timeshare development, the applicant shall submit a plan of how the project will be
physically upgraded and modernized.
F. Tax Collection. A statement indicating the manner in which real estate transfer taxes
and sales taxes will be collected.
26.590.060 Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge Development
It is the intent of the City of Aspen that all timeshare developments incorporate some of the
physical and operational features that are typically found in lodges in Aspen. The City
4
recognizes that each timeshare development is unique, and that each development should
not contain all of these features. In fact, considering the proposed location of the
development and the intended method of operating the facility, certain of these features may
not be appropriate. The City also recognizes that when owners occupy their units, the
development will operate more like a private residential complex than like a lodge. But the
City seeks to balance that form of use with opportunities for other guests to use the facility.
Therefore, the City has identified a menu of timeshare lodging features, including both
mandatory and optional elements. All timeshare developments shall incorporate the
mandatory physical and operational features listed herein. Provided however, that an
applicant may propose to instead substitute optional operational features for one or more
of the mandatory features listed herein, or may propose its own set of features which ensure
that the development operates in a manner similar to a lodge when the owners are not using
their timeshare interests.
A. Physical Elements.
1. All timeshare developments shall be managed on -site, with a front desk that
is located within a lobby that is sized to meet the needs of the project. If the
timeshare lodge is part of a multi -site development, there may be a single
1/+ front desk for these sites. The front desk shall be open at least during regular
business hours, and shall be managed to provide full-time registration and
reservation services, including provision for late check -in and for other off -
hours guest needs. The front desk shall accommodate walk-in rentals.
2. The planned timeshare development shall contain a sufficient level of
recreational facilities and other amenities to serve the occupants, including
appropriate facilities for both the winter and the summer seasons.
B. Mandatory Operational Practices. The City wants to ensure that the units in a
timeshare development are available for rental to the public when they are not being
occupied by the owner or the owner's guests. The City has identified certain
operational practices that will accomplish this intent, which are listed in this section.
An applicant who agrees to include all of the practices listed below in the operation
of the timeshare development shall be deemed to have complied with this intent.
The City recognizes, however, that there may be other ways to comply with this
intent, and will consider these and other operational practices. Applicants may
propose to substitute one or more of the optional practices listed in Section C.,
below, for one or more of the mandatory practices listed in this Section B.
Applicants may also propose other operational practices not listed in Section C. as
a means of demonstrating compliance with this standard. Acceptance of the
proposed optional practices as a substitute for one or more of the mandatory
practices shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.
5
1. Timeshare estates shall be made available for short-term rental in a managed
program when the estate is not in use by the owner of the unit or the owner's
guests. The purchasing disclosure documents shall state that the purchaser
must sign an agreement with the management company to rent the estate
when it is not being occupied by the purchaser or guests.
2. The covenants of the homeowner's association shall permit walk-in rental of
units. The association shall not limit rental of units to such arrangements as
only weekly rentals or Saturday -to -Saturday rentals; instead the association
shall permit shorter stays, split -week rentals, and similar flexible arrangements.
3. Owners of timeshare estates shall be required to reserve their unit/time
sufficiently far in advance to enable the public to obtain access to those units
that are not so reserved.
4. The owner of a timeshare estate shall not be permitted to occupy that estate
for any period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days.
5. The units that remain in the developer's inventory shall be made available for
rental to the public while the interests are being sold, except for models and
other units that are needed for marketing or promotional purposes.
6. Units that are available for rental shall be listed at competitive rates in a
central reservation system. Listing of the unit with a recognized central
reservation system in Aspen, or through the central reservation system of the
company that will manage the timeshare development, is preferred.
C. Optional Operational Features.
1. Timeshare developments that subdivide each unit into a larger number of
interests (more than 10 interests per unit) are preferred to those which
subdivide each unit into a smaller number of interests (less than 10 interests
per unit).
2. Applicants may formulate their timeshare use plan such that the purchaser
would not purchase an interest in a particular unit and would not expect to
occupy the same unit each visit; instead the purchaser would purchase the
right to occupy a certain type of unit for a certain period of time. Applicants
may also include provisions in the homeowner's association documents
prohibiting owners from personalizing the unit they have purchased.
3. Applicants may design their development as a mixed project, which includes
not only timeshare units, but also some units that would continue to be owned
and operated by the applicant and his successors or assigns as traditional
In
lodge units. Another type of use plan that is encouraged would be for the
applicant to agree not to sell all of the shares in every unit, but to instead
keep some time reserved for rental to the public at market rates during both
the high seasons and the off-seasons.
4. Applicants may decide to sell on and off-season estates as a package.
5. Applicants may include in their use plan provisions that allow for a wide range
of exchange opportunities for owners, which will promote new Aspen trials.
26.590.070 Review Standards for Timeshare Development.
The following standards shall apply to the review of any timeshare development. These
standards are in addition to those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and
Subdivision applications.
A. Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation.
1. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing development to a timeshare
development shall prepare a fiscal impact analysis of the proposed
development, which demonstrates whether there would be any negative sales,
property, or other tax consequences to the City from the approval of the
proposed conversion. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of the
timeshare development, be required to mitigate any negative tax consequences
the project will cause.
2. The City of Aspen Finance Department has created a model which evaluates
the tax consequences of a proposed timeshare conversion. The model
evaluates the direct sales tax implications from having fewer days of occupancy
by guests that pay sales taxes in a timeshare lodge as compared to a
traditional lodge. The model also considers the indirect sales tax benefits that
may accrue from increased occupancy in timeshare lodge units as compared
to other types of accommodations within the City. Finally, the model
considers any property tax implications due to the conversion of property that
is assessed as a commercial use to property that is assessed as a residential
use. Applicants shall meet with the City Finance Department before
submitting their timeshare development application to review the model and
to understand the factors the City will use in evaluating the tax impacts of
their proposal.
B. Affordable Housing Requirement. Whenever a timeshare development is required to
provide affordable housing, the mitigation for the development shall be calculated by
applying the standards of the City's housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable
housing requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed
7
lock out rooms in the development, and shall also take into account any accessory
retail, restaurant, conference, or other functions proposed in the development.
C. Parking Requirement.
1. The parking requirement for timeshare development shall be calculated by
applying the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge uses.
The parking requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number
of proposed lock out rooms in the development.
2. The timeshare development shall also provide an appropriate level of guest
transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle vehicles, to offer an
alternative to having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen.
3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in
a parking space on -site when the owner is not using that estate.
D. Appropriateness of Marketing and Sales Practices. The marketing and sale of
timeshare units shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title 12, Article
61, C.R.S., as may be amended from time to time. The applicant and licensed
marketing entity shall present to the City a plan for marketing the timeshare
development.
The following marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall
not be permitted:
a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers of timeshare units on any
street, mall, or other public property or facility;
b. Sales campaigns using phone solicitations; and
C. Any unethical sales and marketing practices which would tend to
mislead potential purchasers.
2. Giving of gifts to encourage potential purchasers to attend a sales presentation
or to visit a timeshare development is permitted, provided the gift reflects the
local Aspen economy. For example, gifts for travel to or accommodations in
Aspen, restaurants in Aspen, and local attractions (ski passes, concert tickets,
rafting trips, etc.) are permitted. Gifts that have no relationship to the local
Aspen economy are not permitted. The following gifts are also not permitted:
a. Any gift for which an accurate description is not given;
•
•
b. Any gift package for which notice is not given to the prospective
purchaser that the purchaser will be required to attend a sales
presentation as a condition of receiving the gifts; and
C. Any gift package for which the printed announcement of the
requirement to attend a sales presentation is in smaller type face than
the information on the gift being offered.
E. Upgrading of Existing Projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be converted
to a timeshare development shall be physically upgraded and modernized. The
extent of the upgrading that is to be accomplished shall be determined as part of the
PUD review, considering the condition of the existing facilities, with the intent being
to make the development compatible in character with surrounding properties and
to extend the useful life of the building.
1. To the extent that it would be practical and reasonable, existing structures
shall be brought into compliance with the City's adopted fire, health, and
building codes.
2. No sale of any interest in a timeshare development shall be closed until a
certificate of occupancy has been issued for the upgrading.
E Adequacy of Maintenance and Management Plan. The applicant shall provide
documentation and guarantees that the timeshare development will be appropriately
managed and maintained in an manner that will be both stable and continuous. This
shall include an identification of when and how maintenance will be provided, and
shall also address the following requirements:
1. A fair procedure shall be established for the estate owners to review and
approve any fee increases which may be made throughout the life of the
timeshare development, to provide assurance and protection to timeshare
owners that management/assessment fees will be applied and used
appropriately.
2. The applicant shall also provide documentation establishing the adequacy of
a reserve fund to ensure that the proposed timeshare development will be
properly maintained throughout its lifetime.
G. Compliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed
timeshare development will comply with all applicable requirements of Title 12,
Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3, C.R.S.;
including the requirements concerning the five (5) day period for rescission of a sales
contract, and the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow.
0
H. Approval By Condominium Owners. If the development that is proposed to be
timeshared is a condominium, the applicant shall submit written proof that the
condominium declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred (100) percent of the
owners of the condominium units have approved the timeshare development, that all
mortgagees of the condominium have approved the proposed timeshare development,
and that all condominium units in the timeshare development will be included in the
same sales and marketing program.
L Prohibited Practices and Uses. Without in any way limiting any requirement contained
in this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage in any of the
following practices:
1. The creation, operation or sale of a right -to -use interest or any other
timeshare concept which is not specifically allowed and approved pursuant to
the requirements of this section. Right -to -use timeshare concepts (e.g. lease-
holds and vacation clubs) are considered inappropriate in Aspen and are not
permitted.
2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare
approval, timeshare development instruments, or disclosure statement.
3. Failure to comply with any representations contained in any application for
timesharing or misrepresenting the substance of any such application to
another who may be a prospective purchaser of a timeshare interest.
4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a timeshare estate or interest
therein in violation of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval
granted pursuant hereto, or cause or aid and abet another to violate any
requirement of this Chapter, or an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter.
26.590.080 Business License and Sales Tax Payments.
A. Business License. It shall be unlawful for any timeshare development to operate in
the City of Aspen without first obtaining a business license in accordance with the
standard procedures of the City of Aspen.
B. Sales Tax Payments. Occupancy of any timeshare unit by anyone who pays a fee for
the use of the unit (other than the owner thereof) shall be subject to the City's sales
tax the same as if such occupancy were of a hotel or lodge unit. Any timeshare
development, as a condition of its approval, shall be required to obtain an Aspen
Sales Tax/Lodging Tax License, which shall establish how this tax shall be collected
and paid to the City. The manager of the association shall be responsible for the
timely collection of the City sales tax for the City of Aspen.
10
26.590.090 Timeshare Documents.
At the same time the applicant submits the PUD Development Plan and PUD Agreement
to the City for recordation, pursuant to Section 26.445.070, the applicant shall also submit
the following timeshare documents in a form suitable for recording. The Planning Director
may require the applicant to submit a draft version of these timeshare documents at the
time of submission of the Final PUD application.
A. Disclosure Statement. The applicant shall submit a disclosure statement that contains
the following information:
1. The name and address of the developer of the timeshare development as well
as a summary of the developer's business experience, including all background
and experience in the development of timeshare development, and the present
financial condition of the developer.
2. The name and address of the manager/management company for the
development, if any, and a description of the manager's/management
company's responsibilities, powers, duties, authority and business experience.
All information on the manager's background and experience specifically
related to timeshare development shall be provided.
3. The names and addresses of the marketing entity and the listing broker and
a statement of whether there are any lawsuits pending or investigations that
have been undertaken against the marketing entity or listing broker, and if so,
a description of the status or disposition of said lawsuits or investigations. A
summary of the marketing entity's business experience including all
background and experience related to timeshare development.
4. A description of the timeshare units, including the developer's schedule for
completion of all buildings, units, and amenities, with dates of availability.
5. If the timeshare plan consists of a condominium or a similar form of
ownership, a description of the development and any pertinent provisions of
the condominium instruments.
6. Any restraints on the transfer of the purchaser's interest in the timeshare units
or plan.
7. The timeshare use plan, which shall include a description of the rights and
responsibilities under the plan.
11
0 •
8. Notice of any liens, title defects or encumbrances on or affecting the title to
the units or plan and, if there are encumbrances or liens, a statement as to
whether, when and how they will be removed.
9. Notice of any pending or anticipated legal actions that are material to the
timeshare units or plan of which the applicant has, or should have, knowledge.
10. The total financial obligation of the purchaser, which shall include the initial
price and any additional charges to which the purchaser may be subject in
purchasing the unit.
11. An estimate of the dues, maintenance fees, real property taxes, sales taxes,
real estate transfer tax and similar periodic expenses, and the method or
formula by which they are derived and apportioned, which shall include
whether maintenance fees are determined by unit, time of year, or prorated
share of the overall maintenance costs, or any other means utilized to
compute maintenance fees.
12. A statement demonstrating the manner in which management/assessment fees
will be held, utilized and accounted for.
13. A description of any financing offered by the applicant.
14. The terms and significant limitations of any warranties provided, including
statutory warranties and limitations on the enforcement thereof or on
damages.
15. A statement that the proposed development will comply with all applicable
requirements of Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S. Upon request from the City, the
applicant shall provide a copy of the documents submitted to the State of
Colorado for the registration and certification of the timeshare developer.
16. The extent to which a timeshare unit may become subject to a tax or other
lien arising out of claims against other timeshare owners of the same
timeshare unit.
17. The minimum percentage of units the developer will require be sold before
the developer will proceed with the completion of the timeshare development.
18. A description of the maintenance to be supplied to the timeshare
development, including how and when such maintenance will be provided.
12
0 •
19. Whether any or all the units in the proposed development will be available for
participation in an exchange program. The applicant shall disclose which
exchange program(s) the timeshare estate owners will be eligible to utilize.
20. A description of all insurance covering the property.
21. A description of the on -site amenities and recreational facilities which are
available for use by the unit owners. All on -site amenities shall be owned by
the homeowner's association and the developer shall not be allowed to charge
any additional fees for use of the amenities. If there are any off -site facilities
that are related to the property, these shall also be described, including a
summary of any fees that timeshare owners would have to pay to use those
off -site facilities.
22. A statement that any timeshare interest shall be expressly subject to all
requirements and representations set forth in the disclosure statement, which
shall be placed of record with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
23. For any timeshare development that is a conversion of an existing project, a
statement shall be provided by the developer, based on a report prepared by
an independent architect or engineer, licensed by the State of Colorado,
describing the present condition of all structural components and mechanical
and electrical installations material to the use and enjoyment of the timeshare
units. The statement shall also provide a list of any outstanding notices of
uncured violations of building code or other municipal regulations, together
with the estimated cost of curing those violations.
B. Timeshare Development Instruments. The applicant shall submit the following
timeshare development instruments:
1. Instruments for the interval estate, time span estate, or fractional estate,
including:
a. The legal description, street address or other description sufficient to
identify the property.
b. Identification of timeshare time periods by letter, name, number or
combination thereof.
C. Identification of the timeshare estate and the method whereby
additional timeshare estates may be created.
d. The formula, fraction or percentage of the common expenses and any
voting rights assigned to each timeshare estate.
13
0 0
e. Any restrictions on the use, occupancy, alteration or alienation of
timeshare units.
f. Any other matters that the applicant or the City Council deems
reasonably necessary.
2. All timeshare development instruments shall provide for the following:
a. That a homeowners' association shall be established. Title to the
common areas of the development and responsibility for maintenance
of the development shall reside within the association. The association
shall designate a managing agent. The management contract with the
managing agent shall allow for either party to terminate, for cause,
upon sixty (60) days notice. In the event the manager is terminated,
a new managing agent shall be designated as quickly as possible by the
association. Any management agreement shall specify the managing
agent's duties and responsibilities to maintain the development.
b. A stipulation by the owner of the timeshare interest irrevocably
designating the homeowners' association and/or the managing agent as
an agent for the service of legal notices for any legal action, proceeding
or hearing pertaining to the timeshare interest or for the service of
process (in a manner sufficient to satisfy the requirements of personal
service in the state, pursuant to Rule 4 C.R.C.P., as amended).
C. Each timeshare interest with a multiple ownership shall be required to
designate one managing agent as the spokesperson and voter for all of
the owners involved.
d. That the association shall have the ability to compel a timeshare owner
to pay maintenance fees and if any owner's fees are not paid, his
interest shall be subject to a lien and foreclosure or other divestment.
In the event an owner or his guests violate the rules and regulations of
the association, the association shall have the right to enjoin the
violation and the prevailing party in such suit shall be awarded his
court costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
e. Provisions addressing reconstruction or repair of all or a portion of the
timeshare development following its willful or non -willful destruction.
Provisions should also be included addressing termination of the
association, including the percentage of owners that must agree for the
termination to become effective, what happens to the common
elements in the event of a termination, and how the proceeds shall be
14
0 .
distributed in the event the property is taken due to condemnation or
eminent domain.
3. Updating and filing.
a. The developer and his successors and assigns (other than individual
unit purchasers) shall have a continuing duty to update the disclosure
statement and file with the City all amendments to the timeshare
development's instruments. Such amendments shall comply with the
requirements of this section. No amendment which shall significantly
alter the disclosure statement or the timeshare development
instruments shall be effective unless approved and accepted by the City
and filed in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. All
amendments shall be initially submitted for review to the Community
Development Director who shall have authority to either approve a
proposed amendment as in compliance with the requirements of this
section or refer the proposed amendment for appropriate subdivision
or PUD approval.
b. The foregoing updating and filing requirements do not apply to a single
unit owner. However, the condominium association and/or the
homeowners association, or both if there be multiple associations, shall
have the continuing responsibility to update the filing, the disclosure
statement, and any amendments to the condominium documents and/or
timeshare development instruments with the City and, subject to
applicable City approvals, to file the same in the Office of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder as soon as practicable after City approval
has been granted. Once the condominium association has been
formed, the City shall not accept any amendments for review without
prior approval thereby.
4. Before transfer of a timeshare unit and no later than the date of execution of
any contract of sale, the applicant or any other seller of a timeshare unit shall
provide the intended transferee with a copy of the disclosure statement and
any amendments thereto, except this requirement shall not apply to the owner
of a single timeshare estate in a development who is attempting to sell the
estate.
5. No conveyance of a timeshare interest shall be valid unless the instrument of
conveyance shall indicate that title is being transferred subject to the
condominium declaration which shall include the disclosure statement as an
exhibit thereto.
15
0 •
Section 2•
That the following definitions be revised or added to Section 26.104.100:
Timeshare development or unit. A development, building, or unit, the title to which is, or
is to be, divided into interval estates, time span estates, or fractional estates, as defined at
Section 38-33-110, C.R.S., as may be amended from time to time.
Timeshare Lodge. A development or a unit that has been approved for timesharing,
pursuant to Chapter 26.590, and has the characteristics of a timeshare lodge, as specified in
Section 26.590.060. Each unit in a timeshare lodge shall be subdivided into no less than
seven (7) interval estates, time span estates, or fractional estates. A timeshare lodge unit
may contain a kitchen and still be considered a lodge unit (not a residential dwelling unit)
for purposes of this Code.
Lodge. Same as hotel.
gPrtinn i-
That Sections 26.710.140 C., 26.710.190 C., 26.710.200 C. and 26.710.320 C. be amended to
delete "timesharing" as a conditional use, and that Sections 26.710.190 B., 26.710.200 B., and
26.710.320 B. be amended to add "timeshare lodge" as a permitted use.
Section 4•
That Section 26.710.320 B. I., permitted uses in the LP Zone District, he amended to read
as follows:
1. Lodge, provided:
a. All lodge units within the LP Overlay Zone District may have kitchens within
individual lodge rooms.
b. All lodge units must be available for overnight lodging by the general public
on a short-term basis for at least six (6) months of each calendar year. This
requirement shall not apply to a timeshare lodge.
Section 5:
That Section 26.710.190 D.2.d., minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirement for lodge
units in the L/TR Zone District, be amended to read as follows:
d. Lodge units (including timeshare lodge units). No requirement.
16
0
Section 6:
That Section 26.710.190 B.4, permitted uses in the L/TR zone district, be amended to read
as follows:
4. Multi -family dwellings, provided that such dwellings shall only be permitted on the
following types of properties:
a. properties on which multi -family dwellings were in existence as of ,
2002 (the effective date of this Code Amendment); or
b. properties for which a development order for the development of multi -family
dwellings has been issued by the City, pursuant to Section 26.304.070 of this
Code as of , 2002 (the effective date of this Code Amendment),
provided a building permit for the multi -family dwellings is issued before the
vested rights for the development expire.
Section 7•
That Section 26.470.070 O., Conversion of Lodge Reconstruction Credits to Residential
Dwelling Units, be repealed.
APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on , 2002.
APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
City Attorney
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
Jasmine Tygre, Chairperson
17
:• 9Z o. 112
STATE F COLOFADO
CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION Department of Regulatory Agencies of cow
'ACK LANG y MARQUEZ, Director M. Michael Cooke A.
e�
Executive Director H p
+ r
r
1876 `
May 1998 (first notice printed in 1991, revised in 1994, 1996 and 1997)
Bill Owens
Governor
NOTICE TO ALL BUILDERS OR DESIGNERS OF MULTI -FAMILY BUILDINGS
Since 1991, the federal Fair Housing Act has required multi -family dwellings
containing four or more units to meet seven specific accessibility standards in all
units of elevator buildings, and in the ground floor units of non -elevator buildings.
NOTE: Even though you or your building inspector may consider a
townhome a single-family home (or a "zero lot line home" or "attached
single-family home") because it is on its own lot and separated from others
by firewalls, it is not exempt from Fair Housing Act requirements. The
HUD definition of the "covered multi -family dwellings" subject to the accessibility
requirements states that "Dwelling units within a single structure separated
by firewalls do not constitute separate buildings."
The Division is frequently asked what standards should be followed when there are
differences, or conflicts, between the accessibility requirements of the Fair Housing
Act and other state statutes or local ordinances. The answer is that the more
stringent requirements should be followed, because the Fair Housing Act states
explicitly that it "does not invalidate or limit any law of a State or political
subdivision of a State ... that requires dwellings to be designed and constructed in a
manner that affords handicapped persons greater access..."
Builders and designers should then be aware of the following state or local laws:
1). The State Fair Housing Act, CRS 24-34-501, et. seq., was amended in 1990 to
require the same seven handicap features as the Federal Fair Housing Act.
Colorado has not adopted any in regulations but will follow the HUD
accessibility guidelines found in 24 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations), Chapter I.
2. Another Colorado law, attached, in effect since 1975, applies to any building used
by the public, regardless of whether it is built by private or public funds. Privately -
funded single-family homes are exempt, as are other residential projects containing
less than seven units, but projects with seven units or more must make one in seven
accessible to the ANSI standards. (Until 1998, the statute referred to the 1980
ANSI standards; it now refers to the "most current version" of the ANSI standards.)
Major differences between this law and the Fair Housing Acts are on the last page.
3. Some cities and counties enforce the accessibility requirements of the UBC or
their own local ordinances. (The 1997 UBC contains the FHA requirements.)
1560 Broadway, Suite 1050 ■ Denver, Colorado 80202-5143 ■ 303-894-2997
Fax # 303-894-7830 ■ TTY # 303-894-7832 ■ 1-800-262-4845 (Colorado only)
The mission of the Division is to assure that all Colorado citizens who are real 19
or potential victims of illegal discrimination are afforded the equal protection of the laws.
Builders Dlannine construton should try to comply with all cessibility la.ws--thP
Fair Housing Acts, the attached state statute, and any local building codes. When
there are conflicts, builders must follow the more stringent requirements. As an
example, sections 9-5-111 and 112 of the attached state statute require one in seven
units to meet the most current version of the ANSI 117.1, which has more stringent
accessibility standards than those in the Fair Housing Acts. These one -in -seven
units would have to meet the ANSI 117.1 requirements; the remaining units would
have to meet the requirements of the Fair Housing Acts.
The Division is often asked whether the accessibility requirements of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) apply to multi -family construction. Except for the
examples given below, the ADA does not apply to residential construction. Usually,
the federal and state Fair Housing Acts requirements apply to residential
construction, and the architectural standards of the ADA (ADAAG) apply to
commercial facilities and buildings or portions of buildings considered to be "public
accommodations." However, there are some types or parts of residential projects
(see below) that are subject to both the Fair Housing Act and the ADA.
• Under Title II of the ADA, (State and Local Government Services), housing built
"by, on behalf of or for the use of state or local governments is subject to the ADA.
• Under Title III of the ADA (Public Accommodations and Commercial Facilities),
which applies to non -governmental public accommodations and commercial
structures, any features or buildings considered to be "public accommodations" are
subject to the ADA and, if built since 1991, also subject to the Fair Housing Act.
Examples of features or types of housing considered "public accommodations" under
Title III and therefore subject to ADAAG (Americans With Disabilities Accessibility
Guidelines) are:
1. The office where prospective residents come to apply for rentals or sales.
2. Common areas, such as a clubhouse or swimming pool, expected to be
rented out to the public. (Common areas used only by residents and their
guests are not considered "public accommodations" under the ADA.)
3. Apartments or condos designed to be used on a short term basis,
such as ski area units rented out like motels.
4. Nursing homes, long term care facilities, college dormitories.
5. Some time shares.
Further information about the ADA and ADA architectural standards (ADAAG) are
available from the ADA InfoCenter in Colorado Springs, 1-800-949-4232.
Nancy R. Snow
Housing Compliance Specialist
20 (303) 894-7822, Ext. 325, 1-800-262-4845 (Colorado Only) ouooix
w
TITLE 9
SAFETY — INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL
ARTICLE 5
Building Constructed by Public or Private Funds — Standards
9-5-101. Definitions. As used in this article, unless the context
otherwise requires:
(1) "Aging" means those manifestations of the aging processes that
significantly reduce mobility, flexibility, coordination, and perceptiveness but are not
accounted for in the other categories mentioned in this section.
(2) "Appropriate number" means the number of a specific item that
would be reasonably necessary, in accord with the purpose and function of a building
or facility, to accommodate individuals with specific disabilities in proportion to the
anticipated number of individuals with disabilities who would use a particular
building or facility.
(3) "Disabilities of incoordination" means faulty coordination or
palsy from brain, spinal, or peripheral nerve injury.
(4) "Fixed turning radius, front structure to rear structure" means the
turning radius of a wheel chair, left front -foot platform to right rear wheel, or right
front -foot platform to left rear wheel, when pivoting on a spot.
(5) "Fixed turning radius, wheel to wheel" means the tracking of the
caster wheels and large wheels of a wheel chair when pivoting on a spot.
(6) "Hearing disabilities" means deafness or hearing impairments
that might make an individual insecure in public areas because the individual is
unable to communicate or hear warning signals.
(7) "Involved (involvement)" means a portion of the human anatomy
or physiology, or both, which has a loss or impairment of normal function as a result
of genesis, trauma, disease, inflammation, or degeneration.
(8) "Nonambulatory disabilities" means impairments that, regardless
of cause or manifestation, for all practical purposes confine individuals to wheel
chairs.
(9) "Ramps" or "ramps with gradients" means ramps with gradients,
or ramps, with slopes, that deviate from what would otherwise be considered the
normal level. An "exterior ramp", as distinguished from a "walk", means an
appendage to a building leading to a level above or below existing ground level. As
such, a ramp shall meet certain requirements similar to those imposed upon stairs.
(10) "Semiambulatory disabilities" means impairments that cause
individuals to walk with difficulty or insecurity. Individuals using braces or
crutches, amputees, arthritics, spastics, and those with pulmonary and cardiac ills
may be semiambulatory.
(11) "Sight disabilities" means total blindness or impairments
affecting sight to the extent that the individual functioning in public areas is insecure
or exposed to danger.
(12)"Standard" means that when this term appears in small letters, it
is descriptive and means typical type.
(13) "Walk" means a predetermined, prepared -surface, exterior
pathway leading to or from a building or a facility, or from one exterior area to
another, placed on the existing ground level and not deviating from the level of the
existing ground immediately adjacent thereto.
21
9-5-102. Applicability of standards. (1) The standards and specifications
set forth in this article shall apply to all buildings and facilities used by the public
which are constructed in whole or in part by the use of state, county, or municipal
funds or the funds of any political subdivision of the state or which are constructed
with private funds.
All such buildings and facilities to be constructed from plans on which
architectural drawings are started after July 1, 1975, from any one of these funds or
any combination thereof shall conform to each of the standards and specifications
prescribed in this article. The governmental unit responsible for the enforcement of
this article shall grant exceptions to or modify any particular standard or
specification when it is determined that it is impractical and would create an unusual
hardship or would unreasonably complicate the construction, alteration, or repair in
question. Any such exception or modification of the provisions of this article shall
be made in writing as a matter of public record. These standards and specifications
shall be adhered to in those buildings and facilities which will be constructed from
architectural drawings prepared after July 1, 1975, unless the authority responsible
for the construction determines that the construction has reached a state where
compliance is impractical. This article shall apply to permanent buildings.
(2) Any building or facility which would have been subject to the provisions
of this article but was under construction prior to July 1, 1976, shall comply with the
standards and specifications set forth in this article when alterations, structural
repairs, or additions are made to such building or facility. This requirement shall
only apply to the area of specific alteration, structural repair, or addition and shall
not be construed to mean that the entire structure or facility is subject to this article.
(3) The general assembly finds and declares that the standards and
specifications set forth in this article are of statewide concern. Nothing in this article
shall prohibit any municipality or other governmental subdivision from making and
enforcing standards and specifications that are more stringent than those set forth in
this article.
9-5-103. Disabilities covered — purpose. (1) This article is concerned with
nonambulatory disabilities, semiambulatory disabilities, sight disabilities, hearing
disabilities, disabilities of incoordination, and aging.
(2) It is intended to make all buildings and facilities covered by this article
accessible to and functional for persons with disabilities to, through, and within their
doors without loss of function, space, or facility where the general public is
concerned.
9-5-10.1. Design criteria. Design criteria shall comply with the most current
version of the "American National Standard for Buildings and Facilities Providing
Accessibility and Usability for Physically Handicapped People", promulgated by the
American national standard institute, commonly cited as "ANSI A117.1".
9-5-105. Repealed 1998
9-5-106. Repealed 1998
9-5-107. Repealed 1998
Wa
22
9-5-108. Repealed 1998
9-5-109. Repealed 1998
9-5-110. Responsibility for enforcing standards. (1) The responsibility for
enforcement of this article is as follows:
(a) Where state funds are utilized, by the department of personnel;
(b) Where funds of counties, municipalities, or other political
subdivisions are utilized, by the governing bodies thereof;
(c) Where wholly private funds are utilized, by the building
department, or its equivalent, of the political subdivision having jurisdiction.
(2) The government unit responsible for enforcement of this
article may exempt any building or facility from any provision of this article upon a
finding that compliance with such provision would subject an undue hardship on the
taxpayers of the governmental unit liable for the cost of such compliance in relation
to the benefits to persons with disabilities that are derived from such compliance.
9-5-111. Exemptions for certain privately funded projects. This article
does not apply to privately funded projects for the construction of separate houses
designed as single-family residences or to other types of residential property
containing less than seven residential units. For larger residential and transient
accommodation projects, this article shall apply to one unit for each seven units or
major fraction thereof, as follows:
Number of Units required to
Units comply
7 0
8-14 1
15-21 2
22-28 3
29-35 4
36-42 5
etc.
9-5-112. Residential building project requirement. Before any
construction of a residential building project may be started, which project includes
seven or more residential units, a contract shall be entered into with the governing
body of the municipality, city, town, county, or city and county where said project is
to be located. Said contract shall guarantee to the governing body that the specific
number of residential units for persons with disabilities, as provided in section 9-5-
111, shall be constructed in such a manner as to be easily accessible and adaptable
for persons with disabilities and shall require the builder of such project to certify
that said accessible and adaptable units will comply with the most current version of
the "American National Standard for Buildings and Facilities Providing Accessibility
and Usability for Physically Handicapped People", promulgated by the American
national standard institute, commonly cited as "ANSI A117.1".
-3-
23
NOTE THAT THE COLORADO LAW ON THE PRECEDING PAGES DIFFERS
FROM THE FAIR HOUSING ACTS IN THE FOLLOWING RESPECTS:
1) It applies not only to new buildings, but also to alterations,
structural repairs and additions; the seven accessibility
requirements of the Fair Housing Acts apply only to new buildings;
2) It applies to residential and commercial building, the Fair
Housing Acts apply only to residential construction;
3) It refers to the most recent version of the ANSI standard,
whereas the Fair Housing Acts and the HUD design guidelines refer
to the 1986 ANSI standard;
4) It applies to projects with seven or more units, whereas the
federal and Colorado Fair Housing Acts apply on a building -by -
building basis, to any building containing four or more residential
units;
5) It requires approximately one out of seven units in the project to
be made accessible, whereas the Fair Housing Act accessibility
standards apply to all units in elevator buildings and ground floor
units in non -elevator buildings. However, the ANSI standards for
those units are in some cases stricter and provide more
accessibility for persons with disabilities than the standards in the
Fair Housing Acts;
6) Section 9-5-111 applies, not only to housing, as do the Fair
Housing Acts, but places the same requirement for one -in -seven
accessible units to "transient accommodation projects."
7) Because the older state law requires the use of the ANSI
standards, it contains some requirements for sight and hearing
disabilities, whereas the requirements of the two Fair Housing Acts
are for mobility impairments only; and,
8) It allows the unit of local government to modify or grant
exceptions to the requirements for impracticality or unusual
hardship. However, mandates of federal law would still prevail;
thus no local government could waive any requirements of the
Federal Fair Housing Act, or any other federal law, such as the ADA
or the 1973 Rehabilitation Act, which prescribes accessibility
features for projects and entities receiving federal money.
00003x
24
•
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joyce Ohlson, Community Development Deputy Director
FROM: James Lindt, Planner
RE: Fractional Ownership Data Summary
DATE: May 16, 2002
SUMMARY:
In investigating the scope of impacts of the proposed fractional ownership code amendments,
Staff performed a GIS data analysis in ArcView. Staff found that seven multi -family
structures that have been condominiumized in the L/TR zone district would be eligible for
the fractional ownership exemption that is proposed. According to our GIS data, there are a
total of thirty-three multi -family building that have been condominiumized in the L/TR zone
district, of which twenty-six of them contained more than six units.
In addition, the R/N4F zone district that was being considered for eligibility for the fractional
ownership exemption was investigated in the same manner as the L/TR zone district. Staff
found that eighteen multi -family structures would be eligible for the proposed fractional
ownership exemption if it were extended to the R/MF zone district. In total, there are thirty-
six multi -family structures of more than six units in R/MF zone district out of 54 total
condominiumized multi -family structures.
Condo. Multi -family Streuctures
Less Than 6 Units
More Than 6 Units
L/TR
7
26
R/MF
18
36
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council
THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
FROM: Joyce A. Ohlson, Deputy Directorl�
SUBJECT: 2nd Reading, Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2002, Timeshare Regulations, Public
Hearing for Code Amendment (Continued from September 23, 2002)
DATE: October 15, 2002
Background:
In late 2001, the City Council directed Staff to initiate code amendments that would address
fractional ownership projects, hereinafter called, "Timeshare/s". The project started off with
research and evaluation of the City's current regulations, resulting in the writing and presentation
at a Council work session on February 12, 2002 of Fractional Fee Ownership - Summary of
Research and Identification of Regulatory Options. This report was prepared by planning
consultant, Alan Richman who assisted the City in this project. The primary conclusion of that
report was that timeshare development can have positive impacts on Aspen, provided its
potential negative impacts are properly managed. The project proceeded with a number of work
sessions and public hearings with the Planning Commission and the public. On June 1 lth, the
Planning and Zoning Commission completed their work on the timeshare code amendments and
forwarded a positive recommendation to the City Council to adopt the attached ordinance. The
City Council passed Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2002 on 1 st Reading on June 24, 2002.
Summary:
The positive and negative impacts of timeshares, as concluded in Fractional Fee Ownership -
Summary of Research and Identification of Regulatory Options are as follows:
Positive Impacts:
• Increased tourism and vitality
• Ownership units that turn over instead of being vacant; and
• Re -investment to upgrade older lodges.
Negative Impacts:
• Loss of traditional lodge inventory;
• Inappropriate marketing and sales practices; and
• Short-term residents in long term neighborhoods.
The current timeshare provisions within the Land Use Code are proposed for repeal as part of the
attached ordinance and many of the other sections are affected and therefore, amended as well.
Instead of analyzing the ordinance section -by -section, the following Outline of Proposed
Timeshare Code Amendments is intended to give you a sense of the basic directions taken in the
code amendment. Essentially, there are two main aspects to the ordinance: the provisions that
are intended to encourage timeshare development to occur, given its positive impacts, and the
provisions that are intended to manage and thereby limit its potential negative impacts.
Following is an outline of these.
Outline of Proposed Timeshare Code Amendments:
1. New provisions proposed to encourage timeshare lodge development:
• Timesharing would be permitted use instead of a conditional use.
• Elimination of the "density penalty" in the L/TR zone district for any lodge unit that has a
kitchen, enabling timeshare lodge units to contain kitchens.
• Elimination of LP zone district provision that limited timesharing to only 6 months of the
year. This provision will apply only to lodges, which are not timeshared ensuring
availability to visitors. Repealing of the "Conversion of the Lodge Reconstruction Credits
to Residential Dwelling Units" provisions, in order to not create an incentive for
redevelopment of lodges to residential units.
• Submission contents for timesharing considerably reduced. An applicant will not have to
produce required legal documents until the project has received at least conceptual
approval, or for smaller projects, until the PUD is to be recorded.
• Simple exemption process for certain types of timeshare conversions.
• Timesharing would be classified as a lodge use (instead of a residential use) for GMQS
review, making projects eligible for a larger allocation bucket.
2. New requirements proposed to better manage timesharing:
• Timeshare would be reviewed as a PUD (either 2 or 4 step).
• Establishment of a "menu" of mandatory and optional physical elements and operational
practices that are to be included in timeshare projects.
• Each timeshare lodge unit must be split into at least 7 estates.
• Timeshare developments must comply with the City's business license requirements.
• Review standards have been updated to address current community concerns; some
former standards and application requirements have been deleted.
Discussion (New information for October 15 hearing):
Section 26.590.070, Review Standards for Timeshare Lodge Development has been amended
since the last public hearing on August 26th on this ordinance. The ordinance now includes a
review standard requiring that applicants proposing to convert a traditional lodge to a timeshare
lodge provide a fiscal impact analysis. The components of the fiscal impact analysis are
specifically itemized and have to do with the history and projections for sales tax, real estate
transfer tax, property tax and, in general, any other information that is relevant to understanding
the tax consequences of the proposed development. If the fiscal impact study demonstrates there
will be an annual loss to the City from the conversion of an existing lodge to a timeshare lodge,
then the applicant shall be required to propose a mitigation program that is entered into between
the applicant and the City Council through the PUD agreement for the development. The City
Attorney Office is investigating other options for fiscal impacts caused by new timeshare
development.
Review Procedure:
Text Amendment: Pursuant to Section 26.310, the City Council may approve, recommend
alternative language, or deny a proposed text amendment after considering a recommendation by
the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director and following a public
hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation:
On June 11, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted Resolution No. 16, Series of
2002, by a vote of 4 (four) to 1 (one) recommending that the City Council amend the Land Use
Code to address Timeshare development. The Planning Commission's recommendation for the
code amendment language differs somewhat from what Staff has provided to the Council.
These changes came about from the Council and public input at the public hearing on August
26th, from recommendations from an outside attorney as noted above, and suggestions from the
City Attorney. (The Planning Commission resolution and minutes of the June 4th and June 1 lth
public hearing have been provided two other times at Council's previous hearings and therefore,
are not attached again.)
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that City Council approve Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2002.
Recommended Motion:
""I move to approve Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2002, finding that the Review Criteria
contained within Exhibit A have been met."
City Manager Comments:
Attachments:
Exhibit A — Review Criteria and Staff Findings
ORDINANCE NO.21
(SERIES OF 2002)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO AMEND CHAPTER 26.590
26.590, TIMESHARE, AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE CODE, THESE BEING
SECTION 26.104.100, DEFINITIONS; 26.710.320, LODGE PRESERVATION
OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT; 26.710.190, LODGE/TOURIST RESIDENTIAL ZONE
DISTRICT; 26.710.330, SKI AREA BASE ZONE DISTRICT; 26.710.140,
COMMERCIAL CORE ZONE DISTRICT; 26.710.200, COMMERCIAL LODGE ZONE
DISTRICT; 26.480.030 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS; 26.480.040 SUBDIVISION
PROCEDURES; 26.510.030, PROCEDURES FOR SIGN PERMIT APPROVAL; AND
26.470.070, GMQS EXEMPTIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Aspen directed the Community Development Department to propose amendments to the
Land Use Code to better address the emerging types of timeshare and fractional fee projects that are
being planned in Aspen; and,
WHEREAS, in response to this direction, the Community Development Director prepared
the research paper Fractional Fee Ownership - Summary of Research and Identification of
Regulatory Options, dated January, 2002; and,
WHEREAS, a work session was held with the Aspen City Council and the Planning and
Zoning Commission on February 12, 2002, at which time a discussion of the research paper was
held and direction was given to the Community Development Director to prepare the appropriate
amendments to the Aspen Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, a work session was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission on
March 26, 2002, to review a first draft of these proposed amendments to the Land Use Code, at
which time it was determined that a public hearing should be scheduled to consider the proposals;
and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Aspen Land Use Code, applications to
amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval,
approval with conditions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the
Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after
reviewing and considering these recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the
amendments to the Land Use Code as are described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on May 21, June 4, and June 11, 2002, to consider these amendments to the Aspen Land
Use Code, took public testimony, and considered the recommendations of the Planning Director;
- 1 -
and,
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval of these amendments by a vote of 4 (four) in favor to 1 (one) against; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the recommendations of the
Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission during a duly noticed
public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the amendments to the Aspen Land Use Code, as
described herein, meet or exceed all applicable standards and their approval is consistent with the
goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the
promotion of the public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN COLORADO:
Certinn 1
That Chapter 26.590 of the Aspen Municipal Code be repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
Chapter 26.590
TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT
26.590.010 Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish the procedures and standards by which timeshare
development may be permitted within the City of Aspen. It is the City's intent to establish
timeshare regulations that provide for the protection of the character of Aspen as a resort
community, and that help to promote increased tourism and vitality within the City. Specifically,
the City intends that new timeshare projects in Aspen will implement the goals of the Aspen Area
Community Plan, and will help to achieve the following public purposes:
A. Increased Vitality. Timeshare developments can provide the opportunity for increased
tourism to Aspen, can add to the level of community vitality, and can help to create a more
sustainable local economy. This can be accomplished by expanding the number and variety
of "hot beds" available to visitors, raising occupancy levels in the accommodations sector,
and attracting "new trials" to Aspen, from persons who have not previously visited this
community.
B. Preserve and Enhance Lodging Inventory. Aspen's tourist accommodations inventory has
- 2 -
for some time included a significant percentage of traditional lodges. The community
would like to preserve and enhance this lodging inventory, by encouraging timeshare units
to be contained in projects that look and operate in a manner similar to Aspen's traditional
lodges. These regulations have been designed to accomplish this purpose by establishing
standards for the physical and operational features of timeshare lodges, to ensure that new
and re -developed timeshare lodges maintain Aspen's lodging traditions.
C. Upgrade Quality of Accommodations. It is important to Aspen's tourist economy that its
accommodations are kept up-to-date. Timeshare development offers the opportunity to
infuse capital into the short term accommodations inventory, so facilities can be
modernized. It is equally important to ensure that once facilities are upgraded, the facility is
managed to provide a quality visitor experience over time. These regulations are intended
to ensure that timeshare lodges are properly maintained over the life of the development.
D. Maintain Community Character. Aspen has a valued reputation as a quality resort
community. The City intends to regulate timeshare marketing and sales practices, to ensure
that the way timeshare estates are marketed and sold is consistent with the character of this
community, and to minimize the potential for practices that would create an inappropriate
image of Aspen. The City also intends to provide protection for its long term residential
neighborhoods, to ensure that the impacts of timeshare development do not adversely affect
the character of these residential areas, by limiting this use to the City's lodge and selected
commercial zone districts.
26.590.020 Overview of Timeshare Development.
A. Applicability. The requirements of this Chapter shall apply to all timeshare development
within the City of Aspen. These requirements shall be in addition to all other applicable
requirements set forth in this Title 26, and those set forth in the Colorado statutes.
B. Types of Timeshare Development. There are two types of timeshare development that may
be permitted within the City of Aspen, as follows:
Timeshare lodge development is the basic form of timesharing permitted in Aspen. It
applies to any application to convert lodge units or residential dwelling units to timesharing
or to develop new units for timesharing, except for those applications that are eligible for an
exemption, as described below. Timeshare lodge development is a permitted use in the
Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR), Commercial Lodge (CL), Lodge Preservation Overlay
(LP), Commercial Core (CC), and Ski Area Base (SKI) zone districts. To obtain approval
of a timeshare lodge development, an applicant shall follow the procedures outlined in
Section 26.590.040 and shall comply with the applicable characteristics of Section
26.590.060 and the applicable standards of Section 26.590.070.
2. Exempt timesharing is a more limited type of timesharing permitted in Aspen. The only
units eligible for this exemption are single-family dwelling units, condominiumized duplex
- 3 -
0 •
dwelling units, and condominiumized multi -family dwelling units within any individual
condominium complex or condominium project that contains no more than six (6) such
units. Exempt timesharing is a permitted use in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR) and
the Ski Area Base (SKI) zone districts. To obtain approval for exempt timesharing, an
applicant shall follow the procedures outlined in Section 26.590.030 B and shall comply
with the standards of Section 26.590.030 C.
26.590.030 Exempt Timesharing.
A. Eligibility For Exemption.
1. The following types of dwelling units are eligible to apply for this exemption:
a. Single-family dwelling units;
b. Condominiumized duplex dwelling units; and
C. Condominiumized multi -family dwelling units within any individual condominium
complex or condominium project that contains no more than six (6) such units.
2. To be eligible to apply for the exemption, the single-family, duplex, or multi -family
dwelling units must be located in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR) zone district or the
Aspen Highlands Village PUD.
B. Minimum Requirements To Obtain Exemption.
1. No more than six (6) estates may be created in any dwelling unit via this exemption. An
applicant wishing to create more than six (6) estates in any unit may do so only via an
application for a timeshare lodge development.
2. The ownership interests that may be created pursuant to this exemption shall be limited to
"time -span estates" as defined in C.R.S. 38-33-110, where the annually recurring exclusive
right to possession and occupancy is determined by a schedule or formula.
3. Applications for exempt timesharing shall be processed as a subdivision exemption,
pursuant to Section 26.480.030 A.S. of this Code.
4. The minimum application contents for the subdivision exemption application shall be as
follows:
a. The applicable portions of the information described in Section 26.590.050 A., B., F and
G.; and
b. The general application contents required in Section 26.304.030, Application and Fees.
- 4 -
0 0
C. Review Standards for Exemption. An applicant for exempt timesharing shall demonstrate
compliance with each of the following standards. These standards are in addition to those
standards applicable to the review of the subdivision exemption.
The proposal shall not conflict with any applicable deed restrictions or private covenants, or
with any provisions of the Colorado statutes. If the proposal is for a condominium, it shall
comply with the applicable provisions of Section 26.590.070 I. of this Code.
2. All units to be converted to timesharing shall comply with the City's adopted fire, health,
and building codes. If any unit does not comply with said codes, then no sale of an interest
in that unit shall be closed until a certificate of occupancy has been issued that brings the
unit into compliance.
3. All dwelling units to be converted to timesharing shall comply with the requirements of the
zone district in which they are located and all other applicable standards of this Land Use
Code, or with the requirements of any PUD or other site specific development approval
granted to the property.
4. The conversion of any multi -family dwelling unit that meets the definition of residential
multi -family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 26.530,
Resident Multi -Family Replacement Program, even when there is no demolition of the
existing multi -family dwelling unit.
The marketing, sales, management, and operation of the timeshare estates shall comply with
the provisions of Sections 26.590.070 F. and 26.590.070 J. of this Code.
6. A wall sign shall be mounted on each building stating that it has been approved by the City
for timesharing and providing the name and phone number of a management entity or local
contact person who can be called in the event of an emergency or to respond to
neighborhood concerns. The sign shall comply with the requirements of Section
26.510.030 B.22. of this Code.
7. Development shall be in compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision requirements in
Section 26.480 when new lots or units are created.
26.590.040 Procedure for Review of Timeshare Lodge Development Application.
All timesharing that is not eligible for an exemption shall be processed as follows:
A. PUD Review Required. Timeshare lodge development shall be processed as a Planned Unit
Development (PUD), pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of this Code.
B. Consolidated PUD Review. The Community Development Director may determine that
- 5 -
because a timeshare lodge development is a conversion of an existing building, or because
of the limited extent of the issues involved in the proposal, the four step PUD review
process should be consolidated into a two step review, pursuant to Section 26.445.030 B.2,
Consolidated Conceptual and Final Review. Development of a timeshare lodge in the
Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) Zone District shall be processed as a two step review,
pursuant to Section 26.445.030 B.3. The Community Development Director is also
authorized to waive those PUD submission requirements from Section 26.445.060 and
review standards from Section 26.445.050 that the Director finds are not applicable to a
proposed timeshare development.
C. Subdivision Review. Timeshare lodge development shall also require subdivision approval.
Review of the subdivision application may be combined with final PUD review, as
authorized by Section 26.304.060 B., Combined Reviews, and by Section 26.445.030 B.4,
Concurrent Associated Reviews.
D. Growth Management Quota System Review. Whenever a proposed timeshare lodge
development or exempt timesharing is subject to review under the City's Growth
Management Quota System (Chapter 26.470), the development shall be considered to be a
"Tourist Accommodation" or a "Lodge" under that System.
K Authority to Grant Variations. Variations from the requirements applied to timeshare lodge
development may be authorized by the City Council. An applicant requesting a variation
shall demonstrate that the provision requested to be varied is not applicable to the proposed
development or cannot be met, and shall demonstrate that the proposed variation is
reasonable, would not be contrary to the public interest, and better implements the purpose
and intent of these timeshare regulations than the codified requirement.
26.590.050 Contents of Application.
In addition to the general application information required in Section 26.304.030, Application and
Fees, and those application contents for PUD and subdivision, the application for timeshare lodge
development shall include the following information:
A. Timeshare Use Plan. A detailed description of the basic elements of the proposed
timeshare use plan. The use plan shall describe the number of estates being created in each
unit, the total number of estates to be created, the expected price for each estate, and
whether a purchaser is buying a specific unit for a specific time, a specific unit for a floating
time, or whether there is no specific unit but just a specific time. It shall also describe
whether owners will be able to participate in an exchange program, and if so, in which
program(s) they will be eligible to participate. The use plan shall also provide a specific
description of how the development will comply with the requirements of Section
26.590.060, Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge.
B. Summary of Disclosure Statement and Timeshare Instruments. A detailed summary of each
- 6 -
of the key points that will be included in the disclosure statement and the timeshare
development instruments (see Section 26.590.090) if the project receives approval from the
City.
C. Management Plan. A plan for how the timeshare development will be managed, describing
whether the applicant will manage the project, or if it will be managed by a management
company, a branded company, or other entity, and describing how the project will be
operated.
D. Marketing Plan. The marketing plan for the timeshare development, including information
on proposed sales techniques (including a description of gifts, premiums, or promotions to
be offered), sales packaging, and whether a sales office will be established off -site.
E Budget. A planned budget for the proposed homeowners/condominium association
estimating the proposed costs and expenditures for the management and maintenance of the
timeshare development.
F. Upgrading Plan. For any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a timeshare
lodge development, the applicant shall submit a plan of how the project will be physically
upgraded and modernized.
G. Tax Collection. A statement indicating the manner in which real estate transfer taxes and
sales taxes will be collected.
H. Developer's Registration. A copy of the developer's registration with the Colorado Real
Estate Commission. If the developer has not so registered at the time of submission of the
application, then this information shall be submitted at the time the timeshare documents
are submitted for recordation, pursuant to Section 26.590.090 of this Code.
26.590.060 Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge Development
It is the intent of the City of Aspen that all timeshare lodge developments incorporate some of the
physical and operational features that are typically found in lodges in Aspen. The City recognizes
that each timeshare development is unique, and that each development should not contain all of
these features. In fact, considering the proposed location of the development and the intended
method of operating the facility, certain of these features may not be appropriate. The City also
recognizes that when owners occupy their units, the development will operate more like a private
residential complex than like a lodge. But the City seeks to balance that form of use with
opportunities for other guests to use the facility. Therefore, the City has identified a menu of
timeshare lodging features, including both mandatory and optional elements. All timeshare lodge
developments shall incorporate the mandatory physical and operational features listed herein.
However, an applicant may instead propose to substitute optional operational features for one or
more of the mandatory features listed herein, or may propose its own set of features which ensure
that the development operates in a manner similar to a lodge when the owners are not using their
- 7 -
timeshare estates, as described further below.
A. Mandatory Physical Elements.
All timeshare lodge developments shall have a staffed on -site front desk, located within a
lobby that is sized to meet the needs of the project. If the timeshare lodge is part of a multi -
site development, there may be a single front desk for these sites. The staffed front desk
shall be open at least during regular business hours, and shall be managed to provide full-
time registration and reservation services, including provision for late check -in and for other
off -hours guest needs. The front desk shall accommodate walk-in rentals.
2. A timeshare lodge development shall contain a sufficient level of recreational facilities
(such as exercise equipment, a pool or spa, or similar facilities) and other amenities (such as
a lobby, meeting spaces, and similar facilities) to serve the occupants, including facilities
that can be used in the winter and the summer seasons. The extent of the facilities provided
should be proportional to the size of the timeshare lodge development. The types of
facilities should be consistent with the planned method and style of operating the
development.
3. A timeshare lodge in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district shall not have any lodge
rooms located on the ground floor. Instead, a timeshare lodge in the CC zone district shall
contain at least one of the following elements: a bar, restaurant, or retail facilities. The
element(s) provided shall be located along the street front, shall be accessible from the
street, and shall be designed to serve the public, not just the occupants of the timeshare
lodge.
B. Mandatory Operational Practices. The City wants to ensure that the units in a timeshare
lodge development are available for rental to the public when they are not being occupied
by the owner, the owner's guests, or persons occupying the unit under an exchange
program. The City has identified certain operational practices that will accomplish this
intent, which are listed in this section. An applicant who agrees to include all of the
practices listed below in the operation of the timeshare development shall be deemed to
have complied with the requirements of this sub -section B and need not address any of the
optional operational practices of sub -section C.
The City recognizes, however, that there may be other ways to comply with this intent, and
will consider these and other operational practices. Applicants may propose to substitute
one or more of the optional practices listed in Section C., below, for one or more of the
mandatory practices listed in this Section B. Applicants may also propose other operational
practices not listed in Section C. as a means of demonstrating compliance with this
standard. Acceptance of the proposed optional practices as a substitute for one or more of
the mandatory practices shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.
1. Timeshare estates shall be made available for short-term rental when the estate is not in use
- 8 -
by the owner of the unit, the owner's guests, or persons occupying the unit under an
exchange program. Units that are available for rental shall be listed at competitive rates in a
central reservation system. Listing of the unit with a recognized central reservation system
in Aspen, or through the central reservation system of the company that will manage the
timeshare development, is preferred.
2. The covenants of the homeowners association shall permit walk-in rental of units. The
association shall not limit rental of units to such arrangements as only weekly rentals or
Saturday -to -Saturday rentals; instead the association shall permit shorter stays, split -week
rentals, and similar flexible arrangements.
3. Owners of timeshare estates shall be required to reserve their unit/time sufficiently far
enough in advance to enable the public to obtain access to those units that are not so
reserved.
4. The owner of a timeshare estate shall not be permitted to occupy that estate for any period
in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days.
5. The units that remain in the developer's inventory shall be made available for rental to the
public while the estates are being sold, except for models and other units that are needed for
marketing or promotional purposes.
C Optional Operational Features.
Timeshare lodge developments that subdivide each unit into a larger number of estates
(more than 10 estates per unit) are preferred to those which subdivide each unit into a
smaller number of estates (less than 10 estates per unit).
2. Applicants may formulate their timeshare use plan such that the purchaser would not expect
to occupy the same unit each visit; instead the purchaser would purchase the right to occupy
a certain type of unit for a certain period of time. Applicants may also include provisions in
the homeowners association documents prohibiting owners from personalizing the unit they
have purchased.
3. Applicants may design their development as a mixed project, which includes not only
timeshare units, but also some units that would continue to be owned and operated by the
applicant and his successors or assigns as traditional lodge units. Another type of use plan
that is encouraged would be for the applicant to agree not to sell all of the shares in every
unit, but to instead keep some time reserved for rental to the public at market rates during
both the high seasons and the off-seasons.
4. Applicants may decide to sell on and off-season estates as a package.
5. Applicants may include in their use plan provisions that allow for a wide range of exchange
- 9 -
•
•
opportunities for owners, which will promote new Aspen trials.
26.590.070 Review Standards for Timeshare Lodge Development.
An applicant for timeshare lodge development shall demonstrate compliance with each of the
following standards, as applicable to the proposed development. These standards are in addition to
those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and Subdivision applications.
A. Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing
lodge to a timeshare lodge development shall be required to demonstrate that the
proposed conversion will not have a negative tax consequence for the City. In order to
demonstrate the tax consequences of the proposed conversion, the applicant shall prepare
a detailed fiscal impact study as part of the final PUD application. The fiscal impact
study shall contain at least the following comparisons between the existing lodge
operation and the proposed timeshare lodge development:
1. A summary of the sales taxes paid to the City for rental of lodge rooms during the prior
five years of its operation. If the lodge has stopped renting rooms prior to the time of
submission of the application, then the summary shall reflect the final five years the lodge
was in operation. The summary of past taxes paid shall be compared to a projection of
the sales taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the
first five years of its operation. As part of this projection, the applicant shall specify the
number of nights the applicant anticipates each timeshare lodge unit will be available for
daily rental to visitors (that is, the annual number of nights when the unit will not be
occupied by the owner or the owner's guests), the expected visitor occupancy rate for
these units, the expected average daily cost to rent the unit, and the resulting amount of
sales tax that will be paid to the City.
2. An estimation of the real estate transfer taxes that would be paid to the City if the existing
lodge were to be sold. If an actual sale of the property has occurred within the last 12
months, then the real estate taxes paid for that sale shall be used. This estimation shall be
compared to a projection of the real estate transfer taxes the proposed timeshare lodge
development will pay to the City over the first five years of its operation. This projection
shall include a statement of the expected sales prices for the timeshare estates, and the
applicable tax rate that will be applied to each sale.
3. A summary of the City -portion of the property taxes paid for the lodge for the prior five
years of its operation, and a projection of the property taxes the proposed timeshare lodge
development will pay to the City over the first five years of its operation. This projection
shall include a statement of the expected value that will be assigned to the property by the
Tax Assessor, and the applicable tax rate.
The fiscal impact study may also contain such other information that the applicant
believes is relevant to understanding the tax consequences of the proposed development.
- 10 -
For example, the applicant may provide information demonstrating there will be
"secondary", or "indirect" tax benefits to the City from the occupancy of the timeshare
units, in terms of increased retail sales and other economic activity in the community as
compared to the existing lodge development. The applicant shall be expected to prove
definitively why the timeshare units would cause such economic advantages that would
not be achieved by a traditional lodge development. Any such additional information
provided shall compare the taxes paid during the prior five years of the lodge's operation
to the first five years of the proposed timeshare lodge's operation.
If the fiscal impact study demonstrates there will be an annual tax loss to the City from
the conversion of an existing lodge to a timeshare lodge, then the applicant shall be
required to propose a mitigation program that resolves the problem, to the satisfaction of
the Aspen City Council. The accepted mitigation program shall be documented in the
PUD Agreement for the project that is entered into between the applicant and the Aspen
City Council.
B. Upgrading of Existing Projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a
timeshare lodge development shall be physically upgraded and modernized. The extent of
the upgrading that is to be accomplished shall be determined as part of the PUD review,
considering the condition of the existing facilities, with the intent being to make the
development compatible in character with surrounding properties and to extend the useful
life of the building.
1. To the extent that it would be practical and reasonable, existing structures shall be brought
into compliance with the City's adopted fire, health, and building codes.
2. No sale of any interest in a timeshare lodge development shall be closed until a certificate of
occupancy has been issued for the upgrading.
C. Preservation of Existing Lodging Inventory. An express purpose of these regulations is to
preserve and enhance Aspen's existing lodging inventory. Therefore, any proposal to
convert an existing lodge or other property that provides short term accommodations to a
timeshare lodge should, at a minimum, replace the existing number of units on the property
in the planned timeshare lodge. If the applicant is unable to replace the existing number of
units, then the timeshare lodge development shall replace the existing number of bedrooms
on the property, or the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposal complies with the
purposes of these regulations, even though the planned timeshare lodge will not replace
either the existing number of units or bedrooms.
D. Affordable Housing Requirements.
1. Whenever a timeshare lodge development is required to provide affordable housing,
mitigation for the development shall be calculated by applying the standards of the City's
housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable housing requirement shall be calculated
based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms in the development, and shall
also take into account any retail, restaurant, conference, or other functions proposed in the
lodge.
2. The conversion of any multi -family dwelling unit that meets the definition of residential
multi -family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 26.530,
Resident Multi -Family Replacement Program, even when there is no demolition of the
existing multi -family dwelling unit.
E. Parking Requirements.
1. The parking requirement for timeshare lodge development shall be calculated by applying
the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge uses. The parking
requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms
in the development.
2. The timeshare lodge development shall also provide an appropriate level of guest
transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle vehicles, to offer an alternative to
having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen.
3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in a parking space
on -site when the owner is not using that estate.
F. Appropriateness of Marketing and Sales Practices. The marketing and sale of timeshare
estates shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S., as
may be amended from time to time. The applicant and licensed marketing entity shall
present to the City a plan for marketing the timeshare development.
1. The following marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall not be
permitted:
a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers of timeshare units on any street, mall, or other
public property or facility; and
b. Any unethical sales and marketing practices which would tend to mislead potential
purchasers.
2. Giving of gifts to encourage potential purchasers to attend a sales presentation or to visit a
timeshare development is permitted, provided the gift reflects the local Aspen economy.
For example, gifts for travel to or accommodations in Aspen, restaurants in Aspen, and
local attractions (ski passes, concert tickets, rafting trips, etc.) are permitted. Gifts that have
no relationship to the local Aspen economy are not permitted. The following gifts are also
not permitted:
=N=
0 •
a. Any gift for which an accurate description is not given;
b. Any gift package for which notice is not given to the prospective purchaser that the
purchaser will be required to attend a sales presentation as a condition of receiving the gifts;
and
C. Any gift package for which the printed announcement of the requirement to attend a sales
presentation is in smaller type face than the information on the gift being offered.
G. Adequacy of Maintenance and Management Plan. The applicant shall provide
documentation and guarantees that the timeshare lodge development will be appropriately
managed and maintained in an manner that will be both stable and continuous. This shall
include an identification of when and how maintenance will be provided, and shall also
address the following requirements:
1. A fair procedure shall be established for the estate owners to review and approve any fee
increases which may be made throughout the life of the timeshare development, to provide
assurance and protection to timeshare owners that management/assessment fees will be
applied and used appropriately.
2. The applicant shall also demonstrate that there will be a reserve fund to ensure that the
proposed timeshare development will be properly maintained throughout its lifetime.
H. Compliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed
timeshare lodge development will comply with all applicable requirements of Title 12,
Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3, C.R.S.; including
the requirements concerning the five (5) day period for rescission of a sales contract, and
the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow.
1. Approval By Condominium Owners. If the development that is proposed to be timeshared
is a condominium, the applicant shall submit written proof that the condominium
declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred (100) percent of the owners of the
condominium units have approved the timeshare development, including any improvements
to the common elements that the applicant may propose, that all mortgagees of the
condominium have approved the proposed timeshare development, and that all
condominium units in the timeshare development will be included in the same sales and
marketing program.
J. Prohibited Practices and Uses. Without in any way limiting any requirement contained in
this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage in any of the following
practices:
1. The creation, operation or sale of a right -to -use interest or any other timeshare concept
which is not specifically allowed and approved pursuant to the requirements of this section.
- 13 -
Right -to -use timeshare concepts (e.g. lease -holds and vacation clubs) are considered
inappropriate in Aspen and are not permitted.
2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare approval,
timeshare development instruments, or disclosure statement.
3. Failure to comply with any representations contained in any application for timesharing or
misrepresenting the substance of any such application to another who may be a prospective
purchaser of a timeshare interest.
4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a timeshare estate or interest therein in violation
of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval granted pursuant hereto, or cause or aid
and abet another to violate any requirement of this Chapter, or an approval granted pursuant
to this Chapter.
26.590.080 Business License and Sales Tax Payments.
A. Business License. It shall be unlawful for any timeshare development to operate in the City
of Aspen without first obtaining a business license in accordance with the standard
procedures of the City of Aspen.
B. Sales Tax Payments. Occupancy of any timeshare unit by anyone who pays a rental fee for
the use of the unit (other than the owner thereof) shall be subject to the City's sales tax the
same as if such occupancy were of a hotel or lodge unit. Any timeshare development, as a
condition of its approval, shall be required to obtain an Aspen Sales Tax/Lodging Tax
License, which shall establish how this tax shall be collected and paid to the City. The
manager of the association shall be responsible for the timely collection of the City sales tax
for the City of Aspen.
26.590.090 Timeshare Documents.
At the same time the applicant submits the PUD Development Plan and PUD Agreement to the
City for recordation, pursuant to Section 26.445.070, or submits the necessary documents to record
the subdivision exemption, the applicant shall also submit the following timeshare documents in a
form suitable for recording. The Community Development Director may require the applicant to
submit a draft version of these timeshare documents at the time of submission of the Final PUD
application.
A. Disclosure Statement. The applicant shall submit a disclosure statement that contains the
following information:
1. The name and address of the developer of the timeshare development as well as a summary
of the developer's business experience, including all background and experience in the
development of timeshare development, and the present financial condition of the
- 14 -
developer.
2. The name and address of the manager/management company for the development, if any,
and a description of the manager's/management company's responsibilities, powers, duties,
authority and business experience. All information on the manager's background and
experience specifically related to timeshare development shall be provided.
3. The names and addresses of the marketing entity and the listing broker and a statement of
whether there are any lawsuits pending or investigations that have been undertaken against
the marketing entity or listing broker, and if so, a description of the status or disposition of
said lawsuits or investigations. A summary of the marketing entity's business experience
including all background and experience related to timeshare development.
4. A description of the timeshare units, including the developer's schedule for completion of
all buildings, units, and amenities, with dates of availability.
5. If the timeshare plan consists of a condominium or a similar form of ownership, a
description of the development and any pertinent provisions of the condominium
instruments.
6. Any restraints on the transfer of the purchaser's interest in the timeshare units or plan.
7. The timeshare use plan, which shall include a description of the rights and responsibilities
under the plan.
Notice of any liens, title defects or encumbrances on or affecting the title to the units or plan
and, if there are encumbrances or liens, a statement as to whether, when and how they will
be removed.
9. Notice of any pending or anticipated legal actions that are material to the timeshare units or
plan of which the applicant has, or should have, knowledge.
10. The total financial obligation of the purchaser, which shall include the initial price and any
additional charges to which the purchaser may be subject in purchasing the unit.
11. An estimate of the dues, maintenance fees, real property taxes, sales taxes, real estate
transfer tax and similar periodic expenses, and the method or formula by which they are
derived and apportioned, which shall include whether maintenance fees are determined by
unit, time of year, or prorated share of the overall maintenance costs, or any other means
utilized to compute maintenance fees.
12. A statement demonstrating the manner in which management/assessment fees will be held,
utilized and accounted for.
- 15 -
13. A description of any financing offered by the applicant.
14. The terms and significant limitations of any warranties provided, including statutory
warranties and limitations on the enforcement thereof or on damages.
15. A statement that the proposed development will comply with all applicable requirements of
Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S. Upon request from the City, the applicant shall provide a copy
of the documents submitted to the State of Colorado for the registration and certification of
the timeshare developer.
16. The extent to which a timeshare unit may become subject to a tax or other lien arising out of
claims against other timeshare owners of the same timeshare unit.
17. The minimum percentage of units the developer will require be sold before the developer
will proceed with the completion of the timeshare development.
18. A description of the maintenance to be supplied to the timeshare development, including
how and when such maintenance will be provided.
19. Whether any or all the units in the proposed development will be available for participation
in an exchange program. The applicant shall disclose which exchange program(s) the
timeshare estate owners will be eligible to utilize.
20. A description of all insurance covering the property.
21. A description of the on -site amenities and recreational facilities which are available for use
by the unit owners. All on -site amenities shall be owned by the homeowner's association
and the developer shall not be allowed to charge any additional fees for use of the
amenities. If there are any off -site facilities that are related to the property, these shall also
be described, including a summary of any fees that timeshare owners would have to pay to
use those off -site facilities.
22. A statement that any timeshare interest shall be expressly subject to all requirements and
representations set forth in the disclosure statement.
23. For any timeshare development that is a conversion of an existing project, a statement shall
be provided by the developer, based on a report prepared by an independent architect or
engineer, licensed by the State of Colorado, describing the present condition of all structural
components and mechanical and electrical installations material to the use and enjoyment of
the timeshare units. The statement shall also provide a list of any outstanding notices of
uncured violations of building code or other municipal regulations, together with the
estimated cost of curing those violations.
B. Timeshare Development Instruments. The applicant shall submit the following timeshare
- 16 -
•
development instruments:
Instruments for the interval estate or time span estate including:
a. The legal description, street address or other description sufficient to identify the property.
b. Identification of timeshare time periods by letter, name, number or combination thereof.
Identification of the timeshare estate and the method whereby additional timeshare estates
may be created.
d. The formula, fraction or percentage of the common expenses and any voting rights assigned
to each timeshare estate.
e. Any restrictions on the use, occupancy, alteration or alienation of timeshare units.
f. Any other matters that the applicant or the City Council deems reasonably necessary.
2. All timeshare development instruments shall provide for the following:
a. That a homeowners association shall be established. Responsibility for maintenance of the
development shall reside within the association. The association shall designate a managing
agent. The management contract with the managing agent shall allow for either party to
terminate, for cause, upon thirty (30) days notice. In the event the manager is terminated, a
new managing agent shall be designated as quickly as possible by the association. Any
management agreement shall specify the managing agent's duties and responsibilities to
maintain the development.
b. A stipulation by the owner of the timeshare interest irrevocably designating the
homeowners association and/or the managing agent as an agent for the service of legal
notices for any legal action, proceeding or hearing pertaining to the timeshare interest or for
the service of process (in a manner sufficient to satisfy the requirements of personal service
in the state, pursuant to Rule 4 C.R.C.P., as amended).
Each timeshare interest with a multiple ownership shall be required to designate one
managing agent as the spokesperson and voter for all of the owners involved.
d. That the association shall have the ability to compel a timeshare owner to pay maintenance
fees and if any owner's fees are not paid, his interest shall be subject to a lien and
foreclosure or other divestment. In the event an owner or his guests violate the rules and
regulations of the association, the association shall have the right to enjoin the violation and
the prevailing party in such suit shall be awarded his court costs and reasonable attorney's
fees.
- 17 -
0 !
e. Provisions addressing reconstruction or repair of all or a portion of the timeshare
development following its willful or non -willful destruction. Provisions should also be
included addressing termination of the association, including the percentage of owners that
must agree for the termination to become effective, what happens to the common elements
in the event of a termination, and how the proceeds shall be distributed in the event the
property is taken due to condemnation or eminent domain.
3. Updating and filing.
a. The developer and his successors and assigns (other than individual unit purchasers) shall
have a continuing duty to update the disclosure statement and file with the City all
amendments to the timeshare development's instruments. Such amendments shall comply
with the requirements of this section. No amendment which shall significantly alter the
disclosure statement or the timeshare development instruments shall be effective unless
approved and accepted by the City and filed in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder. All amendments shall be initially submitted for review to the Community
Development Director who shall have authority to either approve a proposed amendment as
in compliance with the requirements of this section or refer the proposed amendment for
appropriate subdivision or PUD approval.
b. The condominium association and/or the homeowners association, or both if there be
multiple associations, and not individual unit owners shall have the continuing
responsibility to submit to the City any amendments to the condominium documents and/or
timeshare development instruments that would alter any condition imposed by the City or
any prior representation made by the applicant to obtain approval of the timeshare
development. Once the condominium association has been formed, the City shall not accept
any amendments for review without prior approval thereby.
4. Before transfer of a timeshare unit and no later than the date of execution of any contract of
sale, the applicant or any other seller of a timeshare unit shall provide the intended
transferee with a copy of the disclosure statement and any amendments thereto, except this
requirement shall not apply to the owner of a single timeshare estate in a development who
is attempting to sell the estate.
5. No conveyance of a timeshare interest shall be valid unless the instrument of conveyance
shall indicate that title is being transferred subject to the condominium declaration which
shall include the disclosure statement as an exhibit thereto.
Sectinn 2-
That the following definitions be revised or added to Section 26.104.100 of the Aspen Municipal
Code:
Timeshare Lodge. A development or a unit that has been approved for timesharing, pursuant to
- 18 -
Chapter 26.590, and has the characteristics of a timeshare lodge, as specified in Section 26.590.060.
Each unit in a timeshare lodge shall be subdivided into no less than seven (7) time span or interval
estates. A timeshare lodge unit may contain a kitchen and still be considered to be a lodge unit (not
a residential dwelling unit) for purposes of this Land Use Code (although the City's adopted
building codes will consider a unit with a kitchen to be a dwelling unit, and the City may, therefore,
require it to comply with the applicable provisions of those codes for a dwelling unit).
Lodge. Same as hotel.
Section 3•
That Section 26.710.320 B.1. of the Aspen Municipal Code, permitted uses in the LP Zone District,
be amended to read as follows:
1. Lodge, provided:
a. All lodge units within the LP Overlay Zone District may have kitchens within individual
lodge rooms.
b. All lodge units must be available for overnight lodging by the general public on a short-
term basis for at least six (6) months of each calendar year. This requirement shall not
apply to a timeshare lodge.
Cecctinn 4-
That Section 26.710.190 D.2.d. of the Aspen Municipal Code, minimum lot area per dwelling unit
requirement for lodge units in the L/TR Zone District, be amended to read as follows:
d. Lodge units (including timeshare lodge units). No requirement. Whenever kitchen
facilities are installed in a lodge unit in the L/TR zone district, such unit shall be deemed a
multi -family dwelling unit, and the lodge shall be required to satisfy the minimum lot area
requirements for a multi -family dwelling, as provided above, unless the development is a
timeshare lodge, which shall have no minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirement.
gection 5!
That Sections 26.710.140 C., 26.710.190 C., 26.710.200 C., 26.710.320 C. and 26.710.330 C. of
the Aspen Municipal Code be amended to delete "timesharing" as a conditional use.
Section 6:
That Sections 26.710.140 B., 26.710.200 B., and 26.710.320 B. of the Aspen Municipal Code be
amended to add "timeshare lodge" as a permitted use, and that Sections 26.710.190 B. and
26.710.330 B. of the Aspen Municipal Code be amended to add "timeshare lodge" and "exempt
- 19 -
timesharing" as permitted uses.
Section 7:
That Section 26.480.030 A. of the Aspen Municipal Code, General Exemptions, be amended to add
a new sub -section 5., to read as follows:
5. Exempt Timesharing. The creation of time -span estates that comply with the requirements
for exempt timesharing, pursuant to Section 26.590.030 of the Code. This subdivision exemption
shall not be used to create any new lots or dwelling units.
Section 8:
That sub -section A. of Section 26.480.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Procedures for Review,
be amended to read as follows:
A. Lot Line Adjustment and Exempt Timesharing. After an application for a lot line
adjustment or exempt timesharing has been determined to be complete by the Community
Development Director, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application.
Section 9:
That a new sub -section 22. be added to Section 26.510.030 B. of the Aspen Municipal Code,
Exempt Signs, to read as follows
22. Timeshare identification signs. A building that is approved for exempt timesharing,
pursuant to Section 26.590.030, shall have a wall -mounted sign with an area not exceeding
two (2) square feet, stating that it has been approved for timesharing and identifying the
name and phone number of a contact person or management entity for the property.
Section 10:
That Section 26.470.070 O. of the Aspen Municipal Code, Conversion of Lodge Reconstruction
Credits to Residential Dwelling Units, be repealed.
Section 11
That the City Clerk is directed, upon adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance
in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Section 12:
This Ordinance 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
- 20 -
•
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 13:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance 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.
Cection 14-
A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on August 26, then continued to September 23, and
finally heard on the 15th day of October, 2002 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall,
Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of same was published in a
newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on this 24" day of June, 2002.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2002.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
- 21 -
11
C
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
EXHIBIT A
AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE CODE
Section 26.310.040, Text Amendment Standards of Review
In reviewing an amendment to the text or the official zone district map, the City Council and
the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict ►vith any applicable portions
of this title.
Staff Finding:
The proposed code amendments are not in conflict with any applicable portions of this title
or the Municipal Code. Staff feels the proposed code amendments will further the city's goal
of preserving the character of Aspen as a resort community and will increase the vitality of
the city.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the
Aspen Area Comprehensive Plat.
Staff Finding:
The proposed code amendments will contribute to the promotion and enhancement of the
lifestyle and character that is Aspen. Staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent
with the elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, especially as the AACP supports
economic sustainability, community vitality and enhancement of the community as a resort
community.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone
districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood
characteristics.
Staff Finding:
The proposed code amendments will require timeshare lodging to be developed through a
Planned Unit Development (PUD). Timeshare applications will have to comply with all
PUD and subdivision regulations. The requirements of a PUD are that they follow the
regulations of the underlying zoning, evaluate the impact of the development in the context
of the neighborhood in which it is located and determine appropriate levels of density and
development standards for the specific site. Staff finds the proposed amendment to be
compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety.
Staff Finding:
There is already a traffic program in place, including provisions in the Aspen Area
Community Plan for improvements in transportation which help to minimize the impact of
new development and require for mitigation. There is also an existing public transportation
system that serves the city. Many lodges and new lodge proposals provide shuttle
transportation for their guests, which minimizes traffic generation and contributes to the
safety of the roads. It is anticipated that through the PUD process, the development will
address traffic generation, parking and safety and mitigate appropriately based on impacts.
Staff feels that the proposed amendment will not have any significant effects on traffic
generation and road safety.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the
proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including,
but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply,
parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
The proposed code amendments affect areas of the city that are already developed or are
ready for redevelopment. There will not be any significant population growth generated by
the proposed amendment. Staff feels that the infrastructure and public facilities that are
already in place in the city are either sufficient to meet any needs generated by the timeshare
developments or would have to be upgraded by the development.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not feel that the proposed code amendment will result in any significant adverse
impacts on the natural environment.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
The proposed code amendments are intended to preserve and enhance community character
in Aspen. The proposed timeshare development regulations are intended to help achieve the
goal of the City, especially as they relate to tourism accommodations, community vitality and
economic sustainability. The regulations are intended to have timeshare developments be like
lodges with a high level of turnover, high occupancy and increased availability. Therefore,
Staff finds these criteria to be met.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or
the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment.
Staff Finding:
These criteria do not apply to the proposed amendments in that this criterion is site specific.
L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public
interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title.
Staff Finding:
The purpose of the proposed amendments is to increase opportunity for tourism in Aspen, as
well as ensure the upgrade and enhancement of the quality of lodging opportunities. The
proposed amendments will establish regulations for timeshares that will be in the public's
2
interest. Staff finds the proposed amendments to be in harmony with the purpose and intent
of the title and promote health, safety and welfare.
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
0 0 N 1% ob
MEMORANDUM
Mayor and City Council
Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
Joyce A. Ohlson, Deputy Directorwo
1 S` Reading, Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2002, Timeshare Regulations (Code
Amendment)
June 24, 2002
In late 2001, the City Council directed Staff to initiate code amendments that would address
fractional ownership projects, hereinafter called, "Timeshare/s". The project started off with
research and evaluation of the City's current regulations, resulting in the writing and presentation at
a Council work session on February 12, 2002 of Fractional Fee Ownership - Summary of Research
and Identification of Regulatory Options. This report was prepared by planning consultant, Alan
Richman who assisted the City in this project. The primary conclusion of that report was that
timeshare development can have positive impacts on Aspen, provided its potential negative impacts
are properly managed. The project proceeded with a number of work sessions and public hearings
with the Planning Commission and the public. On June I Ith, the Planning and Zoning Commission
completed their work on the timeshare code amendments and forwarded a positive recommendation
to the City Council to adopt the attached ordinance (Exhibit A).
Summary:
The positive and negative impacts of timeshares, as concluded in Fractional Fee Ownership -
Summary of Research and Identification of Regulatory Options are as follows:
Positive impacts:
* Increased tourism & vitality;
* Ownership units that turn over instead of being vacant; and
* Re -investment to upgrade older lodges.
Negative Impacts:
* Loss of traditional lodge inventory;
* Inappropriate marketing and sales practices; and
1
* Short term residents in long term neighborhoods.
The current timeshare provisions within the Land Use Code are proposed for repeal as part of the
attached ordinance and many of the other sections are affected and therefore, amended as well.
Instead of analyzing the ordinance section -by -section, the following Outline of Proposed Timeshare
Code Amendments is intended to give you a sense of the basic directions taken in the code
amendment. Essentially, there are two main aspects to the ordinance: the provisions that are
intended to encourage timeshare development to occur, given its positive impacts, and the
provisions that are intended to manage and thereby limit its potential negative impacts. Following
is an outline of these.
Outline of Proposed Timeshare Code Amendments:
New provisions proposed to encourage timeshare lodge development:
Timesharing would be a permitted use instead of a conditional use.
Elimination of the "density penalty" in the L/TR zone district for any lodge unit that
has a kitchen, enabling timeshare lodge units to contain kitchens.
Elimination of LP zone district provision that limited timesharing to only 6 months
of the year. This provision will apply only to lodges which are not timeshared
ensuring availability to visitors. Repealing of the "Conversion of the Lodge
Reconstruction Credits to Residential Dwelling Units" provisions, in order to not
create an incentive for redevelopment of lodges to residential units.
Submission contents for timesharing considerably reduced. An applicant will not
have to produce required legal documents until the project has received at least
conceptual approval, or for smaller projects, until the PUD is to be recorded.
Simple exemption process for certain types of timeshare conversions.
Timesharing would be classified as a lodge use (instead of a residential use) for
GMQS review, making projects eligible for a larger allocation bucket.
2. New requirements proposed to better manage timesharing:
Timeshare would be reviewed as a PUD (either 2 or 4 step).
Establishment of a "menu" of mandatory and optional physical elements and
operational practices that are to be included in timeshare projects.
Each timeshare lodge unit must be split into at least 7 estates.
Timeshare developments must comply with the City's business license
requirements.
Review standards have been updated to address current community concerns; some
former standards and application requirements have been deleted.
At Council's work session on June 4', Staff indicated we would further pursue legal consultation
regarding a Security Exchange Commission filing and its impact on regulating timeshare projects.
Specifically, the issue has to do with whether the City's proposed ordinance too strongly favors that
owners put units into a rental pool if not being used by the owner; an owner' family, friends, etc.; or
through an exchange program. We do not want the timeshare units to fall under the SEC ruling and
be considered a security which only security brokers could sell. The intent is for the units to be
handled and sold as real estate. We have initiated this review with a legal expert in the field of
resort development and will provide that analysis at 2"d Reading.
Review Procedure:
Text Amendment: Pursuant to Section 26.310, the City Council may approve, recommend
alternative language, or deny a proposed text amendment after considering a recommendation by
the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director and following a public
hearing.
Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation:
On June 11, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted Resolution No. 16, Series of
2002, by a vote of 4 (four) to 1 (one) recommending that the City Council approve the proposed
ordinance, amending the Land Use Code to address Timeshare development. The Planning
Commission's recommendation for the code amendment language differs only slightly from what
Staff has provided to the Council. These changes are not substantive, only clarifying, and are
shown in your ordinance by underlining. (Staff has not provided an additional 22 page copy of the
Commission's resolution in order to save paper.) Minutes of the June 4' and June l l' public
hearing are provided as Exhibit B.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that City Council approve the V Reading of the proposed ordinance approving
the code amendments as contained within the ordinance and set 2"d Reading and public hearing for
July 8, 2002.
Recommended Motion:
"I move to approve Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2002, at 1' Reading, approving Land Use Code
Amendments regarding Timeshare Development and related code sections, and setting the date for
2"d Reading and public hearing for July 8, 2002."
City Manager Comments:
Attachments:
Exhibit A - Proposed Ordinance No, Series of 2002
Exhibit B - Planning and Zoning Commission Draft Minutes of June 4 and June 11, 2002
Exhibit C — Letter from Bert L. Myrin Jr.
0 .
ORDINANCE NO.21
(SERIES OF 2002)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO AMEND CHAPTER 26.590
26.590, TIMESHARE, AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE CODE, THESE BEING
SECTION 26.104.100, DEFINITIONS; 26.710.320, LODGE PRESERVATION
OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT; 26.710.190, LODGE/TOURIST RESIDENTIAL ZONE
DISTRICT; 26.710.140, COMMERCIAL CORE ZONE DISTRICT; 26.710.200,
COMMERCIAL LODGE ZONE DISTRICT; 26.480.030 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS;
26.480.040 SUBDIVISION PROCEDURES; 26.510.030, PROCEDURES FOR SIGN
PERMIT APPROVAL; AND 26.470.070, GMQS EXEMPTIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Aspen directed the Community Development Department to propose amendments to the
Land Use Code to better address the emerging types of timeshare and fractional fee projects that are
being planned in Aspen; and
WHEREAS, in response to this direction, the Community Development Director prepared
the research paper Fractional Fee Ownership - Summary of Research and Identification of
Regulatory Options, dated January, 2002; and
WHEREAS, a work session was held with the Aspen City Council and the Planning and
Zoning Commission on February 12, 2002, at which time a discussion of the research paper was
held and direction was given to the Community Development Director to prepare the appropriate
amendments to the Aspen Land Use Code; and
WHEREAS, a work session was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission on
March 26, 2002, to review a first draft of these proposed amendments to the Land Use Code, at
which time it was determined that a public hearing should be scheduled to consider the proposals;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Aspen Land Use Code, applications to
amend the tent of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval,
approval with conditions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the
Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after
reviewing and considering these recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the
amendments to the Land Use Code as are described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on May 21, June 4, and June 11, 2002, to consider these amendments to the Aspen Land
Use Code, took public testimony, and considered the recommendations of the Planning Director;
and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval of these amendments by a vote of 4 (four) in favor to 1 (one) against; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the recommendations of the
Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission during a duly noticed
public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the amendments to the Aspen Land Use Code, as
described herein, meet or exceed all applicable standards and their approval is consistent with the
goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the
promotion of the public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN COLORADO:
section 1:
That Chapter 26.590 of the Aspen Municipal Code be repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
Chapter 26.590
TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT
26.590.010 Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish the procedures and standards by which timeshare
development may be permitted within the City of Aspen. It is the City's intent to establish
timeshare regulations that provide for the protection of the character of Aspen as a resort
community, and that help to promote increased tourism and vitality within the City. Specifically,
the City intends that new timeshare projects in Aspen will implement the goals of the Aspen Area
Community Plan, and will help to achieve the following public purposes:
A. Increased Vitality. Timeshare developments can provide the opportunity for increased
tourism to Aspen, can add to the level of community vitality, and can help to create a more
sustainable local economy. This can be accomplished by expanding the number and variety
of "hot beds" available to visitors, raising occupancy levels in the accommodations sector,
and attracting "new trials" to Aspen, from persons who have not previously visited this
community.
B. Preserve and Enhance Lodging Inventory. Aspen's tourist accommodations inventory has
for some time included a significant percentage of traditional lodges. The community
would like to preserve and enhance this lodging inventory, by encouraging timeshare units
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 2
to be contained in projects that look and operate in a manner similar to Aspen's traditional
lodges. These regulations have been designed to accomplish this purpose by establishing
standards for the physical and operational features of timeshare lodges, to ensure that new
and re -developed timeshare lodges maintain Aspen's lodging traditions.
C. Upgrade Quality of Accommodations. It is important to Aspen's tourist economy that its
accommodations are kept up-to-date. Timeshare development offers the opportunity to
infuse capital into the short term accommodations inventory, so facilities can be
modernized. It is equally important to ensure that once facilities are upgraded, the facility is
managed to provide a quality visitor experience over time. These regulations are intended
to ensure that timeshare lodges are properly maintained over the life of the development.
D. Maintain Community Character. Aspen has a valued reputation as a quality resort
community. The City intends to regulate timeshare marketing and sales practices, to ensure
that the way timeshare estates are marketed and sold is consistent with the character of this
community, and to minimize the potential for practices that would create an inappropriate
image of Aspen. The City also intends to provide protection for its long term residential
neighborhoods, to ensure that the impacts of timeshare development do not adversely affect
the character of these residential areas, by limiting this use to the City's lodge and selected
commercial zone districts.
26.590.020 Overview of Timeshare Development.
A. Applicability. The requirements of this Chapter shall apply to all timeshare development
within the City of Aspen. These requirements shall be in addition to all other applicable
requirements set forth in this Title 26, and those set forth in the Colorado statutes.
R Types of Timeshare Development. There are two types of timeshare development that may
be permitted within the City of Aspen, as follows:
1. Timeshare lodge development is the basic form of timesharing permitted in Aspen.
It applies to any application to convert lodge units or residential dwelling units to
timesharing, except for those applications that are eligible for an exemption, as
described below. Timeshare lodge development is a permitted use in the
Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR), Commercial Lodge (CL), Lodge Preservation
Overlay (LP), and Commercial Core (CC) zone districts. The standards and
procedures for timeshare lodge development are described in Sections 26.590.040
through 26.590.070.
2. Exempt timesharing is a more limited type of timesharing permitted in Aspen. The
only units eligible for this exemption are single-family dwelling units,
condominiumized duplex dwelling units, and condominiumized multi -family
dwelling units within any individual condominium complex or condominium
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 3
project that contains no more than six (6) such units. Exempt timesharing is a
permitted use in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR) zone district and the Aspen
Highlands Village PUD. The standards and procedures for exempt timesharing are
described in Section 26.590.030.
26.590.030 Exempt Timesharing.
A. Eligibility For Exemption.
The following types of dwelling units are eligible to apply for this exemption:
a. Single-family dwelling units;
b. Condominiumized duplex dwelling units; and
C. Condominiumized multi -family dwelling units within any individual
condominium complex or condominium project that contains no more than
six (6) such units.
2. To be eligible to apply for the exemption, the single-family, duplex, or multi -family
dwelling units must be located in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR) zone district
or the Aspen Highlands Village PUD.
B. Minimum Requirements To Obtain Exemption.
1. No more than six (6) estates may be created in any dwelling unit via this exemption.
An applicant wishing to create more than six (6) estates in any unit may do so only
via an application for a timeshare lodge development.
2. The ownership interests that may be created pursuant to this exemption shall be
limited to "time -span estates" as defined in C.R.S. 38-33-110, where the annually
recurring exclusive right to possession and occupancy is determined by a schedule
or formula.
3. Applications for exempt timesharing shall be processed as a subdivision exemption,
pursuant to Section 26.480.030 A.5. of this Code.
4. The minimum application contents for the subdivision exemption application shall
be as follows:
a. The applicable portions of the information described in Section 26.590.050
A., B., F and G.; and
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002
•
b. The general application contents required in Section 26.304.030,
Application and Fees.
C. Review Standards for Exemption. An applicant for exempt timesharing shall demonstrate
compliance with each of the following standards. These standards are in addition to those
standards applicable to the review of the subdivision exemption.
1. The proposal shall not conflict with any applicable deed restrictions or private
covenants, or with any provisions of the Colorado statutes. If the proposal is for a
condominium, it shall comply with the applicable provisions of Section 26.590.070
I. of this Code.
2. All units to be converted to timesharing shall comply with the City's adopted fire,
health, and building codes. If any unit does not comply with said codes, then no
sale of an interest in that unit shall be closed until a certificate of occupancy has
been issued that brings the unit into compliance.
3. All dwelling units to be converted to timesharing shall comply with the
requirements of the zone district in which they are located and all other applicable
standards of this Land Use Code, or with the requirements of any PUD or other site
specific development approval granted to the property.
4. The conversion of any multi -family dwelling unit that meets the definition of
residential multi -family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions of
Chapter 26.530, Resident Multi -Family Replacement Program, even when there is
no demolition of the existing multi -family dwelling unit.
5. The marketing, sales, management, and operation of the timeshare estates shall
comply with the provisions of Sections 26.590.070 F. and 26.590.070 J. of this
Code.
6. A wall sign shall be mounted on each building stating that it has been approved by
the City for timesharing and providing the name and phone number of a
management entity or local contact person who can be called in the event of an
emergency or to respond to neighborhood concerns. The sign shall comply with the
requirements of Section 26.510.030 B.22. of this Code.
7. Development shall be in compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision
requirements in Section 26.480 when new lots or units are created.
8. When exempt timeshare lodge development is subject to review under the City's
Growth Management Quota System , the development shall be considered to be a
"Tourist Accommodation" or a "Lodge" under that system.
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 5
26.590.040 Procedure for Review of Timeshare Lodge Development Application.
All timesharing that is not eligible for an exemption shall be processed as follows:
A. PUD Review Required. Timeshare lodge development shall be processed as a Planned Unit
Development (PUD), pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of this Code.
B. Consolidated PUD Review. The Community Development Director may determine that
because a timeshare lodge development is a conversion of an existing building, or because
of the limited extent of the issues involved in the proposal, the four step PUD review
process should be consolidated into a two step review, pursuant to Section 26.445.030 B.2,
Consolidated Conceptual and Final Review. Development of a timeshare lodge in the
Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) Zone District shall be processed as a two step review,
pursuant to Section 26.445.030 B.3. The Community Development Director is also
authorized to waive those PUD submission requirements from Section 26.445.060 and
review standards from Section 26.445.050 that the Director finds are not applicable to a
proposed timeshare development.
C. Subdivision Review. Timeshare lodge development shall also require subdivision approval.
Review of the subdivision application may be combined with final PUD review, as
authorized by Section 26.304.060 B., Combined Reviews, and by Section 26.445.030 B.4,
Concurrent Associated Reviews.
D. Growth Management Quota System Review. Whenever a proposed timeshare lodge
development or exempt timesharing is subject to review under the City's Growth
Management Quota System (Chapter 26.470), the development shall be considered to be a
"Tourist Accommodation" or a "Lodge" under that System.
E Authority to Grant Variations. Variations from the requirements applied to timeshare lodge
development may be authorized by the City Council. An applicant requesting a variation
shall demonstrate that the provision requested to be varied is not applicable to the proposed
development or cannot be met, and shall demonstrate that the proposed variation is
reasonable, would not be contrary to the public interest, and better implements the purpose
and intent of these timeshare regulations than the codified requirement.
26.590.050 Contents of Application.
In addition to the general application information required in Section 26.304.030, Application and
Fees, and those application contents for PUD and subdivision, the application for timeshare lodge
development shall include the following information:
A. Timeshare Use Plan. A detailed description of the basic elements of the proposed
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 5
timeshare use plan. The use plan shall describe the number of estates being created in each
unit, the total number of estates to be created, the expected price for each estate, and
whether a purchaser is buying a specific unit for a specific time, a specific unit for a floating
time, or whether there is no specific unit but just a specific time. It shall also describe
whether owners will be able to participate in an exchange program, and if so, in which
program(s) they will be eligible to participate. The use plan shall also provide a specific
description of how the development will comply with the requirements of Section
26.590.060, Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge.
B. Summary of Disclosure Statement and Timeshare Instruments. A detailed summary of each
of the key points that will be included in the disclosure statement and the timeshare
development instruments (see Section 26.590.090) if the project receives approval from the
City.
C. Management Plan. A plan for how the timeshare development will be managed, describing
whether the applicant will manage the project, or if it will be managed by a management
company, a branded company, or other entity, and describing how the project will be
operated.
D. Marketing Plan. The marketing plan for the timeshare development, including information
on proposed sales techniques (including a description of gifts, premiums, or promotions to
be offered), sales packaging, and whether a sales office will be established off -site.
K Budget. A thorough account of the proposed homeowners/condominium association
budget, giving a true indication of proposed costs and expenditures.
F. Upgrading Plan. For any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a timeshare
lodge development, the applicant shall submit a plan of how the project will be physically
upgraded and modernized.
G. Tax Collection. A statement indicating the manner in which real estate transfer taxes and
sales taxes will be collected.
H. Developer's Registration. A copy of the developer's registration with the Colorado Real
Estate Commission. If the developer has not so registered at the time of submission of the
application, then this information shall be submitted at the time the timeshare documents
are submitted for recordation, pursuant to Section 26.590.090 of this Code.
26.590.060 Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge Development
It is the intent of the City of Aspen that all timeshare lodge developments incorporate some of the
physical and operational features that are typically found in lodges in Aspen. The City recognizes
that each timeshare development is unique, and that each development should not contain all of
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002
•
these features. In fact, considering the proposed location of the development and the intended
method of operating the facility, certain of these features may not be appropriate. The City also
recognizes that when owners occupy their units, the development will operate more like a private
residential complex than like a lodge. But the City seeks to balance that form of use with
opportunities for other guests to use the facility. Therefore, the City has identified a menu of
timeshare lodging features, including both mandatory and optional elements. All timeshare lodge
developments shall incorporate the mandatory physical and operational features listed herein.
However, an applicant may instead propose to substitute optional operational features for one or
more of the mandatory features listed herein, or may propose its own set of features which ensure
that the development operates in a manner similar to a lodge when the owners are not using their
timeshare estates, as described further below.
A. Mandatory Physical Elements.
All timeshare lodge developments shall have an manned on -site front desk, located
within a lobby that is sized to meet the needs of the project. If the timeshare lodge
is part of a multi -site development, there may be a single front desk for these sites.
The manned front desk shall be open at least during regular business hours, and
shall be managed to provide full-time registration and reservation services,
including provision for late check -in and for other off -hours guest needs. The front
desk shall accommodate walk-in rentals.
2. A timeshare lodge development shall contain a sufficient level of recreational
facilities and other amenities to serve the occupants, including appropriate facilities
for both the winter and the summer seasons.
3. A timeshare lodge in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district shall not have any
lodge rooms located on the ground floor. Instead, a timeshare lodge in the CC zone
district shall contain at least one of the following elements: a bar, restaurant, or retail
facilities. The element(s) provided shall be located along the street front, shall be
accessible from the street, and shall be designed to serve the public, not just the
occupants of the timeshare lodge.
B. Mandatory Operational Practices. The City wants to ensure that the units in a timeshare
lodge development are available for rental to the public when they are not being occupied
by the owner, the owner's guests, or persons occupying the unit under an exchange
program. The City has identified certain operational practices that will accomplish this
intent, which are listed in this section. An applicant who agrees to include all of the
practices listed below in the operation of the timeshare development shall be deemed to
have complied with this intent.
The City recognizes, however, that there may be other ways to comply with this intent, and
will consider these and other operational practices. Applicants may propose to substitute
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002
•
•
one or more of the optional practices listed in Section C., below, for one or more of the
mandatory practices listed in this Section B. Applicants may also propose other operational
practices not listed in Section C. as a means of demonstrating compliance with this
standard. Acceptance of the proposed optional practices as a substitute for one or more of
the mandatory practices shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.
1. Timeshare estates shall be made available for short-term rental in a managed
program when the estate is not in use by the owner of the unit, the owner's guests, or
persons occupying the unit under an exchange program. The purchasing disclosure
documents shall state that the purchaser must sign an agreement with the
management company to rent the estate when it is not being occupied by the
purchaser, guests or exchangers.
2. The covenants of the homeowners association shall permit walk-in rental of units.
The association shall not limit rental of units to such arrangements as only weekly
rentals or Saturday -to -Saturday rentals; instead the association shall permit shorter
stays, split -week rentals, and similar flexible arrangements.
3. Owners of timeshare estates shall be required to reserve their unit/time sufficiently
far enough in advance to enable the public to obtain access to those units that are not
so reserved.
4. The owner of a timeshare estate shall not be permitted to occupy that estate for any
period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days.
5. The units that remain in the developer's inventory shall be made available for rental
to the public while the estates are being sold, except for models and other units that
are needed for marketing or promotional purposes.
6. Units that are available for rental shall be listed at competitive rates in a central
reservation system. Listing of the unit with a recognized central reservation system
in Aspen, or through the central reservation system of the company that will manage
the timeshare development, is preferred.
C. Optional Operational Features.
1. Timeshare lodge developments that subdivide each unit into a larger number of
estates (more than 10 estates per unit) are preferred to those which subdivide each
unit into a smaller number of estates (less than 10 estates per unit).
2. Applicants may formulate their timeshare use plan such that the purchaser would
not expect to occupy the same unit each visit; instead the purchaser would purchase
the right to occupy a certain type of unit for a certain period of time. Applicants
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 9
may also include provisions in the homeowners association documents prohibiting
owners from personalizing the unit they have purchased.
3. Applicants may design their development as a mixed project, which includes not
only timeshare units, but also some units that would continue to be owned and
operated by the applicant and his successors or assigns as traditional lodge units.
Another type of use plan that is encouraged would be for the applicant to agree not
to sell all of the shares in every unit, but to instead keep some time reserved for
rental to the public at market rates during both the high seasons and the off-seasons.
4. Applicants may decide to sell on and off-season estates as a package.
5. Applicants may include in their use plan provisions that allow for a wide range of
exchange opportunities for owners, which will promote new Aspen trials.
26.590.070 Review Standards for Timeshare Lodge Development.
An applicant for timeshare lodge development shall demonstrate compliance with each of the
following standards, as applicable to the proposed development. These standards are in addition to
those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and Subdivision applications.
A. Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation.
1. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing development to a timeshare lodge
development shall prepare a fiscal impact analysis of the proposed development,
which demonstrates whether there would be any negative sales, property, or other
tax consequences to the City from the approval of the proposed conversion. The
applicant shall, as a condition of approval of the timeshare lodge development, be
required to mitigate any negative tax consequences the project will cause.
2. The City of Aspen Finance Department has created a model which evaluates the tax
consequences of a proposed timeshare conversion. The model evaluates the direct
sales tax implications from having fewer days of occupancy by guests that pay sales
taxes in a timeshare lodge as compared to a traditional lodge. The model also
considers the indirect sales tax benefits that may accrue from increased occupancy
in timeshare lodge units as compared to other types of accommodations within the
City. Finally, the model considers any property tax implications due to the
conversion of property that is assessed as a commercial use to property that is
assessed as a residential use. Applicants shall meet with the City Finance
Department before submitting their timeshare development application to review the
model and to understand the factors the City will use in evaluating the tax impacts
of their proposal.
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 10
B. Upgrading of Existing Projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a
timeshare lodge development shall be physically upgraded and modernized. The extent of
the upgrading that is to be accomplished shall be determined as part of the PUD review,
considering the condition of the existing facilities, with the intent being to make the
development compatible in character with surrounding properties and to extend the useful
life of the building.
To the extent that it would be practical and reasonable, existing structures shall be
brought into compliance with the City's adopted fire, health, and building codes.
2. No sale of any interest in a timeshare lodge development shall be closed until a
certificate of occupancy has been issued for the upgrading.
C. Preservation of Existing Lodging Inventory. An express purpose of these regulations is to
preserve and enhance Aspen's existing lodging inventory. Therefore, any proposal to
convert an existing lodge or other property that provides short term accommodations to a
timeshare lodge should, at a minimum, replace the existing number of units on the property
in the planned timeshare lodge. If the applicant is unable to replace the existing number of
units, then the timeshare lodge development shall replace the existing number of bedrooms
on the property, or the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposal complies with the
purposes of these regulations, even though the planned timeshare lodge will not replace
either the existing number of units or bedrooms.
D. Affordable Housing Requirements.
Whenever a timeshare lodge development is required to provide affordable housing,
mitigation for the development shall be calculated by applying the standards of the
City's housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable housing requirement shall be
calculated based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms in the
development, and shall also take into account any retail, restaurant, conference, or
other functions proposed in the lodge.
2. The conversion of any multi -family dwelling unit that meets the definition of
residential multi -family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions of
Chapter 26.530, Resident Multi -Family Replacement Program, even when there is
no demolition of the existing multi -family dwelling unit.
E Parking Requirements.
The parking requirement for timeshare lodge development shall be calculated by
applying the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge uses. The
parking requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed
lock out rooms in the development.
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 11
2. The timeshare lodge development shall also provide an appropriate level of guest
transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle vehicles, to offer an alternative
to having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen.
3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in a
parking space on -site when the owner is not using that estate.
F. Appropriateness of Marketing and Sales Practices. The marketing and sale of timeshare
estates shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S., as
may be amended from time to time. The applicant and licensed marketing entity shall
present to the City a plan for marketing the timeshare development.
1. The following marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall not
be permitted:
a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers of timeshare units on any street,
mall, or other public property or facility;
b. Sales campaigns using phone solicitations; and
C. Any unethical sales and marketing practices which would tend to mislead
potential purchasers.
2. Giving of gifts to encourage potential purchasers to attend a sales presentation or to
visit a timeshare development is permitted, provided the gift reflects the local Aspen
economy. For example, gifts for travel to or accommodations in Aspen, restaurants
in Aspen, and local attractions (ski passes, concert tickets, rafting trips, etc.) are
permitted. Gifts that have no relationship to the local Aspen economy are not
permitted. The following gifts are also not permitted:
a. Any gift for which an accurate description is not given;
b. Any gift package for which notice is not given to the prospective purchaser
that the purchaser will be required to attend a sales presentation as a
condition of receiving the gifts; and
C. Any gift package for which the printed announcement of the requirement to
attend a sales presentation is in smaller type face than the information on the
gift being offered.
G. Adequacy of Maintenance and Management Plan. The applicant shall provide
documentation and guarantees that the timeshare lodge development will be appropriately
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 12
managed and maintained in an manner that will be both stable and continuous. This shall
include an identification of when and how maintenance will be provided, and shall also
address the following requirements:
1. A fair procedure shall be established for the estate owners to review and approve
any fee increases which may be made throughout the life of the timeshare
development, to provide assurance and protection to timeshare owners that
management/assessment fees will be applied and used appropriately.
2. The applicant shall also provide documentation establishing the adequacy of a
reserve fund to ensure that the proposed timeshare development will be properly
maintained throughout its lifetime.
H. Compliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed
timeshare lodge development will comply with all applicable requirements of Title 12,
Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3, C.R.S.; including
the requirements concerning the five (5) day period for rescission of a sales contract, and
the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow.
I. Approval By Condominium Owners. If the development that is proposed to be timeshared
is a condominium, the applicant shall submit written proof that the condominium
declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred (100) percent of the owners of the
condominium units have approved the timeshare development, that all mortgagees of the
condominium have approved the proposed timeshare development, and that all
condominium units in the timeshare development will be included in the same sales and
marketing program.
J. Prohibited Practices and Uses. Without in any way limiting any requirement contained in
this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage in any of the following
practices:
1. The creation, operation or sale of a right -to -use interest or any other timeshare
concept which is not specifically allowed and approved pursuant to the requirements
of this section. Right -to -use timeshare concepts (e.g. lease -holds and vacation
clubs) are considered inappropriate in Aspen and are not permitted.
2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare approval,
timeshare development instruments, or disclosure statement.
3. Failure to comply with any representations contained in any application for
timesharing or misrepresenting the substance of any such application to another who
may be a prospective purchaser of a timeshare interest.
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 13
0 0
4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a timeshare estate or interest therein in
violation of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval granted pursuant
hereto, or cause or aid and abet another to violate any requirement of this Chapter,
or an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter.
26.590.080 Business License and Sales Tax Payments.
A. Business License. It shall be unlawful for any timeshare development to operate in the City
of Aspen without first obtaining a business license in accordance with the standard
procedures of the City of Aspen.
B. Sales Tax Payments. Occupancy of any timeshare unit by anyone who pays a fee for the
use of the unit (other than the owner thereof) shall be subject to the City's sales tax the same
as if such occupancy were of a hotel or lodge unit. Any timeshare development, as a
condition of its approval, shall be required to obtain an Aspen Sales Tax/Lodging Tax
License, which shall establish how this tax shall be collected and paid to the City. The
manager of the association shall be responsible for the timely collection of the City sales tax
for the City of Aspen.
26.590.090 Timeshare Documents.
At the same time the applicant submits the PUD Development Plan and PUD Agreement to the
City for recordation, pursuant to Section 26.445.070, or submits the necessary documents to record
the subdivision exemption, the applicant shall also submit the following timeshare documents in a
form suitable for recording. The Community Development Director may require the applicant to
submit a draft version of these timeshare documents at the time of submission of the Final PUD
application.
A. Disclosure Statement. The applicant shall submit a disclosure statement that contains the
following information:
The name and address of the developer of the timeshare development as well as a
summary of the developer's business experience, including all background and
experience in the development of timeshare development, and the present financial
condition of the developer.
2. The name and address of the manager/management company for the development,
if any, and a description of the manager's/management company's responsibilities,
powers, duties, authority and business experience. All information on the manager's
background and experience specifically related to timeshare development shall be
provided.
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 14
3. The names and addresses of the marketing entity and the listing broker and a
statement of whether there are any lawsuits pending or investigations that have been
undertaken against the marketing entity or listing broker, and if so, a description of
the status or disposition of said lawsuits or investigations. A summary of the
marketing entity's business experience including all background and experience
related to timeshare development.
4. A description of the timeshare units, including the developer's schedule for
completion of all buildings, units, and amenities, with dates of availability.
5. If the timeshare plan consists of a condominium or a similar form of ownership, a
description of the development and any pertinent provisions of the condominium
instruments.
6. Any restraints on the transfer of the purchaser's interest in the timeshare units or
plan.
7. The timeshare use plan, which shall include a description of the rights and
responsibilities under the plan.
8. Notice of any liens, title defects or encumbrances on or affecting the title to the units
or plan and, if there are encumbrances or liens, a statement as to whether, when and
how they will be removed.
9. Notice of any pending or anticipated legal actions that are material to the timeshare
units or plan of which the applicant has, or should have, knowledge.
10. The total financial obligation of the purchaser, which shall include the initial price
and any additional charges to which the purchaser may be subject in purchasing the
unit.
11. An estimate of the dues, maintenance fees, real property taxes, sales taxes, real
estate transfer tax and similar periodic expenses, and the method or formula by
which they are derived and apportioned, which shall include whether maintenance
fees are determined by unit, time of year, or prorated share of the overall
maintenance costs, or any other means utilized to compute maintenance fees.
12. A statement demonstrating the manner in which management/assessment fees will
be held, utilized and accounted for.
13. A description of any financing offered by the applicant.
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 15
14. The terms and significant limitations of any warranties provided, including statutory
warranties and limitations on the enforcement thereof or on damages.
15. A statement that the proposed development will comply with all applicable
requirements of Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S. Upon request from the City, the
applicant shall provide a copy of the documents submitted to the State of Colorado
for the registration and certification of the timeshare developer.
16. The extent to which a timeshare unit may become subject to a tax or other lien
arising out of claims against other timeshare owners of the same timeshare unit.
17. The minimum percentage of units the developer will require be sold before the
developer will proceed with the completion of the timeshare development.
18. A description of the maintenance to be supplied to the timeshare development,
including how and when such maintenance will be provided.
19. Whether any or all the units in the proposed development will be available for
participation in an exchange program. The applicant shall disclose which exchange
program(s) the timeshare estate owners will be eligible to utilize.
20. A description of all insurance covering the property.
21. A description of the on -site amenities and recreational facilities which are available
for use by the unit owners. All on -site amenities shall be owned by the
homeowner's association and the developer shall not be allowed to charge any
additional fees for use of the amenities. If there are any off -site facilities that are
related to the property, these shall also be described, including a summary of any
fees that timeshare owners would have to pay to use those off -site facilities.
22. A statement that any timeshare interest shall be expressly subject to all requirements
and representations set forth in the disclosure statement, which shall be placed of
record with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
23. For any timeshare development that is a conversion of an existing project, a
statement shall be provided by the developer, based on a report prepared by an
independent architect or engineer, licensed by the State of Colorado, describing the
present condition of all structural components and mechanical and electrical
installations material to the use and enjoyment of the timeshare units. The statement
shall also provide a list of any outstanding notices of uncured violations of building
code or other municipal regulations, together with the estimated cost of curing those
violations.
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 16
•
•
R Timeshare Development Instruments. The applicant shall submit the following timeshare
development instruments:
1. Instruments for the interval estate or time span estate including:
a. The legal description, street address or other description sufficient to identify
the property.
b. Identification of timeshare time periods by letter, name, number or
combination thereof.
C. Identification of the timeshare estate and the method whereby additional
timeshare estates may be created.
d. The formula, fraction or percentage of the common expenses and any voting
rights assigned to each timeshare estate.
e. Any restrictions on the use, occupancy, alteration or alienation of timeshare
units.
f. Any other matters that the applicant or the City Council deems reasonably
necessary.
2. All timeshare development instruments shall provide for the following:
a. That a homeowners association shall be established. Title to the common
areas of the development and responsibility for maintenance of the
development shall reside within the association. The association shall
designate a managing agent. The management contract with the managing
agent shall allow for either party to terminate, for cause, upon siA (60)
thirty (30) days notice. In the event the manager is terminated, a new
managing agent shall be designated as quickly as possible by the
association. Any management agreement shall specify the managing agent's
duties and responsibilities to maintain the development.
b. A stipulation by the owner of the timeshare interest irrevocably designating
the homeowners association and/or the managing agent as an agent for the
service of legal notices for any legal action, proceeding or hearing pertaining
to the timeshare interest or for the service of process (in a manner sufficient
to satisfy the requirements of personal service in the state, pursuant to Rule 4
C.R.C.P., as amended).
C. Each timeshare interest with a multiple ownership shall be required to
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 17
designate one managing agent as the spokesperson and voter for all of the
owners involved.
d. That the association shall have the ability to compel a timeshare owner to
pay maintenance fees and if any owner's fees are not paid, his interest shall
be subject to a lien and foreclosure or other divestment. In the event an
owner or his guests violate the rules and regulations of the association, the
association shall have the right to enjoin the violation and the prevailing
party in such suit shall be awarded his court costs and reasonable attorney's
fees.
e. Provisions addressing reconstruction or repair of all or a portion of the
timeshare development following its willful or non -willful destruction.
Provisions should also be included addressing termination of the association,
including the percentage of owners that must agree for the termination to
become effective, what happens to the common elements in the event of a
termination, and how the proceeds shall be distributed in the event the
property is taken due to condemnation or eminent domain.
3. Updating and filing.
a. The developer and his successors and assigns (other than individual unit
purchasers) shall have a continuing duty to update the disclosure statement
and file with the City all amendments to the timeshare development's
instruments. Such amendments shall comply with the requirements of this
section. No amendment which shall significantly alter the disclosure
statement or the timeshare development instruments shall be effective unless
approved and accepted by the City and filed in the office of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder. All amendments shall be initially submitted for
review to the Community Development Director who shall have authority to
either approve a proposed amendment as in compliance with the
requirements of this section or refer the proposed amendment for appropriate
subdivision or PUD approval.
b. The foregoing updating and filing requirements do not apply to o single „nit
, The condominium association and/or the homeowners
association, or both if there be multiple associations, and not individual unit
owners, shall have the continuing responsibility to update the filing, the
disclosure statement, and any amendments to the condominium documents
and/or timeshare development instruments with the City and, subject to
applicable City approvals, to file the same in the Office of the Pitkin County
Clerk and Recorder as soon as practicable after City approval has been
granted. Once the condominium association has been formed, the City shall
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 18
not accept any amendments for review without prior approval thereby.
4. Before transfer of a timeshare unit and no later than the date of execution of any
contract of sale, the applicant or any other seller of a timeshare unit shall provide the
intended transferee with a copy of the disclosure statement and any amendments
thereto, except this requirement shall not apply to the owner of a single timeshare
estate in a development who is attempting to sell the estate.
No conveyance of a timeshare interest shall be valid unless the instrument of
conveyance shall indicate that title is being transferred subject to the condominium
declaration which shall include the disclosure statement as an exhibit thereto.
Section 2:
That the following definitions be revised or added to Section 26.104.100 of the Aspen Municipal
Code:
Timeshare Lodge. A development or a unit that has been approved for timesharing, pursuant to
Chapter 26.590, and has the characteristics of a timeshare lodge, as specified in Section 26.590.060.
Each unit in a timeshare lodge shall be subdivided into no less than seven (7) time span or interval
estates. A timeshare lodge unit may contain a kitchen and still be considered to be a lodge unit (not
a residential dwelling unit) for purposes of this Land Use Code (although the City's adopted
building codes will consider a unit with a kitchen to be a dwelling unit, and the City may, therefore,
require it to comply with the applicable provisions of those codes for a dwelling unit).
Lodge. Same as hotel.
Section 3:
That Section 26.710.320 B.1. of the Aspen Municipal Code, permitted uses in the LP Zone District,
be amended to read as follows:
1. Lodge, provided:
a. All lodge units within the LP Overlay Zone District may have kitchens within
individual lodge rooms.
b. All lodge units must be available for overnight lodging by the general public on a
short-term basis for at least six (6) months of each calendar year. This requirement
shall not apply to a timeshare lodge.
Section 4:
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 19
That Section 26.710.190 D.2.d. of the Aspen Municipal Code, minimum lot area per dwelling unit
requirement for lodge units in the L/TR Zone District, be amended to read as follows:
d. Lodge units (including timeshare lodge units). No requirement. Whenever kitchen
facilities are installed in a lodge unit in the L/TR zone district, such unit shall be deemed a
multi -family dwelling unit, and the lodge shall be required to satisfy the minimum lot area
requirements for a multi -family dwelling, as provided above, unless the development is a
timeshare lodge, which shall have no minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirement.
Section 5:
That Sections 26.710.140 C., 26.710.190 C., 26.710.200 C. and 26.710.320 C. of the Aspen
Municipal Code be amended to delete "timesharing" as a conditional use.
Section 6:
That Sections 26.710.140 B., 26.710.200 B., and 26.710.320 B. of the Aspen Municipal Code be
amended to add "timeshare lodge" as a permitted use, and that Section 26.710.190 B. of the Aspen
Municipal Code be amended to add "timeshare lodge" and "exempt timesharing" as permitted uses.
Section 7•
That Section 26.480.030 A. of the Aspen Municipal Code, General Exemptions, be amended to add
a new sub -section 5., to read as follows:
5. Exempt Timesharing. The creation of time -span estates that comply with the requirements
for exempt timesharing, pursuant to Section 26.590.030 of the Code. This subdivision exemption
shall not be used to create any new lots or dwelling units.
Section 8•
That sub -section A. of Section 26.480.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Procedures for Review,
be amended to read as follows:
A. Lot Line Adjustment and Exempt Timesharing. After an application for a lot line
adjustment or exempt timesharing has been determined to be complete by the Community
Development Director, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application.
Section 9:
That a new sub -section 22. be added to Section 26.510.030 B. of the Aspen Municipal Code.
Exempt Signs, to read as follows:
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 20
•
•
22. Timeshare identification signs. A building that is approved for exempt timesharing,
pursuant to Section 26.590.030, may shall have a wall -mounted sign with an area not
exceeding two (2) square feet, stating that it has been approved for timesharing and
identifying the name and phone number of a contact person or management entity for the
property.
Section 10:
That Section 26.470.070 O. of the Aspen Municipal Code, Conversion of Lodge Reconstruction
Credits to Residential Dwelling Units, be repealed.
Section 11:
That the City Clerk is directed, upon adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance
in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
gecfinn 12-
This Ordinance 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 13:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance 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.
Section 14:
A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the day of , 2002 at 5:00 in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a
public notice of same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of
Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on this 24" day of June, 2002.
Attest:
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 21
C�
CJ
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2002.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Timeshare Ord. No. 21, 2002 22
ASPEN PLANN* & ZONING COMMISSION46Minutes JUNE 4, 2002
COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS ........................................ 2
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................... 2
311 FIRST STREET REZONING and LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT......... 3
FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP CODE AMENDMENTS ........................................ 4
ASPEN PLANNI• & ZONING COMMISSION • inutes JUNE 4.2002
Jasmine Tygre opened the special Planning and Zoning Meeting after the Growth
Management meeting in Sister Cities Meeting Room with Eric Cohen, Ruth
Kruger, Bert Myrin, Ron Erickson and Steven Buettow. Roger Haneman was
excused. Staff in attendance were: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; James
Lindt, Amy Guthrie, Community Development; Kathryn Koch, City Clerk.
COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS
Ron Erickson asked to have city council review single-family residences in the
commercial core. Amy Guthrie noted that the office district might present some
problems for historic homes. Erickson said that he did not think that this was very
controversial.
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to ask staff to begin review of a code
amendment to no longer allow single-family residences in the
commercial core, lodge and office zone districts. Bert Myrin seconded.
APPROVED 6-0.
Erickson asked if a rigid structure that covers an open space was an awning or a
roof? Amy Guthrie responded that it was a roof. Guthrie said that she spoke to
Harley Baldwin and he had some thoughts about how to comply; he has one month
to comply. David Hoefer stated that the court case was continued for one month.
Steven Buettow stated that his appointment was finished and this was his last
meeting as a P&Z Member. Buettow said that this was a great honor and enjoyed
working with all people from the different commissions and staff. He noted that
eight years went by fast and said that he had the confidence in the commission to
strive to make all of the projects the best as possible.
Bert Myrin asked if Steven had served on any commissions or boards that needed a
replacement for him. Buettow replied that he was the chair for DRAC; he served
on the Burlingame COWOP, implemented the Residential Design Standards and
with P&Z accomplished the Physics Building, Music Tent, West End
Transportation and Snyder projects to name a few. Buettow encouraged the
commission to stay involved in the COWOP process, especially since the projects
may not come though the full P&Z review after COWOP.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None stated.
2
ASPEN PLANNI• & ZONING COMMISSION• Minutes JUNE 4, 2002
PUBLIC HEARING:
311 FIRST STREET REZONING and LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT
Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing. David Hoefer noted that proper notice
was provided and the commission had jurisdiction to proceed.
Amy Guthrie said that the property was just less than 7,000 square feet and zoned
R-15; the property was non -conforming in every possible way. The lot was not a
large enough parcel for the zone district; there were 3 units on the parcel where
only 1 was permitted. Staff has been in an enforcement action to have the property
become more in compliance with the underlying zoning; the result has been to
rezone to RMF, which exists around the neighborhood. Two units would be
allowed the existing Victorian brick house and a modern building constructed next
to it, which would bring the property into compliance.
Guthrie said that the code amendment was discussed in a prior work session to
allow a cash -in -lieu payment as a form of mitigation in the RMF zone district;
currently an ADU was the only allowable form of mitigation, which was not
consistent with what other neighborhoods were allowed. Guthrie noted that an
ADU on this site would add to the over -crowding and density on this site.
Guthrie stated that the brick historic house and the new brick home were currently
connected but that connection would be demolished, which HPC viewed as good
thing to allow the historic structure to be returned to a smaller structure. Guthrie
said that HPC was reviewing the FAR from the demolished connection to create a
garage.
David Hoefer said that there were 2 resolutions for this project.
Raul Gawrys, architect, stated that what was presented summed up what the
applicants wanted. Gawrys said that it was disgraceful to have the two buildings
connected and thought that there should be a separation of landscaping and fencing
to give an individual identity to the 2 pieces. Gawrys said that they were trying to
correct mistakes made by prior owners. Guthrie said that in the RMF zone district
the lot was large enough to subdivide or condominiumize. Gawrys thanked staff.
Myrin asked if some of the space could be converted to an ADU rather than adding
onto the building to work for the mitigation. Guthrie replied that would not really
work because to receive any bonus for an ADU it had to be completely detached
and mandatory deed -restricted.
3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION• Minutes JUNE 4.2002
No public comments.
There was discussion of a lot split over condominiumization, the physical restraints
on the property with the existing size of the buildings, no objections were raised
for the change to the RMF zone district and the cash -in -lieu housing
recommendation was acceptable.
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to approve P&Z Resolution #02-17
and to recommend City Council approve the rezoning from R-15 to
RMF for a property located at 311 S First Street (2735-124-68-004).
Steven Buettow seconded. Roll call vote: Kruger, yes; Myrin, yes;
Cohen, yes; Erickson, yes; Buettow, yes; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 6-0.
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to approve P&Z Resolution #02-18
and to recommend City Council approve amending Section
26.710.090(B)(7) allowing cash -in -lieu as an acceptable form of housing
mitigation at 311 S First Street; Ruth Kruger seconded. Roll call vote:
Erickson, no; Cohen, yes; Kruger, yes; Myrin, yes; Buettow, yes; Tygre,
yes. APPROVED 5-1.
Eric Cohen said that he wanted to recommend that Council look at the cash -in -lieu
one more time before it be accepted.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (05/21/02):
FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP CODE AMENDMENTS
Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing on Fractional Ownership.
Alan Richman stated that there were a few changes from the last hearing beginning
on page 3 of the resolution in the overview section the word building was changed
from pir�,-e-t. Under review standards for exemption # 1. the proposal shall not
conflict with any applicable deed -restriction or private covenants language was
added. On page 5 item #6 the sign was mounted on the building not on each units
in the building. Page 6 under item "C" Management Plan was a new area added.
On page 8 #B 1 the last word exchangers and #B3 sufficientlyfar enough in
advance was added. On page 18 under the definition of Timeshare Lodge the
language was modified to under the city's discretion as to whether it complies with
the provisions.
Staff researched timeshare in the RFM zone district and amended that multi -family
units would be allowed in the LTR zone district. Joyce Olson distributed maps of
the LTR and RMF zone districts. Ohlson said that there were exemptions that
0
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION• Minutes JUNE 4 2002
could be applied to deeds that were divided with LLCs, duplexes, single-family
homes and multi -family condos that currently existed with 6 units or less in the
LTR zone. Ohlson said that the geographically the LTR zone was the best area
because of the general statement of the LTR zone district. There was a coinciding
spreadsheet that had the number of units and number of buildings with 6 or less
units. Alan Richman said that there were 25 buildings in the LTR zone that could
be exempted. The exempt projects do not have to have a front desk. Ohlson noted
that the affordable housing units would not be allowed in the exemption. There
were approximately 130 units that could be exempted through this process for
timeshare.
Ohlson said that the RMF district was out of the scope; the timeshare was focused
on the core areas of the city and Aspen Highlands Village. Ohlson distributed
maps of the zone districts. The conversion required replacement of affordable
housing. Tygre asked why RMF was included. Ohlson and Richman responded
that was not decided as yet, but the public was here to address that issue. Eric
Cohen asked about the areas north of the river and there may be a few buildings
west of the core, but he wouldn't go north of the river.
Ron Erickson excused himself.
Bert Myrin said that to extend the incentive for nightly stays to the RMF area had a
big impact and changed the neighborhood and made it less desirable. Myrin
agreed with the LTR but not the RMF because of the displacement of some
community that was established in the area.
Tygre said the purpose of enacting the timeshare legislation was to provide
hotbeds; it was always part of the planning that hotbeds should be located near the
facilities and the downtown core. Tygre noted that LTR made sense just as an
option but to let everybody go into timeshare, there would be the risk of turning
residential neighborhoods into tourist orientated neighborhoods. Tygre said that
there was only so much audience available for the competition; tourists should be
at the base of the mountain. Tygre said that leading into the RMF would lead to
the profit taken by people being bought out of their houses because of the
economics. Tygre noted that the area east of town was residential since the 1970's
and many properties around East Hopkins had 6-month rental restrictions. Tygre
stated that the incentives should occur in the areas where tourism was most
appropriate in the LTR zone districts with plenty of opportunities for timeshare.
5
ASPEN PLANNAG & ZONING COMMISSION sminutes JUNE 4, 2002
Ruth Kruger agreed with supporting the exemption for the LTR zone district but
not the RMF at this time. Kruger said that she also supported the residential
character of those areas in the RMF at this time.
David Mylar, public, introduced his client Charles Kennedy; he stated that he was
present in the broader context because the subject was of great interest to him.
Mylar said that he appreciated the opportunity to work with staff on the fashioning
of this regulation. Mylar and Kennedy encouraged the expansion of the eligible
area for the exempt timesharing to at least the portion of the RMF zone south of
Cooper Street, the extension of Highway 82, which had demarcation of properties
over time primarily second homes and tourists. Mylar said that there was no
fundamental difference between properties on East Durant two blocks from the
Gondola and ones in the LTR zone district, both would achieve the objective if
allowed the exemption under this provision. Mylar said that he appreciated the
limited scope of applicability of this experiment but until the results were in, then
they could see if they were what was expected. Mylar said that it should be made
big enough that there would be results; maybe there wasn't enough information as
to which properties were eligible, not technically but practically for conversion.
Mylar said that if the properties with housing replacement options were subtracted
out or too small and in poor physical condition, there may not be that many viable
units for the conversion market.
Mylar said that by reducing the scope of the exemptions by reducing the size of the
project makes more sense than reducing the area within which the exemptions
would be applicable. Mylar said that 6 was a good number for the number of
fractions as a maximum for previously condominiumized properties. Mylar said
that people wanting to make an investment in Aspen and the community would
buy these units. Mylar said that the market has not yet been tested.
Scott Writer, public, said that one thing that was important in planning was to
support a middle class in Aspen with a place to live rather than moving down
valley to own a home. Writer said that he generally reacted negatively to provide
an exemption and would rather see the project go through a full-blown process so
the neighbors could have an opportunity to have input.
Tygre said that an experiment that could have a lot of consequences should be
started small and if successful then expand it rather than going big and pulling
back. Tygre said that existing hotel sites were appropriate and to expand to LTR
projects was the next logical place for the exemption.
0
ASPEN PLANNIR & ZONING COMMISSION 04inutes JUNE 4, 2002
Mylar reiterated that this should be related to units that were already short-term
rental and should not encourage the loss that could be available for long-term
residents. Mylar suggested that special review or staff review because no
judgment call would be required; it should be determined by circumstances with
criteria as part of this review. Tygre noted that was very difficult to determine.
Charles Kennedy, public, stated that he was a resident and contacted Dave Mylar
because of a building that he had that would be a perfect opportunity for this kind
of exemption. Kennedy said that there probably would not be a mad rush for this
kind of exemption or enough buildings that were eligible for this exemption.
Richman asked for the conditions that would be applicable. Tygre responded that
she was reluctant to go any further on conditions without Ron and Roger's
experienced input. Kruger agreed. Ohlson stated that it would allow some fine-
tuning and rewritten conditions to review. Cohen agreed to revisit the criteria and
to look at the multi -building projects, geographic area, better definitions and
language on the whole.
Ohlson noted that P&Z met with council next Tuesday (6/11) for a work session at
4 pm; she said that this topic could be continued to after that meeting at 5:30.
Richman said that the last item was multi -family units in the LTR zone, which was
to be addressed during the in -fill amendments. Myrin noted that this encouraged
hotels to convert into a different kind of hotbed; the hotel hotbed did not require a
retail space downtown that could have been shopped as a retail store downtown.
Myrin said that the timeshare hotbed changed the vitality of the downtown core
and community character.
MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to continue the public hearing for the
code amendment on Timeshare to June 11, 2002 after the work session
with city council; seconded by Ruth Kruger. APPROVED 5-0.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to adjourn. Steven Buettow seconded.
APPROVED 5-0.
Tygre noted that the purpose and intent was clearly stated. Richman replied that
the commission expressed the goals very clearly early on in the process.
Transcribed by Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
7
•
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION kinutes JUNE 11, 2002
Jasmine Tygre opened the special Planning and Zoning Meeting at 5:15 p.m. after
the work session with City Council in Council Chambers with Bert Myrin, Ron
Erickson, Ruth Kruger and Roger Haneman. Eric Cohen was excused. Staff in
attendance were: Joyce Ohlson, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy
r" 1„
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to approve the minutes frvnr*1vrt1—,
2002; seconded by Ruth Kruger. APPROVED 5-0.
MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve the minutes from May 28,
2002; seconded by Ruth Kruger. APPROVED 5-0.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None stated.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (05/21/02 and 06/04/02):
FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP CODE AMENDMENTS
Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing on Fractional Ownership.
Tygre explained that the exemptions were covered in the last meeting and the rest
of the commission wanted to get input form Ron and Roger prior to the approval of
the code amendments. Alan Richman noted that staff had additional research to
provide the commission with additional information on the RMF zone district for
the exemption to apply with conditions.
Joyce Ohlson stated that the statistics were drawn from GIS in conjunction with
assessors' plats, which produced 2 maps showing geographic boundaries along
with a tally sheet of the number of buildings and the number of units in the (R/MF)
Residential Multi -family Zone District. Richman noted that the criteria may not
work on the west side but could possibly work on the east side. Ohlson said that if
Cooper was used because it was closer to the activity center then it negates
inclusion of these.
Ron Erickson said that if second homes were to be timeshared they would probably
get better usage. Erickson reviewed the list of condominiums pointing out the
long-term residences; he said that he was not in favor of converting long-term local
housing to timeshare. Erickson said that the LTR zone district was for the most
part short-term rental properties; he said that more short-term rental properties
were needed (studios, one and two bedrooms). Richman said that a member of the
public asked about a certain area of the RMF zone district being included and it
was up to the planning and zoning commission to decide if there was any interest
1
ASPEN PLANNI• & ZONING COMMISSION kinutes JUNE 11 2002
in pursuing the RMF zone district's inclusion or exclusion in the adopted
resolution. Ohlson noted that only condominiums were to be included in the
exemption. Richman stated that state law required that the buildings be
condominiumized for the timeshare exemption.
DW
Richman reiterated that the question on the table, which was to limit th
exemption to the LTR or expand to RMF. Ohlson said that there were 38 units on
the south side of Cooper that could potentially convert. Erickson stated that he did
not want to reduce the bed base in the RMF zone because condominiums haven't
been built in the last 25 years.
Ruth Kruger said that there would probably be many properties in the LTR zone
district at the base of the mountain; she said that maybe this could be watched to
see how it does in this zone district meeting the requirements of the exemption.
Richman said that the properties that were eligible for the exemption were in the
table and met the standards and on page 3 of the resolution for properties with 6
units or less in the LTR zone district. The sentence at the top of page 3 The City
also intends to provide protection for its long term residential neighborhoods, to
ensure that the impacts of timeshare development do not adversely affect the
character of these residential areas by limiting the use to City's Lodging
Commercial Zone districts was added. Kruger asked how the city would protect
the long-term residences. Richman replied that by limiting timeshare to the LTR
commercial zone districts.
Roger Haneman said that he agreed with not going into the RMF with timeshare at
this time; he did not want to see a reduction in the bed base and did not see any
protection for that in the resolution. Haneman voiced concern for buildings going
from 20 units down to 10 units when one of the goals was to preserve and enhance
lodging inventory; there was nothing that would protect the current bedroom count,
which would enlarge the units but not necessarily benefit the town. Ohlson replied
that at a minimum it would turn into 7 owners per unit with a timeshare. Kruger
said that maybe there would be an incentive to create more bedrooms. Richman
said that presently there was a density penalty in the LTR which basically doesn't
allow as many bedrooms as you may want; one bedroom per 1,000 square feet,
which would be deleted in the conversion.
The commission agreed that incentives, desirability, intent to be the same number
of bedrooms or an increased number of bedrooms, for sale purposes, density and
evaluation points would become part of the standards for review.
Charles Kennedy, public, stated that he remodeled properties and was intrigued by
the timeshare aspects. Kennedy said that what he wanted to do paralleled what the
2
•
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONIN
tinutes JUNE 11, 2002
commission wanted to do, which was to take single-family properties that were not
being used very much and convert them into luxury homes sold to 4 or 5 people
with deeded interests. Kennedy said that if someone were allowed to step forward
and apply based upon the building, upon the rental of the building that could add to
the vitality of the neighborhood that the commission sought. Kennedy said that he
wanted to take the steps; there were 4 units in this building and knew of 2 that may
want to do this. Kennedy said that if there were language for site specific, this
would apply to luxury properties.
Bert Myrin said that an LLC couldn't be prevented from doing this; he asked the "
FT,
advantage of a deeded inertest. Kennedy replied that he did not want to go down
the securities path and did not want to do anything against the community.
Kennedy gave a scenario of his plan with a deeded interest.
Tygre stated that the original task was to develop the appropriate regulations for
timeshare lodges and this has gone way beyond that. The commission felt
uncomfortable in venturing into other areas that may be very innovative and
creative. The purpose of the charge was to revitalize the lodges in the LTR zone
district by allowing with the appropriate recommendations for the regulation for
the lodges that wanted to convert to timeshare. Also the language of not losing the
bedrooms was an addition.
The commission discussed lock -offs, size of the rooms, size of units, 2 and 3
bedroom condominiums, 4 to 5 bedrooms not needed, studios and 1 bedrooms
were needed, room verses unit. Ohlson said that the occupancy level was what
was important.
Richman noted the additional changes on page 3 were To
be eligible for- the
���~~•~'+�^„, the „nits shall be replaced with Exempt timeshare. Page 19, section 6
identified that exempt timesharing was a use permitted only in the LTR zone
district.
Myrin said that the timeshare offices in town decreased the vitality and decreased
the community character; he said that the offices should be in a hotel room on site
or on the second floor of a building or outside the commercial core. Myrin said
that he didn't know if there was a way to address this issue in this resolution rather
than wait until another ordinance came along, there was a tremendous impact on
commercial core. Myrin said that these projects require an office in town unlike a
hotel or luxury apartment. Richman said that they were required to disclose the
offsite location of the office but there was no review standard at this point; he said
that this would be handled in the infill review. Erickson said that he understood
Bert's concern but felt that it was a separate issue and he didn't think that just
3
•
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING CO
timeshare offices should be restricted but maybe all real estate offices in the
commercial core should be restricted. Erickson said that would be a difficult piece
of legislation and he said that he did not want this piece of legislation delayed or
muddied by this issue. Erickson noted that it was an ancillary problem but was not
restrictive to just timeshare office. Myrin stated that the timeshare office was a
highly intensive sales office unlike a regular real estate office because many shares
of each unit had to be sold; he felt it was a direct impact of this ordinance on how it
changed town. Myrin said that he could not support passing the ordinance unless
there was something to mitigate the impacts of the vitality and character that it was
zapping from the core. Kruger said that this was not the sale of a one time
residential home or condominium but the sale of something more viable to the
community than a home that was used one month a year. Kruger agreed with Ron
on the legislation that has been labored over for a long time and needed to be put in
place; this was to be addresses as a separate issue. Kruger said that it was viable
retail space that was used to sell property. Tygre commented that Bert's point of
view was well taken but should be kept as a separate issue and considered in the
infill review.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve P&Z Resolution #16, series
2002 as amended. Seconded by Ron Erickson. Roll call vote:
Haneman, yes; Kruger, yes; Erickson, yes; Myrin, no; Tygre, yes.
APPROVED 4-1.
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to adjourn at 6:30 p.m. Bert Myrin
seconded. APPROVED.5-0.
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
0
•
•
CUTHBERT L. MYRIN JR.
300 PUPPY SMITH ST. #203-101
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
June 18, 2002
City Hall
Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
TELEPHONE: (970)925-2691
FACSIMILE: (562) 268-9628
E-MAIL: BERT@R MYRIN.COM
RE: Timeshare Ordinance - Vitality and Community Character
Dear Madam Mayor and Council Members:
The Timeshare Ordinance
beds" and "new trials."
impacts on our retail
timeshare conversion and
timeshare developer that
office than a retail
Historically relatively
have replaced retailers.
addresses many concerns including "hot
However, it does not acknowledge adverse
core. This ordinance will encourage
development and provide such wealth to a
the developer can pay more for a sales
tenant can in our downtown core.
few real estate offices (non -timeshare)
Despite the justification of enabling the revitalization of hotel
rooms, the success of a timeshare requires an enormous sales
force. A property is broken down into room size pieces and those
pieces are then broken down into blocks of time which each must
be sold. While Aspen prevents timeshare salespeople on the
street, it is endorsing an ordinance and the corresponding wealth
to allow a timeshare sales office to replace our retailers.
Whether vitality and community character in the core along with
retail stores generating sales tax is a priority to the City is a
decision for Council to make. I would have supported the
Timeshare Ordinance if it had acknowledged this direct impact
perhaps by limiting sales offices to within the timeshare
property itself or restricting them to non -ground floor space in
the core.
Enclosure
Very truly yours,
�GQ71
CUTHBERT L. MYRIN JR.
1�X hi, h I -I- (. ,
0 •
Chapter 26.590
TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT
26.590.010 Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish the procedures and standards by which timeshare
development may be permitted within the City of Aspen. It is the City's intent to establish
timeshare regulations that provide for the protection of the character of Aspen as a resort
community, and that help to promote increased tourism and vitality within the City.
Specifically, the City intends that new timeshare projects in Aspen will implement the goals
of the Aspen Area Community Plan, and will help to achieve the following public purposes:
imeshare developments can provide the opportunity for increased
tourism o pen, can add to the level of community vitality, and can help to create
a more sustainable local economy. This can be accomplished by expanding the
number and variety of "hot beds" available to visitors, raising occupancy levels in the
accommodations sector, and attracting "new trials" to Aspen, from persons who have
not previously visited this community.
B. Preserve and Enhance Lodging Inventory. Aspen's tourist accommodations inventory
has for some time included a significant percentage of traditional lodges. The
community would like to preserve and enhance this lodging inventory, by encouraging
timeshare units to be contained in projects that look and operate in a manner similar
to Aspen's traditional lodges. These regulations have been designed to accomplish
this purpose by establishing standards for the physical and operational features of
timeshare lodges, to ensure that new and re -developed timeshare lodges maintain
Aspen's lodging traditions.
C Upgrade Quality of Accommodations. It is important to Aspen's tourist economy that
its accommodations are kept up-to-date. Timeshare development offers the
opportunity to infuse capital into the short term accommodations inventory, so
facilities can be modernized. It is equally important to ensure that once facilities are
upgraded, the facility is managed to provide a quality visitor experience over time.
These regulations are intended to ensure that timeshare lodges are properly
Aspen has a valued reputation as a quality resort
community. e"ityintentswtoiregulate timeshare marketing and sales practices, to
ensure that the way timeshare units are marketed and sold is consistent with the
character of this community, and to minimize the potential for practices that would
create an inappropriate image of Aspen.
First Draft of Revisions to Aspen's Timeshare Regulations - 3/26/02 Page 1
0
W
a
E
0
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU: Joyce A. Ohlson, Deputy Planning Directo�
FROM: Alan Richman Planning Services Wk
SUBJECT: Section -by -Section Summary of the Proposed Resolution
DATE: May 16, 2002
Attached for your review is a Resolution that contains the proposed changes to Chapter
26.590, Timeshare Development, and associated sections of the Code. The Resolution is
similar to the draft of the regulations you reviewed at the work session held on March 26.
The language has been revised in response to the comments made at the work session.
Further changes were made based on direction provided by the City Manager, City Attorney,
and Community Development Director at a follow-up meeting I held with them. The key
principles these senior staff members directed me to implement are as follows:
1. L/TR is a zone district with a limited area, and limited remaining development
potential. It is critical to the economic viability of Aspen as a resort community, since
it is the place where much of the community's tourist inventory is located. Therefore,
future development in this zone district must support the tourist economy, and not
result in the loss of additional lands to second homes that are occupied during a
limited portion of the year. Consequently, the group decided to recommend
elimination of the opportunity to develop any new multi -family developments in the
L/TR zone district, but to maintain existing L/TR uses as conforming uses, with all
of the rights these uses have today (remodeling, additions, creation of new units, etc.).
The group also supported repeal of the recently adopted GMQS exemption that
allows lodge reconstruction credits to be converted to residential units.
2. In our earlier discussions with the Planning and Zoning Commission, we had decided
not to address timeshare conversions of single-family and duplex dwellings, out of the
belief that this was a minor issue compared to lodge conversions, and that we should
focus our attention on lodges first. Staff was not comfortable with this conclusion and
felt that the City should address these conversions in a simple, but limited manner.
One benefit to the City of doing so is it provides the opportunity to keep track of the
units so converted, so over time the City can monitor whether this activity is
becoming a problem. It also provides the City with the opportunity to implement
some effective standards to better manage this activity, so it will not have significant
impacts on the City's residential neighborhoods. This procedure will also be of
benefit to applicants, who would prefer to be able to provide a deed for the interests
they convey, rather than enter into a partnership -type of interest.
3. As an outcome of these two directions, the group also decided to recommend
establishing a minimum standard for the number of estates for each timeshare lodge
unit. The minimum standard proposed is 7 estates per unit.
Following this meeting, I held several additional meetings with Community Development
Department staff to revise the text of the proposed Code Amendments. Considering all of
this work, and considering the findings contained in our original research paper (Fractional
Fee Ownership - Summary of Research and Identification of Regulatory Options, January,
2002), following is a section -by -section summary of the contents of the Resolution, including
highlights of the changes made since the work session.
Section 1 - Chapter 26.590
Section 26.590.010 identifies the City's primary reasons for adopting these regulations. It
sets the stage for the standards that are contained in this Chapter.
Section 26.590.020 is a newly -named section which introduces the two types of timesharing
permitted in Aspen, these being timeshare lodge development and exempt timesharing. It
also states the applicability of these regulations to all timeshare development in Aspen.
Section 26.590.030 is a new section that defines the eligibility requirements and minimum
standards for exempt timesharing. It limits this exemption to single-family and duplex units,
and multi -family units in projects that contain no more than 6 units, provided the units are
located in the L/TR zone district or the Aspen Highlands PUD. Each unit may be split into
no more than 6 estates using this exemption; the creation of more than 6 estates per unit
may only be accomplished as a timeshare lodge. The exemption would be granted using the
subdivision exemption process, and standards to manage this activity have been established.
Section 26.590.040 makes all timeshare development subject to PUD review and describes
how the four step PUD process can be consolidated down to a two step process. It also
clarifies that timeshare development requires subdivision review, and that timeshare
development is considered to be a tourist accommodation or a lodge for GMQS review, not
a residential development. Finally, it expands the authority for the City Council to grant
variations, which was established as part of the recent review of the Grand Aspen project.
Section 26.590.050 establishes the required application contents for timeshare development.
It allows applicants to apply for this use without first having to prepare all of the disclosure
documents, timeshare instruments, and covenants that will ultimately be needed. Instead,
the applicant is required to outline the key principals that will be included in these
documents. Other key documents, such as the marketing plan, budget, and upgrading plan,
must also be submitted. A requirement has been added for the developer to provide a copy
of his or her Colorado Real Estate Commission registration.
0a
Section 26.590.060 identifies the physical and operational characteristics of what would
constitute a timeshare lodge in Aspen. This section has been written as a menu of
mandatory and optional features, so each development can adopt practices that are
consistent with its intended style of operation. It tries to avoid dictating a uniform set of
rules that govern how each timeshare development must look or operate. The most
significant change to this section from the prior draft is that the requirement for a timeshare
lodge to include a bar, restaurant, or retail space has been deleted, except in the CC zone.
In addition, a new mandatory operational standard has been proposed (13.4), limiting
occupancy of a timeshare estate by an owner to no more than 30 consecutive days, providing
further assurance that these units operate like lodge units, not residential units.
Section 26.590.070 contains the review standards for timeshare lodge development. These
standards represent a combination of several of the standards in today's Code, along with
several new or updated standards based on the research we conducted. Several standards
now found in the City Code (such as E. and F.) have been revised from prescriptive to
performance standards, giving applicants flexibility in their development plans. Other
currently adopted standards (such as D. and G.) have been written to require compliance
with State statutes, to eliminate the differences between local than State standards.
Section 26.590.080 requires timeshare developments to comply with the City's business
license procedures. It is unclear whether projects approved under the City's current
standards have been complying with the adopted timeshare licensing requirements. This will
replace that approach with an approach that should be easier to enforce.
Section 26.590.090 establishes the requirements for the types of documents that must be
recorded by a timeshare developer. These requirements are based on the City's adopted
timeshare regulations, but have been edited to remove any requirements that no longer
appear to be applicable.
Related Code Sections Proposed to be Amended
Section 2: This section of the Resolution amends two Code definitions, as follows:
♦ It creates a new definition for "timeshare lodge", tied to Section 26.590.060, which
establishes the mandatory and optional characteristics of this use. This definition
allows kitchens to be included in any unit that has been approved for timesharing.
An addition made to this definition since your last review is the requirement that
each timeshare lodge unit be split into a minimum of seven (7) estates.
♦ A "house -keeping" change to the definition of "lodge" is also proposed. It would
delete the LP lodge standards from the definition of lodge and move them to the
L/TR zone district section (see explanation of Section 3, below).
3
Section 3: This section amends the LP zone district permitted use list, to include the
language that was previously found in the definition of a lodge (see Section 2, above). The
proposed language also eliminates the requirement that an LP timeshare lodge unit must
be occupied at least 6 months per year by the public.
Section 4: This section amends the L/TR zone district dimensional requirements. It states
that lodge units, including timeshare lodge units, are not subject to the minimum lot area
per dwelling unit requirements of the L/TR zone district; residential units are the only units
subject to the density requirements of this zone district.
Section 5 & 6: These sections would make timeshare lodge a permitted, not a conditional
use in the L/TR, CL, LP, and CC zone districts.
Section 7: This section has been added subsequent to the P&Z work session. It would
prohibit the development of new projects containing multi -family dwelling units in the L/TR
zone district, but will allow this use to continue where it already exists or where there is
currently a development approval for such units to be built. The purpose of this change is
to focus the use of the City's primary lodge zone district on tourism and visitation, and to
avoid the proliferation of residences that tend to remain vacant for large parts of the year.
By keeping existing multi -family dwellings as permitted uses, all existing projects would be
able to be remodeled, expanded, and otherwise re -developed, the same as today, but no new
multi -family projects would be allowed in this zone. Therefore, the only way to develop new
multi -family style dwelling units in this zone would be if the project complied with the
requirements of a timeshare lodge, ensuring such projects will be available for short-term
occupancy and high turnover.
Sections 8 & 9: These are new sections added since you reviewed the last draft. Section
8 creates a new subdivision exemption, for exempt timesharing, while Section 9 states that
the exemption can be granted administratively.
Section 10: This is also a new section, authorizing an identification/contact sign to be placed
on any dwelling unit approved for exempt timesharing.
Section 11: This section of the Code authorizes a GMQS exemption to convert lodge unit
reconstruction credits to residential credits. Since the Code now clarifies that timeshare
lodge development requires lodge, not residential allotments, it is no longer necessary.
Furthermore, given the desire of the City to promote short term accommodations in its
limited areas of lodge zoning, this type of exemption is no longer seen as appropriate.
Therefore, this section of the Resolution would repeal this provision.
We recommend that you review all of the proposed changes and following the conclusion
of the public hearing, that you adopt the proposed Resolution.
4
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AMENDMENTS
TO THE ASPEN LAND USE CODE TO REPEAL AND RE-ENACT CHAPTER
26.590, TIMESHARE, AND RELATED SECTIONS OF THE CODE
Resolution # 02 - 16
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen
directed the Community Development Department to propose amendments to the Land Use
Code to better address the emerging types of timeshare and fractional fee projects that are
being planned in Aspen; and
WHEREAS, in response to this direction, the Community Development Director prepared
the research paper Fractional Fee Ownership - Summary of Research and Identification of
Regulatory Options, dated January, 2002; and
WHEREAS, a work session was held with the Aspen City Council and the Planning and
Zoning Commission on February 12, 2002, at which time a discussion of the research paper
was held and direction was given to the Community Development Director to prepare the
appropriate amendments to the Aspen Land Use Code; and
WHEREAS, a work session was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission on March
26, 2002, to review a first draft of these proposed amendments to the Land Use Code, at
which time it was determined that a public hearing should be scheduled to consider the
proposals; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Aspen Land Use Code, applications to amend
the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval,
approval with conditions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by
the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City
Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the
amendments to the Land Use Code as are described herein; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on May 21, 2002, to consider these amendments to the Aspen Land Use Code, took public
testimony, and considered the recommendations of the Planning Director; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission
approved these amendments by a vote of _ in favor to _ against.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission, that it recommends that the
Aspen City Council adopt the following amendments to Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code,
the Aspen Land Use Code:
Section 1•
That Chapter 26.590 be repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
Chapter 26.590
TIMESHARE DEVELOPMENT
26.590.010 Purpose and Intent.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish the procedures and standards by which timeshare
development may be permitted within the City of Aspen. It is the City's intent to establish
timeshare regulations that provide for the protection of the character of Aspen as a resort
community, and that help to promote increased tourism and vitality within the City.
Specifically, the City intends that new timeshare projects in Aspen will implement the goals
of the Aspen Area Community Plan, and will help to achieve the following public purposes:
A. Increased Vitality. Timeshare developments can provide the opportunity for increased
tourism to Aspen, can add to the level of community vitality, and can help to create
a more sustainable local economy. This can be accomplished by expanding the
number and variety of "hot beds" available to visitors, raising occupancy levels in the
accommodations sector, and attracting "new trials" to Aspen, from persons who have
not previously visited this community.
B. Presence and Enhance Lodging Inventory. Aspen's tourist accommodations inventory
has for some time included a significant percentage of traditional lodges. The
community would like to preserve and enhance this lodging inventory, by encouraging
timeshare units to be contained in projects that look and operate in a manner similar
to Aspen's traditional lodges. These regulations have been designed to accomplish
this purpose by establishing standards for the physical and operational features of
timeshare lodges, to ensure that new and re -developed timeshare lodges maintain
Aspen's lodging traditions.
C. Upgrade Quality of Accommodations. It is important to Aspen's tourist economy that
its accommodations are kept up-to-date. Timeshare development offers the
opportunity to infuse capital into the short term accommodations inventory, so
facilities can be modernized. It is equally important to ensure that once facilities are
upgraded, the facility is managed to provide a quality visitor experience over time.
These regulations are intended to ensure that timeshare lodges are properly
maintained over the life of the development.
D. Maintain Community Character. Aspen has a valued reputation as a quality resort
community. The City intends to regulate timeshare marketing and sales practices, to
ensure that the way timeshare estates are marketed and sold is consistent with the
0
character of this community, and to minimize the potential for practices that would
create an inappropriate image of Aspen.
26.590.020 Overview of Timeshare Development.
A. Applicability. The requirements of this Chapter shall apply to all timeshare
development within the City of Aspen. These requirements shall be in addition to
all other applicable requirements set forth in this Title 26, and those set forth in the
Colorado statutes.
B. Types of Timeshare Development. There are two types of timeshare development that
may be permitted within the City of Aspen, as follows:
Timeshare lodge development is the basic form of timesharing permitted in
Aspen. It applies to any application to convert lodge units or residential
dwelling units to timesharing, except for those applications that are eligible for
an exemption, as described below. Timeshare lodge development is allowed
as a permitted use in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR), Commercial
Lodge (CL), Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP), and Commercial Core (CC)
zone districts. The standards and procedures for timeshare lodge
development are described in Sections 26.590.040 through 26.590.070.
2. Exempt timesharing is a more limited type of timesharing allowed in Aspen.
The only units eligible for this exemption are single-family dwelling units,
condominiumized duplex dwelling units, and existing condominiumized multi-
family dwelling units within a project that contains no more than six (6) such
units, provided such units are located in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR)
zone district or the Aspen Highlands Village PUD. The standards and
procedures for exempt timesharing are described in Section 26.590.030.
26.590.030 Exempt Timesharing.
A. Eligibility For Exemption.
1. The following types of dwelling units are eligible to apply for this exemption:
a. Single-family dwelling units;
b. Condominiumized duplex dwelling units; and
C. Existing condominiumized multi -family dwelling units (as such units are
described in Section 26.710.190 B.4), provided the project in which the
units are located contains no more than six (6) such units.
3
2. To be eligible to apply for the exemption, the single-family, duplex, or multi-
family dwelling units must be located in the Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR)
zone district or the Aspen Highlands Village PUD.
B. Minimum Requirements To Obtain Exemption.
1. No more than six (6) estates may be created in any dwelling unit via this
exemption. An applicant wishing to create more than six (6) estates in any
unit may do so only via an application for a timeshare lodge development.
2. The ownership interests that may be created pursuant to this exemption shall
be limited to "time -span estates" as defined in C.R.S. 38-33-110, where the
annually recurring exclusive right to possession and occupancy is determined
by a schedule or formula.
3. Applications for exempt timesharing shall be processed as a subdivision
exemption, pursuant to Section 26.480.030 A.S. of this Code.
4. The minimum application contents for the subdivision exemption application
shall be as follows:
a. The applicable portions of the information described in Section
26.590.050 A., B., F and G.; and
b. The general application contents required in Section 26.304.030,
Application and Fees.
C Review Standards for Exemption. An applicant for exempt timesharing shall
demonstrate compliance with each of the following standards. These standards are
in addition to those standards applicable to the review of the subdivision exemption.
1. The proposal shall not conflict with any applicable private covenants or any
provisions of the Colorado statutes. If the proposal is for a condominium, it
shall comply with the applicable provisions of Section 26.590.070 H.
2. All units to be converted to timesharing shall be in compliance with the City's
adopted fire, health, and building codes. If any unit does not comply with said
codes, then no sale of an interest in that unit shall be closed until a certificate
of occupancy has been issued that brings the unit into compliance.
3. All dwelling units to be converted to timesharing shall be in compliance with
the requirements of the zone district in which they are located and all other
applicable standards of this Land Use Code, or with the requirements of any
PUD or other site specific development approval granted to the property.
0
4. The conversion of any multi -family dwelling unit that meets the definition of
residential multi -family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions
of Chapter 26.530, Resident Multi -Family Replacement Program, even when
there is no demolition of the existing multi -family dwelling unit.
5. The marketing, sales, management, and operation of the timeshare estates
shall comply with the provisions of Sections 26.590.070 D. and 26.590.070 I.
of this Code.
6. A wall sign shall be mounted on each dwelling unit stating that the unit has
been approved by the City for timesharing and providing the name and phone
number of a management entity or local contact person who can be called in
the event of an emergency or to respond to neighborhood concerns. The sign
shall comply with the requirements of Section 26.510.030 B.22. of this Code.
26.590.040 Procedure for Review of Timeshare Lodge Development Application.
All timesharing that is not eligible for an exemption shall be processed as follows:
A. PUD Review Required. Timeshare lodge development shall be processed as a Planned
Unit Development (PUD), pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of this Code.
B. Consolidated PUD Review. The Community Development Director may determine
that because a timeshare lodge development is a conversion of an existing building,
or because of the limited extent of the issues involved in the proposal, the four step
PUD review process should be consolidated into a two step review, pursuant to
Section 26.445.030 B.2, Consolidated Conceptual and Final Review. Development
of a timeshare lodge in the Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) Zone District shall be
processed as a two step review, pursuant to Section 26.445.030 B.3. The Community
Development Director is also authorized to waive those PUD submission
requirements from Section 26.445.060 and review standards from Section 26.445.050
that the Director finds are not applicable to a proposed timeshare development.
C. Subdivision Review. Timeshare lodge development shall also require subdivision
approval. Review of the subdivision application may be combined with final PUD
review, as authorized by Section 26.304.060 B., Combined Reviews, and by Section
26.445.030 BA, Concurrent Associated Reviews.
D. Growth Management Quota System Review. Whenever a proposed timeshare lodge
development or exempt timesharing is subject to review under the City's Growth
Management Quota System (Chapter 26.470), the development shall be considered
to be a "Tourist Accommodation" or a "Lodge" under that System.
G
E. Authority to Grant Variations. Variations from the requirements applied to timeshare
lodge development may be authorized by the City Council. An applicant requesting
a variation shall demonstrate that the provision requested to be varied is not
applicable to the proposed development or cannot be met, and shall demonstrate
that the proposed variation is reasonable, would not be contrary to the public
interest, and better implements the purpose and intent of these timeshare regulations
than the codified requirement.
26.590.050 Contents of Application.
In addition to the general application information required in Section 26.304.030,
Application and Fees, and those application contents for PUD and subdivision, the
application for timeshare lodge development shall include the following information:
A. Timeshare Use Plan. A detailed description of the basic elements of the proposed
timeshare use plan. The use plan shall describe the number of estates being created
in each unit, the total number of estates to be created, the expected price for each
estate, and whether a purchaser is buying a specific unit for a specific time, a specific
unit for a floating time, or whether there is no specific unit but just a specific time.
It shall also describe whether owners will be able to participate in an exchange
program, and if so, in which program(s) they will be eligible to participate. The use
plan shall also provide a specific description of how the development will comply with
the requirements of Section 26.590.060, Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge.
B. Summary of Disclosure Statement and Timeshare Instruments. A detailed summary of
each of the key points that will be included in the disclosure statement and the
timeshare development instruments (see Section 26.590.090) if the project receives
approval from the City.
C. Marketing Plan. The marketing plan for the timeshare development, including
information on proposed sales techniques (including a description of gifts, premiums,
or promotions to be offered), sales packaging, and whether a sales office will be
established off -site.
D. Budget. A thorough account of the proposed homeowners/condominium association
budget, giving a true indication of proposed costs and expenditures.
E. Upgrading Plan. For any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a
timeshare lodge development, the applicant shall submit a plan of how the project
will be physically upgraded and modernized.
F. Tax Collection. A statement indicating the manner in which real estate transfer taxes
and sales taxes will be collected.
on
0
G. Developer's Registration. A copy of the developer's registration with the Colorado
Real Estate Commission. If the developer has not so registered at the time of
submission of the application, then this information shall be submitted at the time the
timeshare documents are submitted for recordation, pursuant to Section 26.590.090
of this Code.
26.590.060 Characteristics of a Timeshare Lodge Development
It is the intent of the City of Aspen that all timeshare lodge developments incorporate some
of the physical and operational features that are typically found in lodges in Aspen. The
City recognizes that each timeshare development is unique, and that each development
should not contain all of these features. In fact, considering the proposed location of the
development and the intended method of operating the facility, certain of these features may
not be appropriate. The City also recognizes that when owners occupy their units, the
development will operate more like a private residential complex than like a lodge. But the
City seeks to balance that form of use with opportunities for other guests to use the facility.
Therefore, the City has identified a menu of timeshare lodging features, including both
mandatory and optional elements. All timeshare lodge developments shall incorporate the
mandatory physical and operational features listed herein. However, an applicant may
instead propose to substitute optional operational features for one or more of the mandatory
features listed herein, or may propose its own set of features which ensure that the
development operates in a manner similar to a lodge when the owners are not using their
timeshare estates, as described further below.
A. Mandatory Physical Elements.
1. All timeshare lodge developments shall be managed on -site, with a front desk
that is located within a lobby that is sized to meet the needs of the project.
If the timeshare lodge is part of a multi -site development, there may be a
single front desk for these sites. The front desk shall be open at least during
regular business hours, and shall be managed to provide full-time registration
and reservation services, including provision for late check -in and for other
off -hours guest needs. The front desk shall accommodate walk-in rentals.
2. The planned timeshare lodge development shall contain a sufficient level of
recreational facilities and other amenities to serve the occupants, including
appropriate facilities for both the winter and the summer seasons.
3. A timeshare lodge in the Commercial Core (CC) zone district shall not have
any lodge rooms located on the ground floor. Instead, a timeshare lodge
development in the CC zone shall contain at least one of the following
elements: a bar, restaurant, or retail facilities. The element(s) provided shall
be located along the street front, shall be accessible from the street, and shall
be designed to serve the public, not just the occupants of the timeshare lodge.
7
•
B. Mandatory Operational Practices. The City wants to ensure that the units in a
timeshare lodge development are available for rental to the public when they are not
being occupied by the owner or the owner's guests. The City has identified certain
operational practices that will accomplish this intent, which are listed in this section.
An applicant who agrees to include all of the practices listed below in the operation
of the timeshare development shall be deemed to have complied with this intent.
The City recognizes, however, that there may be other ways to comply with this
intent, and will consider these and other operational practices. Applicants may
propose to substitute one or more of the optional practices listed in Section C.,
below, for one or more of the mandatory practices listed in this Section B.
Applicants may also propose other operational practices not listed in Section C. as
a means of demonstrating compliance with this standard. Acceptance of the
proposed optional practices as a substitute for one or more of the mandatory
practices shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.
1. Timeshare estates shall be made available for short-term rental in a managed
program when the estate is not in use by the owner of the unit or the owner's
guests. The purchasing disclosure documents shall state that the purchaser
must sign an agreement with the management company to rent the estate
when it is not being occupied by the purchaser or guests.
2. The covenants of the homeowners association shall permit walk-in rental of
units. The association shall not limit rental of units to such arrangements as
only weekly rentals or Saturday -to -Saturday rentals; instead the association
shall permit shorter stays, split -week rentals, and similar flexible arrangements.
3. Owners of timeshare estates shall be required to reserve their unit/time
sufficiently far in advance to enable the public to obtain access to those units
that are not so reserved.
4. The owner of a timeshare estate shall not be permitted to occupy that estate
for any period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days.
5. The units that remain in the developer's inventory shall be made available for
rental to the public while the estates are being sold, except for models and
other units that are needed for marketing or promotional purposes.
6. Units that are available for rental shall be listed at competitive rates in a
central reservation system. Listing of the unit with a recognized central
reservation system in Aspen, or through the central reservation system of the
company that will manage the timeshare development, is preferred.
0 •
C. Optional Operational Features.
1. Timeshare lodge developments that subdivide each unit into a larger number
of estates (more than 10 estates per unit) are preferred to those which
subdivide each unit into a smaller number of estates (less than 10 estates per
unit).
2. Applicants may formulate their timeshare use plan such that the purchaser
would not purchase an interest in a particular unit and would not expect to
occupy the same unit each visit; instead the purchaser would purchase the
right to occupy a certain type of unit for a certain period of time. Applicants
may also include provisions in the homeowners association documents
prohibiting owners from personalizing the unit they have purchased.
3. Applicants may design their development as a mixed project, which includes
not only timeshare units, but also some units that would continue to be owned
and operated by the applicant and his successors or assigns as traditional
lodge units. Another type of use plan that is encouraged would be for the
applicant to agree not to sell all of the shares in every unit, but to instead
keep some time reserved for rental to the public at market rates during both
the high seasons and the off-seasons.
4. Applicants may decide to sell on and off-season estates as a package.
5. Applicants may include in their use plan provisions that allow for a wide range
of exchange opportunities for owners, which will promote new Aspen trials.
26.590.070 Review Standards for Timeshare Lodge Development.
An applicant for timeshare lodge development shall demonstrate compliance with each of
the following standards, as applicable to the proposed development. These standards are
in addition to those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and Subdivision
applications.
A. Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation.
1. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing development to a timeshare
lodge development shall prepare a fiscal impact analysis of the proposed
development, which demonstrates whether there would be any negative sales,
property, or other tax consequences to the City from the approval of the
proposed conversion. The applicant shall, as a condition of approval of the
timeshare lodge development, be required to mitigate any negative tax
consequences the project will cause.
9
0 w
2. The City of Aspen Finance Department has created a model which evaluates
the tax consequences of a proposed timeshare conversion. The model
evaluates the direct sales tax implications from having fewer days of occupancy
by guests that pay sales taxes in a timeshare lodge as compared to a
traditional lodge. The model also considers the indirect sales tax benefits that
may accrue from increased occupancy in timeshare lodge units as compared
to other types of accommodations within the City. Finally, the model
considers any property tax implications due to the conversion of property that
is assessed as a commercial use to property that is assessed as a residential
use. Applicants shall meet with the City Finance Department before
submitting their timeshare development application to review the model and
to understand the factors the City will use in evaluating the tax impacts of
their proposal.
B. Affordable Housing Requirements.
1. Whenever a timeshare lodge development is required to provide affordable
housing, mitigation for the development shall be calculated by applying the
standards of the City's housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable
housing requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of
proposed lock out rooms in the development, and shall also take into account
any retail, restaurant, conference, or other functions proposed in the lodge.
2. The conversion of any multi -family dwelling unit that meets the definition of
residential multi -family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions
of Chapter 26.530, Resident Multi -Family Replacement Program, even when
there is no demolition of the existing multi -family dwelling unit.
C Parking Requirements.
1. The parking requirement for timeshare lodge development shall be calculated
by applying the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge
uses. The parking requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum
number of proposed lock out rooms in the development.
2. The timeshare lodge development shall also provide an appropriate level of
guest transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle vehicles, to offer
an alternative to having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen.
3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in
a parking space on -site when the owner is not using that estate.
D. Appropriateness of Marketing and Sales Practices. The marketing and sale of
timeshare estates shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title 12,
10
•
•
Article 61, C.R.S., as may be amended from time to time. The applicant and licensed
marketing entity shall present to the City a plan for marketing the timeshare
development.
1. The following marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall
not be permitted:
a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers of timeshare units on any
street, mall, or other public property or facility;
b. Sales campaigns using phone solicitations; and
C. Any unethical sales and marketing practices which would tend to
mislead potential purchasers.
2. Giving of gifts to encourage potential purchasers to attend a sales presentation
or to visit a timeshare development is permitted, provided the gift reflects the
local Aspen economy. For example, gifts for travel to or accommodations in
Aspen, restaurants in Aspen, and local attractions (ski passes, concert tickets,
rafting trips, etc.) are permitted. Gifts that have no relationship to the local
Aspen economy are not permitted. The following gifts are also not permitted:
a. Any gift for which an accurate description is not given;
b. Any gift package for which notice is not given to the prospective
purchaser that the purchaser will be required to attend a sales
presentation as a condition of receiving the gifts; and
C. Any gift package for which the printed announcement of the
requirement to attend a sales presentation is in smaller type face than
the information on the gift being offered.
E. Upgrading of Existing Projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be converted
to a timeshare lodge development shall be physically upgraded and modernized. The
extent of the upgrading that is to be accomplished shall be determined as part of the
PUD review, considering the condition of the existing facilities, with the intent being
to make the development compatible in character with surrounding properties and
to extend the useful life of the building.
1. To the extent that it would be practical and reasonable, existing structures
shall be brought into compliance with the City's adopted fire, health, and
building codes.
11
2. No sale of any interest in a timeshare lodge development shall be closed until
a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the upgrading.
F. Adequacy of Maintenance and Management Plan. The applicant shall provide
documentation and guarantees that the timeshare lodge development will be
appropriately managed and maintained in an manner that will be both stable and
continuous. This shall include an identification of when and how maintenance will
be provided, and shall also address the following requirements:
1. A fair procedure shall be established for the estate owners to review and
approve any fee increases which may be made throughout the life of the
timeshare development, to provide assurance and protection to timeshare
owners that management/assessment fees will be applied and used
appropriately.
2. The applicant shall also provide documentation establishing the adequacy of
a reserve fund to ensure that the proposed timeshare development will be
properly maintained throughout its lifetime.
G. Compliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed
timeshare lodge development will comply with all applicable requirements of Title 12,
Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3, C.R.S.;
including the requirements concerning the five (5) day period for rescission of a sales
contract, and the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow.
H. Approval By Condominium Owners. If the development that is proposed to be
timeshared is a condominium, the applicant shall submit written proof that the
condominium declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred (100) percent of the
owners of the condominium units have approved the timeshare development, that all
mortgagees of the condominium have approved the proposed timeshare development,
and that all condominium units in the timeshare development will be included in the
same sales and marketing program.
L Prohibited Practices and Uses. Without in any way limiting any requirement contained
in this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage in any of the
following practices:
1. The creation, operation or sale of a right -to -use interest or any other
timeshare concept which is not specifically allowed and approved pursuant to
the requirements of this section. Right -to -use timeshare concepts (e.g. lease-
holds and vacation clubs) are considered inappropriate in Aspen and are not
permitted.
12
2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare
approval, timeshare development instruments, or disclosure statement.
3. Failure to comply with any representations contained in any application for
timesharing or misrepresenting the substance of any such application to
another who may be a prospective purchaser of a timeshare interest.
4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a timeshare estate or interest
therein in violation of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval
granted pursuant hereto, or cause or aid and abet another to violate any
requirement of this Chapter, or an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter.
26.590.080 Business License and Sales Tax Payments.
A. Business License. It shall be unlawful for any timeshare development to operate in
the City of Aspen without first obtaining a business license in accordance with the
standard procedures of the City of Aspen.
B. Sales Tax Payments. Occupancy of any timeshare unit by anyone who pays a fee for
the use of the unit (other than the owner thereof) shall be subject to the City's sales
tax the same as if such occupancy were of a hotel or lodge unit. Any timeshare
development, as a condition of its approval, shall be required to obtain an Aspen
Sales Tax/Lodging Tax License, which shall establish how this tax shall be collected
and paid to the City. The manager of the association shall be responsible for the
timely collection of the City sales tax for the City of Aspen.
26.590.090 Timeshare Documents.
At the same time the applicant submits the PUD Development Plan and PUD Agreement
to the City for recordation, pursuant to Section 26.445.070, or submits the necessary
documents to record the subdivision exemption, the applicant shall also submit the following
timeshare documents in a form suitable for recording. The Community Development
Director may require the applicant to submit a draft version of these timeshare documents
at the time of submission of the Final PUD application.
A. Disclosure Statement. The applicant shall submit a disclosure statement that contains
the following information:
1. The name and address of the developer of the timeshare development as well
as a summary of the developer's business experience, including all background
and experience in the development of timeshare development, and the present
financial condition of the developer.
13
9 •
2. The name and address of the manager/management company for the
development, if any, and a description of the manager's/management
company's responsibilities, powers, duties, authority and business experience.
All information on the manager's background and experience specifically
related to timeshare development shall be provided.
3. The names and addresses of the marketing entity and the listing broker and
a statement of whether there are any lawsuits pending or investigations that
have been undertaken against the marketing entity or listing broker, and if so,
a description of the status or disposition of said lawsuits or investigations. A
summary of the marketing entity's business experience including all
background and experience related to timeshare development.
4. A description of the timeshare units, including the developer's schedule for
completion of all buildings, units, and amenities, with dates of availability.
5. If the timeshare plan consists of a condominium or a similar form of
ownership, a description of the development and any pertinent provisions of
the condominium instruments.
6. Any restraints on the transfer of the purchaser's interest in the timeshare units
or plan.
7. The timeshare use plan, which shall include a description of the rights and
responsibilities under the plan.
S. Notice of any liens, title defects or encumbrances on or affecting the title to
the units or plan and, if there are encumbrances or liens, a statement as to
whether, when and how they will be removed.
9. Notice of any pending or anticipated legal actions that are material to the
timeshare units or plan of which the applicant has, or should have, knowledge.
10. The total financial obligation of the purchaser, which shall include the initial
price and any additional charges to which the purchaser may be subject in
purchasing the unit.
11. An estimate of the dues, maintenance fees, real property taxes, sales taxes,
real estate transfer tax and similar periodic expenses, and the method or
formula by which they are derived and apportioned, which shall include
whether maintenance fees are determined by unit, time of year, or prorated
share of the overall maintenance costs, or any other means utilized to
compute maintenance fees.
14
12. A statement demonstrating the manner in which management/assessment fees
will be held, utilized and accounted for.
13. A description of any financing offered by the applicant.
14. The terms and significant limitations of any warranties provided, including
statutory warranties and limitations on the enforcement thereof or on
damages.
15. A statement that the proposed development will comply with all applicable
requirements of Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S. Upon request from the City, the
applicant shall provide a copy of the documents submitted to the State of
Colorado for the registration and certification of the timeshare developer.
16. The extent to which a timeshare unit may become subject to a tax or other
lien arising out of claims against other timeshare owners of the same
timeshare unit.
17. The minimum percentage of units the developer will require be sold before
the developer will proceed with the completion of the timeshare development.
18. A description of the maintenance to be supplied to the timeshare
development, including how and when such maintenance will be provided.
19. Whether any or all the units in the proposed development will be available for
participation in an exchange program. The applicant shall disclose which
exchange program(s) the timeshare estate owners will be eligible to utilize.
20. A description of all insurance covering the property
21. A description of the on -site amenities and recreational facilities which are
available for use by the unit owners. All on -site amenities shall be owned by
the homeowner's association and the developer shall not be allowed to charge
any additional fees for use of the amenities. If there are any off -site facilities
that are related to the property, these shall also be described, including a
summary of any fees that timeshare owners would have to pay to use those
off -site facilities.
22. A statement that any timeshare interest shall be expressly subject to all
requirements and representations set forth in the disclosure statement, which
shall be placed of record with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
23. For any timeshare development that is a conversion of an existing project, a
statement shall be provided by the developer, based on a report prepared by
15
•
an independent architect or engineer, licensed by the State of Colorado,
describing the present condition of all structural components and mechanical
and electrical installations material to the use and enjoyment of the timeshare
units. The statement shall also provide a list of any outstanding notices of
uncured violations of building code or other municipal regulations, together
with the estimated cost of curing those violations.
B. Timeshare Development Instruments. The applicant shall submit the following
timeshare development instruments:
1. Instruments for the interval estate or time span estate including:
a. The legal description, street address or other description sufficient to
identify the property.
b. Identification of timeshare time periods by letter, name, number or
combination thereof.
C. Identification of the timeshare estate and the method whereby
additional timeshare estates may be created.
d. The formula, fraction or percentage of the common expenses and any
voting rights assigned to each timeshare estate.
e. Any restrictions on the use, occupancy, alteration or alienation of
timeshare units.
f. Any other matters that the applicant or the City Council deems
reasonably necessary.
2. All timeshare development instruments shall provide for the following:
a. That a homeowners association shall be established. Title to the
' common areas of the development and responsibility for maintenance
of the development shall reside within the association. The association
shall designate a managing agent. The management contract with the
managing agent shall allow for either party to terminate, for cause,
upon sixty (60) days notice. In the event the manager is terminated,
a new managing agent shall be designated as quickly as possible by the
association. Any management agreement shall specify the managing
agent's duties and responsibilities to maintain the development.
b. A stipulation by the owner of the timeshare interest irrevocably
designating the homeowners association and/or the managing agent as
16
•
� J
an agent for the service of legal notices for any legal action, proceeding
or hearing pertaining to the timeshare interest or for the service of
process (in a manner sufficient to satisfy the requirements of personal
service in the state, pursuant to Rule 4 C.R.C.P., as amended).
C. Each timeshare interest with a multiple ownership shall be required to
designate one managing agent as the spokesperson and voter for all of
the owners involved.
d. That the association shall have the ability to compel a timeshare owner
to pay maintenance fees and if any owner's fees are not paid, his
interest shall be subject to a lien and foreclosure or other divestment.
In the event an owner or his guests violate the rules and regulations of
the association, the association shall have the right to enjoin the
violation and the prevailing party in such suit shall be awarded his
court costs and reasonable attorney's fees.
e. Provisions addressing reconstruction or repair of all or a portion of the
timeshare development following its willful or non -willful destruction.
Provisions should also be included addressing termination of the
association, including the percentage of owners that must agree for the
termination to become effective, what happens to the common
elements in the event of a termination, and how the proceeds shall be
distributed in the event the property is taken due to condemnation or
eminent domain.
3. Updating and filing.
a. The developer and his successors and assigns (other than individual
unit purchasers) shall have a continuing duty to update the disclosure
statement and file with the City all amendments to the timeshare
development's instruments. Such amendments shall comply with the
requirements of this section. No amendment which shall significantly
alter the disclosure statement or the timeshare development
instruments shall be effective unless approved and accepted by the City
and filed in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. All
amendments shall be initially submitted for review to the Community
Development Director who shall have authority to either approve a
proposed amendment as in compliance with the requirements of this
section or refer the proposed amendment for appropriate subdivision
or PUD approval.
b. The foregoing updating and filing requirements do not apply to a single
unit owner. However, the condominium association and/or the
17
C1
•
homeowners association, or both if there be multiple associations, shall
have the continuing responsibility to update the filing, the disclosure
statement, and any amendments to the condominium documents and/or
timeshare development instruments with the City and, subject to
applicable City approvals, to file the same in the Office of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder as soon as practicable after City approval
has been granted. Once the condominium association has been
formed, the City shall not accept any amendments for review without
prior approval thereby.
4. Before transfer of a timeshare unit and no later than the date of execution of
any contract of sale, the applicant or any other seller of a timeshare unit shall
provide the intended transferee with a copy of the disclosure statement and
any amendments thereto, except this requirement shall not apply to the owner
of a single timeshare estate in a development who is attempting to sell the
estate.
5. No conveyance of a timeshare interest shall be valid unless the instrument of
conveyance shall indicate that title is being transferred subject to the
condominium declaration which shall include the disclosure statement as an
exhibit thereto.
Section 2•
That the following definitions be revised or added to Section 26.104.100:
Timeshare Lodge. A development or a unit that has been approved for timesharing,
pursuant to Chapter 26.590, and has the characteristics of a timeshare lodge, as specified in
Section 26.590.060. Each unit in a timeshare lodge shall be subdivided into no less than
seven (7) time span or interval estates. A timeshare lodge unit may contain a kitchen and
still be considered to be a lodge unit (not a residential dwelling unit) for purposes of this
Land Use Code (although the Uniform Building Code will consider a unit with a kitchen to
be a dwelling unit, and it will be subject to all applicable requirements thereof).
Lodge. Same as hotel.
Section 3•
That Section 26.710.320 B.1., permitted uses in the LP Zone District, be amended to read
as follows:
1. Lodge, provided:
•
a. All lodge units within the LP Overlay Zone District may have kitchens within
individual lodge rooms.
b. All lodge units must be available for overnight lodging by the general public
on a short-term basis for at least six (6) months of each calendar year. This
requirement shall not apply to a timeshare lodge.
Section 4•
That Section 26.710.190 D.2.d., minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirement for lodge
units in the L/TR Zone District, be amended to read as follows:
d. Lodge units (including timeshare lodge units). No requirement.
Section 5•
That Sections 26.710.140 C., 26.710.190 C., 26.710.200 C. and 26.710.320 C. be amended to
delete "timesharing" as a conditional use.
Section 6•
That Sections 26.710.140 B., 26.710.190 B., 26.710.200 B., and 26.710.320 B. be amended to
add "timeshare lodge" as a permitted use.
gk-etinn 7•
That Section 26.710.190 B.4, permitted uses in the L/TR zone district, be amended to read
as follows:
4. Multi -family dwellings, provided that such dwellings shall only be permitted on the
following types of properties:
a. properties on which multi -family dwellings were in existence as of ,
2002 (the effective date of this Code Amendment); or
b. properties for which a development order for the development of multi -family
dwellings has been issued by the City, pursuant to Section 26.304.070 of this
Code as of , 2002 (the effective date of this Code Amendment),
provided a building permit for the multi -family dwellings is issued before the
vested rights for the development expire.
The intent of this section is to permit existing multi -family dwellings in the L/TR zone
district to continue, and to permit these dwellings to be remodeled and expanded,
including the addition of new units to any property on which there are existing or
19
U
approved multi -family dwellings, but not to allow this use to be initiated on any
property where the use does not exist or has not been approved for development as
of , 2002 (the effective date of this Code Amendment).
Section 8:
That Section 26.480.030 A., General Exemptions, be amended to add a new sub -section 5.,
to read as follows:
5. Exempt Timesharing. The creation of time -span estates that comply with the
requirements for exempt timesharing, pursuant to Section 26.590.030 of the Code. This
subdivision exemption shall not be used to create any new lots or dwelling units.
Section 9•
That sub -section A. of Section 26.480.040, Procedures for Review, be amended to read as
follows:
A. Lot Line Adjustment and Exempt Tunesharing. After an application for a lot line
adjustment or exempt timesharing has been determined to be complete by the Community
Development Director, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
application.
Section 10:
That a new sub -section 22. be added to Section 26.510.030 B., Exempt Signs, to read as
follows:
22. Timeshare identification signs. A dwelling unit that is approved for exempt
timesharing, pursuant to Section 26.590.030, may have a wall -mounted sign with an
area not exceeding two (2) square feet, stating that the unit has been approved for
timesharing and identifying the name and phone number of a contact person or
management entity for the unit.
Section 11•
That Section 26.470.070 O., Conversion of Lodge Reconstruction Credits to Residential
Dwelling Units, be repealed.
APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on 12002.
20
�.J
0
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Jasmine Tygre, Chairperson
21
CRY d Aspen
City Attorneys Office
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: John P. Worcester
DATE: April 4, 2001
RE: Analysis of Fractional Fees Report
Enclosed please find a copy of the "Analysis of Fractional Fees" report we engaged Freilich,
Myler, Letiner & Carlisle to prepare for the City. As you may know, this firm, which is
associated with Dave Myler of Aspen, is one of the best in the country when it comes to land use
issues. I don't know that they have reported anything new for us, but do give us some avenues
for discussion. If nothing else, I think it is fair that we have received the best analysis that can be
prepared on this topic since it is such a new development in the land use area.
Please advise if you would like to schedule a work session with the Community Development
staff to review the contents of the report.
cc: City Manager
Community Development Director
ANALYSIS OF
FRACTIONAL FEES
Submitted by:
Freilich, Myler, Leitner & Carlisle
March 2001
ANALYSIS OF FRACTIONAL FEES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................1
II. DEFINITIONS..........................................................I
1. Fee Interests or Estates . ....................................... 1
2. Non -fee Interests ............................................ 2
3. Colorado Law...............................................3
4. Conclusion.................................................4
III. THE PLANNING ISSUE GENERALLY ..................................... 4
IV. REGULATORY ISSUES ................................................. 5
A. General..........................................................5
1. General regulatory provisions .................................. 5
2. Fractional fees ............................................... 6
B. Regulation of Use 7
C. Subdivision.....................................................1I
D. Regulation by Aspen..............................................13
V. PLANNING ANALYSIS...............................................16
A. Introduction.....................................................16
B. Single-family Residential — Conversion from Single -owner to Fractional Fee
Ownership................................................17
1. Land Use Impacts..........................................19
2. Impacts on Occupancy ....................................... 24
3. Summary .................................................25
C. Commercial units: Conversion of hotel or other multi -unit structures to Fractional
Fees...........................................................26
1. Land Use Impacts .......................................... 27
2. Impacts on Occupancy ....................................... 29
3. Summary .................................................38
VI. IMPACTS ON CITY REVENUE .......................................... 40
A. The Real Property Tax.............................................41
B. The Sales Tax....................................................42
C. The Real Estate Transfer Tax ........................................ 43
D. Summary.......................................................44
VII. CONCLUSION........................................................45
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
•
ANALYSIS OF FRACTIONAL FEES
I. INTRODUCTION
- Time share ownership of real estate, by which many people have rights to a single
condominium unit, have been common in resort communities for many years. The City of Aspen
has recently been faced with an increased use of one form of multiple use ownership, known as
"fractional fee" ownership. City staff is concerned about the potential impact of fractional fee
ownership on the City. At the request of the City, we have analyzed the planning and legal
implications of fractional fee ownership; whether other states and cities have dealt with the issue,
and, if so, how; and whether Colorado law permits the regulation of fractional fee ownership by a
local government.
II. DEFINITIONS
There are several different forms of ownership by which more than one person or family
"owns" or has an interest in a single unit. The names of these interests vary significantly from state
to state, with the same interest often having different names, or one name applying to different forms
of ownership. Generally, these forms of ownership can be broken down into either fee ownerships,
including, possibly, fractional fees, and non -fee interests.
I . Fee Interests or Estates.
a. Owners have recurring/rotating estates for years, with a right to occupy the property
for a specified period, and a remainder interest as tenants in common. Common names for this form
of ownership:
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 1 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
• timeshare
• Interval estate
• Interval ownership
b. Each owner has an individual fractional interest as a tenant in common. Covenants
are recorded to give each owner a specified period of possession. It is also possible that the
ownership period is not by some permanently recorded document, but by some annual agreement
among the owners. Common names for this form of ownership:
• Time span estate
• Fractional interest, including fractional fee
• Tenancy -in -common estate
c. Each owner has fee simple ownership for given period each year; time is treated as
a conveyable dimension, in addition to width, height and depth. For the time period of ownership,
owner is sole owner, not tenant in common. Common names for this form of ownership:
• fee simple timeshare
2. Non -fee Interests
"Traditional" time share model, where each owner has a lease or license granting each
such owner a right to occupy property during a specified time period, with no fee interest. These
may be classified, depending on the state, as either real property or personal property interests.
Common names for this form of ownership:
• Timeshare
• Right -to -use interest
• Vacation license or lease
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 2 Aspcn Fractional Fees -March 2001
3. Colorado Law
Timeshares in Colorado are defined in §38-33-110 ofthe Condominium Ownership Act,
_ (timeshare estates) and § 12-61-401(4) (timeshare use).' Timeshare estates are divided into two
types: interval estates and time -span estates. Although neither estate specifically provides
for"fractional fee ownership," the definition of a "time -span estate" in §38-33-110(8), would appear
to include fractional fee interests:
"(a) an undivided interest in a present estate in fee simple, the magnitude of the
interest having been established by the time of the creation of the time -span estate either
by the project instruments or by the deed conveying the time -span estate; and (b) an
exclusive right to possession and occupancy of the unit during an annually recurring
period of time defined and established by a recorded schedule ...."
The Aspen Land Use Regulations define timeshare use in a similar manner, specifying that the right
of occupancy is on a periodic basis for a set period of time. §26.104.100, Aspen Code.
However, many fractional fee projects do not have recorded schedules for the time period of
an owner's occupancy or provide for an annually recurring time for possession and occupancy, but,
instead, have a rotating occupancy time, or occupancy determined by lottery. Thus, many fractional
fees would not fit squarely within the definition of time span estate.' Since they are fee interests,
they can not be interval estates.' Therefore, they may not even be time-shares under state law. See,
e.g., Bernhardt v. Hemphill, 878 P.2d 107 (Col. App. 1994): where the contract did not reserve to
1 A "timeshare use" is defined as a contractual or membership right of occupancy to a unit for an allotted
period of time.
2 The Utah Timeshare and Camp Resorts Project Act, § 59-19-1 et seq. Utah Code Ann. defines timeshare
estates to include fractional fees, the definition of which is not tied to specific recurring periods of occupancy.
3 An interval estate is an estate for years.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 3 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
the purchasers exclusive right to a particular unit they did not transfer any interest in real estate and
were not time -span estates.
_ . Although fractional fees do not appear to fit within the definition of timeshares under Colorado
law, the real estate community has taken the position that, at least with respect to developer
registration, fractional fees are timeshares and fractional fee projects must be registered under
§ C.R.S.
4. Conclusion
Not all fractional fees fit within the generally accepted definitions of timeshare because
all of the definitions which relate to fee ownership seem to require that there is a specified, annually
recurring period of occupancy to which the timeshare owner is entitled.' On the other hand, a
fractional fee is not a traditional ownership interest, even as an interest in common with several other
co -owners. Under traditional ownership definitions, the owner of a common interest would be
entitled to use the entire property at all times together with all co -owners. There are no limitations
on time. Although a fractional fee appears to be a hybrid, neither a traditional timeshare nor a
traditional form of ownership, it is closer to a timeshare than any other property interest. Therefore,
regulation of fractional fees as a variation of a timeshare would be appropriate.
III. THE PLANNING ISSUE GENERALLY
Aspen faces two issues arising from the development of fractional fee ownership properties.
As single family homes in residential districts are either converted to or developed as fractional fee
4 A fractional fee development in which the owners had specified annually recurring occupancy periods
would be a timeshare.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 4 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
interests, Aspen is concerned about the impact on the surrounding neighborhood from the potential
increased use of the property. In commercial/hotel districts, the issue is whether the change to
fractional fee ownership properties, with a net decrease in the number of overnight beds available,
is a problem for Aspen's tourist industry. Although both involve the use of fractional fee properties,
the impacts on the City are very different, as will be the decision on whether it is appropriate to
regulate such interests.
IV. REGULATORY ISSUES
A. General
General regulatory provisions
Timeshare interests are regulated by statute in many states. Regulation of timeshare interests
is often consumer protection legislation, controlling the creation and sale of timeshares with specific
disclosure requirements affecting the advertising for sale of such interests, as well as requirements
for the sellers of timeshares, similar to the regulation of the sale of other securities. Legislation in
each state which regulates timeshares varies widely, although there are uniform acts which have been
adopted by some states, including the Model Real Estate Time Share Act and the Uniform Real
Estate Time Share Act. Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Nebraska,
Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia and
Wisconsin all have specific timeshare statutes.
Since in most cases fee timeshare units are found in condominium properties, timeshares may
also, or in the alternative, be regulated by state laws controlling condominiums. In Colorado, as in
other states, timeshares are part of the state regulatory system of the sale of condominiums and other
047424.wpd / 90782.001 5 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
similar multiple -owner developments. Condominium Ownership Act, §38-33-110, et seq., Colo.
Rev. Stat., and Common Interest Ownership Act, §38-33.3-101 et seq. Most states, including
Colorado, do not regulate non -condominium fractional fee ownership, e.g., single family house
fractional fees.
Consumer protection -type timeshare statutes generally contain detailed provisions controlling
offering statements, advertising practices, and the rights of a purchaser. See, e.g., Article 57, Ch.
19, Utah Code Ann., "Timeshare and Camp Resort Projects." Developers of timeshare projects are
often required to obtain approval from state licensing authorities. See § 12-61-401 et seq., Colo Rev.
Stat.; North Carolina Time Share Act, §93A-39 et seq., N.C. Gen. Stat. The purpose of these statutes
is to protect the public from unscrupulous and misleading sales and advertising practices. Where
timeshares are regulated as part of condominium regulations, the focus is, similarly, consumer
protection, although these regulations generally also control the rights and responsibilities of
condominium owners vis-a-vis the original developer and the other condominium owners.
2. Fractional fees.
The term "fractional fee" is not defined by any state statute except the Utah Timeshare and
Camp Resorts Project Act. Under §57-19-2(17) Utah Code Ann., a timeshare estate is.defined as
a "small undivided fractional fee interest in real property by which the purchaser does not receive
any right to use accommodations except as evidenced by contract, declaration or other instrument
defining a legal right." This definition does not require that the occupancy period be a set annually
recurring period. The application of the Utah regulations is not limited to timeshares in
condominiums.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 6 Aspcn Fractional Fccs-March 2001
However, although other states do not use the term "fractional fee", some states seem to have
made an attempt to distinguish fractional fee type ownership from general time sharing. For
example, South Carolina defines the conveyance of 13 or fewer interests held by tenants in common,
trusts, or partnerships, as "vacation multiple ownership interests" rather than as "time sharing units,"
and does not subject them to the same degree of consumer protection legislation, presumably since
the sale of such units is not as widely or generally advertised to the public. §27-32-250 S.C. Rev.
Stat.
B. Regulation of Use
Since the concern in Aspen is not the sales or advertising practices or the rights and
responsibilities of owners or developers, but the impact of a particular use, i.e., fractional fees, on
the City, general consumer protection statutes offer no assistance. Instead, it is useful to examine
how other states have dealt with the physical attributes of multiple owned units, rather than merely
the legal process of their creation and sale.
Many states have explicit statutory prohibitions on treating particular developments differently
from other projects which look the same but have a different form of ownership. In the majority of
such states, state condominium acts provide that local zoning regulations, subdivision controls and
building codes may not impose any requirement on a condominium which it does not impose on
other physically similar property. In some states, however, this prohibition explicitly applies to
timesharing, not just condominiums, and prohibits zoning, subdivision or other regulations from
discriminating against or imposing requirements on timeshare programs which it would not impose
on "a similar development under a different form of ownership." See, e.g., §66-32-104 Tenn. Code
Ann. The Model Real Estate Time Share Act, adopted in Wisconsin, Massachusetts and Rhode
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 7 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
Island, also specifically provides that no zoning or other land use regulation may prohibit timeshares
or impose any requirement on timeshares they do not impose on physically -identical development
under a different form of ownership. See, e.g., Wis. Stat. §707.10.
In Colorado, §38-33.3-106 of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act prohibits a local
government from enacting any building codes, zoning, subdivision or other real estate use law which
imposes "any requirement upon a condominium or cooperative which it would not impose upon a
physically identical development under a different form of ownership. [emphasis added]" This
prohibition does not specifically apply to timeshares. It would apply to the condominium interest,
but not the division of the individual units within the condominium. It would also not include the
conversion of single-family homes to timeshares since the definition of common interest community
requires that an ownership interest include obligations with respect to property outside of the unit
itself. A single-family home fractional fee would, presumably, give an owner fee ownership of the
entire property and no obligations or common property, and, thus, would not be a common interest
community. CIOA contains no restriction against local governments adopting land use controls
applicable to non -common interest communities. Thus, there is nothing in state law which explicitly
prohibits zoning or subdivision regulations which distinguish timeshares or fractional fees from other
"ownership forms."
The key to all of these provisions is that a local government may not regulate, through land use
controls, the form of ownership of a property. This prohibition is derived from the purpose behind
zoning controls, which is to regulate the uses of land and their impacts on other uses and people,
rather than to regulate ownership. Thus, if the physical use of a property and its impacts on the
community are the same regardless of whether there is a single owner or multiple owners having a
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 8 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
fractional ownership interest in the property, local regulation through zoning may not be possible
since the purpose of zoning is to regulate such things as density and not ownership. Alternatively,
if there are different impacts from fractional fee projects than from individually owned units or
houses, the regulation would not be of the ownership, but of the use, and would be valid.
Although, as a city with home rule powers, Aspen is not limited by the strictures of Colorado's
zoning enabling legislation for cities, Title 31, Article 23, Col. Rev. Stat., Aspen's ability to zone
fractional fee ownerships is limited by the courts. First and foremost, zoning, as an aspect of a city's
police power, must be reasonable and be substantially related to the public health, safety, or general
welfare. See, e.g., Boulder County Commissioners v. Echternacht, 572 P.2d 143 (Col. 1977). Courts
in states other than Colorado have dealt with the issue of ownership as compared to use, and have
generally held that a condominium is not a "use" of property. Since a condominium is not a use
of property, these cases have held that it can not be regulated by zoning. See e.g., Bridge Park Co.
v. Borough of Highland Park, 273 A2d 397, 399 (N.J. App. Div. 1971) ("A building is not `used'
as a condominium for purposes of zoning"); Wentworth Hotel, Inc. v. Town of New Castle, 287 A.2d
615, 619 (N. Hampshire 1972) ("the proposed condominiums differ from apartments only in the type
of ownership and the ordinance is not concerned with the type of ownership, but with the number
of families per building, the size of lots, and the character of the use"); City of Miami Beach v. Arlen
King Cole Condominium Association, Inc., 302 So.2d 777 (Fla. 3d. DCA 1974) (a conversion to
condominium ownership was not a change of use and thus it did not affect an existing valid non-
conforming use); FGL&L Property Corp. v. City of Rye, 485 N.E.2d 986 (N.Y.1985) ("zoning deals
basically with a land use and not with the person who owns or occupies it").
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 9 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
0 0
There do not appear to be any cases examining whether zoning regulation of timeshares or the
division of interests within a unit is possible. The closest case is United Property Owners
Association of Belmar v. Borough of Belmar, 447 A.2d 933,936 (N.J. Super 1982), in which aNew
Jersey appellate court examined a resort community's zoning regulations which prohibited the
seasonal rental of residential property except in certain limited residential zones. The court
concluded that "[z]oning laws are designed to control types of uses in particular zones and are not
ordinarily concerned with periods of occupancy or the property interest of the occupants." . The
court viewed the time limitation on the renting of property (property could not be rented out for
periods less than one year) as an arbitrary and unreasonable restraint on the use of private property.
Thus, such regulation was not permitted.
Therefore, to the extent that Aspen wanted to regulate a type of ownership, i.e., fractional fee
ownership, per se, it probably could not. Thus, for example, Aspen could not say that properties
which were owned as fractional fees were prohibited while properties which had, e.g., 8 lessees,
each with a lease for 6 weeks were permitted: the distinction would be based solely on the type of
ownership and not on the impact.. However, if Aspen defined fractional fees and similar short term
occupancies, regardless of the form of ownership, as a different type of use from other uses because
of different impacts, so that what was regulated was not the ownership but the use, such regulation
could be possible. The Belmar case, while seeming to prohibit the regulation of occupancies based
on the term of the rental period, focused primarily on the effect on property owners. In another New
Jersey case, Hantman v. Township of Randolph, 155 A.2d 554 (N.J. Superior Ct. 1959), the Court
examined the effect which a change from seasonal to year-round use of a bungalow colony would
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 10 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
have on the general welfare of a community and concluded that such change would be "a substantial
and therefore an unlawful extension of a non -conforming use." 155 A.2d at 138.
The purpose of the prohibition on regulating the form of ownership originally rose out of a
concern that communities wanted to exclude the condominium form of ownership. A traditional
condominium generally has the same number of units/apartments as an identical rental apartment
building and the units are occupied in the same way, with an identical impact on the community.
However, units owned as "fractional fees" and similar multiple interests in a single unit have
different impacts from a single occupancy unit, because instead of one family using the home as a
vacation home for a short period of time during the year, the unit is fully occupied throughout the
year. As the New Hampshire court in the Wenhvorth Hotel case recognized, the zoning ordinance
is concerned with such factors as the number of families per building and the character of the use,
287 A.2d at 119, and invalidated an ordinance which regulated condominiums solely on the basis
of ownership and not with regard to these impact factors.
Colorado law gives local governments very broad authority to regulate land use. Under the
Local Government Land Use Control Enabling Act, §29-20-101, et seq., Col. Stat. Rev., local
governments can regulate the location of activities which result in significant changes in population
density, §29-20-104(1)(e), as well as regulate the use of land "on the basis of the impact thereof on
the community," §29-20-104(1)(g).
C. Subdivision
Condominiums, in addition to being a form of ownership, involve the subdivision of what had
formerly been a single parcels into multiple units to allow the separate fee ownership of each. Thus,
subdivision controls generally affect condominium development. Since fractional fee ownership
N47424.wpd / 90782.001 11 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
involves the separation of a single property or unit into multiple time ownerships, the creation of
fractional fee interests in Aspen could, conceivably, be a subdivision', subject to local subdivision
laws.' As with timeshare regulations, subdivision regulation varies widely by state. In some states,
condominiums are specifically defined as subdivisions, while in other states, the definition of
subdivision excludes condominiums. The specific definition of subdivision in a state statute will
determine whether or not these statutes are applicable to fractional fees. Generally, if a
condominium is a subdivision, the definition will be broad enough to include fractional fee
ownerships. If a fractional fee is a subdivision, then it is subject to the local review process created
by local subdivision regulations.
Subdivisions are defined in different Colorado statutes depending on the purpose of the
regulation. The Registration of Subdivision Developers Act defines subdivision as the division of
real property into 20 or more interests for residential use, and specifically includes a group of 20 or
more timeshares. §12-61-401(3) Col. Rev. Stat. Under this definition, the conversion of a hotel to
a condominium would be a subdivision. Different definitions are contained in Article 28 of Title
30 regarding county planning and Article 23, Title 31, regarding municipal planning and zoning. ,
§30-28-101(10), Col. Rev. Stat. provides, in relevant part, that a subdivision is any parcel of land
which is to be used for multiple dwellings, including condominiums, or which is divided into two
or more interests in common. Section 31-23-201(2) C.R.S. defines subdivision to include the
' A subdivision is defined in the Aspen Code as: "The process, act, or result of dividing land into two or
more lots, parcels, or other units of land or separate legal interests for the purpose of transfer of ownership,
leasehold interest, building, or development." (Emphasis added.)
' As a home rule city, Aspen is not controlled by state subdivision enabling legislation.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 12 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
condominiumization of property, but does not include the division of land into two or more interests
in common. All definitions of subdivision in Colorado, including in the Aspen Code, relate to the
division of land or real property, although the Aspen Code, in addition, provides that subdivisions
include time-sharing. However, the definition specifically excludes the division of land created by
the acquisition of interests as tenants -in -common. The division of a unit in a condominium into
fractional fee ownership interests is not a division of land, and, therefore, subdivision law should not
be applicable to fractional fees. The conversion of, or the construction of, a single-family home as
fractional fee ownerships would be subject to subdivision regulation only if more than 20 fee
interests were created.
Excluding fractional fees from the definition of subdivision is consistent with the goals of
subdivision regulation, which have included providing a more efficient method for selling land by
providing for blocks and lots to define a parcel, controlling urban development by requiring on -site
improvements, ensuring adequacy of public improvements by mandating dedication of land for these
purposes, and by linking development to the control of sprawl. See Model Subdivision Regulations,
Robert H. Freilich and Michael M. Shultz, APA 1995, pp. 1-4.
D. Regulation by Aspen
As a home rule city, Aspen has broad authority to legislate and control local land use, subject
to its own charter and code. Article XX, §6, Colorado Constitution; see City of Colorado Springs
v. Smartt, 620 P.2d 1060 (Col. 1980). A home rule city's zoning authority is governed by its own
charter and ordinances. Zavala v. City and County of Denver, 759 P.2d 664, 669 (Col. 1988).
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 13 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
Whether Aspen can regulate fractional fees thus depends on its charter and code as well as the
provisions of state law. As discussed above, the only provision of Colorado law which might
preclude such regulation is the prohibition on the treatment of condominiums differently from
physically similar property.
To the extent that Aspen intends to adopt zoning or other regulations relating to the use of
single family homes as fractional fees, there is nothing in Colorado law to prevent that. With respect
to the use of zoning and other land use provisions to control fractional fees in multi -family buildings,
there would similarly be no problem unless the property were held in condominium ownership. If
the property were a condominium, then §33-33.3-106 Col. Rev. Stat. might prevent Aspen from
adopting such regulations. However, as discussed earlier, the purpose of the prohibition on
regulation of condominiums was to prevent the outright prohibition of condominiums, where the use
of a property was considered the same as another use, and the only difference was ownership. As
long as Aspen can show a different impact based on use, not ownership, the regulation of fractional
fees in a condominium should be valid.
In determining the applicability of state law to home rule cities, the Colorado courts have
distinguished among matters of purely local concern, where the local ordinances take precedence;
matters of statewide concern, where the local government has power only if expressly authorized by
the Colorado General Assembly; and matters of mixed local and state concern. Town of Telluride
v. Lot Thirty -Four Venture, L.L.C., 3 F.3d 30 (Col. 2000). In matters of mixed state and local
concern, home rule municipalities may adopt ordinances as long as they do not conflict with or are
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 14 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
•
preempted by, state statute. See U.S. West Communication, Inc. v. City ofLongmont, 924 P.2d 1071
(Col. App. 1995).
Section 38-33.3-106 clearly evidences an intent by the state to preempt the local regulatory
control of condominiums to prevent them from being treated differently from other physically
identical structures. However, §38-33.3-106 does not prohibit the regulation of timeshares. Zoning
and land use controls are traditionally matters for local governments. A local government's interest
in land use control is "one of orderly development and use of land in a manner consistent with local
demographic and environmental concerns." Board of County Commissioners, La Plata County v.
Bowen/Edwards Associates, Inc., 830 P.2d 1045, 1057 (Col. 1992). Orderly development of a city
includes the ability to regulate density. See Di Salle v. Giggal, 261 P.2d 499 (Col. 1953). Similarly,
a city can regulate intensity of use. The state's interest in controlling timeshares, including fractional
fees, is, presumably, to ensure that such form of ownership is available. Given the distinct nature
of these interests, it is probable that any legislative intent to prohibit local land use regulation of
timeshares would be expressly stated. "A legislative intent to preempt local control over certain
activities cannot be inferred merely from the enactment of a state statute addressing certain aspects
of these activities." Bowen/Edwards Associates, Inc. at 1058.
The purpose of zoning regulations is to control development and use, not ownership. Although
there is no state prohibition on land use regulation of timeshares, any zoning ordinance must be
directed to use and development. Therefore, as long as Aspen establishes zoning regulations on the
use of property for fractional fees and other similar multiple short-term occupancy no matter the
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 15 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
•
•
form of ownership, which are intended to regulate the impact of such uses, and not the form of
ownership, such regulation should be legally defensible.
V. PLANNING ANALYSIS
A. Introduction
In the City of Aspen, fractional fee ownership will likely occur under one of two scenarios,
either:
1) conversion of existing single-family homes' from whole ownership
units to fractional fee ownership or
2) conversion of existing lodging and accommodation units from single or whole
ownership into fractional fee ownership of individual units.'
Under both scenarios there may be impacts not only within the zoning district where the
conversion takes place, but throughout the city at -large. The discussion that follows is structured
accordingly, and sets out the likely impacts of fractionalized ownership on the City of Aspen, at both
the neighborhood and city-wide levels.
In preparation of this report, we have considered the plans and policies of approximately
twelve resort communities nationwide, five of which are in Colorado, that have dealt with a variety
of accommodations including traditional hotels, timeshares, short-term rentals, and, in at least one
case, fractional fee unit development. In general, the issues facing these communities, and which
face Aspen today, affect both residential and commercial zoning districts, and may carry
7 In this report, "single-family homes" means detached residential structures consisting of a single dwelling
unit.
s Although conversion of existing properties is the most likely scenario, fractional fees may also be
created in newly constructed buildings. The analysis would be the same.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 16 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
•
implications far beyond the boundaries of the zoning district in which they are located. As Aspen
considers whether to regulate fractional fee developments, it is useful to take from other
communities their experience in regulating this and other forms of resort accommodations. In this
section, we discuss the planning issues that have arisen in a number of other communities and the
regulations they have implemented to address them.
While some measure of caution should be taken when analogizing Aspen's circumstance to
those of other local governments, by examining other resort communities we get a reliable indication
of the sorts of planning impacts that fractional fee units may have, both at a neighborhood and a city-
wide level. Although a number of the communities, both in Colorado and around the country, have
dealt with developments similar to, though distinct from, fractional fee ownership, it is important
to note that only one community examined here, the Town of Vail, has attempted to regulate
fractional fee projects as a use distinct from other traditional accommodations like hotels, timeshares,
or short-term rental of single-family homes. Even though the form of ownership may be different,
the experiences of these other communities offer an indication of the land use impacts fractional fee
development may impart. The City of Aspen may find that some land use impacts are best addressed
with zoning and regulatory techniques that do not address, or apply strictly to, the fractional fee form
of ownership. This is particularly true where conversion of single-family housing stock is
concerned.
B. Single-family Residential BConversion from Single -owner to Fractional Fee
Ownership
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 17 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
If single-family homes are converted to a fractional fee form of ownership, the City of Aspen
may experience different land use impacts than currently exist in its single-family residential
neighborhoods. On the other hand, should the City decide to encourage short-term occupancies in
certain residential neighborhoods, there are a number of impacts that it should address so as to
minimize negative land use impacts. As is discussed below, there are a number of regulatory
approaches the City of Aspen should consider in this regard.
First, for example, the City may continue to allow owners of single-family homes to lease
their homes to short-term tenants at certain times of the year, and to allow fractional fee projects in
single-family districts. Both Westhampton, New York, and Breckenridge, Colorado have taken this
sort of approach to address the demand for seasonal, short-term rental of single-family homes and
to curb potential land use impacts on affected neighborhoods. Second, Aspen may determine that
in certain residential districts, use of single-family homes should be restricted to permanent residents
and all short-term use or fractional fee projects should be prohibited or severely restricted.' Key
West, Florida has taken this approach, by limiting short-term use to selected zoning districts. The
regulatory schemes used in these three communities are discussed in some detail below.
It is important to bear in mind that none of these communities regulate based on form of
ownership, and that the regulations discussed below are applied based entirely on the short-term
nature of the rentals. However, if Aspen were to experience, or to allow in certain districts,
conversion from traditional single family ownership to fractional fee ownership, the land use impacts
9 The term short-term' rental refers to those units that are rented out as vacation rentals by the owner of a
home. As used here, it is a use distinct from a single-family home under fractional fee ownership.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 18 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
may be similar to short-term rentals. That is, if the owners of these homes are, in reality, short-term
occupants, the City can expect, at least to some degree, land use impacts more akin to hotel/tourist
uses than to traditional residential uses. If the City decides to expressly allow or encourage
fractional fee projects within single-family districts, there are several new impacts that it should
anticipate at the neighborhood level, as well as impacts on occupancies in the City.
1. Land Use Impacts
Most land use impacts peculiar to fractional fee, single-family homes and other short-term
occupancies will extend only to the immediate neighborhood. In neighborhoods where homes are
occupied year around by permanent residents, the threat of fractional fee interests causes obvious
concerns with respect to noise, traffic, and other nuisance matters. However, these impacts are, for
the most part, limited to the zoning district in which the short-term, fractional fee use is occurring.
Regardless, the City should take these "neighborhood" impacts into account when determining
whether to regulate fractional fee projects in single-family districts, and, if regulated, in which
districts they should be allowed. In districts where short term rentals are permitted, fractional fees
should be similarly be allowed since land use impacts will be comparable. Furthermore, any
regulatory restrictions applied to short term rentals should be similarly applied to fractional fee
single-family homes, as well. Any distinction between the regulation of the two uses should be
based entirely on identifiable distinctions between the impacts of the two uses, should they emerge.
When dwelling units traditionally reserved for long-term use are converted into short-term
or lodging -type uses, the character of the once -residential district is likely to change. By considering
the regulation of short-term rentals in other communities, Aspen can anticipate some of the impacts
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 19 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
that may result if fractional fee projects are allowed in residential districts. Both the City of Key
West, Florida and the Village of Westhampton, New York have had to cope with mounting pressure
from homeowners to convert traditionally long-term, residential homes into short-term rental
properties, at least during the height of tourist season. Both communities were experiencing
undesirable neighborhood impacts as a result of this trend. Key West chose to prohibit short-term
occupancies in most traditionally single-family districts, while Westhampton chose to accommodate
them by specifically addressing potential negative land use impacts on the affected neighborhoods.
Following a brief discussion of these two communities, is an analysis of the regulations the Town
of Breckenridge adopted to address the neighborhood impacts of short-term rental of single-family
homes.
a. Key West, Florida
In Key West, the short-term rental of whole ownership, single-family homes created
considerable local controversy. Neighbors complained of the noise, traffic, and parking problems
that resulted from the short-term use of traditional, single-family homes. Short-term rentals were
criticized for their impacts on the "character and stability" of residential neighborhoods. Occupants
of these rentals were characterized as "good citizens," but were disparaged for their failure "to
contribute to activities that strengthen a community." In response, the City of Key West adopted a
transient living accommodations ordinance in 1998,10 The ordinance limits the ability of
homeowners in residential districts to lease their property for periods of less than thirty (30)
10 City of Key West Ordinance #98-31.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 20 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
consecutive days, in an effort to curb many of the district -level complaints that had become typical
in established Key West neighborhoods. A copy of the Key West ordinance is attached at Appendix
A to this report.
Should the City of Aspen decide that fractional fee projects are undesirable in certain
residential districts, the City of Key West ordinance may provide some guidance for regulating this
use. Specifically, the ordinance phases out pre-existing short-term rentals in districts where this use
is considered incompatible with existing permanent residential uses, but permits it in other districts.
In districts that allow short-term use of single-family homes, property owners must secure a city
license and provide certain basic information that allows the City to track short-term uses in
residential districts. Additionally, the City imposes regulations that ensure fire safety, parking, and
property owner accountability should noise or other nuisance matters arise. Finally, the ordinance
provides for fees, penalties, and enforcement procedures. The Key West ordinance applies only to
properties which are leased for a short term; thus applying differently to properties based on
ownership. Although this has not been held to be invalid, to avoid any problems Aspen regulations
should not depend on whether property is leased or owned for short periods, but whether the
occupancies are for short terms. Aspen may consider the licensing requirements used by the City
of Key West as an appropriate means of regulating fractional fee projects in single-family, residential
districts. "
b. Westhampton, New York
11 Due to administrative appeals made under Florida law, the implementation of Key West's ordinance has
been delayed. These appeals are based largely on "area of critical state concern" guidelines peculiar to the Florida
Keys and Florida's growth management program.
k47424.wpd / 90782.001 21 Aspcn Fractional Fecs-March 2001
The City of Aspen may identify residential districts in which increased tourism would be
appropriate and even welcome, particularly in districts that are unoccupied for long periods of the
off-season. Should that be the case, the Village of Westhampton provides an excellent example of
how a community can address the negative impacts of short-term rentals while continuing to
accommodate this alternative use in residential districts. Unlike Key West, the Village of
Westhampton has been more accommodating of the short-term use of single-family homes. This
is likely due to the fact that demand for this alternative use was very strong and was limited to the
summer months, whereas in Key West, demand was year around and concentrated in neighborhoods
with significant permanent residents, as opposed to second -home owners. Westhampton adopted
an ordinance that limited the "multiple occupancy" of one- and two-family dwellings, in order to
address overcrowding, excessive traffic, parking problems, noise, and an overburdening of public
facilities. A copy of Westhampton's ordinance is included at Appendix B of this report.
The ordinance requires permits to be secured for residential properties leased for the summer
or any part of the summer. Special provisions apply to all permit holders, including a limitation on
the number of vehicles parked on the premises, a limitation on the number of unrelated people
occupying a unit, and a notice requirement so that all property owners within 200 feet of the summer
rental property are aware of the short-term use. The Westhampton ordinance is fairly restrictive
and involves rather sophisticated guidelines and requirements, of both the tenant and the landowner.
However, summer rentals remain in high demand, and the Village seems to have found an acceptable
means of curbing neighborhood impacts while responding to the market demand for this short-term
residential use. The extent to which Aspen could follow the Westhampton example, would depend,
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 22 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
of course, on whether demand for fractional fee projects is or becomes significant in residential
districts. If so, this regulatory scheme may offer some guidance to the City.
C. Breckenridge, Colorado
For the past five years, the Town of Breckenridge has allowed "chalet houses" as a distinct,
allowable use in residential districts. Similar to the situation confronting Key West and
Westhampton, Breckenridge developed the chalet house in response to the increased short-term
rental of single-family homes and the complaints that accompanied it. Neighbors complained of the
traffic, unmet parking demand, and noise that resulted from short-term rentals in largely residential
districts. By merely adopting a definition of chalet house and identifying the districts in which they
are allowed, Breckenridge has regulated the manner in which homes are rented, while continuing
to allow the short-term rental of single-family, detached homes. Homes that exercise the option of
becoming a chalet house must limit rentals to tour groups and must employ the services of a
professional property management company. l'-
Breckenridge defines a "chalet house" as a single-family residence or duplex used for the
temporary housing of tour groups for periods of between two (2) and thirty (30) consecutive nights.
Homeowners must secure a license from the Town and identify a manager who will provide meals
to the tour group, as well as management services like housekeeping and transportation. The town
12 Interestingly, short-term rentals are allowed in Breckenridge, even if the owner opts not to qualify as a
chalet house. It seems the chalet house scheme was developed in anticipation of significant regulation of short-term
rentals of single-family homes. However, the latter never occurred, but "chalet houses" continue to be popular in
Breckenridge. This is due to marketing possibilities that present themselves through local property management
firms and tour operators. Regardless, its mention here is intended to provide a Colorado context to the discussion of
short-term rental regulation.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 23 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
• 0
has limited the negative impacts of short-term rentals by discouraging chalet house tenants from
driving their own cars; by requiring homeowners to provide housekeeping services; and by
_ prohibiting any alterations to the house that would change the "single-family residential character"
of the structure.
Notably, the Breckenridge ordinance does not require a property owner to qualify as a chalet
house in order to rent his or her house on a short-term basis. But, by setting forth chalet house
criteria, the Town encouraged a number of homeowners to limit short-term rentals to the tour group
model and to curb potentially negative impacts on affected neighborhoods. Essentially, homeowners
have been provided with a rental scheme that may not have been apparent otherwise. Though not
required, many homeowners have chosen to exercise this option in response to an apparent demand
for alternative resort accommodations. Should the City of Aspen choose to regulate fractional fees
projects in single-family districts, it may consider some of the limitations imposed on
Breckenridge's chalet houses; specifically, the limit on private cars, the mandatory management
company, and the limitation on structural alteration of the home.
2. Impacts on Occupancy
Impacts on city-wide occupancy rates are difficult to predict. For the most part, they will
depend on the extent to which occupancy of single family homes with fractional fee ownership
interests have higher occupancies than what was typical when the home was held in traditional fee
simple ownership. However, even if occupancy rates of individual homes is increased, there may
not necessarily be a concurrent increase in occupancies city-wide. The extent to which additional
visitors could be generated, as opposed to merely shifting occupancy from traditional
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 24 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
accommodations to single-family homes is beyond the scope of this report. The City will have to
consider the extent to which fractional -fee ownership of single-family homes will draw visitors that
would not otherwise visit Aspen, and thereby increase the occupancy rates city-wide. Again, there
is very little data to help answer these questions. However, as multi -unit fractional fee projects are
developed in Colorado and around the country, their effect on occupancy, at both the project level
and city-wide level, will become clearer. As is discussed below, the Town of Vail has experienced
increased occupancies in multi -unit fractional fee projects themselves, but has been unable to discern
the overall effect on the neighborhood or the town at -large.
3. Summary
As far as could be ascertained, the homes subject to the regulations discussed here were
whole ownership units, not held as fractional fee. However, should homes in Aspen convert from
whole ownership to fractional fee units, increased neighborhood impacts become more likely, since
durations of occupancy will decrease to accommodate short-term visitors to the area and there will
be increased intensity or level of use. Also, single-family fractional fees may also remain occupied
more often than do short term rentals which are more likely to be occupied only during holidays and
extended weekends during the season. The extent to which single-family conversions will alter a
neighborhoods character is difficult to predict, and depends on how "purely" residential the district
was before the conversion occurred. On the other hand, fractional fee properties will have
occupancies of longer duration than short term rentals, hotels and other lodging facilities.
Unfortunately, of the communities queried for this report, none regulate the conversion of
single-family residential homes to fractional fee ownership, or even view this sort of conversion as
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 25 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
one to warrant attention. It remains to be seen whether single-family homes under fractional fee
ownership would cause the noise, traffic, parking, and property maintenance issues experienced by
the local governments discussed here. Since single-family fractional fee owners occupy the unit, as
opposed to a disinterested lessee, fractional fee projects will cause fewer negative impacts than short-
term rentals. There is reason to believe that, unlike short-term renters, fractional owners have a pride
of ownership in their property that fosters proper maintenance and a respect for neighbors.
Although the average ownership interest in a fractional fee ranges from six to twelve owners
per unit, per year, owners generally divide this time into one to two week increments throughout the
year. However, as is discussed in the section below, duration of occupancy varies widely from
project -to -project, depending on the particular fractional fee arrangement. If single-family, fractional
fee projects become commonplace in Aspen, the City should regulate the land use impacts that result
depending on occupancy patterns that emerge. Additionally, neighborhood impacts should be
measured in light of the existing characteristics of the affected district, taking into account whether
the neighborhood has been more residential or more transient in nature, or whether homes are
occupied by permanent residents or by second home owners for limited times throughout the year.
These considerations should guide the City as it determines whether fractional fee projects should
be allowed in traditionally residential districts, and if so, which regulatory options should be
exercised to address neighborhood -level land use impacts.
C. Commercial units: Conversion of hotel or other multi -unit structures to Fractional Fees
The second, and perhaps more likely, scenario under which the City of Aspen will address
fractional fee projects, is the conversion from traditional hotel properties to multi -unit fractional fee
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 26 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
projects.13 If fractional fee projects are permitted in the City of Aspen, at least to some degree, there
will be impacts the city can anticipate and should consider as future conversions occur. Of the
communities examined in preparation for this report, the Town of Vail is the only one to specifically
address fractional fee projects in its land use regulations. Vail's ordinance provisions are discussed
below, and are examined in light of both the land use impacts fractional fee units have had in the
community, as well as their impacts on occupancy rates. Subsection 1, below, offers some insight
into the land use impacts Aspen can anticipate should conversion to fractional fee ownership become
widespread in the local lodge accommodation market. Subsection 2 analyzes the occupancy rates
that may typify fractional fees. This discussion stems entirely from interviews with George Ruther,
a planner in Vail; and Bill Sullivan, developer of the Austria House, Vail's first fractional fee
project. Finally, this section concludes with an overview of the issues raised by this discussion of
land use and occupancy impacts, and of the issues that remain unresolved at this early stage of what
appears to be a trend towards fractional fee projects in resort accommodations.
1. Land Use Impacts
Since most hotel conversions, or multi -unit fractional fee projects, will occur in districts
where hotel and lodging uses are widespread, many of the neighborhood -level impacts discussed in
the section above have diminished relevance to the current discussion. In terms of immediate land
use and planning impacts, multi -unit fractional fee projects will have impacts very similar to
traditional hotels or timeshares now operating in the commercial and lodging districts of Aspen. The
13 Note that the development of new fractional fee projects will have impacts on land use and occupancy
that are similar to hotel conversions. Unless otherwise indicated, conclusions drawn with respect to conversions
apply to new development as well.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 27 Aspcn Fractional Fees -March 2001
-
extent to which this will be the case is difficult to assess given how few communities have developed
fractional fee projects, a lack of consistency between the communities that have developed them, and
the varying configurations of the projects themselves. Some multi -unit fractional fees are built and
operated in a manner that is essentially indistinguishable from a hotel, while others are more typical
of a timeshare, with guests limited almost entirely to the owners of the units. Typically, these
developments are less intense and generate less traffic per square foot than traditional hotels. In fact,
some fractional fee projects may have fewer total units per square foot than a traditional hotel, so
land use impacts, such as traffic, parking, noise, and demand on infrastructure may be less than those
generated by a hotel.
An important caveat is required on this point, however. Fractional fee projects that make
short-term accommodations available to "walk-in" guests clearly will have neighborhood impacts
similar to traditional hotels. Many multi -unit fractional fee projects are constructed so that
individual bedrooms can operate as "lock -outs" and be rented on a nightly basis in a manner typical
of a hotel." Fractional fee projects that operate in this manner may generate increased traffic or
parking demand than those that do not. Aspen should consider regulations that address both types
of multi -unit fractional fee projects, and apply them as developments are proposed or altered in the
future to accommodate hotel -type units. City-wide transportation and other vital infrastructure
should be planned to accommodate fractional fee projects just as they would for hotels and other
multi -unit lodging accommodations.
14 A "lock -out" refers to a bedroom, or portion of a dwelling unit, that can be rented individually, as a
separate unit from the larger dwelling. For example, a three -bedroom fractional fee unit can be designed so that the
bedrooms are secured and rented separately.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 28 Aspen Fractional Fecs-Much 2001
0 •
Of particular concern, however, is the impact fractional fee projects may have on occupancies
throughout the City. This, in large part, will depend on the extent to which the fractional fee projects
operate as hotels, as compared to timeshares. Vail has structured its regulations to ensure that
fractional fee projects are developed in conjunction with existing short-term accommodation uses
and operate in a manner similar to a traditional hotel.
2. Impacts on Occupancy
Like many of the Colorado communities examined, Aspen has in place a lodge
preservation initiative to protect and enhance the supply of short-term accommodations available to
Aspen's visitors. As fractional fee projects become more typical in resort development, the City's
interest in preserving the long-term supply of these accommodations is clearly implicated. Of
particular concern, of course, is the occupancies that will typify fractional fee projects in both the
short -run as well as the long -run. Specifically, how do the occupancies of fractional fee projects
compare to those of hotels and traditional timeshares? Data is somewhat limited at this early point
in the fractional fee trend. Two sources of information have been examined in the preparation of this
report, the Town of Vail's estimates, discussed in subsection 2a, and Bill Sullivan's perspective on
fractional fees and on anticipated occupancies, discussed in subsection 2b, below.
a. Vail. Colorado
The regulatory scheme that underlies the Town of Vail's control of fractional fee projects
provides constructive insight into the case -specific issues that arise when local governments review
and consider approval of these projects. As mentioned above, Vail's regulations are deliberately
designed to achieve two important goals:
k47424.wpd / 90782.001 29 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
1) to preserve existing lodge accommodations; and
2) to encourage new multi -unit fractional fee projects to operate more like
hotels than traditional timeshares.
Vail planners believe that increased city-wide occupancies hinge on the extent to which they
successfully accomplish these two objectives.
i. The ordinance
The Town of Vail adopted regulations to address fractional fee uses in 1997. The issue
surfaced when a fractional fee project was proposed in a Public Accommodations district, and
confusion arose as to the appropriate land use classification for the project. The Town was inclined
to classify the project as a condominium, while the developer asserted the project was really a hotel,
a use clearly allowed in the Public Accommodations district. The regulations discussed here, and
included as Appendix C to this report, resulted from this controversial project.
Since this original fractional fee project, Vail has created a new use category called
"fractional fee club." Fractional fee regulation stems largely from three definitions and the
conditional use criteria discussed below. These three definitions are as follows:
Fractional fee: A tenancy in common interest in improved real property, including
condominiums, created or held by person, partnership, corporations, or joint ventures or similar
entities, wherein the tenants in common have formally arranged by oral or written agreement or
understanding, either recorded or unrecorded, allowing for the use and occupancy of the property
by one or more cotenants during any period, whether annually recurring or not which is binding upon
any assignee or future owner of a fractional fee interest or if such agreement continues to be in any
way binding or effective upon any cotenant for the sale of any interest in property.
Fractional fee club: A fractional fee project in which each condominium unit, pursuant to
recorded project documentation as approved by the Town of Vail, has no fewer than six (6) and no
more than twelve (12) owners per unit and whose use is established by a reservation system. Each
of the fractional fee club units are made available for short-term rental in a managed program when
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 30 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
not in use by the club members. The project is managed on -site with a front desk operating twenty-
four (24 hours a day, seven (7) days a week providing reservation and registration capabilities. The
project shall include or be proximate to transportation, retail shops, eating and drinking
establishments, and recreation facilities.
Fractional fee club unit: A condominium unit in a fractional fee club described as such
in the project documentation and not an accommodation unit within the fractional fee club.
Fractional fee clubs are allowed as a conditional use in only four zoning districts, all of which are
oriented towards transient accommodations and tourist amenities. Conditional use criteria address
the Town's concern that accommodation units be maintained to preserve existing lodging facilities.
That is, additional fractional fee units are not permitted unless existing hotel units are preserved,
either in number or floor area.
If the proposed fractional fee is a conversion from an existing hotel, the new project, once
converted, must maintain an equivalent number of accommodation units as it had prior to
conversion. However, equivalency may be achieved by either maintaining the same number of hotel
units or by maintaining a square footage equivalent to that existing prior to the conversion. In other
words, a conversion from a hotel to a hotel/fractional fee hybrid must not result in more hotel units
than fractional fee units and cannot result in an overall reduction in total units.15 If the proposed
fractional fee is a new development, Town provisions restrict the gross residential floor area (GRFA)
that can be given to fractional fee units. Specifically, accommodation unit GRFA must be at least
as great as fractional fee GRFA. If a proposed project includes lock -out units, these units are not
calculated as traditional accommodation units, but rather as fractional fee units. In addition,
applicants for a fractional fee club must demonstrate the ability to "create and maintain a high level
15 Note that this "hybrid" of hotel rooms, or accommodation units, and fractional fee units, is the only
manner in which Vail will permit fractional fee clubs.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 31 Aspen Fractional Fccs-March 2001
of occupancy." Town provisions also address employee housing and require the owners' written
approval of any development or conversion.
Since the adoption of these ordinances the Town of Vail has processed two projects under
their provisions. Planner George Ruther feels the regulations have served the Town well, helping
it to protect the existing bed base, while at the same time encouraging hotel -type facilities in new
fractional fee projects.
ii. Factors Influencing Occupancy
One of the most important land use impacts that widespread fractional fee projects may have
is also the most difficult to predict: occupancies and impacts on the local bed base. This task is a
difficult one, for three primary reasons. First, there are relatively few fractional fee projects that
have been developed and in operation for any reasonable period of time. This makes long-term
predictions of occupancy characteristics particularly suspect. Second, of those that have been
developed, many fractional fees operate in conjunction with other land uses, like hotels and
traditional timeshares, making it difficult to attribute a shift in occupancy to the development of a
particular fractional fee project. Third, even where occupancy rates for a particular fractional fee
development have been documented, the extent to which the community's overall occupancy rate
is affected is difficult to ascertain. However, should fractional fee projects become typical in Aspen,
the City can regulate them in ways that may protect, and may well enhance, its inventory of
accommodation units.
Vail's sole fractional fee project has been in operation for about four years. Mr. Ruther
reports that occupancy rates for this project are greater than those found at traditional hotels and
A47424.wpd / 90782.001 32 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
•
lodging facilities. This project, which is a hybrid of traditional accommodation units and fractional
fee units, experiences annual occupancy rates of about 75%, as compared to traditional hotels in
Vail, which typically experience annual rates of about 65%. The fractional fee units are more likely
to enjoy increased occupancies during the off-season than at other times of the year. On balance,
Mr. Ruther concludes that the fractional fee project has increased the Town of Vail's ability to
maintain high occupancies. He feels that without this additional and distinct accommodation
offering fractional fee owners would not have otherwise visited Vail.
The extent to which the bed base of Aspen will be affected by fractional fee projects probably
depends on the extent to which future projects are built and operated in a manner similar to a hotel.
Vail's land use regulations encourage short-term occupancies in fractional fee projects by requiring
fractional fee projects to include hotel -type services, to limit the number of owners per unit, to
include an equivalent number of accommodation units and fractional fee units, and to otherwise
demonstrate, through a conditional use procedure, an ability to maintain high occupancy rates over
the long-term.
First, Vail requires all fractional fee clubs to be developed in a manner very similar to
traditional hotels. Specifically, it requires a front desk with 24-hour management and reservation
services. Also, fractional fee clubs, by definition, must be situated so that club users have access to
visitor amenities, including transportation, retail, restaurants, and recreation facilities. By requiring
fractional fees to provide guest services and convenient access to visitor amenities, Vail has guided
this emerging resort accommodation into the realm of traditional hotels and lodging facilities.
Should Aspen choose to accommodate fractional fee development, it may include similar
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 33 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
0 9
requirements. History has demonstrated that, over the long-term, occupancies are generally stronger
for hotels than traditional timeshares. As such, Aspen's long-term interest in lodge preservation will
be well -served to the extent fractional fees operate in concurrence with, and in response to,
traditional hotel market demand. It is necessary to remember that fractional fee projects have not
been in existence long enough to ascertain reliable ownership patterns and turnover rates over the
long-term.
The second way that Vail has encouraged fractional fees to operate like hotels is by limiting
ownership to twelve (12) owners per unit. The result of this restriction, of course, is that fractional
fee owners have access to their unit for at least four (4) weeks out of the year.16 The Town was
concerned that with a great number of owners using the property for shorter periods of time,
fractional fee properties were more likely to deteriorate due to lack of maintenance and owner
attention. A common criticism of traditional timeshares is that with so many estate holders the
individual units are not properly maintained. As a result, resort communities have seen timeshare
property values decline, timeshare estate holders disappear, and, eventually, timeshare projects
remain unoccupied for extended periods of time. Mr. Ruther anticipates that the Town's restriction
on the number of owners per fractional fee unit may help Vail avoid this fate with respect to
fractional fee developments. Note that Vail's code does not regulate any fractional fee projects with
fewer than six (6) owners. This will likely encourage small-scale fractional fee projects that are
more akin to traditional ownership projects.
16 According to Mr. Ruther, ownership time -spans generally run about five (5) weeks per year.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 34 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
0
The third critical component in Vail's regulation of fractional fees is its requirement that
fractional fee clubs maintain at least as many accommodation units as fractional fee units.
Furthermore, by categorizing new fractional fee units as lock -out units the City may enhance the
existing inventory of accommodation units available to the short-term visitors. Should the City of
Aspen allow fractional fee projects, a provision similar to Vail's may be appropriate so that further
fractional fee development and conversions do not undermine current lodge preservation initiatives.
And, finally, Vail included as part of its conditional use review the requirement that a
fractional fee club applicant demonstrate an ability to create and maintain a high level of occupancy.
This places a reasonable burden on the developer to explain exactly the type of fractional fee project
being proposed; specifically, whether the project is more like a hotel or a traditional timeshare. This
sort of information is of particular importance at this point in what appears to be a trend in resort
development. Although occupancies are generally higher in the fractional fee project examined in
the Town of Vail, there is simply not enough evidence to indicate how long-term occupancies will
respond over the long-term. With traditional timeshares, occupancies deteriorated because the
patterns of ownership grew unpredictable. Whether fractional fee ownership will follow suit is
simply unknown.
In addition to the provisions Vail has adopted, there are several other techniques that Aspen
may consider, should it decide to regulate fractional fee development in the future. Developers may
be required to include a monthly break down of anticipated, or historical, occupancy rates for a given
type of fractional fee project. Occupancies may be enhanced by rental pools and lock -outs that
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 35 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
would allow a new project to rent in a manner similar to a hotel.17 Aspen may consider requiring
new projects and fractional fee conversions to design units with lock -out capability.
Although the Town of Telluride does not regulate fractional fee units in the manner Vail
does, in an effort to preserve its bed base Telluride requires some timeshare projects, whether
fractional fee or otherwise, to restrict occupancies to periods of less than thirty (30) consecutive days
or sixty (60) total days in a calendar year. Steve Ferris, Telluride Planning Director, views this
requirement, enforced by deed restriction, as one that accommodates the shifting demands of today's
resort market, while protecting the Town's interest in lodge preservation. Again, should the City
of Aspen determine that regulation of fractional fee projects is appropriate, deed restrictions of this
sort may be useful. The Telluride provisions, including sample deed restriction language, is included
as Appendix D to this report.
b. Developer Perspective
As is mentioned above, Bill Sullivan is one of the developers of Austria House, the first
fractional fee project completed in Vail. An interview with Mr. Sullivan provided additional insight
into a form of ownership and resort accommodation that remains largely a mystery to local
governments. Mr. Sullivan describes a fractional fee project as one in which each owner is deeded
a fractional interest in a particular unit. Owners then hold, in addition to a fee simple interest, a right
to occupy, for a certain number of weeks per year, either the actual unit purchased or another unit
of equivalent size. The right of occupancy is not part of the deed but is decided among the pool of
17 Note that developer will resist the "rental pool" concept because if the units become investment tools,
various securities laws may apply.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 36 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
owners and recorded with the county clerk. Note that unlike traditional timeshare arrangements,
though not explicitly precluded, these units are not "exchangeable" for units in other resort towns.
The Austria House has twelve owners per unit, an arrangement that Mr. Sullivan insists on
in other projects. When an owner elects not to stay in his or her unit, the unit can be rented out,
either to other owners or to a non -owner on a nightly or full -week basis. However, Mr. Sullivan
points out, there is no rental pool arrangement at the Austria House. In an effort to keep units full,
owners who fail to show up for their allocated time may have to pay a penalty to the homeowners
board. On the issue of occupancy, particular over the long-term, Mr. Sullivan commented on two
particular points.
First, he disfavors Vail's equivalency requirement, favoring instead the ability to maximize
density with 100% fractional fee units. Mr. Sullivan believes that fractional free occupancies are
running around 85% annually, versus hotels that runabout 20 percentage points lower.18 For this
reason, he believes Vail's overall occupancies would be higher if more lodging units were of the
fractional fee variety. Additionally, according to Mr. Sullivan, fractional fee owners contribute more
to the local economy than do traditional hotel guests. He feels that the loyalty of visitors is a plus
for communities that have fractional fee projects, and that fractional fee projects encourage visitor
loyalty more than hotels.
Also, Mr. Sullivan offered the following to local governments concerned that fractional fee
developments will lose viability in the resort market and will experience diminished occupancies in
18 It is important to note that the occupancy rates offered by Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Ruther of Vail are
estimates and are not the product of an official accounting.
4
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 37 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
the long -run. First, as opposed to the relatively low cost of traditional timeshare estates, fractional
- fee interests are selling for approximately $250,000 per owner per unit. According to Mr. Sullivan,
with an investment significantly greater than that required for a timeshare fractional fee owners are
less likely than traditional timeshare interest holders to abandon their interest in the property. In
other words, they are vested to a much greater extent than traditional timeshare interest holders
typically have been. And, finally, of the few units that have resold in the Austria House's brief
history, all sales represent an appreciation in value. Clearly, not enough time has passed to
determine whether fractional fee units will continue to appreciate. However, as time passes and
additional fractional fee projects are developed, this is precisely the type of information the City of
Aspen should maintain and search out.
3. Summary
As the City of Aspen considers regulating multi -unit fractional fee projects, several land use
impacts may be anticipated. Traditional planning concerns, like traffic, parking, impacts on
municipal services, and land use compatibility, will generally mirror impacts associated with
traditional hotels and timeshares. As is pointed out above, the nature of a particular fractional fee
project will vary depending on the location, the jurisdiction, and customer -demand driving a
particular project. Some fractional fee projects may include the ability to "lock -out" units and to
otherwise rent units on a nightly basis to visitors other than an actual fractional fee owner. Other
projects, however, will be oriented towards longer stays of at least a full week. These are all fact -
specific inquiries that the City must consider when assessing the land use impacts of proposed
fractional fee projects. Regulations should reflect the fact that, although the form of ownership is
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 38 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
the same, fractional fee developments and conversions vary from project -to -project, and should be
reviewed accordingly.
While there is some evidence that fractional fee projects may increase local occupancies, the
evidence is far from conclusive. Regardless, Aspen will likely continue to receive applications for
the development of multi -unit fractional fee projects. Short of prohibiting this form of ownership
entirely, the City should incorporate provisions that will protect or enhance the local bed base, while
simultaneously protecting the character of this unique city. The information set out in this report
provides the reader with an up -date of where fractional fee development stands from the point of
view of a local government reviewing this new type of development. However, the authors caution
the reader that several issues remain unresolved simply because fractional fee projects remain a
relatively new product in today's resort markets. This section concludes with a list of factors the
City of Aspen should consider and monitor as it considers possible regulation of fractional fee
projects, in both the single-family and multi -unit context. As more data is available, and as several
fractional fee projects in the region develop, the City will be better prepared to assess the following:
1) long-term ownership trends in fractional fee developments, including
turnover rates among owners;
2) occupancy rates on a project -by -project basis;
3) the manner in which fractional fee developments will impact occupancy rates
city-wide;
4) owner profiles and spending habits; and
5) job generation characteristics of fractional fee projects, as opposed to hotel,
single-family and condos with short-term rentals, and timeshares involving
more than twelve (12) owners.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 39 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
VI. IMPACTS ON CITY REVENUE 19
Aside from the land use impacts and their effect on the local bed base, conversions from
traditional hotels to fractional fee projects may have significant impacts on city revenues. There are
certain fiscal impacts that the City must consider as it assesses the extent to which fractional fee
ownership will be allowed or encouraged in the future. There are three city tax categories relevant
here: the property tax, sales tax, and real estate transfer tax. According to the City finance
department, fractional fee projects are considered residential uses for tax purposes. As such,
conversions to fractional fee ownership from some other commercial uses, specifically
accommodations and lodging, may have significant impact on City revenues. Alternatively,
conversions of existing detached, residential units or timeshares to fractional fee projects will have
very little impact on City revenues since these conversions do not involve a change from or to a
commercial use. In order to get an idea of how a commercial -to -residential conversion may affect
city property tax revenue, consider the conversion of a fictitious 100-room hotel to a 35-unit
fractional fee residential building. Such a conversion will impact the amount of revenue that accrues
to the City by way of the property tax, sales tax, and real estate transfer tax. Note that City revenues
will be similarly impacted whether properties are being converted from commercial (hotel) to
residential (fractional fee) or whether future development tends towards fractional fee instead of
traditional hotel ownership and use.
19 Information in this section was derived largely from interviews by Freilich, Myler, Leitner & Carlisle of
Tabitha Miller, Finance Director for the City of Aspen.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 40 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
•
A. The Real Property Tax
Property taxes collected on a structure converted from a hotel to a fractional fee arrangement
will be less than property taxes collected on the same building prior to the conversion. Currently,
the mill levy for a 100-room hotel would be based on a rate of 29% of its market value. For this
discussion, assume the 100-room hotel would have a market value of about $20,000,000. The
millage rate is presently .005401 in the City of Aspen. Under this scenario, the City would collect
approximately $31,325 annually from the fictitious hotel prior to conversion. However, once
converted, this same building would be valued as a residential property at 9.74% of its market value,
and the City could expect its annual revenue to fall to about $18,120 annually. This decline is due
to two factors.
First, conversions of this nature will likely involve a decline in the number of units on the
property. This example assumes a 65% drop: from 100 hotel rooms to 35 individual, fractionalized,
residential units. Fractional fee units will generally be of a square footage significantly higher than
a hotel unit. As such, conversions can be expected to have fewer units of greater floor area than a
typical hotel unit. Although the market value of a fractional fee unit will be significantly higher than
a hotel unit, the expected decrease in the number of total taxable units on the property leads to a
substantial decline in overall revenues. The second factor that leads to declining revenues is that the
assessed valuation for residential properties is approximately 1/3 of the valuation for commercial
properties, including hotels. Currently, residential units are taxed at a rate of 9.74% of market value,
compared to the 29% tax rate applied to commercial properties. Given the likely decrease in total
overall units and the residential tax rates that apply to the now -converted fractional fee unit, the City
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 41 Aspcn Fractional Fccs-March 2001
can expect significant declines in property tax revenue when such conversions occur. Similar
declines should be anticipated if future additional units are developed as fractional fee instead of as
traditional hotel units.
B. The Sales Tax
Direct sales taxes collected from a project will also decline significantly as a result of a
conversion from a hotel to a fractional fee arrangement. The City assesses a 4.06% sales tax against
each hotel room rented.20 The Aspen Chamber Resort Association estimates annual hotel room
occupancy rates to have been about 60% in the year 2000. Assuming an annual average room rate
of $210/night,21 the City can expect to collect approximately $186,719.40 in sales tax revenue each
year from the fictitious 100-unit hotel. However, once converted to a fractional fee arrangement,
this source of sales tax revenue essentially disappears for the City. Since the now -converted
fractional fee units are re -categorized as owner -occupied residential property, no sales tax is
assessed.
It should be noted, however, that some fractional fee ownership properties include a "rental
pool," or some other arrangement that would allow the lease of some units for periods of 30 days or
less. To the extent a particular project provides this service, some sales tax revenue may be
20 Most of this revenue accrues directly to the City, although a small portion actually accrues to Pitkin
County and is redirected back to the City of Aspen. Although Pitkin County also collects a separate sales tax, the
County provides no significant municipal services to the City and allocates its sales tax revenue to services provided
outside of the City of Aspen.
21 Average room rates based on Aspen Central Reservations.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 42 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
generated for the City. As is discussed above, the Town of Vail only allows fractional fee projects
that include a mix of long-term and short-term occupancies.
Besides direct sales tax paid by the project, the conversion or development of fractional fee
units may have an effect on indirect sales tax revenue generated from other sources. Although
comment on the indirect effect fractional fee projects may have on city-wide sales tax revenue is
beyond the scope of this report, if year around occupancies increase due to the development of or 0
conversion to fractional fee ownership projects, and if spending habits differ'', there may be some
increase in other sales tax revenue generated by non -accommodation expenditures.
C. The Real Estate Transfer Tax
Real estate transfer taxes collected by the City will increase significantly where traditional
hotels are converted to fractional fee residential uses. The City receives approximately 1.5% on the
sale of all properties in Aspen.23 These monies do not contribute to Aspen's general operating fund,
but instead have been earmarked to fund affordable housing initiatives in the City, as well as the
operation of the Wheeler Opera House. Since this tax is not assessed against the lease of individual
hotel units, a conversion from a hotel to a fractional fee residential property would generate
previously unrealized revenue for the City."
22 A recent article in Urban Land, for example, claims that fractional fee owners are more affluent and will
stimulate increased sales in the towns in which they are located. See Arthur O. Spaulding, Jr. High Fractions, p. 62,
ULI, August 2000.
23 Note, however, that the first V 00,000 of the purchase price is taxed at a rate of only .5%.
24 When a hotel property is sold in fee simple, the real estate transfer tax is assessed against that
transaction, as it is against the transfer of any deed.
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 43 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
Under the fictional hotel example, the newly -converted, 35-unit fraction fee property would
generate approximately $524,000 for the city upon the initial sale of all units. Additionally, the City
finance department estimates annual turnover rates for this type of residential unit to be
approximately 12% citywide. At that rate, the City could expect approximately $62,000 in
additional revenue annually to be available for affordable housing and the Opera House as a result
of a conversion of a 100-unit hotel to fractional fee ownership.
D. Summary
Under current tax policy and under current tax rates, annual property tax revenues would fall
from about $31,325.00 generated by the 100-room hotel to about $18,412.09 generated by a 35-unit
fractional fee residential use. Most significant, however, would be the loss of sales tax revenue due
to the conversion. In the example here, the City's annual revenue of $173,568 generated by hotel
room rentals would be essentially eliminated by the conversion to fractionalized ownership. Any
declines in the property tax and the sales tax is of particular significance because these sources of
revenue fund general city services. However, it may very well be that conversions will attract more
affluent visitors causing an increase in spending. If this turns out to be the case, sales tax revenue
will be positively affected.
On the other hand, the City can expect increases in real estate transfer tax revenue if a
property converts from a hotel to a fractional fee arrangement. As is discussed above, at the time
of the conversion, significant real estate tax revenues will be collected on all new fractional fee units:
in the example used here, approximately $524,000 on a 35-unit fractional fee project. Additional
annual revenues stem primarily from turnovers in ownership that the City estimates at a rate of about
#47424.wpd / 90782.001 44 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
0 •
12% per year. However, under the current scheme, real estate tax revenue has been set aside for
affordable housing and the Wheeler Opera House. As such, this increase in revenue will not offset
the costs of necessary municipal services, but rather will benefit two particular, though important,
municipal concerns.
In sum, the City can expect that conversions to fractional fee, or significant fractional fee
development in lieu of traditional hotels, will result in decreased revenue to the City's general fund,
and increased revenue set asides for affordable housing and the Wheeler Opera House. At the same
time, conversions from timeshare or detached, residential units to fractional fee ownership will have
very little fiscal impact on the City.
VII. CONCLUSION
Regulation of fractional fees by Aspen is permissible, as long as what Aspen is regulating
is the use of the units, not their ownership. Any ordinance should identify the specific land -use
impacts which are intended to be addressed by the regulation. The regulation needs to apply to all
multiply -owned or rented units within a building, not simply fractional fees, and should regulate
short-term rentals and/or fractional fees in the same manner without regard to their respective forms
of ownership.
First and foremost, however, Aspen needs to decide whether the City wants to encourage
fractional fees. If so, then regulation is possible, as discussed above. If Aspen adopts an ordinance
regulating fractional fees, it needs to monitor the land use and economic/tax revenue impacts on the
City in order to ensure that continued regulation is desirable.
N47424.wpd / 90782.001 45 Aspen Fractional Fees -March 2001
ORDINANCE NO. 919_3 1
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF KEY WEST, FLORIDA,
AMENDING CHAPTER V, ARTICLE %%I OF THE KEY
WEST LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDRS)
ENTITLED 'DEFINITIONS" BY AMENDING SECTION 5-
21.2; ADDING SECTION 2-7.21 TO CHAPTER II,
ARTICLE VII LDRS IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH GENERAL
REGULATIONS FOR THE TRANSIENT USE OF A
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING, INCLUDING: PROHIBITIONS;
APPLICATION; GENERAL REGULATIONS; FEES;
ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF
INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City Commission has determined, upon an
examination of the issue and a series of public workshops, that the
transient use of residential dwellings has had deleterious
consequences in the residential neighborhoods of Key West; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that the increase in the
conversion of residential dwellings to transient use is, in part,
responsible for the affordable housing shortage in Key West, a
shortage confirmed in a study of the City by the Shimberg Center of
the University of Florida; and
WHEREAS, although only 507 residential properties city-wide
hold residential dwelling transient licenses (for a total of 906
transient unit uses), the City Commission has been advised that
many more, and perhaps as high as 1500 residential units, are put
to a transient use at some time in a given year; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to impose a phase -out of
certain unlicensed transient uses in prohibited zoning districts,
in order to address the investment expectations of affected
property owners; and
1
APPENDIX A
• 0
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that this proposed
regulation is consistent with Goals 3-1 and lA-A, and Policies 1-
1.2.1 and 1-2.1.3, of the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that this proposed
regulation is consistent with the Principles for Guiding
Development, Section 28-36.003 (1)(a); and
WHEREAS, the City Commission is required under Chapter 163,
Florida Statutes, to enact a complete set of Land Development
Regulations (LDRs); and
WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that regulations
prohibiting unlicensed transient uses of residential dwellings will
serve to promote the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of
Key West;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF KEY WEST,
FLORIDA:
Section 1: That Chapter V, Article XXI, Section 5-21.2 of the
Land Development Regulation is hereby amended as follows*:
Sec. 5-21.2 Definition of terms.
Transient Living Accommodations.. Or Transient Lodging. Any
unit, group of units, dwelling, building, or group of buildings
within a single complex of buildings, which is 1) rented for a
period or periods of less than 30 days or 1 calendar Month,
*(Coding with respect to Section 5-21.2 only: Added language is
underlined; deleted language is struck through.)
2
whichever is less; or which is 2) advertised or held out to the
public as a place regularly rented to transients-regdl_ess of the
Section 2. That Chapter II, Article VII, Section 2-7.21 is
hereby added to the Land Development Regulations as follows:
Sec. 2-7.21 Transient Living Accommodations in Residential
Dwellings - Regulations.
A. Intent.
These regulations apply only to the transient use of
residential.dwellings. In 1986, the City enacted former zoning
code Section 35.24(44) which provided the following definition of
a transient living accommodation: "Commercially operated housing
principally available to short-term visitors for less than twenty-
eight (28) days." (This definition shall hereinafter be referred
to as the "Former Transient Definition.") Some property owners and
developers interpreted the Former Transient Definition to mean that
an owner could rent his or her residential dwelling for less than
half the year without the dwelling losing its residential status,
and therefore without the need for a City -issued transient license
(so long as State of Florida licensing requirements- 'were met).
This interpretation went unchallenged by the City. Three
categories of transient use of residential dwellings resulted: (1)
some owners obtained a transient license allowing unrestricted
transient use; (2) some owners followed the Former Transient
3
Definition and, accordingly, rented their properties less than half
the year; and (3) some owners put their residences to a transient
use without City or State license and without regard to existing
regulations. In addition, many residential dwelling owners never
put their properties to a transient use and they no longer have the
opportunity to do so under the City 's current Rate of Growth
Ordinance.
The City Commission finds that short-term or transient rentals
affect the character and stability of a residential neighborhood.
The home and its intrinsic influences are the foundation of good
citizenship; although short-term tenants no doubt are good citizens
generally, they do not ordinarily contribute to activities that
strengthen a community.
Therefore, the City of Key West intends by these regulations
to establish a uniform definition of transient living
accommodations, and to halt the use of residences for transient
purposes in order to preserve the residential character of
neighborhoods. The City has provided only a brief phase -out period
in recognition that in many instances investment expectations have
already been met either through rental income or rising market
value.
Finally, certain guest houses currently hold a number of the
City's category 10C occupational license which denotes. transient
use of a residential property. The City intends to develop a
uniform guest house occupational license category, and then to re-
designate all 10C licenses held by guest houses accordingly.
4
•
B. Unlicensed Residential Transient Use - Prohibition.
All unlicensed transient use of residential dwellings shall
terminate after thirty (30) days from the effective date of this
Section 2-7.21; provided, however, that properties subject to
Development Agreement executed by the City of Key West may continue
such transient use as allowed under that Development Agreement
until the expiration of the Development Agreement.
C. Application.
The holder of an occupational license allowing residential
transient use must annually provide or comply with the following
information:
1. The complete street address and RE number of the
property.
2. Proof of ownership, including the name, address and phone
number of each person or entity with an ownership interest in the
property.
3. An approved inspection report of the Fire Marshall
verifying compliance with the Fire Marshall's criteria for a
residential dwelling transient lodging use.
4. The gross square footage of the property, including the
number of rooms, bedrooms, kitchens and on -site parking spaces
attributable to transient lodging use.
5. A valid, and current federal employer tax identification
number (or social security• number) for the owner(s) of the
property.
5
6. A valid and current Florida Department of Revenue sales
tax identification number under Chapter 212, Florida Statutes, and
a valid and current license under Chapter 509, Florida Statutes.
7. The name, address and 24-hour phone number of the person
who will be operating the property's transient accommodations.
8. The application shall bear the signatures of all owners,
authorized agents and authorized property managers.
D. General Regulations.
The following regulations shall pertain to transient lodging
use of or within a residential dwelling.
1. Except as provided herein, each residential property
where transient lodging use is in effect shall prominently display
on the outside of the property a medallion alerting the public of
the transient use. The medallion and instructions for its posting
shall be issued by the Licensing Division.
2. A contact person must be available 24-hours per day,
seven days per week for the purpose of responding promptly to
complaints regarding the conduct of the occupants of the
residential dwelling transient lodging. The name and phone number
of the contact person must be posted on exterior of the dwelling in
a place accessible to the public.
3. As a condition of application approval, the Fire Marshall
shall conduct an inspection of each dwelling unit and issue to the
applicant written approval, based on applicable Life Safety
criteria.
R
4. Occupancy of individual units shall conform to the
occupancy limits of the Standard Building Code.
5. The owner or manager shall maintain a tenant and vehicle
registration which shall include the name and address of each
unit's tenant, and the make, year and tag number of the tenant's
vehicle.
6. Parking. The owner shall provide one off-street parking
space per residential dwelling transient lodging unit, except where
the unit is in the City's Historic District; provided, however,
that the owner or manager must instruct all tenants of the Historic
District's residential parking program and if the vehicle is not
eligible to park on the street, then the owner or manager shall
ensure that the tenant is directed to a lawful and appropriate
parking space.
7. There shall be a written lease between a residential
dwelling owner and a tenant, and it shall contain the tenant's
agreement to the regulations contained in this Section 2-7.21.
8. It shall be a violation of these regulations to enter
into a long-term lease with a mutual intent to subvert the
regulatory goals of this Section 2-7.21. It shall also be a
violation of these regulations for a property owner to lease space
to "roommates" for a period of less than 30 days or 1 calendar month
when not licensed as provided hereunder. For the purposes of
enforcement, a rebuttable presumption shall exist that roommates
use a common entrance to a dwelling.
FI
9. It shall be unlawful for any owner, tenant, broker,
realtor, agent or other representative of the owners to hold out or
advertise a residential dwelling for transient rental if the
property is not permitted, as provided hereunder. A broker or
realtor who is found in violation of this regulation shall be
subject to occupational license revocation.
10. Nothing in this Section 2-7.21 is intended to exclude the
application of any ordinance of the City of Key West.
E. Fees; Application Schedule.
1. A person or entity who holds a transient rental
occupational license shall pay the customary annual occupational
license fee, plus an annual inspection and enforcement fee of
$125.00 upon the filing of the application set forth in subsection
C.
2. Fee revenues raised under this Section 2-7.21 shall be
used to fund a position in the Code Enforcement Division, and to
provide enforcement and processing personnel as needed. The
officer holding this position shall have as his or her primary
responsibility the enforcement of the terms and conditions of this
ordinance, and other City regulations relating to the transient use
of properties.
3. For a period of ninety (90) days after the effective date
of this ordinance, the Licensing Division will receive initial
applications pursuant to Section C., and related fees. There shall
be a $25.00 per dwelling unit late fee payable to the City upon
application filing. In all subsequent years after the initial
8
application, annual processing fees shall be paid at the same time
as the occupational license. The City Manager may determine to
pro -rate the initial processing fee.
F. Enforcement; penalties.
A violation of this section 2-7.21 shall be punishable as
a misdemeanor and by a fine of up to Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00)
per day, per unit, per violation. The Code Enforcement Division
may also enforce the terms of this Ordinance by bringing a case to
the Code Enforcement Special Master pursuant to its authority under
law and ordinance. In addition, any license or permission granted
hereunder may be revoked for cause, upon notice and opportunity to
be heard, by the City Commission. In addition to any other remedy
available to the City of Key West, the City or any adversely
affected party may enforce the terms of this ordinance in law or
equity. Any citizen of Key West may seek injunctive relief in a
court of competent jurisdiction to prevent a violation of this
section 2-7.21. The City, by and through its code enforcement
division, may apply for an administrative search warrant to enter
upon the premises of any residence subject to this Ordinance.
Section 3. If any section, provision, clause, phrase, or
application of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional
for any reason by any court of competent jurisdiction, the
remaining provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed severable
therefrom and shall be construed as reasonable and necessary to
achieve the lawful purposes of this Ordinance.
Z
Section 4. All Ordinances or parts of Ordinances of said City
-- in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby
superseded to the extent of such conflict.
Section 5. This Ordinance shall go into effect immediately
upon its passage and adoption and authentication by the signature
of the presiding officer and the Clerk of the Commission.
Read and passed on first reading at a regular meeting held
this 20 day of October 1998.
Read and passed on second reading at a regular meeting held
this lnrh day of NnVFMBRR , 1998.
-Read and passed en third reading at a r-equiar meeatli-nq held -
Authenticated by the presiding officer and Clerk of the
Commission on 1 nrh day of NOVFMBF.R 1998.
Filed with the Clerk NOVFMBER 11 , 1998.
o�
A E� T• , SHEILA K. MULLINS, MA OR
JOS�FHIW PARKER, CITY CLERK
10
§ 197-48.7 WESTHAMPTON BEACH CODE § 197-49
§ 197-48.7. Vending machines as accessory uses in 13-2
and B-3 Districts. [Added 2-14-2000 by L.I.. No.
1-20001
Vending machines dispensing ice, beverages and similar
goods may be permitted as outdoor accessory uses in the B-2
and B-3 Districts, provided that such machines or equipment do
not exceed 25 square feet. Night lighting or internal lighting
connected with such machinery shall be prohibited.
§ 197-48.8. Animal shelters; aviaries; kennels; veterinary
services. [Added 2-14-2000 by L.L. No. 1-20001
The minimum setback for a structure containing any of the
above -captioned uses shall be no less than 100 feet from any
residential zoning district.
ARTICLE V
Multiple Occupancy of One- and Two -Family Dwellings
[Added 5-18-1968; amended 1-16-1981 by L.I.. No.1-1981;
6-12-1981 by LJ— No. 11-1981; 10-12-1984 by
LZ. No. 10-1984; 4-11-1986 by L.L.
No. 4-1986; 2-8-1991 by
L.L. No. 4-19911
§ 197-49. Legislative findings.
A- The summer occupancy of residential dwelling units by
groups of unrelated individuals (commonly referred to as
`group rentals') has increased substantially in recent
years. This situation is the result, in part, of the active
solicitation, in the newspapers and otherwise, for
individuals to become part of a group rental. Each
member of a group rental purchases a share or part
share in the residence, which entitles that individual to
use the residence at specified times. The number of
individuals using residences on any one weekend in
many instances exceeds 15.
_ I
19774.4 4 — Io - MW
APP,ENDIX' B
ROM L;HB BU I L.D I NG DEPAR T FAX NO. • Feb. 27 2001 09 : 59AM Pi
§ 197-49 ZONING § 197-50
B. Overcrowding in residential dwellings is hazardous,
unsafe and unsanitary and interferes with the interest of
the public and the quality of life in the total community
environment, and it is not in conformance with
acceptable building codes, fire codes, occupancy
standards and this Zoning Chapter. These
nonconformities are detrimental to the health, safety
and general welfare of the inhabitants of the Village of
Westhampton Beach.
C. The use of residential dwellings by large group rentals
causes problems of overcrowding, excessively high levels
of vehicular traffic, excessive numbers of vehicles being
parked on the property or adjacent streets, high levels of
noise which often accompany large numbers of people
and an increased intensity of use of the property, causing
the overburdening of facilities serving the public health,
safety and welfare.
D. The problems associated with large group rentals are
incompatible with the primary uses permitted in
residential districts, i.e., residential dwelling, and such
uses not only have detrimental effects unoa the
residential character of these districts but create the
same health. safety and aesthetic problems which these
districts are intended to eliminate. The Board of
Trustees aLso finds that in the business districts the
intensity of use of the residential dwellings therein has
increased beyond that which they can reasonably
accommodate.
E. It is therefore for the purpose of ensuring the continuing
integrity of the residential districts and decreasing the
density within the business districts that the following
provisions are adopted.
§ 197-50. Definitions.
As used in this article, the following terms shall have the
meanings indicated:
19774.5 4 - 10 - 2000
IM
LJHB BUILDING DEPART
FAX NO. : • Feb. 27 2001 09:59AM P2
§ 197-50 WESTHAMPTON BEACH CODE § 197-50
ADULT — A person who has attained the age of 18
years.
DWELLING UNIT — The definition of `dwelling unit"
set forth in § 197-1 of this Code shall apply. (Amended
12-14-1998 by L.L. No,.10-19981
FAMILY:
A- Any number of persons occupying a single nonprofit
dwelling unit, related by blood, mar-iage or legal
adoption, living and cooldng together as a single
housekeeping unit-
B. Any number of persons occupying a single nonprofit
dwelling unit, not exceeding six adults living and
cooking together as a single housekeeping unit
where all were not related by blood, marriage or
legal adoption.
(Coned on page 19775)
19774.6 4 - 10 - 2OW
0
WHB BUILDING DEPARTOF FAX NO.
§ 197-50
C.
D.
E.
• Feb. 27 2001 09:59AN P3
ZONING § 197-50
Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection B of this
definition. a group of unrelated persons numbering more
than six (6) shall be considered a 'family' upon a
determination by the Zoning Board of Appeals that the
group is the functional equivalent of a family pursuant to
the standards enumerated in Subsection E herein. This
presumption may be rebutted. and the nonrelated
individuals may be considered the functional equivalent
of a `f$mW for the purposes of this Article by the
Zoning Board of Appeals if such group of individuals
exhibits one (1) or more characteristics consistent with
the purposes of zoning restrictions in residential districts.
In determining whether a group of more than six (6)
unrelated persons constitutes a "family" for the purpose of
occupying a dwelling unit, as provided for in Subsection
C of this definition. the Zoning Board of Appeals shall
utilize the standards enumerated in Subsection E in
making said determination. Before making a determina-
tion under this subsection, the Zoning Board of Appeals
&hail bold a public hearing, after public notice. Said
application shall be on a form provided by the Zoning
Board of Appeals, accompanied by the appropriate fee.
In making a determination under Subsection D, the
Zoning Board of Appeals shallfind than
(1) The group is one which in theory, size, appearance
and structure, resembles a traditional family unit
(2) The group is one which wM live and cook together as
a single housekeeping unit-
(3) The group is of a permanent nature and is neither a
framework for transient or seasonal living nor
merely an association or relationship which is
transient or seasonal in nature. Nothing herein shall
Preclude the seasonal use of a dwelling unit by a
group which otherwise meets the standards of this
subsection at its permanent residence.
19775 5 - 25 - 91
"ROM : WHB BUILDING DEPARTOT FAX NO. : • Feb. 27 2001 10:00AM P4
1'
§ 197.50 WESTHAIVrON BEACH CODE § LW-50
(4) In no cage shall a dwelling be occupied by more than
two (2) adults to a conventional bedroom-
(5) All other requirements of this Article regarding the
use and occupancy of dwelling units shall be
complied with-
(6) Any determination under this subsection &hall be
limited to the status of a particular group as a
'family" and shall not be interpreted as authorizing
any other use, occupancy or activity.
(7) In malting any such determination, the Board of
Appeals may impose such conditions and safeguards
as the Board of Appeals shall deem necessary or
advisable in order to maintain the stability and
character of the neighborhood and protect the public
health, safety and welfare-
F. The applicant shall mail written notice of the date, time
and place of the hearing by either certified or registered
marl, return receipt requested, to every property owner,
as shown on the current Village of Westhampton Beach
assessment rolls, within the area immediately adjacent
and directly opposite thereto for a distance of two
hundred (200) feet from the perimeter of the property.
G. Persons occupying group quarters sash as a dormitory,
fraternity or sorority house or a seminary shall not be
considered a `family."
OCCUPANCY PERMIT — A permit issued for the use or
occupancy of a one- or two-family residential dwelling as a
summer rental.
SLIMMER — The period from May 1 to September 30 of each
year.
SUMMER RENTAL — An a&eement which is either oral or
in writing whemby during the summer or any part thereof a
one- or two-family residential dwelling or any part of said
dwelling is leased, used or occupied by one (1) or more adults
197,76 $ -rs -ir
I
FROM : WHB BUILDING DEPART FAX NO. • Feb. 27 2001 10:01AM p5
§ 197-50 ZONING § 197.52
for which the owner receives compensation directly or
indirectly. If the dwelling unit is leased to both related
and unrelated persons, each unrelated person over the
age of 18 years shall constitute a separate adult.
TENANT— An adult who leases, uses or occupies a
seasonal rental dwelling unit.
§ 197.51. Permission required.
No residential dwelling shall he used or occupied as a
summer rental unless an occupancy permit has been issued
therefor. An occupancy permit may not be issued to any group
of individuals which is not a family or the functional equivalent
thereof as defined in § 197-50.
§ 197-52- Application for occupancy permit.
A The owner of a summer rental shall file an application
for an occupancy permit with the Zoning Inspector or
Building- Inspector on or before April 25 of each year-
B. In the event that the agreement for summer rental is
entered into subsequent to April 25, the application for
an occupancy permit shall he filed by the owner within
10 days of the execution of a written lease, or within 10
days of the date it is agreed to if oral.
C. The application shall be signed by the owner and each
adult member of a summer rental and shall contain the
following.
(1) The names and permanent addresses of the owner
and each adult member of the summer rental.
(2) The name and the address of the real estate broker,
if any.
(3) The location of the summer recital, including the
Suffolk County Tax Map parcel number.
(4) The number of tenants requested.
19777 1 _ is_"
i
I
I
-ROM : WHB BUILDING DEPART
FAX NO. :
•
Feb. 27 2001 10:01RM P6
§ 197-52
WESTHAMnON
BEACH CODE
§ 197-52
(5) The number and size of each conventional bedroom
and a floor plan if requested by the Building
Inspector. As used herein, a "conventional bedroom"
is a room designed principally as a sleeping area.
Rooms having other purposes, such as dens, living
rooms, hallways or porches, are not to be construed
as a conventional bedroom.
(6) A fully executed contract With a refuse carter doing
business in the Village of Westhampton Beach for
the respective summer providing for refuse pickup
at least once weekly at the subject residence during
said summer_ For vood cause, this provision, on
written application to the Mayor, may be waived by
written instrument only.
(7) The period of the proposed occupancy-
D. A summer rental permit shall be issued by the Zoning.
Inspector or Building Inspector if the application
complies with all the provisions of this section.
E. There shall be a filing fee to be determined by the Board
of Trustees for each application for a summer rental
permit. GA=ended 10-8-1997 by LL. No. 13.19971 '
F. The summer rental permit shall expire on the last day of
the rental period as stated in the application.
G. Summer rental applications may not be released to the
public and are exempt from the View York State Freedom
of Information Act' in any local laws implementing said
statute.
iL No summer rentals shall be leased, occupied or used by
any tenant who is not listed as such on the summer
rental application. Where there is a change in the
individual tenants who will be leasing, occupying or
using the dwelling unit, the group rental application
shall be amended to indicate the name of the new tenant
t
= Editor's Note see Article t of the Public Officers Law.
19778 1 - Ls- 98
FROM : WHB BUILDING DEPARTOT FAX NO. : • Feb. 27 2001 10:02AM P7
§ 197-52 ZONING § 19 7-53.1
before the new tenant may occupy the dwelling unit.
There shall be a filing fee, as determined by the Board of
Trustees, for each amended application. [Amended
10-&1997 by LL No. 13-1997]
I. The selling of shares to tenants where they obtain the
rights of use and occupancy in a dwelling unit on a
transient basis shall be prohibited. The rent or
compensation paid for a summer rental shall not be
shared by more than the permitted number of tenants.
J. Every permit issued under this section shall at all times
be kept on the premises and displayed in a conspicuous
place thereat such that it is at all times subject to the
inspection of any officer, inspector or representative of
the Board of Trustees of the village.
§ 197-53. Violations.
A. Failure to comply with any section contained in this
Article constitutes a violation of this Article. If as
occupancy permit is revoked, it shall be unlawful for any
person other than the owner to use or occupy the one- or
two-family residential dwelling.
B. It shall be a violation of this Article if an application is
not filed and a proper permit obtained.
C. Each violation of this Article shall constitute a separate
and distinct offense.
D. In addition to any other remedy available, if, after a
permit has been issued, there is a violation of this Article
which is not corrected within 10 days after notice of
violation has been served, the permit shall be revoked by
the Zoning Inspector or Building Inspector.
§ 197-53.1. Paric ng. [Added 9-13-1994 by T T. No. 7-1994]
The following provisions shall apply to any one- or two-family
dwelling utilized as a summer rental:
19778.1
FROM : L1HB BUILDING DEPARWT
FAX NO. : • Feb. 27 2001 10:02AM Pe
§ 197-53.1 WESTHAMnON BEACH CODE § 197-55
A- The number of motor vehicles permitted to be parked on
the premises between the hours of 1:00 am. and 6:00
a.m. shall not exceed one motor vehicle for each
conventional bedroom, plus one additional motor vehicle.
B. If motor vehicles are parked on the premises between the
hours of 1:00 a.m. and 6:00 am. it shall be presumed
that the dwelling was used and occupied during said
hours by at least one person for each motor vehicle so
parked.
C. If motor vehicles are parked on the premises between the
hours of 1:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. it shall be presumed
that the dwelling was used and occupied during said
hours by the owner of each vehicle so parked or by a
person related by blood, marriage or legal adoption to the
owner of each vehicle so parked-
D. It shall be presumed to be of a violation of this section if
more than the permitted number of motor vehicles are
parked on the premises between the hours of 1:00 a-m.
and 6:00 a.m.
§ 197-54. Service of notice to agent, owner or tenant -
All notices of refusal, violation or revocation to be sent
pursuant to this Article shall be served upon the agent, if any,
or owner or tenant by certified mail, at the address set forth in
the application or written agreement.
§ 197.55. Enforcement.
A. Any enforcement officer shall be authorized to enforce
the provisions of this article. (Amended 8-8-1997 by
L.L. No. 9-19971
B. An enforcement officer is authorized to make or cause to
be made inspections to determine the compliance of
dwelling units with this article and to safeguard the
` health safety and welfare of the public. The enforcement
19778? 1 _ is - 9a
F
FROM : , WHB BU I LD I NG DEPAR*T FAX NO. : • Feb. 27 2001 10 : 02RM P9
§ 197-55 ZONING § 197-56
officer is authorized to enter, upon the consent of the
owner, tenant or lessee, any premises for the purpose of
performing his duties under this article.
C. An enforcement officer is authorized to make application
for the issuance of a search warrant in order to conduct
an inspection of any premises covered by this article
where the owner, tenant or lessee refuses or fails to
allow an inspection of his premises and where there is
reasonable cause to believe that a violation of this article
has occurred. The application for a search warrant shall
in all respects comply with the applicable laws of the
State of New York.
D. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorize an
enforcement officer to conduct an inspection of any
premises subject to this section without the consent of
the owner, tenzmt or lessee of the premises or without a
warrant duly issued by an appropriate court.
197-56. Penalties for offenses.
Violations of this section shall be subject to civil penalties
and proceedings enumerated as follows:
A. Where authorized by a duly adopted resolution of the
Village Board of Trustees, the Village Attorney shall
bring and maintain a civil proceeding, in the name of the
village in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, to
permanently enjoin the person or persons conducting,
maintaining or permitting any violation of this Article
from fintber conducting, maintaining or permitting said
violation. The owner and lessor of the residence wherein
the violation is conducted, maintained or permitted shall
be made defendants in the action, and the tenant or
tenants of such residence likewise may be enjoined as
defendants in the action.
(1) The person who is listed as the owner upon the
seasonal rental permit application shall be
• presumed to be the owner thereof.
19778.3 1- is -"
FROM :.l.HB BUILDING DEPART
FAX NO.
: • Feb.
27 2001 10:03AM P10
§ 197-56
WESTHAMPTON BEACH CODE
§ 197-60
(2) If, upon the trial of an action under this article or
upon a motion for summary judgment in an action
under this article, a finding is made that the
defendants or any of them have conducted,
maintained or permitted a violation of this section, a
penalty to be included in the judgment may be
awarded at the discretion of the court in an amount
not to exceed 1250 for each day it is found that the
V defendants or any one of them individually
conducted, maintained or permitted the violation.
Upon recovery, such penalty shall be paid into the
general fund of the village.
B. The Village Attorney, as special prosecutor for the
village, may prosecute any and all violations of this
Article in the local Village Justice Court, and if any or all
defendants are found in violation of this article, they will
be subject to the penalties set forth in § 197-83 of the
Village Code.
§ § 197-57 through 197-5S. (Reserved)
ARTICLE VI
Administration
§ 197-59. Enforcement. [Amended 6-11-1976 by L.L No.
2-1976; 8-8-1997 by 1-1- No. 9-19971
This chapter shall be enforced by any enforcement officer, as
defined in § 197-1.
§ 197-60. Conditions for issuing building permits.
[Amended 6-11-1976 by L.L. No. 2-1976J
No building permit shall be issued except when the
provisions of this chapter have been complied with and there
has been presented to the Zoning Inspector evidence of approval
19778.4 i _ is _ ss
Document . http://nfo.datamgt.co � /om_isap...&record=(22FE)&softpage=Document42
C. Elevators.
D. Common hallways.
E. Common lobbies.
F. Common restrooms.
G. Areas designed and used for parking.
H. Areas designed and used as storage which do not have direct access to an individual office or
retail store, not to exceed five percent (5%) of the total proposed net floor area for office and not to
exceed eight percent (8%) of the total proposed net floor area for retail.
Common areas are spaces for which all tenants in the building contribute toward the upkeep and
maintenance thereof and are not used for employee working areas.
FLOOR AREA, SEATING (Used Only For Calculating Parking Requirements): The floor area within
the enclosing walls of a business or structure that is devoted to the seating of guests for dining or
meeting purposes, exclusive of lobbies, preconvene areas and kitchen facilities.
FRACTIONAL FEE: A tenancy in common interest in improved real property, including
condominiums, created or held by person, partnerships, corporations, or joint ventures or similar entities,
wherein the tenants in common have formerly arranged by oral or written agreement or understanding,
either recorded or unrecorded, allowing for the use and occupancy of the property by one or more
cotenants to the exclusion of one or more cotenants during any period, whether annually reoccurring or
not which is binding upon any assignee or future owner of a fractional fee interest or if such agreement
continues to be in any way binding or effective upon any cotenant for the sale of any interest in the
property.
FRACTIONAL FEE CLUB: A fractional fee project in which each condominium unit, pursuant to
recorded project documentation as approved by the town of Vail, has no fewer than six (6) and no more
than twelve (12) owners per unit and whose use is established by a reservation system. Each of the
fractional fee club units are made available for short-term rental in a managed program when not in use
by the club members. The project is managed on -site with a front desk operating twenty four (24) hours
a day, seven () days a week providing reservation and registration capabilities. The project shall include
or be proximate to transportation, retail shops, eating and drinking establishments, and recreation
facilities.
FRACTIONAL FEE CLUB UNIT: A condominium unit in a fractional fee club described as such in the
project documentation and not an accommodation unit within the fractional fee club.
GRADE, EXISTING: The existing grade shall be the existing or natural topography of a site prior to
construction.
GRADE, FINISHED: The finished grade shall be the grade proposed upon completion of a project.
HABITABLE: Any area designed for sleeping, living, cooking, dining, meeting or recreation as applied
to floor area.
HEIGHT: The distance measured vertically from any point on a proposed or existing roof or eaves to the
existing or finished grade (whichever is more restrictive) located directly below said point of the roof or
eaves. Within any building footprint, height shall be measured vertically from any point on a proposed
or existing roof to the existing grade directly below said point on a proposed or existing roof.
HOME OCCUPATION: A use conducted entirely within a dwelling which is incidental and secondary
to the use of the dwelling for dwelling purposes and which does not change the residential character
thereof.
APPENDIX C
of 4 01/10/2001 11:57 AM
noculnent • http://nfo.datamgt.com/sd4om_isap...&record={ 1D791&softpage=Document42
8. Time -Share Estate, Fractional Fee, Fractional Fee Club, Or Time -Share License Proposal: Prior
to the approval of a conditional use permit for a time-share estate, fractional fee, fractional fee club,
or time-share license proposal, the following shall be considered:
a. If the proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of an existing facility, the fractional
fee club shall maintain an equivalency of accommodation units as are presently existing.
Equivalency shall be maintained either by an equal number of units or by square footage. If the
proposal is a new development, it shall provide at least as much accommodation unit gross
residential floor area (GRFA) as fractional fee club unit gross residential floor area (GRFA).
b. Lock -off units and lock -off unit square footage shall not be included in the calculation when
determining the equivalency of existing accommodation units or equivalency of existing square
footage.
c. The ability of the proposed project to create and maintain a high level of occupancy.
d. Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redevelopment fractional fee
club project requesting density over that allowed by zoning. The number of employee housing
units required will be consistent with employee impacts that are expected as a result of the
project.
e. The applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of existing units within the project
or building; and written statements from one hundred percent (100%) of the owners of existing
units indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed fractional fee club. No written
approval shall be valid if it was signed by the owner more than sixty (60) days prior to the date
of filing the application for a conditional use.
9. Transportation Businesses:
a. All vehicles shall be parked upon approved parking areas.
b. All vehicles shall be adequately screened from public rights of way and adjacent properties,
consisting of landscaping and berms, in combination with walls and fences, where deemed
necessary to reduce the deleterious effects of vehicle storage.
c. The number, size and location of vehicles permitted to be stored shall be determined by the
Planning and Environmental Commission based on the adequacy of the site for vehicle storage.
Consideration shall be given to the adequacy of landscaping and other screening methods to
prevent impacts to adjacent properties and other commercial and/or residential uses.
d. Parking associated with transportation businesses shall not reduce or compromise the parking
required for other uses on -site. (Ord. 10(1998) § 11)
12-16-8: PERMIT APPROVAL AND EFFECT:
Approval of a conditional use permit shall lapse and become void if a building permit is not obtained
and construction not commenced and diligently pursued toward completion or the u§q. for which the
approval has been granted has not commenced within two (2) years from when the approval becomes
final. (Ord. 10(1998) § 10: Ord. 48(1991) § 1: Ord. 16(1978) § 4(d))
12-16-9: CONFLICTING PROVISIONS:
In addition to the conditions which may be prescribed pursuant to this Chapter, a conditional use shall
also be subject to all other procedures, permits, and requirements of this and other applicable ordinances
and regulations of the Town. In event of any conflict between the provisions of a conditional use permit
and any other permit or requirement, the more restrictive provision shall prevail. (Ord. 10(1998) § 10:
Ord. 8(1973) § 18.900)
of 4 01/10/2001 12:14 PM
•� 336• 7120d0 Page 2 of d'.
C a�'
ie Owner, on behalf of itself, its heirs, administrators, representatives, successors, and assigns,
/ desiru to sci restrict the use of the Project.
` IT. AGREEMENTS OF T PAPARTIES.
Now, 'r�FiL<'Y2.F ORE, in consideration of the agreements, promises and covenants contained herein,
includim , the aforementioned recitals which are herein incorporated, the Parties hereby agree and
covenant as follows:
A. R ,STRI( LIONS CONCERNING USA. OF THE PROJECT AS A "TIOTEI-".
1, The Owner agrees and does hereby rest-ct the use of the Project as follows:
A. 1be Project shall be restricted to use as a "hotel" as defined in the Telluride Land Use
Code in effect at the time of approval of the Planned Unit Development application, to
wit:
"Hotel" means a building for a transient accommodation use which has a central
lobby or lotrngo area provided adjacent to or in connection with an on -site
reservations, facility.
B. No person shall be allowed to reside in or occupy a hotel unit for more than thirty (30)
consecutive days, or a total of sixty (60) days in any single calender year.
C. 11ie Employee Units, provided that they meet the definition of "Dedicated employed
dwelling units" and/or "affordable housing units" as defined and qualified under the
Town of Telluride's LUC and/or affordable housing; guidelines, shall be excluded from
this restriction.
D. A central lobby or lounge shall be provided within the Project. The Projcct shall include
an on -site central check station which shall include night -call availability. The Project
shall he served by a reservations facility serving the hotel which shall be manned during
normal business hours.
2. The Owner agrees not to undertake a condominium conversion or subdivision of the Project
without the approval of the Town, which may be conditioned or withheld by the Town.
3. In the event Owner or its successor in interest, should fail to perform or adhere: to its obligations
as set forth herein, or fail to meet specified performance timelines, the Town shall have the
following remedies against the Owner, or its successor, which remedies against the Owner, or its
successor, an: cumulative and non-exclusive.
A_ Specific perform-uice.
B. Tnjunctive relief, both mandatory and prohibitory.
C. Withdrawal, cancellation or suspemion of the project's development approvals.
D. Injunction prohibiting the transfer or sale of any lot created under the subdivision
approval.
fr
Page 11 of 14
APPENDIX D
muN ie-;w rn WIY Ur ICLLUKIUC MA 11U, 1uILOJUro r. UQ
�� i� , •UB.r u0/ 1 I � ,cwv r ,u� .. ...
P`
E. Denial, withholding, or cancellation of any building permit, certificate of occupancy,
certificate of appropriateness, or any other authorization granted under Titles 1S or 18 of
the Telluride Municipal Code authorizing or implementing the Project and/or any
structure to be constructed therein.
4. 'The 'Town agrees to include the Tap Fee Reduction in the calculation of Tar Fees for the Project.
The adjusted balance of Tap Fees which will be due and owing for the Projcet ("Required Tap
Fee-) arc as stated in "Attachment P' (attached hereto and made a part hereof), as may be
modified for changes to the plans and specifications for the Project
5. The %rillhin restriction also satisfies a condition of the PUD/Subdivision Approval, requiring the
Owner to deed restrict the hotel unit; within the Project.
i3. MISCELLANEOUS.
1. "Phis Agreement and the Covenants stated herein may not be modified, released or waived except
by written instrument executed by both the Owner and the Town of Telluride, except that the
Town reserves the power to release the Project from the restrictions established in this covenant
and agrccmunt by recording an instrument specifically authorizing such release. This Agreement
may only be amended with the consent of Owner (or its successors in interest) and the Town.
2. 'Phis Agreement is binding upon the owner, its successors and assigns for tht benefit of the Town
and its successors. Ibis Agreement and the Covenants contained herein shall be recorded with
the San Miguel Clerk and Recorder and shall constitute covenants running with the land.
3. In the event of any action, proceeding or litigation between the Town and the Owner concerning
this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to collect its reasonable legal fees and costs,
including the reasonable value of salaried attorney's time. Any state court litigation to enforce
the terms of .this Agreement shall be commenced in San Miguel County, Colorado and venue
shall be restricted to such county.
4. The 11,u-tics hereto warrant they are fully authorised to execute this Agrcc`ment and have taken all
actions necessary to obtain such authorization.
Page 12 of 14
Four Peaks
308 South Galena Street
Aspen Colorado 81611
970.925.2114
March 1, 2001
Joyce Ohlson, Assistant Director
Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen Colorado 81611
Dear Joyce:
Attached are two studies showing the positive economic and community impacts to the
Aspen community of a "Vacation Ownership" project as compared to a moderately priced,
upscale 150-room hotel at the Grand Aspen Site. These studies were produced by two
independent and respected firms in the interval industry, RCI Consulting, Inc. (Richard
Ragatz, principal) and Hobson Ferrarini Associates (Steve Ferrarini, principal). Both firms
present the compelling nature of our proposal.
We believe that the economic benefits that an Interval ownership project presents, as
compared to a 150-room moderately priced hotel, are overwhelming. But we also believe
that it is the intangible benefits to the community presented within these reports that
warrant your consideration of our proposal.
Our proposal, as currently configured in this conceptual phase, proposes to build 51 two,
three and four bedroom units. Each unit will have one or two "lock -off' units so the total
number of "keys" will be approximately 125. Owners of the Intervals will have the option
to use all or part of their units and the operator will have the right to rent out those units or
portions of units that are not occupied to the general public.
On March 6`s, when we are before the Planning and Zoning Commission, both Richard
Ragatz and Steve Ferrarini will be available to provide additional information and answer any
questions that you or the Commission may have.
After further consideration we have decided to present to you a plan that houses all 28 of
the employees not housed at the Bavarian Inn at the Grand Aspen site.
Sincerely,
Four Peaks Management,
Scott Writer, Manager
t'
RCI Consul#in; — March 2001
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
COMMUNITY ECONOMIC BENEFITS FROM A VACATION OWNERSHIP
OFFERING AT THE GRAND ASPEN
ASPEN, COLORADO
The purpose of this report is to analyze potential economic benefits generated to the
City of Aspen by a proposed 51-unit vacation ownership offering at The Grand Aspen
development. Wherever possible, comparisons are made with a hypothetical 150-room
moderately priced hotel.
The term vacation ownership refers to any type of shared ownership of resort property,
involving more than one owner per unit, as opposed to whole ownership involving only one
owner per unit. The two most important forms of vacation ownership are resort timeshare and
fractional interests. It is anticipated The Grand Aspen will be a hybrid of these two products.
Vacation ownership is the fastest growing segment of the international tourism and
resort hospitality industries — increasing in owners by about 15 percent annually for the last 10
years. Currently, about 3.75 million households own vacation ownership in almost 5,000
resorts. Last year, gross sales volume was over $6.5 billion. Considerable economic benefits
are incurred from properly implemented vacation ownership projects, as described in
Chapters II and III and the Appendix.
It is anticipated that the year-round occupancy rate at The Grand Aspen would be
about 87 percent, as compared to only 56.8 percent in the local hotel industry. All 51 units
would have a lock -off feature, and short-term rental and exchange programs would be
available to owners and the general public, functioning just like a hotel. Thus, the 150 room,
moderately priced hotel would generate many more vacant room -nights than The Grand
Aspen — 23,652 compared to only 3,257.
Because units at The Grand Aspen will be larger than hotel rooms, the average number
of occupants would be considerably higher. The number of occupant-nights/person-days
would be 73,770 compared to 62,196 in the hotel.
RCI Consulting, Inc. — Eugene, Oregon 1 Community Economic Benefits: Four Peaks, Marchl0l
•
•
To further demonstrate this particular benefit to the community, the following is a
quote from the Planning Director for the Town of Telluride.
"The aspect of vacation ownership that we find beneficial to the community is that it
addresses our desire to have a larger bed base. While the vacation ownership
projects in Telluride sell usage time to owners, they also offer units for short-term
rentals when they are not being occupied by their owners. Like Aspen, Telluride has
numerous condos bought as second homes that sit empty the majority of the year.
These condos add nothing to our rental bed base, while vacation ownership properties
do if terms of sale are structured appropriately. "
Research repeatedly shows that vacation ownership owners spend 18 to 22 percent or
more on consumer expenditures while in the local community than do hotel guests. It is
estimated that such expenditures would annually be about $9.6 million compared to $6.2
million.
Economic impact theory shows that for every $1 spent in a community, another $1.35
of consumer expenditures are generated elsewhere in the community. This is referred to as
the "multiplier effect." When including the "multiplier effect," these expenditure figures
increase to $22.5 million from The Grand Aspen compared to $14.6 million from the hotel.
The Grand Aspen would generate about 64 employees compared to about 82 at the
hotel. When including consumer expenditures by occupants and employees, and both direct
and induced expenditures, the totals would be about $26.0 million from The Grand Aspen
compared to $18.5 million from the hotel.
Annual Sales Tax generated by The Grand Aspen (including both from occupants and
employees and from direct and induced expenditures) would be about $457,040 from The
Grand Aspen versus $314,091 from the hotel. However, the annual Lodging Tax would be
greater at the hotel — $174,149 compared to $71,774.
When combining these two taxes on an annual basis, the 51-unit vacation ownership
project would generate about $40,574 more than the 150-room hotel. When including
additional Sales Tax collected from appropriate maintenance fees, and more importantly, by
the Real Estate Transfer Tax, during the first three years of operation (i.e., the sell -out period),
The Grand Aspen should generate another $86,560 in Sales Tax and $650,250 in Real Estate
Transfer Tax.
RCI Consulting, Inc. — Eugene, Oregon 11 Community Economic Benefits: Four Peaks, March101
0 •
Over a 10-year period therefore, The Grand Aspen would generate about $1,055,630
more in taxes for the City of Aspen than would a 150-room moderately priced hotel. The
totals would be $5,938,030 compared to $4,882,400, or a 21.6 percent differential.
During this 10-year period, The Grand Aspen also would generate:
• 115,740 more occupant-nights/person-days
• 203,950 fewer vacant room -nights
• $75 million more of consumer expenditures
In recognition of the many economic advantages of a properly implemented vacation
ownership project, community leaders are supporting this type of development.
In addition to the quantifiable economic benefits generated by The Grand Aspen to the
City of Aspen, a series of other benefits also exist — especially when compared to a hotel.
These include:
1. Greater year-round stability in employment patterns and consumer expenditure
patterns due to the significantly higher year-round occupancy rates.
Obviously, seasonal unemployment rates would therefore be less, and local
merchants and service providers would have to worry less about severe
seasonal peaks and declines in their income.
2. Vacation ownership owners feeling more like citizens of Aspen than hotel
guests. Due to the feeling of "ownership" and annually spending more days in
Aspen than hotel guests, vacation ownership owners probably would better
"care" for the community, e.g., more charitable contributions, more concern
about its appearance, etc.
3. Some vacation ownership owners probably will upgrade to whole ownership
over time, thus paying more property taxes, extending the advantages in (2),
etc.
RCI Consulting, Inc. — Eugene, Oregon iii Community Economic Benefits: Four Peaks, March/01
•
4. Less traffic and use of public facilities. Due to their longer average lengths -of -
stay, vacation ownership owners typically spend more time in their units, and
less time driving around sight-seeing, creating impacts on other facilities such
as police and fire protection, etc.
5. Higher repeat visitation patterns. Since "ownership" is attached to the concept,
vacation ownership owners tend to return much more frequently over time than
do transient renters. This stability lessens the need to always be attracting
more tourist flow.
6. General spreading out of the economic benefit across a greater number of
providers of goods and services in the community. As visitors stay for longer
periods of time and return to Aspen more frequently, they are likely to explore
the area and begin to also visit local shops and restaurants more "off the beaten
path.,'
RCI Consulting, Inc. — Eugene, Oregon iv Community Economic Benefits: Four Peaks, March/01
'FROM : WRITER
• FAX NO. : 9709275464 • Mar. 01 2001 02:38PM P2
anCIsulting
Biographical Sketch
RiCHARD L. RAGATZ, PH.D.
AQ Gxisukin& Inc. is i division of RC I
Q;W
RCU
RICHARD L. RA,GAT7, Ph.D. is Executive Vice President of RCI Consulting, His
academic background includes a B.A. in Geography (1961), a Master's of City Planning (1963)
from the University of California, Berkeley, and a Ph.D. (1969) from Cornell University. He was
a member of Phi Kappa Phi Honor Society.
In addition to his consulting activities, he was an Assistant Professor of Housing and
Design at Cornell University (1966-69), where he taught courses in Housing Market Analysis,
For 12 years he was an Associate Professor (1969-74) and Pull Professor (1974-81) of Urban and
Regional planning at the University of Oregon where he taught courses .in Housing Marketing
Analysis, Housing Planning, and Social Issues in Planning and Planning Theory. He was
Department Head from 1969 to 1974. He was a member of the American Society of Planning
Officials, the American Institute of Planners, and the American Institute of Certified Planners.
Ragatz has been very active in the primary trade association representing the resort
industry the American Resort Development Association. He joined ARDA in 1969, the year it
was formed, In 1987, 1989 and 1995, he was given special awards by ARDA for outstanding
contributions to the resort industry. The 1995 award was Industry Loader of the Year.
He also has been active in the Urban Land Institute, having cooperated with that group on
a major national study in 1974 on the recreational properties industry, and a member since 1972.
His Ph.D, dissertation from Cornell in 1969 is recognized as the first national study on
vacation homes ever conducted in the United States. The study was updated in 1974 for the
President's Council on Environmental Quality, in 1977 for the U.S. Forest Service, in 1990 for the
National Association of Realtors, and iti 1993 for the American Resort Development Association.
Since 1969, he has published more than 50 articles on vacation housing for academic
journals and trade magazines. He also has delivered more than 200 speeches on resorts and
tourism at conferences held throughout the world.
Ragatz has achieved international recognition as the leading market researcher in the
resort industry. In, his present capacity with RCI Consulting and in his former capacity as
President of Ragatz Associates, he has conducted national vacation home consumer surveys in the
United States, Canaan, the United Kingdom, Mcxico, Australia, the Caribbean, Malaysia, and
Singapore. He has been involved in more than 1,000 studies in virtually every state and over 50
countries. Current and past clients include most major developers and lenders in the resort
industry.
Areas of specialty include market feasibility analysis, consumer and product research,
marketing plans, business plans, economic impact analysis and project evaluation.
767 Willamette Street • Suite 407 • Eugene. Oregon 97401 . 54]-"45-932 • Fas: 541-686•$I42 richizd.rsgau(Pnjc.rci.com
FR'--V : JR I TER FAX NO. : 97092 75464 0 Mar. 01 2001 02: 39Pf1 P3
RCI CONSULTING, INC.
RCI Consulting, Inc. (formerly Ragatz Associates, Inc.) is a consulting and market research firm that
provides services to the resort industry. The firm has conducted over 1,000 studies in 46 states and 40
countries. Clients represent both the private sector (from small, individually owned companies to
international corporations) and the public sector (from small municipalities to national governments). Our
services include:
Market analysis Project evaluation
Feasibility analysis Impact analysis
Consurner and product research Financial analysis
Strategy planning Marketing plans
In addition to hundreds of contracts for individual clients, the firm's background in the resort industry is
demonstrated through the conduct of several landmark studies, including:
• National and regional studies of the resort timeshare industries in the United States (1995 and 1997), Asia (1999),
Canada (1993), California (1992), Hawaii (1992), Mexico (1993 and 1998), Puerto Vallarta (1993 and 1998),
Cancun (1995 and 1998)� Acapulco (1995 and 1998), Ixtapa(1995 and 19,99), Mazatlan (1998), Manzanillo (1998),
Los Cabers (1998), the Canary Islands (1995), and the Caribbean (1994 and 1999), including supply and demand
characteristics and economic impacts.
• Only comprehensive national survey in last 20 years to determinc the total number of U.S, rccreational property
owners and characteristics of their properties. Included national poll to determine interest in recreational property
among non -owners (1990); updated in 1993 and 1995.
�. • First national survey of resort timeshare buyers in the United States (1978), updated in 1980, 1982, 1983, 1989,
1993, 1995, 1997 and 1993.
• First world-wide study of the resort timeshare industry (1990); updated in 1992 and 1995.
• First national survey of fractional interest purchasers (1989).
• First national survey of the campresort industry - a four -volume study for Coast to Coast Resorts (I 985); updated in
1987 and 1991.
• First national survey of hotel condominium buyers (1984).
• National surveys of resort timeshare owners in Brazil, (1998). France (1996), Germany (1996X Italy (1996), Spain
(1996), Argentina (1996), the United Kingdom (1981 and 1987), Canada (1981 and 1993� Australia (1983), the
Caribbean (1983), Mexico (1986, 1993, and 1996), Singapore (1992), and Malaysia (1992).
• Thy -volume study for the National Timeshare Council documenting the socio-economic impacts of resort
timesharing (1980); updated in 1987,
• First study by the British Department of the Environment on vacation homes (1976).
• Largest study ever funded by the federal government (Housing and Urban Development and President's Council on
Environmental Quality) on privately owned recreational properties (1974); updated for I.I.S. Forest Service (1977
and 1979).
RCI Consulting is a member of the American Resort Development Association and the Urban Land Institute.
A corporate brochure is available from:
RCI Consulting, Inc., 767 Willamette Street, Suite 307, Eugene, Oregon 97401
(541) 686-9335 (tel) - (541) 686-8142 (fax) - ragatzrcic@aoLcour
HOBSON
FER-RAIUNI
A S S O C I A T E S
LAND USE ECONOMICS
DATE: February 28, 2001
TO: Scott Writer
FOUR PEAKS MANAGEMENT, LLC
FROM: Steve Ferrarini
HOBSON FERRARINI ASSOCIATES
SUBJECT: Comparative Analysis of the Benefits to the City of Aspen of
Development of Interval Ownership Versus a Hotel
EXECUTIVE MEMORANDUM
Hobson Ferrarini Associates has been retained by Four Peaks Management, LLC to
provide an objective evaluation of the comparative benefits of developing an interval
ownership product or a moderately priced hotel on a site in downtown Aspen, Colorado.
The analysis focuses on current industry trends, occupancy rates, user demographics,
and economic impacts.
Industry Trends
1. Interval ownership is a way for the general public to pre -purchase, at a fixed price,
an annual vacation at a lower cost than a wholly owned vacation home that they will
probably not have time to use for more than two or three weeks a year. Thus, the
interval consumer can structure a program that will give them as much vacation time
as they can afford or find time for, at a small fraction of the cost.
2. Interval ownership is a way for the general public to pre -purchase, at a fixed price,
an annual vacation at a lower cost than a wholly owned vacation home that they will
probably not have time to use for more than two or three weeks a year. Thus, the
interval consumer can structure a program that will give them as much vacation time
as they can afford or find time for, at a small fraction of the cost.
3. Today, interval ownership is growing at a compound annual growth rate of 7.2%,
compared to only 2.4% for all vacation properties in total. As noted in an industry
overview', attributes contributing to the phenomenal success of this industry are as
follows:
' The United Sates Timeshare Industry: Overview and Economic Impact Analysis. Washington DC:
American Resort Development Association (ARDA), 1997.
•
• Branding: Major hospitality companies like Disney, Marriott, Four Seasons, Ritz
Carlton and others have added creditability and security to buyers.
Wall Street Financing: Many of the hospitality companies have gone public and
sold stock to raise capital to build hotels and interval ownership products. In
1995 there were just five public companies in the industry with a market
capitalization of $262 million. By 1997, several other hospitality companies had
gone public and the combined market capitalization had increased to over $1
billion.
• Flexibility: In order to better meet consumer needs, a proliferation of interval
ownership products have begun to enter the market. Different intervals are now
being offered that range from as low as a 1/7th share with five or six weeks of
guaranteed annually use to a 1/52nd share with one week of annual use.
Additionally, most new interval projects do not sell fixed time, rather usage has
become more flexible to meet the changing needs of buyers.
• Luxury Product: Most recently, large hospitality/hotel companies like Four
Seasons, Ritz Carlton, Auberge, Rosewood, Club Regent, American Ski
Company, Millennium Partners and The Owners Club have entered the interval
market with more luxurious products and interval sizes ranging from 1/4th to
1/5th shares, allowing the purchase of more annual vacation time in five-star
resorts. Thus, interval products range from relatively affordable to more
expensive luxury product.
Occupancy
1. Interval projects maintain higher average occupancy than comparable quality hotels
and, therefore, bring more people to the towns where they are located:
• According to Smith Travel Research,2 annual resort hotel occupancy in the
United States averaged 68.1% in 1999 (however average occupancy in Aspen it
was 56.8%, see Table 1).
• RCI Consulting (pg 26), reported annual occupancy in interval projects
conservatively averaged approximately 80%-81 %, approximately 10 percentage
points higher than resort hotels. However, the report notes that the reported
average significantly underestimates occupancy in most projects because it
included new projects that had a large inventory of unsold units. Stabilized
projects perform better with most projects achieving occupancy rates in excess
of 80% and more than 25% exceeding 90% year round occupancy. Given the
'- Hotel Operating Statistics. Henderson TN: Smith Travel Research, 2000.
3 The Resort Timeshare Industry in the United States: 1997 — A Survey of Projects with Active
Marketing and Sales Programs. Indianapolis: Resort Condominiums International (RCI), 1997.
subject's location it would be expected to perform among the top 25% and
achieve occupancy rates in excess of 90%.
2. Hotel occupancy in Rocky Mountain ski areas tends to be high in the prime winter
and summer seasons, but very low in the shoulder seasons, bringing down the
overall annual average below the national average. Annual hotel occupancy in
Aspen and Park City illustrate this trend:
Table 1
Average Annual Hotel Occupancy Rates
Year Aspen CO Park City UT National
Avg.
1999 54.9% 53.4% 68.1 %
2000 56.8% 54.7% N/A
SOURCE: Smith Travel Research
3. Statistics published by Smith Travel Research further indicate that moderately
priced, economy, and budget hotels maintain lower average occupancy rates than
more expensive ones. In fact, occupancy rates decrease as prices decrease.
Table 2
Average Annual Hotel Occupancy Rates
By Price Category
Year
National
Avg.
Upscale
72%
Mid -Price
68%
Economy
67%
Budget
61 %
SOURCE: Smith Travel Research
4. There are several reasons why less expensive hotels perform more poorly, including
quality, condition, competition from less expensive accommodations (i.e. family,
friends, and RV and camping), and the fact that they target a segment of the
population that travels less frequently.
5. In seasonal resorts locations like Aspen, the inability to attract guests in the shoulder
seasons further erodes the performance of moderately priced hotels. As illustrated in
C�
•
the table below, year round occupancy at moderately priced hotels located near
Colorado's destination ski resorts averaged 52.3% from 1998-2000. During the six-
month shoulder seasons occupancy averages only 39.7% and drops below 30% in
May. This segment of the market cannot typically attract off-season business by
discounting room rates because their rates are already reasonable and these types of
properties do not provide compelling accommodations.
Figure 1:
Average Monthly Occupancy 1998-2000
Moderately Priced Hotels Near Colorado Ski Resorts
i
90 %
80%
70 %
60%
50%
40%
30%
—
10%
I
o- - - - --
Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
i
SOURCE: Smith Travel Research
6. Occupancy for interval ownership projects are higher than hotels for a number of
reasons including:
• Ownership: Interval owners have made an investment and therefore are
committed to using their time. If owners do not use their unit they often give
their time to family or friends or make the unit available through formal
exchanges programs to owners worldwide.
• Bonus or Float Time: Over 55% of the interval properties in the United States
also offer bonus time or float time. Bonus time represents nights that are not
being used for various reasons. This time is then made available to the resort
operator to rent to owners and/or the general public. Projects with a smaller
number of owners per unit usually build bonus or float time into the project by
not selling all of the weeks. In these projects owners can use this time free of
0
•
charge except for housekeeping costs. Thus, occupancy is substantially
increased and the consumer can take more frequent vacations at a lower cost.
• Greater Owner Satisfaction: Survey research by RCI Consulting, ARDA and
DK Shifflet & Associates indicate that the vast majority of interval owners are
very satisfied with their purchase. RCI Consulting reports (pg 52)4 that 73.1 % of
interval owners enjoyed their vacations more and 66.3% believe that, "since
owning, their lives have been positively impacted." Given these responses, it is
not surprising that interval owners have a higher level or overall vacation
satisfaction than hotel guests:
Figure 2
Overall Vacation Satisfaction
90%
78 %
80%
70% 63%
60%
50%- :1
40% 0 Leisure Hotel
30/o
0 0 l9% ■ Timeshare
�
20%
10% 6%
0% .
Excellent Fair -Good Poor
SOURCE: D.K. Shifflet & Associates Ltd.
User Demographics
1. A 1999 study completed by D.K. Shifflet & Associates shows that the household
demographics of interval owners are largely the same as households who rent hotel
rooms on leisure/pleasure trips. This finding is not surprising given that the interval
buyer is usually someone who has rented a hotel room for previous vacations and
believes that interval ownership will provide more benefits, greater vacation
satisfaction, and a better value over renting a vacation home or hotel room.
° The Benefits of Owning Resort Timeshare. Indianapolis: Resort Condominiums International (RCI),
1998.
•
2. After the initial purchase, the ongoing annual costs of owning an interval is far less
expensive than staying in hotel rooms. This is one reason why the demographic
profile of interval owners is very similar to hotel guests and why households
interested in one- to two -weeks of vacation ownership do not need to be affluent.
50%
40%
I
30%
20%
10%
0%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Figures 3-5
Demographic Comparison
Interval Owners vs. Hotel Guests on Leisure Trips
Age
Under 35 35- fY4 55+
Manital Status
Marred Never Married Divorced, Widowed
Education Level
60% ,a
® Leisure Hotel
50% - ■ Interval
40%
29%
30%
o 23%
iI
10%
0%
No College College Graduate Degree
SOURCE: D.K. Shifflet & Associates
Economic Impacts
1. Interval ownership impacts to the local community more positively than hotel
guests for a variety of reasons, including.
• Higher Occupancy: As previously discussed, interval projects maintain higher
year round occupancy and therefore attract a larger number of people to the
communities where they are located. This is particularly significant in
seasonal locations like Aspen when the amount of tourist activity can drop by
as much as 50% during the shoulder seasons.
• Larger Expenditures: Interval owners and their family/guests (collectively
called a party) outspend average hotel parties on local goods and services by
more than 25%. One of the reasons that they can afford to spend more money
is they do not have to pay a large hotel bill at the end of their stay.
Table 3
Average Daily Spending, 1999
Local Goods and Services
Type
Hotel Party
Interval Party
% Difference
Food
$73.36
$92.34
25.9%
Shopping
$52.92
$61.18
15.6%
Entertainment
$50.68
$71.82
41.7%
Miscellaneous
$16.24
$18.24
12.3%
Total
$193.20
$243.5 8
26.1 %
SOURCE: D.K. Shifflet & Associates
More Visits: Interval owners stay longer and return to the same area more
frequently than hotel guests. As a result, they become more a part of the
community, take more pride in it, and are more apt to visit and spend money in
a variety of establishments because they will have more time to explore parts
of the city beyond the major tourist destinations.
• ARDA reports (pg 51), that the average interval owner took 2.5 vacations
in the resort area during the five years preceding their purchase, but plan to
take approximately 4.0 vacations in the same area in the five years after
they purchase.
• RCI Consulting reports (pg 31)6 that the average number of days an
interval owner spent in the location where they purchased was 3.2 days per
trip before they purchased, but 6.8 days per trip after they purchased.
• D.K. Shifflet statistics confirm the above.
5 Industry Overview
6 Timeshare Purchasers: Who Are They, Why They Buy. Indianapolis: Resort Condominiums
International (RCI), 1998.
Summary of Conclusions
1. Interval development in downtown Aspen is expected to provide much greater
benefits to the larger community by attracting people who will spend more money
on vacations, stay longer and will be invested members of the community.
2. The above benefits will accrue while still being able to attract largely the same type
of consumer to Aspen that a moderately, upscale priced hotel would attract, because
interval owners can purchase as much vacation time as they can afford. In fact an
interval project in downtown Aspen would be expected to attract a demographic
group that is probably under represented in Aspen currently due to the cost of
vacation property and many lodging facilities.
3. In terms of local expenditures interval owners spend 26% more on local goods and
services than hotel guests. However, because interval projects maintain higher year
round occupancy, even with fewer rooms and/or lock -offs, an interval project at the
subject would generate approximately 65% more in local expenditures than a hotel.
Table 4
Aggregate Annual Spending Estimate
Hotel vs. Interval
Hotel Interval
Rooms/Lock-Offs 150 124
Times: Days per Year 365 365
Times: Average Occupancy 57% 90%
Equals: Occupied Room Nights/Annual 31,200 40,700
Times: Daily Expenditures $193 $244
Equals: Total Ann'l Expenditures (000) $6,021 $9,931
SOURCE: D.K. Shifflet & Associates and Hobson Ferrarini Associates
Lock -off definition: Large interval (two plus bedrooms) units are often built so the unit can be divided
into several units that can be used independently, thus effectively creating more rooms in the project.
In these cases the owner has the discretion to use all or a part of the overall unit. If less than the whole
is used the owner is rewarded with more vacation time and the operator is free to rent these rooms to
the general public.
0 w
APPENDIX A
FIRM QUALIFICATIONS
The real estate industry continues to be dynamic. Challenges and opportunities are arising from
global financial markets, improvements to technology and communications, increasing
affluence, emerging sources of financing, and other factors that impact demand for real estate.
Since our founding in 1976, Hobson Ferrarini Associates has responded to the ever -evolving
real estate industry by expanding and improving the services that we offer to our clients. We
always strive to add value and provide a competitive advantage to our clients' real estate
activities. We have and will continue to accomplish this goal by helping our clients stay at the
cutting edge of new and emerging trends and markets.
Our comprehensive real estate advisory services include:
• Development Advisory Services
• Periodic Real Estate Market Reports
• Investment Advisory Services
• Litigation Support
• Public Policy and Metropolitan Development Advisory Services
• Strategic Planning for Private and Public Organizations
• Valuation Services
Our assignments involve all types of real estate products and portfolios, including office,
residential, urban and suburban mixed -use complexes, land development, industrial, resort and
recreational developments, and planned communities.
We are particularly proud of the diversity and quality of our clients who include:
• Corporations
• Developers
• Financial Institutions
• Government and Public Agencies
• Institutional Investors
• Non -Profit Organizations
The hallmark of Hobson Ferrarini Associates continues to be clear and definitive
recommendations that add value and can be readily implemented by our clients.
Recommendations are based upon market, economic, physical, and political realities
influencing a given real estate asset or portfolio.
Wallace Hobson, CRE, President 503.226.6616 x 11 wmh(ahobsonferrarini.com
Steve Ferrarini, V.P. 503.226.6616x13 srftaihobsonferrarini.com
•
•
ATTACHMENT 7
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: l
_ ,Aspen,
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: V , 200
STATE OF COLORADO )
SS.
County of Pitkin )
I,y�l ►�v \.���� 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:
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 _ day of
, 200_, to and including the date and time of the public
hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Hailing 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 any federal agency, state, county, municipal government,
school, service district or other governmental or quasi -governmental agency that
owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to t-ie
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 has been available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such amendments.
nature
The fore oing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before e thi day
TV---�
of
, 20042, by
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE TEXT
AMENDMENTS: TIMESHARE REGULATIONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIA4.SEAL
GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held on Monday. July 8, 2002, at a meeting
to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Coun-
Zj
cil, Council Chambers, Cit-- Hall, 130 So. Galena
My commission expires:
St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted
by the City of Aspen Community Development
Department requesting adoption of revised Time.
share Development
/ -
6 — I Pia Y P
O
Regulations. The proposed
•.
code amendments would result in a complete re-
codification of Municipal Code Section 26.590,
Not Public ''••��
Notary •,
Timeshare Development. Code Amendments re -
laced to the Timeshare Regulations will affect the
�•
following Municipal Code Sections:
N
�
26.104.100-Definitions;
26.710.140- Commercial CoreZone District;
CS
7j�'•, ;' O
26.710.190 - Lodge/ Tourist Residential Zone
((� .• •;
District;
26.710.200 - Commercial Lodge Zone District; and,
PQ
O� ^ O `O�
26.710.320 - Lodge Preservation Zone District.
y
26.480.030 - Subdivision Exemptions
26.480.040 - Subdivision Procedures
ATTACHMENTS:
26.510.030 - Procedures for Sign Permit Approval
26.470.070 - GMQS Exemptions
For further information, contact Joyce Ohlson at
the City of Aspen Community Development De-
COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
partment, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-
5090.
s/Helen italin Klan eruct, Mayor
AsCity Counci� )TOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN
Aspen
Published in The Aspen Times on June 22, 2002.
(8918)
HERS
AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BYMAIL
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
cCL, CS
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1/L'< < V�._ — Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARLNG DATE. A? , 200
STATE OF COLOPLAZO
ss.
County of Pitkin )
A
I, 01 Lo— (s— (name, please print)
being or represernag an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
czrtiiy that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) ofthe aspen Land Use Code in the tollowing manner:
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. .4 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 letter$ not
less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least ten (10) days
prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from tht: _ day of
200 , to and including the date and time of the public
hearing. 4 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 ten (10) 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, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the
public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by firsLclass postage prepaid
U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school,
service district or other governmental or quasi -governmental agency that owns
property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the
development application. The names and addresses of property owners shalt 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 nest page)
•
Re_oning or test 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 has been available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearin; on such amendments.
gnature
The foregoin, "Affidavit ot' Notice" was acknowledged before e this
of 200
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE TEXT
AMENDMENTS: TIMESHARE REGULATIONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY C,IVEN that a public hearing
will be held on Tuesday. May 21. 2002. at a meet-
Ing to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Plan-
ning and Zoning Commission. Council Chambers,
City Hall, 130 So. Galena St., Aspen, to consider
an application submitted by the City of Aspen
Community Development Department requesting
adoption of revised Timeshare Development Reg-
ulations. The proposed code amendments would
result In a complete re -codification of Municipal
Code Section 26.590, Timeshare Development.
Code Amendments related to the Timeshare Reg-
ulations will affect the following Municipal Code
Sections:
26.104.100 - Definitions:
26.710.140 - Commercial Core Zone District;
26-710.190 - Lodge/Tourist Residential Zone Dis-
trict;
26.710.200 - Commercial Lodge Zone District; and,
26.710-320 - Lodge Preservation Zone District.
For further information, contact Fred Jarman or
Joyce Ohlson at the City of Aspen Community De-
velopment Department. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen,
CO (970) 920-5090,
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL. SEAL
Nly commission expires:
Notary Public �0.
`3
0—
ATTACHMENTS:
COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
s/Jasmine Tygre• Chair
An en The Aspen
Timesand Zoning Commission YOTOGR4PH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN
Published in The Aspen Times on May 4, 2002.
(8699)
LIST OP t rIE O WIVERS AND GO VER YMENTAL A GENCIES NOTICED
B Y AU -IL