Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.rz.HolidayHouse.55A-897' IMPORTANT MESggGE FOR ~ 7,~, M~K --~~" "'">~ ~r _,~ ~ATE-~_TIM`7'~L~P. M. TOPS ®FORM ASPEN/PrrKIN rL.,arvnmLa urrlce 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81877 (303)920-5090 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES City 00113 00125 00123 00115 County 00113 00125 00123 00113 E3250-134 -63270-136 -63280-137 -63300-139 -63310-740 X3320-147 REFERRAL FEES: -63340-205. -63340-190 -83340-163 SUBTOTAL -63160-726 GMP/GENERAL -63770-127 GMP/DETAILED -63180-128 GMP/FINAL -63190-129 SUB/GENERAL -63200-130 SUB/DETAILED -63210-131 SUB/FINAL X3220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS 63230-133 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENTAGENDAITEMS -63450-146 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REFERRAL FEES: -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH -63340-790 HOUSING X3360-143 ENGINEERING PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 -63080-122 CITY/COUNTY CODE -63090-723 COMP. PLAN ~-- -63140-724 COPY FEES ~. -69000-145 OTHER -~ SUBTOTAL -- Name . I TOTAL 1--- T'--'-~' --~~ Address j ~ ' ~ ~ ~ = / ' ~ Phone: -- ! ~- ~ t_~ . , -,, ~ % i i f' , /~~~~~~~"y~2 GMP/CONCEPTUAL GMP/FINAL SUB/CONCEPTUAL SUB/FINAL ALL 2-STEP AppLICgTIONS ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENTgGENDAITEMS ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HOUSING ENGINEERING 1 _; i.~ ~ i~i / - ~ }' MEMORANDUM T0: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Robert S. Anderson, City Manager FROM: Robert F. Gish, Director of Public DATE: October 5, 1989 Works RE: Waiver of Water Tap Fees for Employee Housing Projects Specifically: Aspen Ski Company - Holiday House ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY/PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION On August 14, 1989, Ron Mitchell presented six projects to City Council which had requested a waiver of water tap fees: Truscott Place $153,839.96 Hunter Longhouse 46,515.08 AVH Senior Housing 68,573.80 Assisted Living Facility 39,559.48 AVH Development/Housing 48,911.58 Holiday House - Aspen Ski Company 27,442.62 $383,842.52 Councilman Peters moved to waive the tap fees for Truscott Place, Hunter Longhouse, the Assisted Living Facility and Housing at the hospital; seconded by Mayor Stirling. This included the requirements that these projects use water conservation devices. All in favor, motion carried. No action was taken on the Aspen Ski Company request to waive the tap fees for the Holiday House Project. Attached to this memo is a summary of Council action on the Rezoning of Holiday House on August 14, 1989. Water Department records confirm that in 1972 the Holiday House did pay for a pool point value assessment at the time of construction. This credit was points in 1972 and changed to ECU's in the early 1980's. Credit was given to the applicant for $530.88 as equivalent value in ECU's. The Aspen Ski Company is requesting in their application to waive the water tap fees in the amount of $24,223.24. This is a reduced amount, as the applicant has eliminated the dishwasher in the units. Attached for your review are copies of Cindy Wilson's memo of July 24, 1989, Aspen Water Department's Invoice C-649 in the ATTACHMENT "A" COUNCIL SUMMl1RY OF ACTION TAKEN ON REZONING OF HOLIDAY HOUSE On August 14, 1989, in Council discussion on Ordinance #50, Series of 1989 - rezoning of Holiday House, Councilman Peters moved to waive the park development impact fee, the building permit fees, with the exception of water and sewer tap fees for the project; seconded by Councilman Gassman. Councilman Gassman said Council should make it explicit they will entertain an application for waiver of tap fees depending on the policy they come up with. Councilman Crockett asked about including specifics on water conservation in the units. Council included these in the motion. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Tuite said condition #2 should be changed if the units are allowed to go to moderate. Byrne said the maximum they can charge under moderate is $.89 per square foot, and they are proposing charging at least $.94 in order to break even. Councilman Gassman moved to allow the project to charge $450 per month rental, until such time at the moderate income guidelines of the housing authority equals $450 per month for this size unit, at which time it will conform to the moderate guidelines; seconded by Councilman Crockett. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Stirling asked if this project will be displacing trees. Byrne said they went out of their way to keep the trees and to add some on the front of the property. Councilman Crockett moved to strongly encourage air quality, recycling participation, and auto disincentives in this project; seconded by Mayor Stirling. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Crockett moved to pass all the conditions 1 through 12; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Mitchell, Deputy City Manager ~~"'~ FROM: Cindy Wilson, Finance Director~~l DATE: July 24, 1989 RE: Housing Project Tap Fees Per your request on Friday, this memo addresses the impact on the water fund of waiving tap fees for employee housing projects. The city code section 23-71 addresses employee housing projects. CODE PROVISIONS The code states: "Whenever the city council shall have determined that a housing project constitutes a bona fide moderate income employee housing development and wishes to subsidize its construction, the utility investment charge per ECU shall be the base charge set forth in Section 23-58 (a).Applicants for such reductions must demonstrate that, if granted, the reduction will be passed on to purchasers or tenants." The rate referenced in Section 23-58(a) is $3,318 per ECU. ALTERNATIVES If Council desires to reduce tap fees below that rate or waive them totally, staff recommends that this be done on a case by case basis. Staff estimates that there are currently six projects which could be considered employee housing projects and not related to other non-employee development. These six projects are estimated to generate about $384,800 in tap fees. Since water department estimates of tap fees for. 1989 are about $2,000,000 and the long- range financial plan for the water fund currently only anticipates $1,500,000 in tap fees in 1989, Council could waive the tap fees for the current employee projects and not have an impact on projections for the water fund. Council could also impose the tap fee provided for in the code, as described above. This would reduce the fees for these projects to about $300,000. Council could also make arrangements for tap fees to be paid over a certain period of time. This should have a less significant impact on rents than requiring payment in a lump sum. I would ask council to seriously consider the need for extending payment over time since this can create the need for considerable staff time to follow up on collection of the payments. Some consideration should be given to penalties for late payments or other recourse the City may have if payments are not made as agreed. Council could reduce the tap fees dependent on the use of water conservation devices. Based on the recent study by the Rocky Mountain Institute of the hospital's employee housing project, water savings from conservation could be as much as 37%. If all of the proposed employee housing projects implemented all of the water conservation items mentioned and Council desired to reduce the tap fees proportionately with conservation, the tap fees for all of the projects would drop from about $384,800 to about $242,500. Council could also set a policy of establishing an annual limit for the amount of tap fee reductions available for employee housing projects. During the budget process, Council and staff would review the long-range plan for the water fund and determine the amount of tap fee reductions available for the next year. In setting this amount, Council would consider the potential projects likely to be built in the coming year. SUMMARY Alternatives for calculating fees: 1. Keep the existing fee structure- no breaks for employee housing. Tap fees in the water fund would probably exceed projections on the long range plans for 1989. Impact on the water fund in future years is unknown, but best under this alternative than any other alternative. 2. Reduce tap fees as allowed by the code to the base fee, regardless of service area. Probably no negative impact on water fund long range plan for 1989, however, water fund will receive about $84,000 less in 1989 than in alternative 1. 3. Reduce tap fees in the same proportion as water conservation. Probably no negative impact on water fund long range plan for 1989, water fund receives about $142,000 less than under alternative 1 (assuming "best case" conservation scenario). 4. Totally waive tap fees for all currently proposed employee housing projects. Probably no negative impact on the water fund long range plan for 1989. Water fund will receive about $384,000 less than under alternative 1. Alternatives for collecting fees: 1. Continue to require 100% payment at time of building permit. 2. Provide a payment plan and include penalties for late payment. Long Term Funding: While any of the alternatives for calculating fees will not have a negative impact on current water fund projections for 1989, any reduction in fees is obviously revenue "lost" as far as the water fund is concerned. Council should note that the long range plan for the water fund does not include any major capital improvements. Due to the fluctuations in tap fee revenues over the years, it is difficult to determine if a long term policy based on one of the above alternatives will have a significant .effect on the projected tap fee collections in future years. Therefore, I recommend that Council determine the appropriateness of reducing tap fees for employee housing on a case by case basis. Council could also set a limit, on an annual basis, of how much tap fees will be reduced for all projects submitted in the coming year. Attached is a revised copy of the water fund fifteen year long range plan. Revenues from monthly charges are projected to remain constant from 1989 through 1994. After that time, revenues from monthly charges are determined by what is required for the fund to "break even" based on projected expenses and other revenues. Tap fees are projected to be $700,000 in 1990 and $500,000 annually through 1994 and then reduce gradually. Please note that after the current bonded debt is paid off in 1997, monthly charges drop dramatically. However, as mentioned earlier, no new capital improvements are projected, either on a cash basis or from bond proceeds. housing tapfees ~- ,~ . ~~130S.Galena BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION General Aspen, CO 81611 Construction 303/920-5440 ASPEN*PITKIN REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT Permit JURISDICTION OF Applicant to complete numbered spaces only. No. -~ JOB ADDRESS 1, ) {'~/, ~^/~i / LEGAL LOT NO p(/, BLOCK TRACT OR SUB/D'IVJIS71O"yN~ / y.1 CJ~/L ~ 11 ISEE ATTACHED SHEET) OW R MAIL ADDREGS ZIP PHONE 3. Sly SK//N6 ~ ~X /z~~ ~/h/Z ~12~ /z2~ CONTRACTOR MAILADDRESS PHONE LICENSE NO. 4. ARC~MI~CT ORD IGNER MAILADDRESS PHONE LICENSE NO. /E~17~~ 303-~/zS 27~63 ~-77~ (3~1~/AN 2/0 G ~~//Z/~1 _ . , , a. !/, / ENGINEER MAIL ADDRESS PHONE LICENSE NO. b~vy~l32rSES. ,~5 as~ 7gs~y E/VG . s. CLA OF WORK: 1GTAL FEE ~ NEW ^ ADDITION ^ ALTERATION ^ REPAIR ^ MOVE WRECK UILD UB PLAN CHECK FEE PERMIT FEE 3%USE TA%DEP ~ ~ ~~~/~~ ~ 8 VALUATION OF WORK 0 00 3 Type of GO°SINCIIgl1 Occupancy Gloup Lol Area s. $ 00, 1Q. Remarks j P~,#C}.n/ ~f~K (Tgal l$q°atle F I F No. of Stories Occ. Loatl W C NO. OF BEDROOMS Use ZOne Flre Sprinklers ReRUireQ E%ISTING ADDED ^Yee LI No A ~ ~r No. of Dwelling Unite OFFSTREET PARKING SPACES: U tl nrgvere Coveretl r SS SPECIAL APPROVALS REOUIREO AUTHORIZED BY GATE ZONING ~ ~ ~ n H.P.C. PARK DEDICATION ~ HEALTH DEPARTMENT I ~I C FIREPLACE LIGATION ACCEPTED APPLICATION ACCEPTED APPROVED FOR ISSUANCE FIRE MARSHAL BY BY BY _ SPRINKLER GATE GATE DATE WATER TAP L. pp ,~ j~p 7 r ~ /~ NOTICE OTHER SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. ^ NO USE TAX DEPOSIT AT TIME OF ISSUANCE. MONTHLY OR OUAR- THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION TERLY REPORTS WILL BE MADE TO THE PITKIN COUNTYTREA- AUTHORIZED IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 120 DAYS, OR IF CON- SURER, AS REQUIRED. STRUCTION OR WORK IS SUSPENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 120 DAYS AT ANV TIME AFTER WORK IS COMMENCED. ~ 3 % OF 25% OF BUILDING PERMIT VALUATION USE TAX DEPOSIT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND AT THE TIME OF PERMIT ISSUANCE. FINAL REPORT TO BE MADE KNOW THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT. ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND TO PITKING COUNTY TREASURER (GENERAL CONTRACTORS RE- ORDINANCES GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL BE COMPLIED WITH PORTING FOR TH EIR SUBCONTRACTORS). WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT. THE GRANTING OF A PERMIT DOES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIOLATE OR CANCEL THE PROVISIONS OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OR THE PER- ~ 3% OF 25% OF BUILDING PERMIT VALUATION USE TAX DEPOSIT FORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION. PAID AT PERMIT ISSUANCE. FINAL USE TAX RETURN IS MADE TO PITKIN COUNTY TREASURER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. °i °f1 ° I°Srel EXEMPT: ^ RESALE # ^ EXEMPT ORGANIZATION C , ' ~ THIS FORM IS A PERMIT ONLY WHEN VALIDATED. QVHEB rF Om+ eoiu»:BI I I WORK STARTED WITHOUT PERMIT WILL BE DOUBLE FEE V Plqn Check Validation Permit Velitladan 3% Use Ta% Deposit Validation \ V~ l.. .$ -. CASEIAAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED:6/1/89 DATE COMPLETE• PROJECT NAME: PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. 2735-124-59-002 55A-89 STAFF MEMBER• Project Address: Legal Address: East 7 5' Lot B Lots C D, E, F, & G, Block 60 APPLICANT: The Aspen Skiinu ComDany Applicant Address: P O Box 1248 Aspen CO 81612 REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn Representative Address/Phone: 300 East Hyman Ave. Asnen CO 81611 5-6587 PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: $1.950.00 NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED: 21 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: ~ P&Z Meeting Date ~ PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO ~ / VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO C CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO Planning Director Approval: Paid: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date: REFERRALS: City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District X City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat Gas Housing Dir. ~ Holy Cross - State Hwy Dept(GW) _ X Aspen Water ~ Fire Marshall State Hwy Dept(GJ) City Electric Building Inspector Envir. Hlth. Roaring Fork Other x Aspen Consol. Energy Center S . D. / ,~t~ Q~ U'a DATE REFERRED: INITIALS: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: City Atty ~~City Engineer ~~oning Env. Health Housing Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: ~ .~. ,~ CASE TO: File FROM: Francis X. Krizmanich, Senior Planner RE: Holiday House Application to Build 9 Employee Units: Rezoning from LP to R/MF PUD, Conceptual and Final Plat DATE: September 19, 1989 On August 14, 1989, the City Council approved Ordinance No. 50, Series of 1989, rezoning the Holiday House property from LP to R/MF PUD subject to the following conditions: 1. The entire project, including the units contained in the addition and in the existing Holiday House, shall be deed restricted to 100 Affordable Housing pursuant to Article 5, Division 2, of the Land Use Code (as amended by Ordinance No. 47 (Series of 1988) prior to the issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy. The Applicant shall not be given GMQS credit for any of the units. 2. A standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. The nine new units must be deed restricted to the Housing Authority's moderate income guidelines, however, the Applicant is permitted to rent these units for up to $450. per month with no increase, until such time as the moderate income guidelines rise to this level. At such time, rents may be increased in keeping with the moderate income guidelines and restrictions. 3. The Applicant shall supply the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, on any of the units, the Housing Authority shall be notified, and deed restrictions amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. 4. PUD approval shall be granted to permit a variation from the strict interpretation of the Code such that the applicant can include courtyard space not visible from the public street to meet the 35% R/MF open space requirement. 5. The Little Nell SPA agreement shall be amended to allow removal of the swimming pool in exchange for the applicant providing a park area and bicycle racks on- site acceptable to the Planning Office staff prior to the issuance of a Certificate of_Occupancy. 6. The East Hopkins Avenue frontage shall be planted with three 3 inch caliper cottonless cottonwoods consistent with the streetscape to the west. 7. A final plat shall be submitted prior to final approval which meets the Code standards as approved by the City Engineer. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a stormwater design and facilities plan for the City Engineer's review and approval. 9. Prior to building permit issuance the Applicant shall reach agreement on sanitation fees with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 10. An automatic alarm and sprinkler system shall be provided as committed by the Applicant. 11. Pursuant to the Parking Special Review approval granted by the Planning Commission, the applicant shall pay cash-in-lieu for nine parking spaces or identify nine off-site spaces to be used by residents of this project. Increased management of the 12 existing on- site parking spaces shall be undertaken by the applicant. 12. The park development impact fee for this project is waived by City Council. 13. The Council strongly encourages the Applicant to 'participate in community recycling efforts and to discourage private automobile use to reduce air pollution. 14. The Council may entertain a future request by the Applicant for the reduction or elimination of water tap fees for this project. casedisposition.holiday 2 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council August 14 1989 ORDINANCE #50, SERIES OF 1989 - Rezoning Holiday House Francis Krizmanich, planning office, said this is rezoning as well as combined conceptual and final plat review. Krizmanich said these actions are to allow the Aspen Skiing Company to construction 9 new emploiyee units at the Hollday House, which current has 26 units. Krizmanich told Council the housing authority reviewed the applicatn's proposal August 9th to deed restrict 4 units to low income and 5 to moderate income guidelines. The housing authority recommended these umnits be restricted to those guidelines. Krizmanich said the first request is to exempt these affordable housing units from the GMP. Staff agrees with the request to exempt these from the GMP as they meet the guidelines for affor- dable housing. Krizmanich said staff has discussed the larger issue of employees' units being tied to their jobs. Krizmanich pointed out these units will have 6 month rental restriction leases. Krizmanich said the housing authority will hold the deed restrictions, which will give them the ability to go in if persons are not renting the units under the guidelines. Krizmanich said another request is whether GMP credits for future development should be granted for employee housing projects that are con- structed now. Krizmanich said he feels it is counter productive to enoucrage people to provide employee housing now that will later be used to support additional growth and development. Krizmanich recomended to not give GMP credits for employee housing that is constructed under the GMP exemption process. H\The housing authority agreed with this. Krizmanich said the entire Holiday House should~be deed restricted to 100 percent employee housing. Krizmanich said 17 units at the Holiday house were restricted as part of the Little Nell project; 10 Regular Meeting Aspen Citv Council August 14, 1989 5 were previously deed restricted, which leaves 4 units not restricted. Phil Bryne, Aspen Skiing company, said the applicants agree with the housing office as to which units have already been deed restricted. Bryne said there is only one unit not accounted for in previous agreements. Bryne said they are willing to deed restrict that one unit but not at any particular income level. Krizmanich said the rezoning request is to go from designation to RMF. Krizmanich said the applicant has met the requirements for a code amendment. The only outstanding issue is the open space requirements. This project is 11 percent short of the 35 percent open space requirement. Krizmanich said some of the open space is not visible from the street. Staff proposed a code amendment to allow open space requirements to be set by special review. However, there are numerous code amendments being worked on currently, and staff is recommending this project be done as a PUD as part of the zoning and that the open space be varied through the PUD. Krizmanich said the fourth request is a minor amendment to the Little Nell SPA agreement, which was to delete the requirement for a swimming pool. Krizmanich told Council the applicant has had maintenance problems with the current swimming pool. The new units are to sit where the existing pool is. Krizmanich said P & Z reached an agreement that the applicants provide on on-site pocket park and bicycle racks in exchange for the loss of the pool on site. Krizmanich told Council P & Z apprroved special review for off site parking reduction, which gives the applicant the choice of making a payment-in-lieu for parking or designatiomn 9 parking spaces off site. Krizmanich said subdivision approval is also required because multi-family projects are inlcuded within the definition of subdivision. The application has dealt with the technical platting requirements and a final plat will have to be submitted. The applicant has requested a waiver of city fees. Krizmanich told Council the code automatically waives building permit and planning office fees. Krizmanich said the code allows Council to waive park development impact fees for affordable housing projects, which staff recommends to be waived. Krizmanich said the outstanding fee is the water tap fees. Krizmanich recommended approval of the project with the it conditions outlined. Bryne told Council the applicants requested their appalication be amended from low/moderate to a designation that falls slightly above moderate. Bryne said when the applicants ran the finanicals for this project, they realized that at $450 per month, without the tap fees being waived, they are looking at an annual deficit. Bryne said this application for 9 more units is not required by any land use agreement. Bryne said the housing authroity did not 11 Reaular Meetina _ Aspen Citv Council Auaust 14, 1989 approve their request for a different rent structure. Bryne said Council can wive the guidelines for square footage restriction on a rpoject that is 100 percent affordable housing. Bryne said the having the tap fees waived is a savings of $292 per unit per year. Councilman Tuite asked if the applicants will get a water credit for eliminating the pool. Bryne said this has not been addressed. Mayor Stirling opened the public hearing. Fred Smith, Aspen Skiing Company, said the Skiing Company is willing to provide 9 units and to deed restrict them. There is no commericla project being carried with this. Smith said they feel the rents they will charge are well within the affordability ranges of year round employees. Richard Roth said he would like to see the rentals stay at the original proposal of low income. Rachle Richards said the logic of the housing authority of denying the rent increase is not being represented at the Council meeting. Bill Wilhoit said he would like to see the rents stay at the original proposal. Mayor Stirling closed the public hearing. Councilman Peters said he agrees with not giving future credits for this project. Councilman Peters said he would rather not see this project underwrite future development. Councilman Peters said $450 per unit is more than was originally proposed; however, there is a chance the project won't get built if the rents are not sup- ported. Councilman Peters said he does not feel this is an argument for allowing the $450 to be indexed with all other rents. Councilman Peters said he would rather see the rents kept flat and attenuate the rents with incremental costs and operating costs, not management, until it intersects the original proposal. Councilman Peters said he would be willing to waive the park dedication fee. Councilman Peters said he would not be willing to waive the tap fees. Council has discussed being able to connect the tap fee savings directly to the rent savings. Councilman Peters said Council does not have control over the rents in this project. Councilman Peters encouraged the applicant to have a no car provision in their leases. Councilman Peters said he like the six month lease provision. Councilman Peters said the applicant might consider season passes to the covered Moore pool. Bryne said the applicnats started with the idea of a break even project. They were not successful in doing that and are already subsidizing this project. Councilman Tuite said he likes the idea of getting 9 units into the inventory. Councilman Tuite said he could go along with the proposed rent structure as long as there is no GMP credits. Councilman Tuite said if the city is encourag- ing rental affordable housing, then they should be waiving tap 12 Regular Meeting Asoen City Council August 14, 1989 including specifics on water conservation in the units. Council included these in the motion. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Tuite said condition #2 should be changed if the units are allowed to go to moderate. Bryne said the maximum they can charge under moderate is $.89 per square foot, and they are proposing charging at least $.94 in order to break even. Councilman Gassman moved to allow the project to charge $450 per month rental until such time at the moderate income guidelines of the housing authority equals $450 per month for this size unit, at which time it will conform to the moderate guidelines; seconded by Councilman Crockett. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Stirling asked if this project will be displacing trees. Bryne said they went out of their way to keep the trees and to add some on the front of the property. Councilman Crockett moved to strongly encourage air quality, recycling participation, and auto disincentives in this project; seconded by Mayor Stirling. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Crockett moved to pass all the conditions 1 through 12; seconded by Councilman Gassman. All in favor, motion carried. 14 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY Pasi Office Box 1248 555 E. Durant Street Aspen. ColOratlo 81612 (303) 925-1220 FAX 303-925-1609 July 21, 1989 Planning and Zoning Dept. 130 S Galena Aspen, Co. 81611 Attn: Francis Krizmanich Dear Francis; /~\ ~-•, Thank you for taking the time to discuss with me the resolution for the Holiday House. The one concern we have involves the wording found in the paragraph on page one beginning with the wording "NOW, TEEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission .... 9 dedicated spaces off-site... The underlined wording would seem to require us to formally record these spaces. It was our understanding that the purpose of providing off-site parking for the Holiday House was to lesson the demands for street parking. We feel this solution can best be met by allowing us to identify specific sites from time to time and to keep your office informed as to where these spaces are located. Please inform us by letter if this wording and explanation will suffice. Thank you in advance for dealing with this matter. Sincerely, ~f Phil By ne cc. Welton Anderson SNOWMA55 • A5f FN MOUNTAIN • BUTTERMILK MOUNTAIN ASPEN SKIING COMPANY ~~ r Past Office Box 1248 555 E. Durant Street C Aspen. Colora0o 81612 (3031 9251220 FAX 303-925-Ifi09 MEMORANDUM FROM: Phil Byrne TO Pitkin County Housing Board SUBJECT Holiday House Expansion August 6, 1989 ~',-*... APPLICANT: ASPEN SKIING COMPANY REQUEST: The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has requested that ASC meet with the Housing Authority prior to the August 14, 1989 meeting with the Aspen City Council, to review income and occupancy guidelines as required by Section 8-109(F) of the Land Use Code. ISSUES: 1.) Deed Restrictions - ASC agrees to deed restrict the 9 proposed new units. These units will be approximately 474 sq. feet and will be a studio design with the function and privacy of a small 1 bedroom apartment. We intend this housing to be used primarily as permanent resident affordable housing, but we would like to reserve the right to use these units for seasonal employees because of the anticipated scarcity of such housing this winter. 2.) Rental Rate - The initial application requested a mix of low-mod type housing based on the Housing Authority Guidelines. We based this request on rental rates currently in place at Castle Ridge, Hunter Longhouse, and Centennial. Conversations with the Housing Authority, Pat (manager of Castle Ridge), Julie Krill (manager of Hunter Longhouse), and Kim (manager of Centennial) generated the following rental rates at their properties. ST 1BR Castle Ridge ................. $336 $522 Hunter Longhouse ............. 535 Centennial low ............... 420 540 Centennial mid ............... 550 670 We have subsequently discovered that our projected $450 per month unit rental rate will place our designation in the Mid-Mod range, which is inconsistent with our initial application. The nine new units are expected to house employees who will fall in the salary range of $16,000 to $30,000. We believe our rental rate compares very favorably with those listed above and request that you categorize our project in the Mid-Mod range. - f%6 :'.L^S•+G.i`: VUQ: L:I9.oI;iTERMILN !.IOUA FAIN 4.. ,. C Page Two cont. Holiday House Expansion 3.) A great deal of work has been done by the Housing Authority staff on a separate issue which does have some bearing on our ability to continue towards the construction of the Holiday House 9 unit expansion. The existing Holiday House has a total of 26 units totaling approximately 9,656 square feet of net livina space or an average of 172 square feet per employee. This housing is being allocated to meet the Little Nell Hotel SPA as follows: 1. Lodge GMP commitment 30 emp. 2. Non-Acc. Commercial GMP commitment 9 emp. 3. Aspen Mtn. Master Plan commitment 4 emp. 4. Restricted prior in 1981 10 emp. 53 emp. These units are deed restricted to low income guidelines. When the C.O. is issued for the Little Nell Hotel, the rent structure will become $108 per person for a maximum monthly total of $5,724 plus the rent from one unit that is not restricted to low income guidelines. This calculation is based on the current low income rate of $.63 per square foot of average living space. REQUEST We understand the motives of the Housing Authority for establishing low income guidelines. We also understand that keeping the rental rates as low as possible should help to preserve affordable living for individuals who don't make a great deal of money. However, the rate for low income has only risen from $.60 in 1985 to the present rate of $.63 per square foot of living space. Is this a reasonable rate compared to the cost of developing additional housing for these employees? We ask you, the Housing Authority Board, to consider a different formula that might encourage private developers to build more low cost units for low to moderate income level employees. ASC asks that you adopt the recommendations found in Issue #1 and Issue #2 in your formal letter to the City Council. ASC thanks you for taking the time to review these matters. Sincerely, Phil Byrne Housing Manager PB/ha ~. ~, Project Name :Holiday House Key Contacts Phil Byrne, Fred Smith, Glenn Horn Number of Units 9 1 BR Number of People Housed 9 Total Sq. Footage: 4425 sq ' $74/sq ' Cost $329,025 Cost per room $36,558 per room Rent $450/rm Status Second hearing ... City Council Aug. 14 Ski Company Share: All 9 units SCORING 23 POINTS 1'st Annual ASC subsidy required $4,539 The current configuration shows 17 studios, 8 one BR units, and 1 2BR unit. The above numbers are based upon expanding the building by 4425 sq.' and adding 9 new 1 BR units, assuming the parking requirements can be relaxed and zoning can be changed from LP(Lodge Preservation) to RMF (Residential Multi-Family). This housing should be used for seasonal employees working at either the Hotel or with the ASC. The proposed units are about 475 sq. feet and will be functional and easy to live in. There will be a kitchen, ample closet space, an open living room/dining room and a good sized bedroom in the back. The configuration is similar to that found at Hunter Longhouse and Midland Park. Assuming the review process goes smoothly, we are looking at September before construction could begin. It is possible that the units could be completed in time for the winter season if modular construction is used. Parking is the major hurdle that must be overcome. The present plans only add 6 new parking spaces, which is below the requirements in the code. We have been directed by the Planning and Zoning department to either find off site storage for these cars or pay $135,000 payment in lieu. Those cars that must be stored might be located at either Buttermilk or West Buttermilk. The bus system will make this a minimal inconvenience in getting to their cars when a downvalley trip is desired. 1 HISTORY OF APPLICATION May 1, 1989 ASC decides to explore the possibility of building additional long term employee housing on the site of the Holiday House pool area. We hire Glenn Horn to prepare the initial application and submit it to the Planning and Zoning Commission. July il, 1989 Planning and Zoning -- They approve the application with a number of recommendations. One of the recommendations includes meeting with the Housing Authority to establish our rental policies, leases, and prices. We are also asked to deed restrict all our units. August 9, 1989 ASC meets with the Housing Authority Board to review above policies. ASC requests exemption from square foot guidelines based on dedicating 100$ of the 9 new units to employee housing. We request a monthly unit rental price of $450/mo. ASC will still have to subsidize the project even at these rates. The Board rejects our request and states by a 4-3 vote that they will recommend we stay with the original 5 mod. 4 low income units. This arrangement seriously jeopardizes the project because of the high cost of carrying the project. ASC requests that City Council allow a $450 per unit per month rent base, including utilities. We feel that these rates compare favorably with the rents found at Centennial, Hunter Longhouse, and Castle Ridge. Our workers, like many other workers in this town, need this affordable housing and we hope you will help us to achieve this goal. ASC would like Council to consider allocating these units to future GMOS credit under the following condition: That these units would have to be converted to low-mod income guidelines before they could be used for GMOS credit. We have done this recently with the Holiday House and feel it is an excellent way to provide very affordable housing as a trade off to increasing our operations base. 2 HOLIDAY HOUSE COST/REVENUE ANALYSIS $450/rm Rent, includes tap fees Revenue 9 1 Bedroom units ------> $ 4,050/mo. X 12 mo. _ Less 5$ vacancy = Total Revenue $450.00 X 9 $ 4,050/ mo. $ 48,600/yr. 2,430 $ 46,170/yr Expenses Building cost $51/sq ' ... .... $225,862 Application, surveys, architect fees 42,250 FFE ........ ....................... 20,700 Contingency 7~• ....................... 20,213 Tap Fees ............................. 25,000 $334,025 Mortgage P & I $ 2,932/mo. $ 35,192/yr. 11~ 20 yr loan ($283,921) 15$ downpayment Management 4 000 Utilities 8,000 Repairs & Maintenance $1/sq.' 4,000 Total Costs $ 51,192/yr Cost to carry project/yr = $ 5,022 Cash needed 1989-90 ............. $ 50,103 (Downpayment 15~) 3 HOLIDAY HOUSE COST/REVENUE ANALYSIS $450/rm Rent, NO tap fees Revenue 9 1 Bedroom units ------> $ 4,050/mo. X 12 mo. _ Less 5% vacancy = Total Revenue $450.00 X 9 $ 4,050/ mo. $ 48,600/yr. 2,430 $ 46,170/yr ExAenses Building cost $51/sq ' .......... $225,862 Application, surveys, architect fees 42,250 FFE ...... ......................... 20,700 Contingency 7% ....................... 20,213 $309,025 Mortgage P & 2 $ 2,714/mo. $ 32,564/yr. 11% 20 yr loan ($262,671) 15% downpayment Management Utilities Repairs & Maintenance $1/sq.' Total Costs 4,000 8,000 4,000 $ 48,564/yr Cost to carry project/yr = $ 2,394 Cash needed 1989-90 ............. $ 46,804 (Downpayment 15%) 4 HOLIDAY HOUSE COST/REVENUE ANALYSIS Revised to show cash flow for 5 mod. 4 low Revenue (5) 1 Bedroom units (mod) $421.86 $ 2,110 (4) 1 Bedroom units (low) $298.62 $ 1,196 $ 3,306/mo ------> $ 4,050/mo. X 12 mo. _ $ 39,672/yr Less 5% vacancy = 1,984 Total Revenue $ 37,688/yr Expenses Building cost $51/sq ' .......... $225,862 Application, surveys, architect fees 42,250 FFE ................................ 20,700 Contingency 7% ....................... 20,213 Tap Fees ............................. 25,000 $334,025 Mortgage P & I $ 2,932/mo. $ 35,192/yr. 11% 20 yr loan ($283,921) 15°s downpayment Management 4 000 Utilities 8,000 Repairs & Maintenance $1/sq.' 4,000 Total Costs $ 51,192/yr Cost to carry project/yr = $ 13,504/yr Cash needed 1989-90 ............. $ 50,103 (Downpayment 15%) ~~ g ° Sm'~ g T- 'O-g o-~",o w `-'' O S~°c wag~£ o~ H'+'-'£ m < o a so c° n ''' a°9.~'n"mo~°:~,9,Y7 y-~9 n.=~mmy,Tm 3-`°i 9' am~n.m ~f ~~3b,ym'y myoa '~~ .py7•+w" g.. .Y ~m 67w°_=ry£~< .fD+.mmom£mw ~ a.m w,o~ w'o y'S.'4'm'°omm wp?,om °Srtmo~C£-. Ow'O S'v p'~mk'o 7C° 7£m nC(B 7S77`D g,v ~°`<.Rim s ~ m m~ °+°'w~°~ o m £ d ~.w •g ~~ w.w wv ~•...G o a_< m »,-•"o ~ a ~. :~ ~_ ~~ £ a ~.»N °'oa a ti ~~ ~ TH m ~*g g a w f° : m ~ m a,~ ° mv,_5 n m pv b'...£ 7 a`< ~o ~? .°:m wH p m ~v C?9 m w ~ p ww ~,mpp °• m m ~`e w 7 p .*.~ C1 $~ X?m ~~7'`°a•,e~nwo.°.,ar'•o°p 3•`m°°'`°wy a.~ '°oro 'm'"o'awmwomx~°.y°~5.~: g'4 0 ~,~,~ ~ m ~~ w c "v ~ 9 w =~~ =° ov cwo ~ °' Co g m 5~ =3 m £ H ° o N c"o•e =i 7 m 36 ° N ~* 7 O ~"O iy' M (p w O C N N 7 O wwn.~$~`°~Fec~g7gg.,o `~m`x~tHO?momb•e °m.+oo~•eme~~TOma,o,~m?p°,g ~~ ^- R7b.,og g ~ n.O og~ m W~~~v"P ^•p w,y ^''d ~, .y p"U77.m ~•m a<C ~~ 777 G '~ n -, °' 'E.mngs3.m8.opoaC.m~~tiEggyv~m OQ'~ °°mS~~2.~ o.ro~...3. o (D ~ o ~ ~ ` ~ wF»~£ ~.~m o.e'A `~'tiw ° ~ wm ~ =a °'m ~ S~ £ 6So w 7w aa.~~ m '~ ~0° "~ o ~'m+ ~7 ~ ~ m = =~ C g w tgo -qbm gv,o 4~°-ter'' ro ~ ~~~g G T~ 7 m t~] o ~ .y° ~ a ~~, o~7mC 7'w oo.o' woo.. o powm°p~o ^7v t 7 y .w•mw 7<°•m .y £< w m w .* w 7 G G 7 ~' ~~ p,'"'~ n 7 a~ ° n -~ < 'O . X m ~p w m m w• o. ,. m w ~< ° a m m o ':~ o .. 'd G m a. "+7 'i1 m m w m ~. S ~e £ a. ' ~' €~ O b O b m m ? C o 7m m >'O F m 7 m iiw ~,9°c m A.~.Gf=.m~ xSg m ~ "'y Sd ;'.~ w `~ m m Y~ ~ 7~ ° o-~ aH H ^a£ a g`< c £ ?mo~'~ safrm yy H c - 2'o g .y o ° m 3 w e ". N m~ °~ o m~ m R °c ~. w r a, ~ vH °: G7.' ~• S m m~ o• °' 7 w ~e ~ ~' E o G ~ w P. ~ £ m ~ °o' R °' ^°f 0. -mi ~H1 °U S b .°. o o £ °D r ?~ ^1 7 ~ ~ 7. m m o m 9o ay °: 'R..m ~ m a~ov SN ~' m ~ ~ 7R'G ~ ~ cx,~ G.m K R~ m m ii^ m m m So 0 `° °-a7m T°'m SH S~: ••m Gee °Cmoom ~°RO`~ 7c'£'Vo £gHO ...wF°p`°o~'w.SSa'O.SRw".°•~'+~~°•: ~-FOw?.~.o~a°e~~ 7~~mma..Gim SGw~iw~w Xmc<ywmn`< c:oC"m_<~goavtr7~ O'w m ~ ~~ A y~ R. e.. N `o'.G 7'~'7w a°'m 'm .yc a'o~ <m H N~ a ~Io £TC~nC ~~G m `~R.wm m'G ,G_,.iyy v mmC-~C "~"mm m 7`w< • o o m TJ o G n ,~ o• eaGp }`o R.y 7' --. A 7. G o.v 7-'~ n~ G 7 G m m~SO~o` e~i'o~w mR~m a.~~R~ mm~oSyw~"~~O~~X ...- w £ m O H ° ~ " a .y O G.<< 4G FD m7 R ^~ R. -- m 7 P. O p '^~ e~ ~ cwcrr m ' ,R., ^~ 7 m w e~ ~f n n Q ... e+ w 6. N ~* w 7' £ ~ £ ~ "~ w N w w fHD Op 7 R~ O g 0.R .D ~ C m O ry 9 Om ~~ b w w 0 0 ~•g °inm0]~m mA-°im7'0 9c tcnp'w~~pp..o vta.m9 yG m~m0.y~ nO~gO mG~~m~.oN~y~Gb vi }D 7w ~G~~bme.: wG. p. '< A n~ O< d m m 0~ 7 d _S' y . w A O N ^'. °m3 ,-. m oogm ,~. _a~ .S n' aSm wo am ~ N ~" °~ O' N N '°"~ ° rwn O N W~ O G F .. m w° 7 S m ~? A °O ^1 m 7 w m 9 ~ V, ~~ O X n '~ . x C N - m a. 7 a-+v ° wb sg n G w °• o arc S°•~ o '.y °e ~ n cnxg w mti--~~v-, gn.°mmgg '`~~^ ~'°'~-'w+c~mm m_S+fw'tifD`Dm b .+ N 7 w n .+ m ^' p 7 .. m w C. ... w m C s. ~~ 7 o m m O S m w W~ m w O' C w S n ° ~' -.... .y f6'o ~. c. n m O 'sO m w w m..V W°S~.O ay ^~ ~.* p.£ mvro-'w~" vo.~*£ o~~'y .~ v,w°~.RSw~mommSm>-... ° O y b ..j -°~ w w p w H .`" .'T n o d PD ~ x. n~ m 'O .-+ <'S~ m 0. 0 7 my'x'oa.a ~v'on ° S ~ .m»~~~'d°. m2S~'~3 .'o° "~..'~G'^O.C 0,~~? A7% Ow mY 7~o~7G"Rw 7wm n.= _. p OG `< c' 0~ X ~f Q. S £ m P~ ~+ m c: CJ . P. m R .- o c. m "y c`~~+' a O E 3 N m (u, (fir) g~ O~ n7' O Q a ~~`` m t ~ ~~~~• ~. ;~ G G O O t1 ^ ~ n p, ° ~ y O N ~ '3 O' Q 2O ^C £ d T O f ~. ~ d p. C S °'ryi '< S S .~ ~-~ v s T ~ 3 ~~ c 2 IG ~ '• ~ d •~ ° i ~ ~ Gf ~ ~ /9 d ~ r d Ll\ O~ -i - ? n U p s ~ !. C c i ~ n oo ~ ro ~ rco n G j 0 `G O° O ~. 7 0 ° ~ ~ c F v+ m ~ ~ n r'o n ~ S ~ . d 3. a m a> -.f m /D i ry O rl 'O ~ ~ ^ y ~ ry ~ ~ ~ d r. Q, UI O C. P~ ~~~, I ~^ ~~^ O O l L O .a N O //~\~^ \V O N ~^ ~. N m m J y 3 C m V d N N D O~q~ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JULY 11, 1989 HOLIDAY HOUSE EXPANSION REZONING, SUBDIVISION, GMOS EXEMPTION, SPECIAL REVIEW FOR PARKING REDUCTION Roger: My pitch is basically is we have to get some storage parking for this facility somewhere. And the Ski Company does have some obvious places at least for some parts of the season. The year around season I am talking about. Jasmine: I agree completely with Mari about the impacts of the parking and the question of who gets to pay for it. I would certainly be willing to leave it up to the applicant to decide whether it makes more sense for them to pay cash-in-lieu parking or to use existing parking on other available sites. It seems to me that a lot of the problem could be mitigated by proper parking management and the idea of storage parking that Roger brought up where you take the boats, the canoes, the yachts whatever it is that is taking up parking spaces and put them in another location and perhaps try to figure out if you can squeeze a different configuration into the parking spaces is yet another option but I agree that you must address the parking situation. I think maybe if in time the existing Holiday House becomes converted to more permanent residence with a lower occupancy rate that might help as well. But in my judgment you must either pay the cash-in- lieu for the parking spaces or provide storage parking somewhere else. Jim: I tend to agree with Jasmine which seems to be the consensus on the Board here. There is a philosophical problem involved here. One is that you are talking of private enterprise taking the handle and providing employee housing. If there is not incentive enough for private enterprise to do that the burden shifts directly upon the community as a whole. There must be some incentive for private enterprise to do that. So I would like to stay away from these $15,000 per space charges in order to give more motivation to private enterprise to do that. But in this particular case especially I think requiring a minimum 9 spaces off site and given the opportunity that the Ski Corp has to provide those 9 spaces I don't think is unreasonable. Considering the congestion in that area it sounds as though they have had some management problems in the past that 9 spaces off site could be a good compromise to the community and solve your problem without cash-in-lieu. Michael: I have a tendency to agree with what Jim said. Welton: I will make it not quite unanimous. 1 or 2 people were in favor of charging the fees. I think if you want to provide off site in the--by paying for parking spaces in the parking PZM7.11.89 structure or by providing parking spaces on the property that you have control over, either one of those options is worthwhile. When coupled with more effective policing roll by the property management along with actually providing those telephone numbers you offered to pass out so that people in the neighborhood can go to the top rather than being--I have gotten lost in trying to get through the bureaucracy at the Skiing Company to try to find out an answer too. So I think making good on that promise is certainly in everybody's best PR interest. The other item that the Planning Office brought up was the payment of park dedication fees. Like the parking fees I am hesitant to require park dedication fees which are usually charged to free market housing, free market single family housing in order to offset their park needs of people generated by this new development. I think you can do some of that on site. In replacing amenities like the swimming pool with something like a barbecue, bicycle racks-and perhaps a little more landscaping than 3 Cottonwood trees at 2 and 1/2 inches in diameter. I would like to have someone propose a motion that consolidates the consensus of the Commission. Nobody has really had a big conflict with the Planning Office's recommendation for the PUD and the open space. And the applicant doesn't seem to have a problem with the Planning Office's approach either. So unless somebody has a real problem with that I think we don't need to hammer that one to death too. MOTION Roger: I think the motion should go to a resolution form in this case because with this applicant I want to make sure everything is in black and white so we know what we are doing. I move for the Planning Office to draft a resolution approving the applicant's proposal to construct an additional 9 employee units on the Holiday House property. Welton: We want to say all the different things which are being applied for which are expansion rezoning, subdivision, GMQS exemption, Special review for Parking reduction. Roger: My motion is for the Planning Department to come back with a resolution that will include all those items. The GMQS approval, The rezoning to RMF PUD and the reason within that and the anticipation that this site will come under the AH zoning in the future and with respect to parking--is the figure 9 off site storage type parking spots or if that doesn't work, cash-in-lieu. Plus additional management. 2 PZM7.11.89 Basically the conditions being along these guidelines as we have amended. Fred: Part of your parking requirement suggests that I need to go establish a use at some area outside the City limits which would be County jurisdiction on land at Buttermilk which is zoned AFSKI which will require amendment to the masterplan because of a specific parking plan. Francis: I think we can handle it. There is provisions in the AFSKI for substantial changes. I could discuss it with County Commissioners. I don't really think there would be a problem with designating 9 spaces out there. Welton: I wouldn't have a problem signing a resolution that was sufficiently vague in the wording as to say "9 parking spaces to be established at a certain date in the future" leaving the whole thing open. Jim: I would be willing to make it a recommendation to Council while they concurrently go through-- Roger: I would not concur with changing my motion at this point. Only because I know what happens in some cases. Another good example is Little Nell where we have these hound dog's ears out in the street far in excess of what P&Z recommended and far in excess of what the Engineering Department recommended. Michael: The only problem with this is we are gong to tie their hands and if we are more concerned with employee units than we are with parking then somewhere along the line somebody has got to make that decision. Mari: I don't think their hands are tied. They have an option to pay the money. Michael: That stops them from doing the project. Fred: That is $135,000.. I could do 5 more units with that. Jasmine seconded the motion. Jim: If we approve Rogers motion we could quite likely end up without this employee housing on the project. It seems to me unreasonable to put them in that position and ourselves in that position when it would be very easy for us to let it go to Council with a recommendation for parking. They are not going to skirt it. Francis is going to watchdog this. And let Council decide. I don't see how that is going to harm the community and 3 r~ • ~ ~. PZM7.11.89 it would assure that we are gong to have a project built this year. Francis: Procedurally, the code provides it is your decision and I don't think Council can do it. If you want to let them slide, let them slide now because inaction is worse in this case i think. Jim: If that is the case then I would agree with Welton's about keeping it openly vague so that that decision can be make at a later time. Roger: I don't have a problem with dealing with this parking situation later on when we know what their problems are. Jim: Fine. Then let's instead of voting yes on this particular motion then let's kill this motion and put it in Welton's words in which we keep it openly vague. Welton: There is a motion on the floor and there is a second. I am not sure that I remember the wording you had that applied to condition #6 which in reference to payment in lieu. Roger: There would be either payment in lieu or 9 off site parking spaces for storage plus increased enforcement. Welton: Roger's motion was that cash-in-lieu be imposed. But that that could be satisfied with 9 spaces somewhere else-- anywhere else. Roll call vote: Bruce, no, Michael, yes, Jim, yes, Mari, yes, Roger, yes, Jasmine, yes, Welton, yes. Motion passes. 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager ~~.~-- FROM: Francis X. Krizmanich, Planning Office RE: Holiday House Expansion DATE: August 14, 1989 ~i i ~~ SUMMARY: The Aspen Skiing Company proposes to construct 9 new employee units at the Holiday House. On July 24, 1989, the Council approved Ordinance 50 on first reading to rezone the Holiday House from Lodge Preservation to Residential/Multi- Family/PUD. On August 9, 1989, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Board reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the project with 4 units deed restricted to Low Income and 5 units deed restricted to Moderate Income guidelines. The Housing Authority also recommended that GMP credit should not be given for these units. BACKGROUND APPLICANT: Aspen Skiing Company (ASC). REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting approval to construct a 9 unit employee housing project on the eastern portion of the Holiday House property which is located at 127 East Hopkins Avenue. The following approvals are being requested by the Applicant: * Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for construction of affordable housing (Section 8-104 C.l.c.); * Amendment to the Official Zone District Map from LP to R/MF (Art. 7, Div. 11); * Amendment to the text of the Land Use Code (Art. 7, Div. 11); * Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement (Section 7-804 E.); * Special Review for Off-Street Parking (Section 7-404 B.) ; * Subdivision Approval (Art. 7, Div. 10); and F"A ~~ Waiver of City fees for: land use reviews, referrals to Engineering and Environmental Health Departments, building permit, and water taps. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The Holiday House property consists of Lots c, d, e, f, g and the east 7.5 feet of Lot b, City of Aspen, Original Townsite. The property is 15,750 square feet in size and is zoned LP. The existing improvements include 17 studio apartments, eight one-bedroom apartments, one two-bedroom apartment, 12 parking spaces, a swimming pool and a storage shed. ISSUES I. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Housing Office: In a memorandum submitted June 24, 1989 (attached) Janet Raczak submitted the following comments: Section 8-104(C)(1)(c) of the City Code allows for exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for construction of affordable housing. The housing must be deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines. The Housing Guidelines require the applicant to file deed restrictions on the 9 new employee housing units restricting the use, occupancy, and rental structure to those established in the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. A standard deed restriction is attached for the applicant's use. Any approvals granted by the City should include conditions requiring that the deed restrictions be filed, and the applicant must supply to the Housing Authority a plan for the units, with a calculation of exact net livable square footage of each unit, all prior to issuance of the building permit. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, the Housing Authority should be notified, and deed restrictions must be amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. Should the applicant desire to construct units larger in size than allowed by the guidelines, its rental price per square foot shall continue to be restricted to the maximum square footage established by the Guidelines. The Housing Office recommends the approval of this project with the following conditions: a. A standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. b. The Applicant shall supply to the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, on any of the units, the Housing Authority shall be notified, and deed restrictions amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. 2. Engineering Department: In a memorandum dated July 2, 1989, (attached) Chuck Roth submitted the following comments: a. The proposed construction would provide heavy density on the site and decrease amenities to the existing residents. The lot next door to the property is for sale. It would be a preferable site for additional employee housing units. The loss of the pool to the residents is a potentially serious reduction in amenities. There was no water in the pool at the time of the site visit. Is the pool generally maintained in an operating condition? Perhaps a Jacuzzi and/or hot tub could be provided in return for permission to delete the pool requirement in the SPA amendment. Also, the applicant could be required to provide some number of Moore pool passes to the Holiday House residents. b. The Holiday House currently offers a bike rack which had many bicycles in it. Any approvals should contain the requirement of providing a bicycle rack for some predetermined number of bicycles. (I did not count how many bikes were in the rack. ) It appears that there are 27 rooms in the existing building. How many bicycles does that translate into? Nine rooms are proposed to be added. c. It appears from the site plan that there might be room for stacking the parking. I do not know of any instance in the City where we have stacked parking, but it could be tried. This would require the car behind to move out of the way for the car in front. Note that the total parking space requirements for the site would increase form 27 to 36 with still only 12 spaces provided. As the application states, the site is located near both the place of employment and the commercial core. At the time of the site visit, the parking on the street at the site was quite completely in use, but the two blocks to the west were little utilized. 3 .~ ., ~. The applicant received permission with the Little Nell project for the 12 spaces for the 27 beds. At this time, the City may want to ask for payment-in-lieu for the parking spaces for the newly constructed units. d. Can more open space be achieved, or the saving of the pool, by constructing a more subterranean building with below grade setbacks from retaining walls so that bottom floors would still see the sky? And/or building over the pool? e. A plat will need to be submitted if approvals are extended. The plat should be titled as referenced above. Platting requirements are listed in Section 7.1004(D)(1)(a) of the Land Use Code. The trash dumpster location must be indicated. A 4 foot by 4 foot utility pedestal easement is required at the southeast corner of the parcel and a 10 foot by 10 foot transformer easement at the southwest corner of the parcel. f. historic cottonwood trees line the street on both sides from the corner of the applicant's property and about two blocks to the west. It is suggested that the applicant be required to plant several large caliper, cottonless cottonwood trees along the front of the property and to provide irrigation for the trees. g. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a copy of the design calculations and facilities design for the stormwater runoff to the City Engineering Department. h. The Engineering Department concurs with the applicant's representative's assessment of the traffic impacts. 3. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: In a letter dated June 21, 1989 (attached} Bruce Matherly submitted the following comments: "In order for the District to provide sanitation for this project the applicant will need to agree to participate in a point repair of the line downstream. The applicant mentions this in his application. The point repair downstream becomes a higher priority in our scheme of rehabilitation as a result of the increased flows from this project. We have estimated the cost of repair and estimate the applicants share to be approximately $3000. Once we have a formal commitment from the applicant concerning his participation in this repair then we can approve this project for sanitation. 4 ,~~. a.. J If the swimming pool, which is mentioned in the application, is connected to our system we will need to know the pool's capacity and work up a permit which will cover when the pool can be drained and what testing of the water will need to be done prior to draining the pool. The application also mentions that it is the applicant's intention to request that the City waive the tap fee for this project. The District will not be able to waive any fees associated with this project as it would eliminate our chances of receiving future EPA grant money for future plant expansions." 4. Aspen Water Department: In a memorandum dated June 21, 1989, Jim Markalunas submitted the following comments (attached): "We have reviewed the application, and wish to note that there is sufficient capacity to provide water for this project. However, Ordinance 47 does not provide for the waiver of water tap fees since these fees are necessary to provide revenue for much needed water systems improvements. Therefore we will be happy to provide water for this facility upon payment of the prerequisite tap fees." 5. Aspen Fire Protection District: In a memorandum dated June 15, 1989 (attached) Wayne Vandemark submitted the following comments: "The project is within a four minute response time for fire department operations. As indicated on page 4 (D) the building will be equipped with a sprinkler system and an automatic alarm system. This office has no further comments." II. PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS: The following analysis will address this project's compatibility with each land use approval being requested. 1. Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for the Construction of Affordable Housing. Section 8-104(C)(1)(c) of the Code permits exemption from the GMQS for affordable housing as follows: "Affordable housina. All housing deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing designee. The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a determination 5 of the City's need for such housing, considering the proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed, specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted." The Applicant proposes to construct 5 moderate and 4 low income studio rental apartments. The apartments will be approximately 474 square feet in size. The Planning Staff generally concurs with the Applicant's analysis and the recommendations of the Housing Office. The only staff concern is the rental rates proposed to be set at the moderate income level for 5 units and at the low income level for 4 units. Section 8-109 F. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations states in part that "It should be anticipated that the proposed housing units will be required to be restricted to the low income price and occupancy guidelines. However, at the time the applicant requests growth management exemption pursuant to the appropriate City or County Code, the Housing Authority shall review and consider the current community need for housing, evaluate the affordability of the proposed units to residents and recommend to the Commission the appropriate price and occupancy category to which the units should be restricted." The Planning Staff notes that the above Guidelines recommend restriction to low income occupancy and price guidelines. This project proposes that a majority of the units - 5 of 9 - be restricted to moderate income guidelines. The Housing Authority has recommended approval of the proposed rental rates. After reviewing rental and occupancy guidelines, the Planning staff has become concerned with some broader issues. That is the administration of privately produced and administered employee housing. We have the following concerns: * Will an employees lease depend on his continued employment? During most of the year, housing is extremely hard to find. The staff suggests that an employee have right of first refusal on a lease renewal regardless of his continued employment. * Who will "police" a multitude of privately run employee housing projects? Perhaps all employee housing projects should be administered by the Housing Authority. * The relationship of employee housing to the Growth Management Quota System is not clear at this time. The Code 6 does not address whether or not employee units may be used for future GMP credit. It could be argued that allowing credit is only another inducement to growth and only provides short term relief for the community's housing crisis while the long term implications of additional growth are ignored. In other words, if a housing shortage for employees exists now, allowing credit for future "free market" projects encourages growth while not providing any net increase of employee housing. The staff notes that the Housing Authority recommended that GMP credits not be given for the Holiday House employee units. 2. Amendment of the Official Zone District Map from LP to R/MF. Section 7-1102 of the Code provides standards for the review of amendments to the text of the Official Zone District Map. Those standards and staff comments follow: Standard A: Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Staff: This project complies with adopted land use regulations with the exception of open space. In regard to open space requirements, the Applicant has indicated that this project will provide 24$ (3,742 sq. ft.) open space where the R/MF zone requires 35$ open space. The applicant has an additional 11.5$ (1,798 sq. ft. ) of open space in a rear courtyard which cannot be counted because it is not visible from a public street. The applicant has proposed a code amendment to allow open space for 100$ employee projects to be set by Special Review. Rather than adopting a Code amendment for this particular project, the Staff recommends that this project be given a PUD designation to allow a variation from the R/MF requirements. The application is somewhat ambiguous in it's commitment to provide a 100 affordable housing project. The staff opinion is that the Code requirement for a 100$ affordable housing project means 100$ of the existing apartment building plus the additional 9 studio apartments Standard B: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as "mixed" residential. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the Plan which calls for the production of affordable housing within the City limits. Standard C: Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. 7 Staff: The staff concurs with the Applicant' of the application) of the surrounding area. opinion that this project is compatible with and neighborhood characteristics. s analysis (page 18 It is the staff existing land uses Standard D: The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff: The Applicant has committed to retain the 12 parking spaces that were required as part of the Little Nell SPA. The staff agrees with the City Engineer, that the existing parking on-site appears to be fully utilized. On-street parking appears to be available approximately two blocks west of the project site. Given the competing goals of providing parking versus additional employee housing, the Planning staff favors the provision of housing. The staff views this project as primarily benefitting the applicant and we recommend that the Applicant be required to provide fees-in-lieu of parking for nine studio units to offset this projects parking impacts. Standard E: Whether and amendment would result in whether and the extent to exceed the capacity of such limited to transportation supply, parks, drainage, facilities. the extent to which the proposed demands on public facilities, and which the proposed amendment would public facilities, including but not `acilities, sewage facilities, water schools, and emergency medical Staff: As noted in the previous section, this project will impact public parking on nearby street frontages. The proposed expansion also contemplates removal of the swimming pool which was required to be retained as part of the Little Nell SPA. The applicant is requesting a Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA to allow elimination of the pool on the theory that nine additional dwelling units would serve their employees better than the pool. The staff opinion is that elimination of this recreational amenity will impact both the project residents and public facilities. This project appears to primarily benefit the Applicant. The Planning staff agrees with the City Engineer, that some on-site amenities should be provided to mitigate this impact. The staff recommends that the Applicant provide some on- site amenities (such as a sauna and hot tub) to offset the loss of the pool and that park dedication fees not be waived for the nine additional studios. Standard F: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project will not significantly adversely affect the natural environment. However, 8 the project will been open space. planting of large would enhance the new building. create more building mass on a site that has We agree with the City Engineer, that the cottonless cottonwood trees along the street streetscape and reduce the visual impact of the Standard G: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project will be compatible with the community character. Standard H: Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff: As noted in the Applicant's analysis on page 18 of the application, the property is located in a mixed residential neighborhood. The proposed zoning appears more appropriate for this project than the existing deed restricted LP zoning. The staff is currently developing an "Affordable Housing" zone district. if an "AH" district is developed, the Commission and Council may want to consider rezoning this property "AH" in the future. Standard I: Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Staff: The staff opinion is that this proposal to provide additional employee housing in the City of Aspen is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. 3. Amendment to the Text of the Land Use Code: The Applicant proposes to amend the Code pursuant to Section 7-1101 of the Code to set open space requirements for a 100$ affordable housing project as a Special Review. The staff would prefer the use of the PUD provision to allow this variation rather than supporting an additional Code amendment at this time. When this application was prepared the PUD procedure was under review in the Code correction process, therefore, the Applicant applied for a code amendment. The staff supports granting a variance for open space because this property would have the required 35$ if the total property was considered. As noted previously, the most appropriate zoning for this project may be the Affordable Housing (AH) zone which staff is presently developing. 4. Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement: Section 7-803(B) of the Code provides that the Council may amend an SPA 9 ~-~ ._~ agreement by following the same procedures used in designating a parcel Specially Planned Area (SPA). The Applicant proposes an amendment to the Little Nell SPA to remove the requirement to maintain the pool at the Holiday House. The staff notes that, at the time of our site inspection the pool was completely empty. We do not know if it has been used recently. The staff does not have a problem with amending the SPA agreement to eliminate the pool if the Applicant is willing to commit to providing other on-site amenities, perhaps a sauna or Jacuzzi as recommended by the City Engineer to off-set the loss of the pool for existing residents. The Applicant should also pay park fees to mitigate off-site impacts created by the nine additional studio units. 5. Special Review for Off-Street Parking: Section 5-301(B) of the Code provides that off-street parking requirements for all affordable housing shall be established by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. The Special Review is a Planning Commission action. Section 7-404 (B)(2) provides the following criteria for Special Review approval: "In all other zone districts, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees." The staff agrees with the Applicant that this site is an excellent location for employee housing and that automobile use will be reduced by its proximity to downtown, Aspen Mountain and bus routes. The staff is concerned however, that there are only 12 spaces on-site when 36 spaces would normally be required if this were not an affordable housing project. We must question where the additional employees' cars will be parked. The Applicant should make a proposal to mitigate this potential impact to public facilities. The staff supports the City Engineer's recommendation that fees-in-lieu be required to mitigate the additional impact created by the nine additional units. Another alternative could be the reservation of long term parking spaces at the Buttermilk or Tiehack areas. 6. Subdivision Approval: Subdivision approval is required for this project because the Land Use Code definition of subdivision includes multi-family projects. This is to insure that this type development is planned in a manner consistent with City policies and regulations. The staff agrees with the Applicant's analysis (pages 23 through 36) and commitments regarding the Subdivision criteria. The commitments made by the Applicant in this section should be required as conditions of approval for this project. 10 7. Waiver of City Fees: The Applicant is requesting that the City waive fees for Land Use Reviews, Plan Checks, Building Permits, and Water Taps. Section 18 of Ordinance No. 47 (Series of 1988) provides for the waiver of fees as follows: "That the Planning Director and the Chief Building Official are hereby directed to waive all land use application and building permit fees for developments which constitute one hundred percent (100) affordable housing or for any new Accessory Dwelling Unit or legalized bandit unit." Based on the above Code provision, the fees for land use reviews and building permits are clearly waived and we have initiated necessary refund procedures. The Code does not presently provide for the waiver of water tap fees. The Aspen Water Department has indicated that they will require tap fees to be paid for this project. The Planning staff notes that there will be a discussion between the Housing Office and the City Council on July 17 regarding approaches to address the issue of tap fees for employee housing. Section 5-606 of the Code states that "Affordable Housino. Whenever the City Council shall have determined that any part of a proposed ddevelopment constitutes an affordable housing development and wishes to subsidize its construction, the City Council may exempt that part of the development from the application of the Park Development Impact Fee, or reduce by any amount the fees imposed by this section." RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Applicants proposal to construct an additional nine employee units on the Holiday House property subject to the conditions listed below. The staff notes that the Housing Authority recommended that no GMP credit be given for the additional units. The staff supports this recommendation because, in our opinion, granting GMP credit encourages future growth and results in no long term housing solution. 1. The entire project, including the units contained in the addition and in the existing Holiday House, shall be deed restricted to 100$ Affordable Housing pursuant to Article 5, Division 2, of the Land Use Code (as amended by Ordinance No. 47 (Series of 1988) prior to the issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy. The Applicant shall not be given GMQS credit for the nine studio apartments. 11 2. A standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall supply the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, on any of the units, the Housing Authority shall be notified, and deed restrictions amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. 4. PUD approval shall be granted to permit a variation from the strict interpretation of the Code such that the applicant can include courtyard space not visible from the public street to meet the 35% R/MF open space requirement. 5. The Little Nell SPA agreement shall be amended to allow removal of the swimming pool in exchange for the applicant providing a park area and bicycle racks on- site acceptable to the Planning Office staff prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. The East Hopkins Avenue frontage shall be planted with cottonless cottonwoods consistent with the streetscape to the west. 7. A final plat shall be submitted prior to final approval which meets the Code standards as approved by the City Engineer. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a stormwater design and facilities plan for the City Engineer's review and approval. 9. Prior to final approval the Applicant shall reach agreement on sanitation fees with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 10. An automatic alarm and sprinkler system shall be provided as committed by the Applicant. 11. Pursuant to the Parking Special Review approval granted by the Planning Commission, the applicant shall pay cash-in-lieu for nine parking spaces or identify nine 12 off-site spaces to be used by residents of this project. Increased management of the 12 on-site parking spaces shall be undertaken by the applicant. PROPOSED MOTION: "Move to approve Ordinance No. 50 (Series of 1989), to rezone the Holiday House from Lodge Preservation to Residential/Multi-Family PUD and to approve a Growth Management Quota System Exemption, a minor amendment to the Little Nell SPA, Subdivision approval and the waiver of Park Development Impact Fees with the conditions of approval numbered 1-11 as listed above." CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS: FXK:das ccmemo.holiday 13 TO: Francis Krizmanich, Planning Office FROM: Janet Raczak, Housing Office RE: Holiday House Expansion DATE: June 24, 1989 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal: ASC proposes to construct a new apartment building just to the east of the Holiday House containing 5 moderate income and 4 low income studio apartments. Each unit will contain approximately 470 square feet. Reviex: Section 8-104(C)(1)(c) of the City Code allowed for the exemption of from the Growth Management Quota System for construction of affordable housing. The housing must be deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines. The Housing Guidelines require the applicant to file deed restrictions on the 9 new employee housing units restricting the use, occupancy, and rental structure to those established in the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. A standard deed restriction is attached for the applicant's use. Any approvals granted by the City should include conditions requiring that the deed restrictions be filed, and the applicant must supply to the Housing Authority a plan for the units, with a calculation of exact net livable square footage of each unit, all prior to issuance of the building permit. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, the Housing Authority should be notified, and deed restrictions must be amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. Should the applicant desire to construct units larger in size that allowed by the guidelines, its rental price per square foot shall continue to be restricted to the maximum square footage established by the Guidelines. Recommendation: The Housing Office recommends the approval of this project with the following conditions: 1. A standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. The applicant shall supply to the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. if at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, on any of the units, the Housing Authority shall be notified, and deed restrictions amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. HOLIDAY.LUA ~~ OCCUPANCY DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT CARETAKER AFFORDABLE RESIDENT DWELLING IINIT THIS OCCUPANCY "Agreement") is made by and between EEMENT (the of , 19 (hereinafter referred to as " Owner"), whose address is and the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority, a Colorado corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Authority") organized pursuant to the Colorado County Housing Authority laws, as set forth in C.R.S. Section 29-4-501, et.seq., and/or the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, and/or the City Council of Aspen, Colorado. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Owner owns real property more specifically described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Real Property"), which Real Property shall contains a single family dwelling ("Free Market Unit") and a affordable dwelling unit, to contain square feet ("Affordable Resident Unit"). For purposes of this agreement, the Free Market Unit, the Affordable Resident Unit, the Real Property and all the appurtenances, improvements and fixtures associated therewith shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, this Agreement imposes certain covenants upon the Property which restrict the use and occupancy of the Property to residents and their families who are either employed by the Owner or who are residents of Pitkin County and fall within the Housing Authority rental price guidelines and resident qualification guidelines established and indexed by the Authority on an annual basis. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of Ten ($10.00) dollars and other good and valuable consideration, paid to the Authority by the Owner, the receipt and sufficiency for which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed by the parties hereto as follows: 1. Owner hereby covenants that the Affordable Resident Unit described above shall at all times remain a rental unit and shall not be condominiumized. 2. The use and occupancy of the Property, described above, shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for individuals who are employed in Pitkin County and who meet the definition of "qualified income residents" as that term is defined by the Housing Authority Guidelines established and indexed from time to time. Owner shall have the right to lease the Affordable Resident Unit to a "qualified income resident" of his own selection. Such individual may be an employee of the Owner, or employed as a resident caretaker, DEED RESTRICTION AND AG'. and entered into this day provided such person fulfills the requirement of a qualified resident. Written verification of employment of persons proposed to reside in the Affordable Resident Unit shall be completed and filed with the Housing Authority Office by the Owner of the Affordable Resident Unit prior to occupancy thereof, and must be acceptable to the Housing Authority. 4. If the Owner does not rent the Affordable Resident Unit to a "qualified income resident" the unit shall be made available for occupancy in accordance with the Housing Authority Guidelines, provided the Owner shall have the right to approve any prospective tenant, which approval shall not be unreasonably delayed or withheld. 5. Unit shall not be vacant for any unreasonable period of time between leases. The Affordable Resident Unit is limited to occupancy by not more than two adults and related children. Resident adults must qualify as, and have been found by the Housing Authority to be, residents of the community and residents thereof as referred to above. Lease agreements executed for occupancy of the Affordable Resident Unit shall provide for a rental terms of not less than six consecutive months. This Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the Real Property as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Housing Authority, the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Pitkin, and the City of Aspen, their respective successors as applicable, by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction, abatement, or eviction of non-complying tenants, for the period of fifty years from the date of recording hereof in the Pitkin County real property records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the day and year above first written. OWNER: Mailing Address: ,-.. ~ . ~e/ l STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 19 by Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Publ ACCEPTANCE BY THE HOUSING AUTHORITY The foregoing agreement and its terms are accepted by The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO BY: Mailing Address: 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 19 by Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public REV. 5/3/89 DR1 MEMORANDUM To: Francis Krizmanich, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department ~/`~ Date: July 2, 1989 Re: Holiday House Expansion - Rezoning, Code Amendment, GMQS Exemption, Special Review and SPA Amendment Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments 1. The Engineering Department understands that this is a review for employee housing and therefore will merit consideration on that basis. Our comments are written not so much to recommend as to provide sufficient information for P & Z review. 2. The proposed construction would provide heavy density on the site and decrease amenities to the existing residents. The lot next door to the property is for sale. It would be a preferable site for additional employee housing units. The loss of the pool to the residents is a potentially serious reduction in amenities. There was no water in the pool at the time of the site visit. Is the pool generally maintained in an operating condition? Perhaps a Jacuzzi and/or hot tub could be provided in return for permis- sion to delete the pool requirement in the SPA amendment. Also, the applicant could be required to provide some number of Moore pool passes to the Holiday House residents. 3. The Holiday House currently offers a bike rack which had many bicycles in it. Any approvals should contain the requirement of providing a bicycle rack for some predetermined number of bicycles. (I did not count how many bikes were in the rack.) It appears that there are 27 beds in the existing building. How many bicycles does that translate into? Nine beds are proposed to be added. 3. It appears from the site plan that there might be room for stacking the parking. I do not know of any instance in the city where we have stacked parking, but it could be tried. This would require the car behind to move out of the way for the car in front. Note that the total parking space requirements for the site would increase from 27 to 36 with still only 12 spaces provided. As the application states, the site is located near both the place of employment and the commercial core. site visit, the parking on the street at the completely in use, but the two blocks to the utilized. The applicant received permission with project for the 12 spaces for the 27 beds. City may want to ask for payment-in-lieu for for the newly constructed units. At the time of the site was quite west were little the Little Nell At this time, the the parking spaces 9. Can more open space be achieved, or the saving of the pool, by constructing a more subterranean building with below grade setbacks from retaining walls so that bottom floors would still see the sky? And/or building over the pool? 5. A plat will need to be submitted if approvals are extended. The plat should be titled as referenced above. Platting require- ments are listed in Section 7.1009(D)(1)(a) of the land use code. The trash dumpster location must be indicated. A 9 foot by four foot utility pedestal easement is required at the southeast corner of the parcel and a 10 foot by 10 foot transformer easement at the southwest corner of the parcel. 6. The historic cottonwood trees line the street on both sides from the corner of the applicant's property and about two blocks to the west. It is suggested that the applicant be required to plant several large caliper, cottonless cottonwood trees along the front of the property and to provide irrigation for the trees. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a copy of the design calculations and facilities design for the stormwater runoff to the city engineering depart- ment. 8. The engineering department concurs with the applicant's representative's assessment of the traffic impacts. cc: Bob Gish memo_89.70 .aspen consolidated sanitation l~istvict 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 61611 Tole. (303) 925-3601 June 21, 1989 Francis Krizmanich Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Holiday House Expansion Dear Francis: Tole. (3031 925-2537 In order for the District to provide sanitation for this project the applicant will need to agree to participate in a point repair of the line downstream. The applicant mentions this in his application. The point repair downstream becomes a higher priority in our scheme of rehabilitation as a result of the increased flows from this project. We have estimated the cost of repair and .estimate the applicants share to be approximately X3000. Once we have a formal commitment from the applicant concerning his participation in this repair then we can approve this project for sanitation. If the swimming pool, which is mentioned in the application, is connected to our system we will need to know the pool's capacity and work up a permit which will cover when the pool can be drained and what testing of the water will need to do be done prior to draining the pool. The application also mentions that it is the applicant's intention to ron~lpst th>± the City waive the tap fee for this project. The District will not be able to waive any fees associated with this project as it would eliminate our chances of receiving future EPA grant money for future plant expansions. Sincerely, ~w ~~;~.~ Bruce Matherly District Hanager ~~ e. WAYNE L. VANDEMARK, FIRE MARSHAL 420 E. HOPKINS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (303) 925.2690 TU: Francis firizmanich, Planning Uffice FROM: Wayne tiandemark, Fire Marshal RE: Holiday House Expansion Parcel ID# 2735-124-59-O0'L DATE: June 15, 1989 The project is within a four minute response time for fire department operations. As indicated on page 4 (D) the building will be equipped with a sprinkler system and an automatic alarm system. This office has no further comments. JUNi`; n ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT TO: Francis Krizmanich FROM: Jim Markalunas SUBJECT: Holiday House Expansion DATE:------------6 / 21 / 8 9-- -- We have reviewed the appli atio ,and wish to note that there is sufficient capacity to provide water for project. However, Ordinance 47 does not provide for the waiver of water tap fees since these fees are necessary to provide revenue for much needed water systems improvements. Therefore, we will be happy to provide water for this facility upon payment of the prerequisite tap fees. cc: Glenn Hom Hairabedian Architects Aspen Ski Co ~., _, .. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GRANTING SPECIAL REVIEW APPROVAL FOR PARKING AND CONSOLIDATED PUD AND R/MF REZONING APPROVAL OF THE HOLIDAY HOUSE EXPANSION TO THE CITY COUNCIL Resolution No. 89- WHEREAS, the Aspen Skiing Company (hereinafter "Applicant") has applied for a Growth Management Quota System Exemption, Amendment to the Official Zone District Map from LP to R/MF, Amendment to the Text of the Land Use Code to set Open Space Requirements as Special Review for Affordable Housing, Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement, Subdivision Approval and Special Review Approval for Off-street Parking to construct a 9 studio apartment addition to the Holiday House; and WHEREAS, the Commission finds that this application is generally consistent with the Policies and Regulations of the City of Aspen Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission notes that the City is considering adoption of an Affordable Housing zone and anticipates that this project may be rezoned to said Affordable Housing zone district in the future if deemed appropriate by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it hereby approves the Parking Special Review on the condition that the Applicant pay cash-in-lieu for nine parking spaces or provide 9 dedicated spaces off-site for employees and that increased management of the existing 12 on-site spaces be undertaken by the Applicant. Resolution No. 89-_ Page 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Commission that it hereby recommends approval of this project to the City Council with the following conditions: 1. The entire project, including the units contained in the addition and in the existing Holiday House, shall be deed restricted to 100$ Affordable Housing pursuant to Article 5, Division 2, of the Land Use Code (as amended by Ordinance No. 47 (Series of 1988). The Applicant may be given GMQS credit for the nine studio apartments as provided in the Land Use Code. 2. Prior to review before City Council, the Applicant shall meet with the Housing Authority for their review and recommendation regarding income and occupancy guidelines as required by Section 8-109 (F) of the Land Use Code. Based upon the City Council's decision, a standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall supply the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. if at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, on any of the units, the Housing Authority shall be notified, and deed restrictions amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. PUD approval shall be granted to permit a variation from the strict interpretation of the Code such that the applicant can include courtyard space not visible from the public street to meet the 35$ R/MF open space requirement. The Little Nell SPA agreement shall be amended to allow removal of the swimming pool if the applicant provides a park area on-site acceptable to the City Council. Bicycle racks shall also be provided on-site. The East Hopkins Avenue frontage shall be planted with cottonless cottonwoods consistent with the streetscape to the west. Resolution No. 89-_ Page 3 7. A final plat shall be submitted prior to final approval which meets the Code standards as approved by the City Engineer. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a stormwater design and facilities plan for the City Engineer's review and approval. 9. Prior to final approval the Applicant shall reach agreement on sanitation fees with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 10: An automatic alarm and sprinkler system shall be provided as committed by the Applicant. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on July 11, 1989. ASPEN PLANNING AND By ~ ~l~~i C. Welton Ande s ATTEST: Jan Carney, Deputy City Clerk Chairman FXK:das pzreso.holiday s TO: Mayor and Council THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr. , City Manager /~~DD•y,.~ FROM: Francis X. Krizmanich, Planning Office ~;`'~!J RE: Holiday House Expansion DATE: July 24, 1989 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval on first reading of an Ordinance to rezone the Holiday House property from Lodge Preservation to Residential/Multi-Family/PUD. The Planning Office and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Holiday House Expansion subject to the recommendations contained in the attached Planning Commission resolution. APPLICANT: Aspen Skiing Company (ASC). REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting approval to construct a 9 unit employee housing project on the eastern portion of the Holiday House property which is located at 127 East Hopkins Avenue. The following approvals are being requested by the Applicant: * Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for construction of affordable housing (Section 8-104 C.i.c.); * Amendment to the Official Zone District Map from LP to R/MF (Art. 7, Div. 11); * Amendment to the text of the Land Use Code (Art. 7, Div. 11); * Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement (Section 7-804 E.); * Special Review for Off-Street Parking (Section 7-404 B.); * Subdivision Approval (Art. 7, Div. 10); and * Waiver of City fees for: land use reviews, referrals to Engineering and Environmental Health Departments, building permit, and water taps. ,-~ ~.. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The Holiday House property consists of Lots c, d, e, f, g and the east 7.5 feet of Lot b, City of Aspen, Original Townsite. The property is 15,750 square feet in size and is zoned LP. The existing improvements include 17 studio apartments, eight one-bedroom apartments, one two-bedroom apartment, 12 parking spaces, a swimming pool and a storage shed. ISSUES I. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Housing Office: In a memorandum submitted June 24, 1989 (attached) Janet Raczak submitted the following comments: Section 8-104(C)(1)(c) of the City Code allows for exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for construction of affordable housing. The housing must be deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines. The Housing Guidelines require the applicant to file deed restrictions on the 9 new employee housing units restricting the use, occupancy, and rental structure to those established in the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. A standard deed restriction is attached for the applicant's use. Any approvals granted by the City should include conditions requiring that the deed restrictions be filed, and the applicant must supply to the Housing Authority a plan for the units, with a calculation of exact net livable square footage of each unit, all prior to issuance of the building permit. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, the Housing Authority should be notified, and deed restrictions must be amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. Should the applicant desire to construct units larger in size than allowed by the guidelines, its rental price per square foot shall continue to be restricted to the maximum square footage established by the Guidelines. The Housing Office recommends the approval of this project with the following conditions: a. A standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. b. The Applicant shall supply to the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable r square footage, on any of the units, the Housing Authority shall be notified, and deed restrictions amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. 2. Engineering Department: In a memorandum dated July 2, 1989, (attached) Chuck Roth submitted the following comments: a. The proposed construction would provide heavy density on the site and decrease amenities to the existing residents. The lot next door to the property is for sale. It would be a preferable site for additional employee housing units. The loss of the pool to the residents is a potentially serious reduction in amenities. There was no water in the pool at the time of the site visit. Is the pool generally maintained in an operating condition? Perhaps a Jacuzzi and/or hot tub could be provided in return for permission to delete the pool requirement in the SPA amendment. Also, the applicant could be required to provide some number of Moore pool passes to the Holiday House residents. b. The Holiday House currently offers a bike rack which had many bicycles in it. Any approvals should contain the requirement of providing a bicycle rack for some predetermined number of bicycles. (I did not count how many bikes were in the rack.) It appears that there are 27 rooms in the existing building. How many bicycles does that translate into? Nine rooms are proposed to be added. c. It appears from the site plan that there might be room for stacking the parking. I do not know of any instance in the City where we have stacked parking, but it could be tried. This would require the car behind to move out of the way for the car in front. Note that the total parking space requirements for the site would increase form 27 to 36 with still only 12 spaces provided. As the application states, the site is located near both the place of employment and the commercial core. At the time of the site visit, the parking on the street at the site was quite completely in use, but the two blocks to the west were little utilized. The applicant received permission with the Little Nell project for the 12 spaces for the 27 beds. At this time, the City may want to ask for payment-in-lieu for the parking spaces for the newly constructed units. 3 ~> d. Can more open space be achieved, or the saving of the pool, by constructing a more subterranean building with below grade setbacks from retaining walls so that bottom floors would still see the sky? And/or building over the pool? e. A plat will need to be submitted if approvals are extended. The plat should be titled as referenced above. Platting requirements are listed in Section 7.1004(D)(1)(a) of the Land Use Code. The trash dumpster location must be indicated. A 4 foot by 4 foot utility pedestal easement is required at the southeast corner of the parcel and a 10 foot by 10 foot transformer easement at the southwest corner of the parcel. f. Historic cottonwood trees line the street on both sides from the corner of the applicant's property and about two blocks to the west. It is suggested that the applicant be required to plant several large caliper, cottonless cottonwood trees along the front of the property and to provide irrigation for the trees. g. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a copy of the design calculations and facilities design for the stormwater runoff to the City Engineering Department. h. The Engineering Department concurs with the applicant's representative's assessment of the traffic impacts. 3. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: In a letter dated June 21, 1989 (attached) Bruce Matherly submitted the following comments: "In order for the District to provide sanitation for this project the applicant will need to agree to participate in a point repair of the line downstream. The applicant mentions this in his application. The point repair downstream becomes a higher priority in our scheme of rehabilitation as a result of the increased flows from this project. We have estimated the cost of repair and estimate the applicants share to be approximately $3000. Once we have a formal commitment from the applicant concerning his participation in this repair then we can approve this project for sanitation. If the swimming pool, which is mentioned in the application, is connected to our system we will need to know the pool's capacity and work up a permit which will cover when the pool 4 ~-, ,.~, ~. 4 t can be drained and what testing of the water will need to be done prior to draining the pool. The application also mentions that it is the applicant's intention to request that the City waive the tap fee for this project. The District will not be able to waive any fees associated with this project as it would eliminate our chances of receiving future EPA grant money for future plant expansions." 4. Aspen Water Department: In a memorandum dated June 21, 1989, Jim Markalunas submitted the following comments (attached): "We have reviewed the application, and wish to note that there is sufficient capacity to provide water for this project. However, Ordinance 47 does not provide for the waiver of water tap fees since these fees are necessary to provide revenue for much needed water systems improvements. Therefore we will be happy to provide water for this facility upon payment of the prerequisite tap fees." 5. Aspen Fire Protection District: In a memorandum dated June 15, 1989 (attached) Wayne Vandemark submitted the following comments: "The project is within a four minute response time for fire department operations. As indicated on page 4 (D) the building will be equipped with a sprinkler system and an automatic alarm system. This office has no further comments." II. PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS: The following analysis will address this project's compatibility with each land use approval being requested. 1. Growth Planagement Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for the Construction of Affordable Housing. Section 8-104(C)(1)(c) of the Code permits exemption from the GMQS for affordable housing as follows: "Affordable housin4. All housing deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing designee. The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed, 5 ~ ~.~ .,_, specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted." The Applicant proposes to construct 5 moderate and 4 low income studio rental apartments. The apartments will be approximately 474 square feet in size. The Planning Staff generally concurs with the Applicant's analysis and the recommendations of the Housing Office. The only staff concern is the rental rates proposed to be set at the moderate income level for 5 units and at the low income level for 4 units. Section 8-109 F. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations states in part that "It should be anticipated that the proposed housing units will be required to be restricted to the low income price and occupancy guidelines. However, at the time the applicant requests growth management exemption pursuant to the appropriate City or County Code, the Housing Authority shall review and consider the current community need for housing, evaluate the affordability of the proposed units to residents and recommend to the Commission the appropriate price and occupancy category to which the units should be restricted." The Planning Staff notes that the above Guidelines recommend restriction to low income occupancy and price guidelines. This project proposes that a majority of the units - 5 of 9 - be restricted to moderate income guidelines. The Staff has not verified that the Housing Authority has approved the proposed rental rates. We recommend that, prior to Council action on this project, the applicant meet with the Housing Authority for their review of the proposed rental rates and that City Council receive their recommendation regarding income and occupancy restrictions. After reviewing rental and occupancy guidelines, the Planning staff has become concerned with a broader issue. That is the administration of privately produced and administered employee housing. We have the following concerns: * Will an employees lease depend on his continued employment? During most of the year, housing is extremely hard to find. The staff suggests that an employee have right of first refusal on a lease renewal regardless of his continued employment. * Who will "police" a multitude of privately run employee housing projects? Perhaps all employee housing projects should be administered by the Housing Authority. 2. Amendment of the Official Zone District Map from LP to R/MF. 6 ~: Section 7-1102 of the Code provides standards for the review of amendments to the text of the Official Zone District Map. Those standards and staff comments follow: Standard A: Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Staff: This project complies with adopted land use regulations with the exception of open space. In regard to open space requirements, the Applicant has indicated that this project will provide 24$ (3,742 sq, ft.) open space where the R/MF zone requires 35$ open space. The applicant has an additional 11.5$ (1,798 sq. ft. ) of open space in a rear courtyard which cannot be counted because it is not visible from a public street. The applicant has proposed a code amendment to allow open space for 100$ employee projects to be set by Special Review. Rather than adopting a Code amendment for this particular project, the Staff recommends that this project be given a PUD designation to allow a variation from the R/MF requirements. The application is somewhat ambiguous in it's commitment to provide a 100$ affordable housing project. The staff opinion is that the Code requirement for a 100$ affordable housing project means 100$ of the existing apartment building plus the additional 9 studio apartments Standard B: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as "mixed" residential. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the Plan which calls for the production of affordable housing within the City limits. Standard C: Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff: The staff concurs with the Applicant's analysis (page 18 of the application) of the surrounding area. It is the staff opinion that this project is compatible with existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. Standard D: The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff: The Applicant has committed to retain the 12 parking spaces that were required as part of the Little Nell SPA. The staff agrees with the City Engineer, that the existing parking on-site appears to be fully utilized. On-street parking appears 7 ~\ to be available approximately two blocks west of the project site. Given the competing goals of providing parking versus additional employee housing, the Planning staff favors the provision of housing. The staff views this project as primarily benefitting the applicant and we recommend that the Applicant be required to provide fees-in-lieu of parking for nine studio units to offset this projects parking impacts. Standard E: Whether and amendment would result in whether and the extent to exceed the capacity of such limited to transportation supply, parks, drainage, facilities. the extent to which the proposed demands on public facilities, and which the proposed amendment would public facilities, including but not `acilities, sewage facilities, water schools, and emergency medical Staff: As noted in the previous section, this project will impact public parking on nearby street frontages. The proposed expansion also contemplates removal of the swimming pool which was required to be retained as part of the Little Nell SPA. The applicant is requesting a Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA to allow elimination of the pool on the theory that nine additional dwelling units would serve their employees better than the pool. The staff opinion is that elimination of this recreational amenity will impact both the project residents and public facilities. This project appears to primarily benefit the Applicant. The Planning staff agrees with the City Engineer, that some on-site amenities should be provided to mitigate this impact. The staff recommends that the Applicant provide some on- site amenities (such as a sauna and hot tub) to offset the loss of the pool and that park dedication fees not be waived for the nine additional studios. Standard F: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project will not significantly adversely affect the natural environment. However, the project will create more building mass on a site that has been open space. We agree with the City Engineer, that the planting of large cottonless cottonwood trees along the street would enhance the streetscape and reduce the visual impact of the new building. Standard G: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project will be compatible with the community character. .-w , 4..., ~. ,~~- Standard H: Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff: As noted in the Applicant's analysis on page 18 of the application, the property is located in a mixed residential neighborhood. The proposed zoning appears more appropriate for this project than the existing deed restricted LP zoning. The staff is currently developing an "Affordable Housing" zone district. If an "AH" district is developed, the Commission and Council may want to consider rezoning this property "AH" in the future. Standard I: Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Staff: The staff opinion is that this proposal to provide additional employee housing in the City of Aspen is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. 3. Amendment to the Text of the Land Use Code: The Applicant proposes to amend the Code pursuant to Section 7-1101 of the Code to set open space requirements for a 100 affordable housing project as a Special Review. The staff would prefer the use of the PUD provision to allow this variation rather than supporting an additional Code amendment at this time. When this application was prepared the PUD procedure was under review in the Code correction process, therefore, the Applicant applied for a code amendment. The staff supports granting a variance for open space because this property would have the required 35$ if the total property was considered. As noted previously, the most appropriate zoning for this project may be the Affordable Housing (AH) zone which staff is presently developing. 4. Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement: Section 7-803(B) of the Code provides that the Council may amend an SPA agreement by following the same procedures used in designating a parcel Specially Planned Area (SPA). The Applicant proposes an amendment to the Little Nell SPA to remove the requirement to maintain the pool at the Holiday House. The staff notes that, at the time of our site inspection the pool was completely empty. We do not know if it has been used recently. The staff does not have a problem with amending the SPA agreement to eliminate the pool if the Applicant is willing to commit to providing other on-site amenities, perhaps a sauna or Jacuzzi as recommended by the City Engineer to off-set the loss of the pool for existing residents. The Applicant should 9 .~,, .~ .,.~. also pay park fees to mitigate off-site impacts created by the nine additional studio units. 5. Special Review for Off-Street Parking: Section 5-301(B) of the Code provides that off-street parking requirements for all affordable housing shall be established by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. The Special Review is a Planning Commission action. Section 7-404 (B)(2) provides the following criteria for Special Review approval: "In all other zone districts, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees." The staff agrees with the Applicant that this site is an excellent location for employee housing and that automobile use will be reduced by its proximity to downtown, Aspen Mountain and bus routes. The staff is concerned however, that there are only 12 spaces on-site when 36 spaces would normally be required if this were not an affordable housing project. We must question where the additional employees' cars will be parked. The Applicant should make a proposal to mitigate this potential impact to public facilities. The staff supports the City Engineer's recommendation that fees-in-lieu be required to mitigate the additional impact created by the nine additional units. Another alternative could be the reservation of long term parking spaces at the Buttermilk or Tiehack areas. 6. Subdivision Approval: Subdivision approval is required for this project because the Land Use Code definition of subdivision includes multi-family projects. This is to insure that this type development is planned in a manner consistent with City policies and regulations. The staff agrees with the Applicant's analysis (pages 23 through 36) and commitments regarding the Subdivision criteria. The commitments made by the Applicant in this section should be required as conditions of approval for this project. 7. Waiver of City Fees: The Applicant is requesting that the City waive fees for Land Use Reviews, Plan Checks, Building Permits, and Water Taps. Section 18 of Ordinance No. 47 (Series of 1988) provides for the waiver of fees as follows: "That the Planning Director and the Chief Building Official are hereby directed to waive all land use application and building permit fees for developments which constitute one hundred percent (100$) affordable housing or for any new Accessory Dwelling Unit or legalized bandit unit." l0 ,.... 1,. ..~ Based on the above Code provision, the fees for land use reviews and building permits are clearly waived and we have initiated necessary refund procedures. The Code does not presently provide for the waiver of water tap fees. The Aspen Water Department has indicated that they will require tap fees to be paid for this project. The Planning staff notes that there will be a discussion between the Housing Office and the City Council on July 17 regarding approaches to address the issue of tap fees for employee housing. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Applicants proposal to construct an additional nine employee units on the Holiday House property subject to the conditions outlined in the attached Planning Commission resolution: PROPOSED MOTION: "Move to approve Ordinance No. ~ (Series of 1989) on first reading." CITY MANAGER FXK:das ccmemo.holiday 11 ,~ ~r MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Francis X. Krizmanich, Planning Office RE: Holiday House Expansion DATE: July 11, 1989 APPLICANT: Aspen Skiing Company (ASC). REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting approval to construct a 9 unit employee housing project on the eastern portion of the Holiday House property which is located at 127 East Hopkins Avenue. The following approvals are being requested by the Applicant: * Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for construction of affordable housing (Section 8-104 C.l.c.); * Amendment to the Official Zone District Map from LP to R/MF (Art. 7, Div. 11); * Amendment to the text of the Land Use Code (Art. 7, Div. 11); * Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement (Section 7-804 E.); * Special Review for Off-Street Parking (Section 7-404 B.); * Subdivision Approval (Art. 7, Div. 10); and * Waiver of City fees for: land use reviews, referrals to Engineering and Environmental Health Departments, building permit, and water taps. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The Holiday House property consists of Lots c, d, e, f, g and the east 7.5 feet of Lot b, City of Aspen, Original Townsite. The property is 15,750 square feet in size and is zoned LP. The existing improvements include 17 studio apartments, eight one-bedroom apartments, one two-bedroom apartment, 12 parking spaces, a swimming pool and a storage shed. ISSUES I. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS y, 1. 2. Housing Office: In a memorandum submitted June 24, 1989 (attached) Janet Raczak submitted the following comments: Section 8-104(C)(1)(c) of the City Code allows for exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for construction of affordable housing. The housing must be deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines. The Housing Guidelines require the applicant to file deed restrictions on the 9 new employee housing units restricting the use, occupancy, and rental structure to those established in the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. A standard deed restriction is attached for the applicant's use. Any approvals granted by the City should include conditions requiring that the deed restrictions be filed, and the applicant must supply to the Housing Authority a plan for the units, with a calculation of exact net livable square footage of each unit, all prior to issuance of the building permit. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, the Housing Authority should be notified, and deed restrictions must be amended prior to issuance of any, temporary or final certificate of occupancy. Should the applicant desire to construct units larger in size than allowed by the guidelines, its rental price per square foot shall continue to be restricted to the maximum square footage established by the Guidelines. The Housing Office recommends the approval of this project with the following conditions: a. A standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. b. The Applicant shall supply to the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, on any of Authority shall be notified, amended prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. the units, the Housing and deed restrictions any temporary or final Engineering Department: In a memorandum dated July 2, 1989, (attached) Chuck Roth submitted the following comments: a. The proposed construction would provide heavy density on the site and decrease amenities to the existing residents. The lot next door to the property is for 2 ~~ r, , sale. It would be a preferable site for additional employee housing units. The loss of the pool to the residents is a potentially serious reduction in amenities. There was no water in the pool at the time of the site visit. Is the pool generally maintained in an operating condition? Perhaps a Jacuzzi and/or hot tub could be provided in return for permission to delete the pool requirement in the SPA amendment. Also, the applicant could be required to provide some number of Moore pool passes to the Holiday House residents. b. The Holiday House currently offers a bike rack which had many bicycles in it. Any approvals should contain the requirement of providing a bicycle rack for some predetermined number of bicycles. (I did not count how many bikes were in the rack.) It appears that there are 27 rooms in the existing building. How many bicycles does that translate into? Nine rooms are proposed to be added. c. It appears from the site plan that there might be room for stacking the parking. I do not know of any instance in the City where we have stacked parking, but it could be tried. This would require the car behind to move out of the way for the car in front. Note that the total parking space requirements for the site would increase form 27 to 36 with still only 12 spaces provided. As the application states, the site is located near both the place of employment and the commercial core. At the time of the site visit, the parking on the street at the site was quite completely in use, but the two blocks to the west were little utilized. The applicant received permission with the Little Nell project for the 12 spaces for the 27 beds. At this time, the City may want to ask for payment-in-lieu for the parking spaces for the newly constructed units. d. Can more open space be achieved, or the saving of the pool, by constructing a more subterranean building with below grade setbacks from retaining walls so that bottom floors would still see the sky? And/or building over the pool? e. A plat will need to be submitted if approvals are extended. The plat should be titled as referenced above. Platting requirements are listed in Section 7.1004(D)(1)(a) of the Land Use Code. The trash dumpster location must be indicated. A 4 foot by 4 3 ,~- ~, foot utility pedestal easement is required at the southeast corner of the parcel and a 10 foot by 10 foot transformer easement at the southwest corner of the parcel. f. Historic cottonwood trees line the street on both sides from the corner of the applicant's property and about ' two blocks to the west. It is suggested that the applicant be required to plant several large caliper, cottonless cottonwood trees along the front of the property and to provide irrigation for the trees. g. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a copy of the design calculations and facilities design for the stormwater runoff to the City Engineering Department. h. The Engineering Department concurs with the applicant's representative's assessment of the traffic impacts. 3. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: In a letter dated June 21, 1989 (attached) Bruce Matherly submitted the following comments: "In order for the District to provide sanitation for this project the applicant will need to agree to participate in a point repair of the line downstream. The applicant mentions this in his application. The point repair downstream becomes a higher priority in our scheme of rehabilitation as a result of the increased flows from this project. We have estimated the cost of repair and estimate the applicants share to be approximately $3000. Once we have a formal commitment from the applicant concerning his participation in this repair then we can approve this project for sanitation. If the swimming pool, which is mentioned in the application, is connected to our system we will need to know the pool's capacity and work up a permit which will cover when the pool can be drained and what testing of the water will need to be done prior to draining the pool. The application also mentions that it is the applicant's intention to request that the City waive the tap fee for this project. The District will not be able to waive any fees associated with this project as it would eliminate our chances of receiving future EPA grant money for future plant expansions." 4. Aspen Water Department: In a memorandum dated June 21, 4 4f, \ n"°a 1989, Jim Markalunas submitted the following comments (attached): "We have reviewed the application, and wish to note that there is sufficient capacity to provide water for this project. However, Ordinance 47 does not provide for the waiver of water tap fees since these fees are necessary to provide revenue for much needed water systems improvements. Therefore we will be happy to provide water for this facility upon payment of the prerequisite tap fees." Aspen Fire Protection District: In a memorandum dated June 15, 1989 (attached) Wayne Vandemark submitted the following comments: "The project is within a four minute response time for fire department operations. As indicated on page 4 (D) the building will be equipped with a sprinkler system and an automatic alarm system. This office has no further comments." II. PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS: The following analysis will address this project's compatibility with each land use approval being requested. i. Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for the Construction of Affordable Housing. Section 8-104(C)(1)(c) of the Code permits exemption from the GMQS for affordable housing as follows: "Affordable housinv. All housing deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing designee. The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed, specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted." The Applicant proposes to construct 5 moderate and 4 low income studio rental apartments. The apartments will be approximately 474 square feet in size. 5 ,,.., ,., ~ .. The Planning Staff generally concurs with the Applicant's analysis and the recommendations of the Housing Office. The only staff concern is the rental rates proposed to be set at the moderate income level for 5 units and. at the low income level for 4 units. Section 8-109 F. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations states in part that "It should be anticipated that the proposed housing units will be required to be restricted to the low income price and occupancy guidelines. However, at the time the applicant requests growth management exemption pursuant to the appropriate City or County Code, the Housing Authority shall review and consider the current community need for housing, evaluate the affordability of the proposed units to residents and recommend to the Commission the appropriate price and occupancy category to which the units should be restricted." The Planning Staff notes that the above Guidelines recommend restriction to low income occupancy and price guidelines. This project proposes that a majority of the units - 5 of 9 - be restricted to moderate income guidelines. The Staff has not verified that the Housing Authority has approved the proposed rental rates. We recommend that, prior to Council action on this project, the applicant meet with the Housing Authority for their review of the proposed rental rates and that City Council receive their recommendation regarding income and occupancy restrictions. After reviewing rental and occupancy guidelines, the Planning staff has become concerned with a broader issue. That is the administration of privately produced and administered employee housing. We have the following concerns: * Will an employees lease depend on his continued employment? During most of the year, housing is extremely hard to find. The staff suggests that an employee have right of first refusal on a lease renewal regardless of his continued employment. * who will "police" a multitude of privately run employee housing projects? Perhaps all employee housing projects should be administered by the Housing Authority. 2. Amendment of the Official Zone District Map from LP to R/MF. Section 7-1102 of the Code provides standards for the review of amendments to the text of the Official Zone District Map. Those standards and staff comments follow: Standard A: Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Staff: This project complies with adopted land use regulations with the exception of open space. In regard to open space 6 ~~, ., a. requirements, the Applicant has indicated that this project will provide 24~ (3,742 sq. ft.) open space where the R/MF zone requires 35~ open space. The applicant has an additional 11.5$ (1,798 sq. ft. ) of open space in a rear courtyard which cannot be counted because it is not visible from a public street. The applicant has proposed a code amendment to allow open space for 100$ employee projects to be set by Special Review. Rather than adopting a Code amendment for this particular project, the Staff recommends that this project be given a PUD designation to allow a variation from the R/MF requirements. The application is somewhat ambiguous in it's commitment to provide a 100 affordable housing project. The staff opinion is that the Code requirement for a 100$ affordable housing project means 100$ of the existing apartment building plus the additional 9 studio apartments Standard B: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area as "mixed" residential. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The project is consistent with the Housing Element of the Plan which calls for the production of affordable housing within the City limits. Standard C: Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff: The staff concurs with the Applicant's analysis (page 18 of the application) of the surrounding area. It is the staff opinion that this project is compatible with existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. Standard D: The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff: The Applicant has committed to retain the 12 parking spaces that were required as part of the Little Nell SPA. The staff agrees with the City Engineer, that the existing parking on-site appears to be fully utilized. On-street parking appears to be available approximately two blocks west of the project site. Given the competing goals of providing parking versus additional employee housing, the Planning staff favors the provision of housing. The staff views this project as primarily benefitting the applicant and we recommend that the Applicant be required to provide fees-in-lieu of parking for nine studio units to offset this projects parking impacts. 7 ~! \ ~. J i Standard E: Whether and amendment would result in whether and the extent to exceed the capacity of such limited to transportation supply, parks, drainage, facilities. the extent to which the proposed demands on public facilities, and which the proposed amendment would .public facilities, including but not `acilities, sewage facilities, water schools, and emergency medical Staff: As noted in the previous section, this project will impact public parking on nearby street frontages. The proposed expansion also contemplates removal of the swimming pool which was required to be retained as part of the Little Nell SPA. The applicant is requesting a Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA to allow elimination of the pool on the theory that nine additional dwelling units would serve their employees better than the pool. The staff opinion is that elimination of this recreational amenity will impact both the project residents and public facilities. This project appears to primarily benefit the Applicant. The Planning staff agrees with the City Engineer, that some on-site amenities should be provided to mitigate this impact. The staff recommends that the Applicant provide some on- site amenities (such as a sauna and hot tub) to offset the loss of the pool and that park dedication fees not be waived for the nine additional studios. Standard F: Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project will not significantly adversely affect the natural environment. However, the project will create more building mass on a site that has been open space. We agree with the City Engineer, that the planting of large cottonless cottonwood trees along the street would enhance the streetscape and reduce the visual impact of the new building. Standard G: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff: The staff opinion is that this project will be compatible with the community character. Standard H: Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff: As noted in the Applicant's analysis on page 18 of the application, the property is located in a mixed residential neighborhood. The proposed zoning appears more appropriate for this project than the existing deed restricted LP zoning. The staff is currently developing an "Affordable Housing" zone 8 ,~~ ,, district. If an "AH" district is developed, the Commission and Council may want to consider rezoning this property "AH" in the future. Standard I: Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Staff: The staff opinion is that this proposal to provide additional employee housing in the City of Aspen is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. 3. Amendment to the Text of the Land Use Code: The Applicant proposes to amend the Code pursuant to Section 7-1101 of the Code to set open space requirements for a 100$ affordable housing project as a Special Review. The staff would prefer the use of the PUD provision to allow this variation rather than supporting an additional Code amendment at this time. When this application was prepared the PUD procedure was under review in the Code correction process, therefore, the Applicant applied for a code amendment. The staff supports granting a variance for open space because this property would have the required 35$ if the total property was considered. As noted previously, the most appropriate zoning for this project may be the Affordable Housing (AH) zone which staff is presently developing. 4. Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement: Section 7-803(B) of the Code provides that the Council may amend an SPA agreement by following the same procedures used in designating a parcel Specially Planned Area (SPA). The Applicant proposes an amendment to the Little Nell SPA to remove the requirement to maintain the pool at the Holiday House. The staff notes that, at the time of our site inspection the pool was completely empty. We do not know if it has been used recently. The staff does not have a problem with amending the SPA agreement to eliminate the pool if the Applicant is willing to commit to providing other on-site amenities, perhaps a sauna or Jacuzzi as recommended by the City Engineer to off-set the loss of the pool for existing residents. The Applicant should also pay park fees to mitigate off-site impacts created by the nine additional studio units. 5. Special Review for Off-Street Parking: Section 5-301(B) of the Code provides that off-street parking requirements for all affordable housing shall be established by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. The Special Review is a Planning Commission action. Section 7-404 (B)(2) provides the following criteria for Special Review approval: 9 ~, ;~ "In all other zone districts, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees." The staff agrees with the Applicant that this site is an excellent location for employee housing and that automobile use will be reduced by its proximity to downtown, Aspen Mountain and bus routes. The staff is concerned however, that there are only 12 spaces on-site when 36 spaces would normally be required if this were not an affordable housing project. We must question where the additional employees' cars will be parked. The Applicant should make a proposal to mitigate this potential impact to public facilities. The staff supports the City Engineer's recommendation that fees-in-lieu be required to mitigate the additional impact created by the nine additional units. Another alternative could be the reservation of long term parking spaces at the Buttermilk or Tiehack areas. 6. Subdivision Approval: Subdivision approval is required for this project because the Land Use Code definition of subdivision includes multi-family projects. This is to insure that this type development is planned in a manner consistent with City policies and regulations. The staff agrees with the Applicant's analysis (pages 23 through 36) and commitments regarding the Subdivision criteria. The commitments made by the Applicant in this section should be required as conditions of approval for this project. 7. Waiver of City Fees: The Applicant is requesting that the City waive fees for Land Use Reviews, Plan Checks, Building Permits, and Water Taps. Section 18 of Ordinance No. 47 (Series of 1988) provides for the waiver of fees as follows: "That the Planning Director and the Chief Building Official are hereby directed to waive all land use application and building permit fees for developments which constitute one hundred percent (1000 affordable housing or for any new Accessory Dwelling Unit or legalized bandit unit." Based on the above Code provision, the fees for land use reviews and building permits are clearly waived and we have initiated necessary refund procedures. The Code does not presently provide for the waiver of water tap fees. The Aspen Water Department has indicated that they will require tap fees to be paid for this project. The Planning staff notes that there will be a discussion between the Housing Office 10 ~,.. and the City Council on July 17 regarding approaches to address the issue of tap fees for employee housing. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Staff recommends approval of the Applicants proposal to construct an additional nine employee units on the Holiday House property. Approval of this application should be subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to review before City Council, the Applicant shall meet with the Housing Authority for their review and recommendation regarding income and occupancy guidelines as required by Section 8-109(F) of the Land Use Code. Based upon the City Council's decision, a standard deed restriction shall be filed as required by the Housing Authority, restricting the use, occupancy, and rental price to those established by the Affordable Housing Guidelines adopted at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. The Applicant shall supply the Housing Authority an exact calculation of the net livable square footage of each unit and plans for each of the units. If at any time the plans change with respect to net livable square footage, on any of the units, the Housing Authority shall be notified, and deed restrictions amended prior to issuance of any temporary or final certificate of occupancy. 3. 100 of the project, meaning all of the units in the existing Holiday House plus the proposed 9 studio units, shall be deed restricted for affordable housing. 4. PUD approval shall be granted to permit a variation from the strict interpretation of the Code such that the applicant can include courtyard space not visible from the public street to meet the 35$ R/MF open space requirement. 5. The Little Nell SPA agreement shall be amended to allow removal of the swimming pool only if the applicant pays park dedication fees for the nine additional studio units and provides off-setting amenities on-site such as a Jacuzzi and sauna. 6. The Applicant shall provide payment-in-lieu of parking for the nine studio-apartments. A bicycle rack shall be provided. 7. The East Hopkins Avenue frontage shall be planted with cottonless cottonwoods consistent with the streetscape to the west. 11 ti ., r 8. A final plat shall be submitted prior to final approval which meets the Code standards as approved by the City Engineer. 9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a stormwater design and facilities plan for the City Engineer's review and approval. 10. Prior to final approval the Applicant shall reach agreement on sanitation fees with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. il. An automatic alarm and sprinkler system shall be provided as committed by the Applicant. pzmemo.holiday 12 Housing Authority City of Aspen/Pitkin County 1 3D South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81 61 1 (3D3) 920-5050 August 1, 1989 Fred Smith Phil Byrne Aspen Skiing Company Box 1248 Aspen, Colorado RE: Holiday House Inspection Dear Phil, AUG - q As per our conversation, the letter will provide you with the information as to actual monthly rental charges of the Holiday House units in accordance with the Little Nell Commercial GMP. According to Holiday House Expansion proposed by the Aspen Skiing Company, it states from Page 15, Employee Housing: " As an inducement to approve the Precise plan and grant the Growth Management Allocations necessary for the Project, Owner has agreed to and. does hereby acknowledge its obligation to provide off-site employee housing for thirty-four (34) employees generated by the Project. Accordingly, Owner agrees to house thirty-four (34) employees by converting and deed restricting seventeen (17) rooms in the existing Holiday House Lodge located at 127 West Hopkins Avenue. Employees shall be housed at two (2) employees per room. Each lodge room shall have a private bath and small kitchen. Lodge rooms may vary in sizes, but shall average 172 sq. ft. of net ,living space per employee..." "Rent for the rooms shall be deed restricted to the low- income rental guidelines in effect at the time of deed restriction, and may be adjusted annually according to the annually adopted City guidelines..." According to your little Nell Commercial GMP/Conceptual Submission, Page 63; " ..Rents may vary among the individual rooms (employees) but shall not exceed the average rent of 172 square feet net living space per employee times the low income rental guideline. Under currently adopted City guidelines the average monthly rent would be $103 per employee calculated at 172 square feet average net living space per employee times $.60 per square foot low income rental guidelines." Aspen Skiing Company August 1, 1989 Page 2 Upon completion of the site inspection performed by Tom Parry, Electrical Inspector Building Department; Eric Peltonen, Building Inspector; Bill Drueding, Zoning Official; and Yvonne Blocker, Admissions and Occupancy Specialist, Housing Authority it was determined that a number of the units will not accommodate the two person per room requirement as stated by your proposal. The Little Nell Commercial GMP/Conceptual Submission, dated August 5, 1986, also states from Page 61; "...The lodge rooms vary in individual sizes, but in total the 28 rooms contain 9,658 square feet of net livincr space or an average of 172 square feet of net living space per employee." The following information is extended to you as to square footage per unit, actual monthly rental per unit, and occupancy standards. A copy of floor plan and square footage per unit is attached. There is an addition of 15 square feet per unit that is derived from the common area lobby of 368 square feet divided by 25 units. Unit #9 291 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit $10 303 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 11 251 S.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 12 216 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 14 216 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 15 216 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 17 348 s.f. 2 employee X 172 s.f. _ $216.00 Unit 16 602 s.f. 3 employees X 172 s.f. _ $324.00 Unit 8 251 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 7 292 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 6 491 s.f. 2 employees X 172 s.f. _ $216.00 Unit 5 338 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Aspen Skiing Company August 1, 1989 Fage 3 Unit 21 299 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 22 299 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 23 601 s.f. 3 employees X 172 s.f. _ $324.00 Unit 24 601 s.f. 3 employees X 172 s.f. _ $324.00 Unit 25 299 s.f. 1 employees X 172 s.f. _ $103.00 Unit 26 299 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $103.00 Unit 2 391 s.f. 2 employees X 172 s.f. _ $216.00 Unit 36 302 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 35 299 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 34 601 s.f. 3 employees X 172 s.f. _ $324.00 Unit 33 601 s.f. 3 employees X 172 s.f. _ $324.00 Unit 32 299 s.f. 1 employee X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 Unit 31 299 s.f. 1 employee,X 172 s.f. _ $108.00 The Holiday House has a total of 25 actual rooms as opposed to the 28 listed in the Submission. Those rooms according to the requirement of meeting the minimum square footage of 172 s.f. per employee and not exceeding the allowable low income charge of $.63 per square foot will accommodate 38 employees as opposed to 56 as stated in the Submission The total rent collected will be $4,094 per month, which is under the estimated income of $11,250 per month. The figure of $11,250 is computed by 25 rooms X $450 per room as projected by the Aspen Skiing Company. Enclosed you will find copies of the Building Code and Safety Violations as noted by the Building Inspectors present at the inspection. A timeframe need be addressed as to resolving these violations and definite steps produced on coming into compliance. Aspen Skiing Company August 1, 1989 Page 4 Please attend a meeting to and Holiday House employe Tuesday, August 8, 1989 at Room of City Hall. IS' I(cere~, ~ / ~3C dirYn"e Bl c(o~kef~~ ((J/^/!// H using Authority resolve all matters as to Little Nell e rents and generation scheduled for 1:30 P.M. at the Second Floor Meeting cc: Fred Gannett, City Attorney Francis Krizmanich, Zoning Gary Lyman, Building James Adamski, Housing Director Bill Drueding, Zoning Tom Parry, Building Tom Baker, Planning L S'a I~ (tea ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ °~ C ~=~ ~ s S D i 3 ~ ~- ~ ~ r i p i i C l~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ OQ s G d- ~ ------- ~T1 i I i L~ --- i ~~ ~\ o~ ~.1~ W ~ 'S` ', ~~ S I ~ -I ~ ~ O ~1- o "~ ~' ~~- 1~ \~ c ,~. ~ ~-~ E ~~ i ~ S`-. ~-- .1 ~- ~~ ~~ r ~- ~-~ ~ s -- - i ~ (Y' 11" ~ s~ S_ ~~ ~~ ---- ~ s ~~ ~_ ~--~ m ~~ • ASPENdPITKII' gEGiONAL BUILDING D~~ARTMENT 130 South Oelena Aepen, Colorado 81611 303/920-6440 3P BUILDING INSPECTION CHECK LIST >Io~~ Inspection Reinspection Partial Complete Permit No. _STEEL(REBAR) ELECTRIC PLUMBING MECHANICAL _ BUILDING Footings Constr. Service- Underground Rough R-Frame Cassions Underground Waste & Vent Flue(s) Insul. Wall Rough Water Pipe F.P. Flue(s) Drywall Wall Cores perm. Service Gas Combust. Air Special Struct. Slabs Final Final Final Mobile Home _ Damp Proof Fire Air Cond. Final Sprinklers Foun. Insul. Kitch. Hood Zoning Found. Drain - Accepted Accepted as Noted Reinspection Fee $30.00 Yes No I No. Bdrms. Instructions tolnspector Kitchen_Tub_Shower_Lav. W.C. Ice_W.BarTub/Shower_Jacuzzi_ Bidet_Floor Drain Laundry- Clothes Washer- Hot Tub D.W._ Jacuzzi w/Shower- City._County- Time of Arrival Time of Departure Address Subdivision Contractor Owner Indepentlence Press, Inc. Phone Job Office Request Recd Date Ime Name Reque tfor~l W TH F A.M. P T Insp ~ Inspector Rev.ll/ee Rejected- You are ordered to make the fol~owing corrections on the construction which is now in progress. ASPEN/~PITKIf~=' REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT ' '130 South Galena Aepen, Colorado 6161 7 303/920-644D BUILDING INSPECTION CHECK LIST ~ Inspection Reinspection Partial Complete Permit N ~'~ _STEEL(REBAR) ELECTRIC PLUMBING MECHANICAL _ BUILDING Footings Constr. Service- Underground Rough R-Frame - Cassions Underground Waste & Vent Flue(s) Insul. - Wall Rough Water Pipe F.P. Flue(s) Drywall - Wall Cores perm. Service Gas Combust. Air Special ._ Struct. Slabs Final Final Final Mobile Home - Damp Proof Fire Air Cond. Final ._ Sprinklers - Foun. Insul. Kitch. Hood Zoning - Found.Drain - Accepted Accepted as Noted Reinspection Fee $30.00 Yes No I No. Bdrms. Instructions to Inspector Kitchen-Tub-Shower_Lav. W.C. Ice_W.BarTub/Shower-Jacuzzi- BidetFloor Drain- Laundry- Clothes Washer- Hot Tub_D.W.-Jacuzzi w/Shower- City-County- Time of Arrival Time of Departure Address Subdivision Contractor Owner IntleDeneence Press, Inc. Phone Job _ Re uest Recd Office q Date Ti a Name Requ t fo ~T W TH F A.M. P. Ti e Insp. Inspector Rav. 11/e9 Rejected- You are ordered to make the following corrections on the construction which is now in progress. ASPEN4PITKIP' REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT '. ti '130 South Oelana Aapan~ Colorado B'16'11 303/920-6440 BUILDING INSPECTION CHECK LIST ~ .- 3 Inspection Reinspection Partial Complete Permit No. _STEEL(REBAR) ELECTRIC PLUMBING MECHANICAL _ BUILDING Footings Constr. Service- Underground Rough R-Frame - Cassions Underground Waste&Vent Flue(s) Insut - Wall Rough Water Pipe F.P. Flue(s) Drywall ._ Wall Cores perm. Service Gas Combust. Air Special - Struct. Slabs Final Final Final Mobile Home - Damp Proof - Fire Air Cond. Final - Sprinklers - Foun. Insul. Kitch. Hood Zoning Found. Drain Accepted Accepted as Noted Reinspection Fee $30.00 Yes No I No. Bdrms. Instructions to Inspector Kitchen-Tub-Shower_Lav. W.C._ Bidet_Floor Drain- Laundry-Clothes Washer ~~~ity~CounJy~/ ~f F~rival Address ~ ! ~ PhoneJob_ Subdivision R t R 'd Contractor Owner ~ ~ Date IndeDentlence Press, Inc. Ice _ W. Bar _ Tub/Shower-Jacuzzi _ .Hot Tub- D.W.- Jacuzzi w/Shower _ Time of Departure Office eques ec _ Date } e Name Reque for T W TH F A.M. P. T 8 I Insp °~ ~ Inspector Rev. 11/88 Rejected- You are ordered to make the following corrections on the construction which is now in progress. a secox ``-zc =- :'.,x eE. _., = sn~ _ c e sE -, rc to r.~~ c .. cr E-s- ?ox E w ':c 5 - t' c et s-id c c- E o 'r- :b ro rc aic -as0r-rs and tr :c t.. .ne mono ~:.,.;e as mach p.._ ~::iE :ic ran =_ rill ce u er.l }' as muc'r. es pace s:-.a ry. .._1 in '_avcr, mo•_ior. caY.-icc. C 0::5 a:': AGI:NDP ,::;c.1^an +: or .: ".'st nos. - c c:^reve C~:~- co .sent ale ^. c::' secona ~ '-~: Co::ne xcn '~.: Y,..lls. _ csc nt ac :..~~ ie 1-1 is v0r .ic-.ne rE S. '. - Luc c.~ C_•,:c; 1'I boss ._ _., ~.._ bnP - ^:0., 4-t'_ne Ccty !:e. r.s ear F:o ~. !!i iche'_1 szic the. Corrn l s_iones s. !':avc- aperocod ihE cor.c gip: o`_ cem- :n'. no the'^lrc~- do partmen¢ aid =_.hcra `_s cepa:': ne:t the ;a se:oe r.; c` the cc,:ctp sour-- :o~.ac. Council aas .. memorandum from th .- eels 0 uol e who s o'm is phis concoct. ^. .is move would `.ave .. __`f 1co3: at brincrnq t~E i;c±id:no eeG ariment ba ci, tc ci_} ..~ _ and - w+ih the ofEiae layout probicr. s. T:;rs •_s the -__st sup ox se ivi no problems at city Ccunci lman blorecuist m vc-d to approve the move and combinine the w__ce ant she ri^s - - .c _.. file co.: r.ty courthouse basement, t: i.on re uotaLed, ant ores- L.`:e Board c: Cou r.:y e _ar :., r :^ Com-.i ss>onors to no :~c cuick'_1'; second ci by Coun clr,~a r, Collins. •- --m ~ s-'~' `.r does not e ~ .e + s' ci . out anv ^io in:o c'~ h .1 nut -o. c c..:a o r c oti E a c.n o- c '- Dun m_r ILC s +c t~ xcn lc ii:e to 1004, rr 'c _a::. r,c 'i tl chE Lti: Ciu.. O,.i l... n=. T:.is woo '.. uE a:. cd-=_ ..iteration 'm- the city m end u xd tt, th+s buiid+ne. The crew nt city hall :_ an old armory buiicine and tai it never be a oreat buildine. C'OUnC`_l;nan t;necht said he would like to see the oolice 0 ~c s o _:;:i s` "Ot d ~^~ts ~ .•, • i ~.: er `. tip':. a '-e cif ~ Grob:er _ xz~ :r, t Cornc+ ^~- .~ 5'_c ti Co ono ~ 'c: =+c o.'r s in '.or.: '° - =nC i. __. nm z Prot i=.e e u. aonet i .0 c ~ '--+. ounciimar n cht said the _iv hou lc mai:c some m.i cecision_ ac out c ha'_' _o th et Inc the bci l.:ine ee pa^t meat baci: into this bu ildinc. ~ounei lman Blomcui st aerced Council sh0u12 looi: at the options, however, :here is an oppr_- tur.itr to combine the lax' en_'o_-cement de?a^me nts. The Commissioners 'nave zero ed to iinancc Lhe remofiellinc and no: chzrce :he cif}' re r.t. Cou r.ciimzn blCmeui r said the bcildinc c_oa rtment car. move into the Deli ce space x'it hoot renovation. Di cl: Rie r.a s`, she n:°`, tole Council t*_ space u.'i 11 be renovated, but 't is esser.t ial to act a decision. zs ro hou it will be ?lapped. The county has hired the architecs to do -..*.a . T1ho will use this space wi11 dictate the re novat ion olans. P.ich Aianoshek, chie: o' police, sale combi r.i nc space will pain the community ar. im?rovemer.t o' services and in co:nmun'_cations be pre en acencies. n_. in :avor, with the excex ion. o` Count lma r. %necY.L and Hayor Stirlinc. Notion carried. Ccc nc!lman Elomcti st moves to direct su _" to review zl'_ s?ace pees=_ fcr the c_tp o`_ Ps per., ncludd nc the bets ens de?armte nL a^d o:h er joint dap ar inept ant to ?resEnt a re?girt 2s t the cao_tal imLroveme nt rmer2a. to be ba ci: ^_o Coco c'_ ~~' Ju ae '_; seconded by Cccnc iu:oman i:a:'_s. B_. in :avor, motion car-iec. __ TO..r_ _ _rCS Tee ..__rcnc, recrca tion d_rec to r, re-.: nd ed Covn d'_ a: budget time t-ey su r.e es tee the '-_ °_ 'JUrsUE d n2 :i 0r.a1 cG+f t0U Zn dm2r:L 1P. J~5?2n. }. r::IS trOnC SaiC tf12 C___ °_LBp r5 iC °lnc >- a e0.^.5'dit2nt LC eCn__r wi ih tnB m2L" a:1G 12C]E ~s Gr Ol:C 2^C CL rr2n: -i. _"C an.^: 2 COLnC117°~a 0.^. LC sEE w::aL ~:_nd C- C1 pGC5a~i :o D•"E S2 iC ~C'.l.^.Cll. 2CC`~ Ctrl y...- .c21C i.. .5 a GYEat 1CEa a-.'. .T.C I'EE I:.^.E SCCY _5 c---- ::C _tlc `C..'.:5 i .'. x'G'G ld,~2 r1,: :C t?IC E.: ^.1 _= a:25G :. D:a vO_ S .^.C acY EC FI Otr IDU C:^. :aE =_Y5: siEC wpO 1CCC 05L. ,S^,S :rOnC sa_C it: r• c,..s.._ta ~: -'.d se wru id ccs: ab ovL 5'.SOC. !:zc0r SL"_r c mooed to s:,e nc 51500 oct ^`_ the col' course bus ee: ccr :his consulLan: and cc [Druz rd ui tL the next ?pare; seconc ed by Coun ci lm 2n Blomquist. r.-. in `_2vor, motion cz rr_ec. _ _TCS p - _ _ 3udoe Ap?ro?ri ai ion P.ecuest -_.~ P.:icrnep Taddune sale :his s'n oc ld be dcoe zs soon as ?ors i`.;le because it ma_: e=:ec: :he o-:at ez :he mall. r.cu nc C.: ':v-.acer rr^.o r. '.:she S. sand cr. .-i t~' pas pa d out S; G,OJO ^ da dme. .aim fie IIa^.c s2ic G RiS~ui:: no: o2y any mere claims 3nc x-_'_l crop t.`.is coverace _r.. ass cite c: :'.- _..:ES cnis c.:c.`.. Coo neilman Slomquist moves is aeoro? :ate :10, OOG `_e_- c_ _ re?air ou: o' tt.e eene ral =end; s econced b•: Cocnd imdr. }:neG-.t_ n_+ ... faro[, [oti en ca--rigid. cne nc er bc.^.i `?er raid Counci-. tae bani:rc:: r: ce girt acorev ed tae L '.. ant sale to Commercial --::acs. Schi _': e.' szid is Ye contemc'_a tad i,: the sale there ~:i'ii be zr. e>:ch anoe c[ picpe :'t}' .tree[. tcc es :a :e ant the Ps?er. 54:=.nc Coen r.^~'. On= c the r.ec=_= tc be c .Sensed i= :he " ~ Dorn 's s -,i ct to a z _em c c e ems. F eon :he ci^, a -^.. ~a ~- ~;, .acts[ re _ive at __+i nc t_..r __ i. rte _.i lc.." .0us ~.`. c: ~ rc a,.='lt ee^t.a _e cad=_. ^he ?m-ecse e= :ie ac_reenen: uas tc rmocee '_ :an ciai uen2lties a=_ xE+1 as ccnircie - icsu re the Can:rucs used thesE =ive units cs emcioyee nos sins units. ':his acreement is .._: _c __ve for '__ .t.__. :~~- ~...; ~,.. .. - _ ~ -. _'. oe..~l _e. +: -e S':.6 .. .:_a.a r: -~ _a~ con::ec_ t,c _ . or. tees, :[C li, for rwa e ... C.ecx '_ec=, am __ a y<ar __ - _ _ _ LE r. CP.^.t CC crOc_ onnual revtais _ron. L:cse ~ ..c=_ re rx esenti m: .: ~v.i nis ratio:. tee"~~ Sc.^:: aer sair the _i: st two tees were paid, the 550'v G~a year has anet ~!.ecn oazd. Schit 3er requester` Council c :hi waive the armir.i stra ti ve recciremencs in t`.is settlement -zement. pro?erty is co: nc tc be ezcha need to the Ski ino Com oanp, w'co needs the hon sine uci L= am w~11 'use these m~.i'_s es employee heu sine. Seti_=cr sair - ci tg ones not Weer to require admrn_stra ti vs _ ._ `roc.. the Sk~inc ^. cm?a.^.y. Sc is=ter said he 'elf this +:as net an acn:c axsiratr IeC `.u tea ?malty, ar.d ;his pe:.alty would _~._ on the unsecured c: ed it ors. G :c ^tt o•n=v ^. ,~~e s. ,~ tY is _ce is a uebc ate- .__ .._ t. _.. _.ionn~ c. ,CC . +:cs =t sa_c--^hc- its _ ;. t;e ..~nkru Fet r ~cn._~a::'., t ~ 5:. t olr Cour ii _:~ la..,.': hoes +, he ~_. cia ^e.,, :u the }': .re--~~-~ oc a.ti -., c: ve t_. S.:ii nc Come-.) mono em vlo }'ec h~o a~nc. It is th •-c c~: con o' e 5 +c Co^.:_ c p.eeu is o,.s my ecs~s e- .ow as Doss Y.lv; ..:r: eh=roe a: a+ tu_: r .v ~ _-sm. n~ _`,o G0 ':L ~ ,. <. the t e[ •. _ :..~_z.:o. ~w n~a ;:c L-~u,~::c;s ._d ii o S:':iirz_Cen .a nv -. e.,: re ate rc-lz ci ita tc _:.is. 'c _.. ,d they iw ~.ce _ Cou :ilman Llom ~ci_t s--d hc- +:otlr l iia to ce - - OGC ooi:r a._c tr.. rehaLi'_i to __.,.. __..o^.t s. ~c C.rt-zp i.: = octi cr. to remove the 'rve units. 'crsch :creed the Sl'.ii• .cam: - ;ad the same c. taor. - remoaine tna unit=_ toes no :. do a:vc:a acv acod. :'ar rene asi:er i? the Si:; inc Comta r. ~: :+e~,ad deed res trio -:~s c- a. omcley ee r. r.: -s. Dorsch said ~:he S::ii:w Cornt ar l- wet lc ue ::-Virg t_ do that. Taddu ne reconm:e nd er ce Cc,:n ell t'n r_se be added to c:o e^.cl oeee housi no Doc '_. Councilman D1om c_::i st moved to :: ai ve the S1,CJD fee am de cr :'es c'ict these cs ecrlovec units; seconr er !:y Councilmc r. !lneeht. Al'_ in favor, with the e>:cc?t ien o' Coun r'lma r: Collin=_ am f:a yor Scrr rl nc. ?!otien ca.-Tied. ..iJ'SG'T P;a yor Sti cline sair there are five municipalities on the eastern slope who have ioi nee the c_tv am county o` Denver to sue the 0.5. Air Fe: c= over' the placement o. ^i: niss_lcs. It +-'ell t 5_,GGG to ioi r. ch:s s[:i t. N,ay or St_r lino pointed our th c- Coon¢i passes .osoiuti o.^. o??csinq t::^:c !:>: [our mcr,ihs arc. 9:aym' Stir line moves is ioi r. tl':c ctp am cocntc e_ Denver to a ma::im um amount o, ;t,OCB tc become Dart cf the ".:: lawsuit; s.e conded be Councilwoman Ita'_ls. C r,:n caiman Hlomcuist c•~estiener ehe;her the city shou lc become Dart o` ti:i Wes like t^is. Ccuncilma r. }:ne sir screed. Ka per Sri rl ine slid this would effect Asper. i" the !:): site apes in where proposer. Conn cilw•oman I.al '_s sair the lawsuit re wires the Air Force no cc ar. environmental impact stury to consider Colo: ado znr Wyomi nc. Councilwoman walls and T:a yor Stir L•ne it favor; Cou nci imembe rs Collins, I:necht, and Elomcuist poops er. motion NOT carried. Councilman Hiomquist moved to ad iourn at 9:05 p.m.; seconder by Councilwoman halls. All in :avor, motion carrier :_ Aat^ _ ,,. nc c:., Cit. ue:i: Recclar ~;eetinc Asper Ci`•: Cocnc:_ Y.ac 1:, 195- ^;avor S_irlinc call eE the meetinc ne order at S: CS p ..:. with Counci lmemDe.e ?tae cht, l.a __ , Col li^_ and Slomouist cresen :. CC^?: S:C °A F.T PCIPA^I OI: CS axles Hentor. a- .. `_or a :ol'_ou up on t'r.e sirewa lit on Du ra r.t street; +:hat - bap-~e.^^.- inc w _., tr.a . Jay Hammenr, ens i.^.eer s.c_ ce oz rtme nc, sale _c _s cp .o El ar cc re_cia oe o:' copal: anyc^inc or. this prejett, am he w!.1 Weer with E.am as soot. as possible. CO J:dCI L.":EK55= COFLn1=:'TS _ Cocnci loran ffiomquist pointed out the new map wall am thanked the pa rk.s, e.^.5 ineerinc am pla nr.i nc departments for pc tri nc this toc~ther. Desicn Ge:ishop he'per re_i^r. the concept am meta od pipe,:. Tc_s mac will enable Council to comprehend what t inc on. _. :!a yor St_ :ir.c. so id be Woo r: today, 5?E,CGO war tr. c' no'!t pa. =_ses ha vc hoer sold. ~. i:a yo: Stislinc said there was an ar isle c the Daily Hews shpts a c'tp r.:a nac e_- helps a?po:coed; there has been no e`tiaal a^nou seer e. ^.: s vet. ':a ec:' St it 1. nc said Council :-as e°[erec: the _ .; to a po;e ntiai canrida ;e and are wa sine to hear bass. ":a pox Et ___inc said .`.ichwsc E: east c` As^e r. not ope r. and r.e u: err t.e ens inecri nc de pa ^r::ent to write the :^.ichwac fiepa ^ment and as_f ti!em to make e=torts to ee; th~ p=ss Doe r.. ~. .':a c0: Stil:i nc saiC the l:h ee lE`i O_De ra iiOL Se 1_ ..a+^ne a :OrIDal ep °n'nc ';a ~' ~ loc_ a: 0:00 : .:. (-. a': m' St i:'1'_,^.c foie Cou ne_: iic :ecci sec a note __'o^ ; c_n .Dope _", file Cif: r..pic sSa e:, v~:a ni.inc the Co'enci'_ for the resoiu;ion and 'c: '..r____.. rte: ra•:". is - Ma vox S;irli ne sair t. - :'eai es race -"a ns`e_ tai _s uc i•('. pm' cent ees:" `... _leco~~d __ z lo; o`_ estat- ~c _: at _n sncn .s coo' nc:<= _pr _.~_ ..__. _,.._. uec. 31, 1Si&0 Loretta Sanner, Recorder Reception i~o. Recorded at 1 R.NI. t AGREEMENT IN SETTLEMENT OF CIVIL CLAIh1S THIS AGREEI•IENT is made and entered into this _~C~ day of eE~ ~1~(:'LJ 1980 by and among the CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ("Aspen"); and, HANS CANTRUP, JUNE CANTRUP and ASPEN HOLIDAY, INC. (collectively "Holiday House Group"). RECITALS: A. Holiday House Group has cons units ("additional units") within the Holiday House Lodge, in Aspen, Pitkin Holiday House Lodge is situate on the in the attached Exhibit "A." B. In constructing those units; tructed five (5) dwelling ground floor of the County, Colorado. The real property described Holiday house Group has violated several material provisions of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen ("Municipal Code"), particularly nrovisions of the Uniform Building Code and the Zoning Code cahich allow Aspen to institute civil litigation compelling removal of the additional units, payment of double the required building and other permit fees and tap fees for the installation of the units, and prohibiting improper expansion or alteration of existing non-conforming uses. C. There is now pending before the Municipal Court of the City of Aspen a separate criminal action, which action deals with various misdemeanors committed by the Holiday House Group in installing the additional units in the Holiday House Lodge. D. Holiday House Group desires to avoid the institution by Aspen of civil litigation to require the removal of the additional units, payment of the required permit and tap fees, and other available civil remedies described in the Municipal Code. E. To increase the available housing supply for qualified employees, Aspen is willing to forego institution of civil litigation to e*:force strict com~iiunce with the provisions of the Municipal Code on the terms and cond.tions set forth in this agreement; and, the express intent of this agreement . , 4G2 3d is to allow settlement of the various civil claims that Aspen has against Holiday House Group without the :iecessity of litigation. IT IS THEREFORE AGREED: 1. Holiday House Group shall pay to Aspen $7,500.00, representing double the tap and connection fees £or plumbing installations in the additional units as required by Sec. 1-11, !I Municipal Code. Payment shall be made in cash or certified funds simultaneously with the execution of this agreement by Holiday House Group. 2. Holiday House Group shall pay to Aspen $2,016.90, representing double the permit and plan check fees for the additional units as required by Sec. 1-11, Municipal Code, which fees are itemized as follows: (a) Building Permit fee' (b) Flan Check fee (c) Electrical Permit fee (d) Plumbing Permit fee TOTAL TOTAL DUE - $626.00 - $203.45 - $126.00 - $ 53.00 $1005.45 X 2 _ $2016.90 Payment shall be made in cash or certified funds simultaneously with the execution of this agreement by Holiday House Group. 3. Holiday House Group shall not be required by Aspen to remove the additional units from the Holiday House Lodge, subject to the following specific conditions: (a) Holiday House Group shall obtain all inspections of the additional units required by the Dunicipal Code, including i-st not limited to electrical inspections, plumbing inspections, building inspections, and fire inspections, and shall pay to Aspen the required fees for all such inspectiors in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Such inspections shall be obtained forthwith. (b) All the additional units shall, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, be made to comply with the varicus provisions of the Municipal Code now violated by them, including the Uniform Building Code, 1976, as -'- a~4(i~~ '.~34_~ amended; the National Electrical Code, 1978 Edition, as amended; the Uniform Housing Code, 1973, as amended; the Technical Plumbing Code Regulations; the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1976 Edition, as amended; and other applicable ordinances or regulations of Aspen. The principal items of noncompliance are set forth on the attached "Schedule of Violations." a, Holiday House Group agrees that the additional units shall be and hereby are restricted for a term of fifty (50) years from the date of this agreement, to be used solely as housing for "qualified employees" as that term is from time to time defined by Aspen. The additional units shall be first made available to occupancy by qualified employees of the owner of the Holiday House Lodge, subject to review and approval by Aspen as described herein. Occupation of the additional units by qualified employees shall be administered as follows: (a) The owner of the Holiday House Lodge hereby designates Aspen, or Aspen's designated agent, as the exclusive authority for approving qualified employees for occupancy of the additional units; (b) The owner of the Holiday House Lodge shall only allow occupancy of the additional units by qualified employees approved by Aspen, and immediately notify the City of Aspen, or its designated agent, in writing, of each and every vacancy that occurs in the additional units; (c) The owner o£ the Holiday House Lodge shall not charge rent or leasehold fees to such qualified employee ''occupants in excess of the rental guidelines from time to time established by Aspen for "low income employee housing." (d) The owner of the Holiday House Lodge, or Holiday House Group (should Holiday House Group sell or lease the Holiday House Lodge), shall pay Aspen, as ar. admini=tration fee, the annual sum of $5,000.00, or 1Co of the gross annual rental or leasehold income received from -3- (or accrued for the benefit of) qualified employees occupying the additional units, whichever is greater. Such payment shall be made in arrears on or before December 31 of each year, with the first payment due December 31, 1981. Holiday house Group agrees personally to guaranty all such payments as des- cribed in paragraph 8. (e) Hans Cantrup and June Cantrup shall obtain and maintain a policy or policies of declining term life isinsurance upon their lives in an amount equal to that amount necessary from time to time under the terms of this agreement to create a fund that will ensure payment of the aggregate of all the annual sums described in subparagraph 4(d) of this agreement; such policy or policies shall have minimum aggregate face value of $250,000.00. The beneficiary of said policy or policies shall be Garfield & Hecht as trustee (the "Trustee") for the mutual benefit of Aspen and Cantrups' estates. The Trustee shall pay the above-described annual sum to Aspen from the proceeds of said policy or policies until the termination of this agreement, at which time the balance, if any, of those proceeds shall be paid over to Cantrups' estates. Holiday House Group shall, upon demand by Aspen, periodically supply Aspen with proof that such policy or policies are in force. (f) Any payments not made to Aspen when due, as provided herein, shall bear interest at the annual rate of 240; and, all such unpaid sums shall constitute a lien upon the real estate and improvements of the Holiday House Lodge that may be foreclosed by Aspen in the same manner as are mortgages in Colorado. PROVIDED HO~v'EVER, that as security .for payment of all sums due as provided herein, Holiday House ~! Group may provide substitute collateral of either (1) real property in Pitkin County, Colorado with equity value sufficient to pay all sums remaining due hereunder; or (2) any other collateral reasonably satisfactory to Aspen. -4- •. , ~'(ir ~:3~.i (g) Aspen's obligation hereunder shall be limited solely to reviewing and approving all c:~plicants for occupancy in the additional units by qualified employees, including those of the owner of the Holiday House Lodge, within a reasonable time after receiving applications for occupancy. The determination of what constitutes a qualified employee shall be solely that of Aspen, in accordance with its then 'applicable ordinances or regulations. Aspen shall not be responsible for rent collection, cleaning, maintenance, repair or any other service other than review and approval of all applicants for occupancy of the additional units. (h) Holiday House Group agrees that neither Aspen nor its agents or employees shall be held responsible for the actions of any qualified employee approved by Aspen for occupancy of any of the additional units. (i) No one shall be allowed to occupy the additional units unless they have been first approved by the City of Aspen and referred to the owner of the Holiday House Lodge in accordance with the described process. (j) No one shall be allowed to occupy the additional units "rent-free," unless the basis for such occupancy, and any alternative compensation by the occupant to the owner of the Holiday House Lodge therefor, has previously been approved by Aspen, or its designated agent, in writing. 5. Holiday House Group, its successors and assigns, shall maintain full and accurate books of account describing the gross rental or leasehold income derived from (or accrued with respect to) the additional units throughout the term of ,.this agreement, and shall make periodic written reports to Aspen of such income in form reasonably acceptable to Aspen or its designated agent. SucY: periodic reports sY:all be given not less than annually. Such books of account shall be maintained in accordance caith standard accounting principals. Holiday House Group shall provide access to Aspen, or its designated agent, for the purpose of reviewing all books of r_ 4C~? ~:_~i~' account kept by Holiday House Group, its successors or assigns, relating to the rental and occupancy of the additional units. 6. Aspen shall be entitled to enforce this agreement by any remedies available at law or in equity, including specifically mandatory injunctive relief and the right to specific performance. In addition to any other legal or it equitable remedies available to Aspen, the parties agree that the damages to Aspen as a result of noncompliance with this agreement by Holiday House Group, its successors or assigns, would be difficult accurately to determine. Thus, as liquidated damages and not as a penalty for such noncompliance, Holiday House Group, its successors or assigns, shall pay to Aspen an amount equal to the sum of all rent and leasehold fees received from (or accrued for the benefit of) all occupants of the additional units that have not been previously approved by Aspen or its designated agent as "qualified employees," together with an additional sum of l00 of that amount, for all the time during which such unauthorized occupancies take place. 7. Unless sooner terminated by agreement of the parties or otherwise, this agreement shall end upon the first to occur of: twenty-one (21) years after the death of FIans Cantrup and June Cantrup or such of their descendants as are in being at the effective date of this agreement, notwith- standing any provisions of this agreement to the contrary; or, fifty-one (51) years after the date of execution hereof. 8. Holiday House Group agrees, jointly and severally, to guaranty performance of this agreement personally, notwith- standing the sale, lease or other transfer of the Holiday House Lodge to any person or entity. This guaranty shall not be affected by any forebearance, change in terms, acceptance, release, any impairment or suspension of remedies and rights of Aspen against any one. „. .. 9. This agreement represents the entire agreement between the parties, and there are no collateral agreements, oral or written, that are not merged herein. Further, this agreement may not be modified or altered except in writing, duly signed and acknowledged by the parties, and recorded in the Pitkin County Records. 10. This agreement shall, immediately after its execution, be recorded in the Pitkin County Records, and it shall bind the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties. 11. Holiday House Group represent that, notwithstanding the fact that there is now pending criminal litigation under the Municipal Code pertaining to the construction of the additional units, and that such litigation has not yet been resolved, Holiday House Group is not entering into this agreement under any duress, but of their free and voluntary act, after due advice of their legal counsel. Although this agreement may be considered in connection with the disposition of the pending criminal litigation, it has specifically independent significance relating to settling the civil claims of Aspen against Holiday House Group that cannot fully and effectively be resolved by the criminal litigation. 12. Notices. Notices required by this agreement, or in connection with this agreement, shall be given by certified mail, return receipt requested; they shall be deemed given when deposited in the United States Certified Mail, with sufficient postage prepaid thereon, and addressed as follows: City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Attention: City Attorney Hans and June Cantrup P. O. Box "'=°~ Aspen, CO 81612 Aspen Holiday, Inc. P. O. Box _ Aspen, CO 81612 cc: Garfield & Hecht 601 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Nothing contained in this paragraph shall be construed as -7- .~ ., ...> ~'~~l% 't5~~ prohibiting the parties from changing the place to which notice is to be given, but no such change shall be effective unless and until it has been accomplished by written notice given in the manner set forth in this paragraph. 13. The parties agree that, except as set Perth or alluded to in this agreement, there exist no claims or demands by either party against the other arising out of the " construction of the unauthorized units in the Holiday House Lodge. 14. The provisions of this agreement are separate and divisible, and, if any court of competent jurisdiction shall determine that any provision hereof is void and/or unenforceable the remaining provisions shall be construed and shall be valid as if the void and/or unenforceable provision or provisions were not intended in this agreement. 15. In the event either party is required to retain the services of any attorney at law for the purpose of enforcing any provision or right hereunder or in any way related hereto or arising herefrom, the non-prevailing party covenants and agrees to pay the prevailing party's costs and expenses related to the enforcement of this agreement, including but not limited to reasonable attorney's fees incurred therein by the prevailing party. If the matter proceeds to litigation arising from this agreement, the parties agree that the judge presiding over the litigation may charge one or both parties with all or any portion of the adverse party's reasonable attorney's fees, said charge to be based upon the relative severity of each party's ,.default or breach, and such other factors as the judge may deem appropriate. 16. Should Holiday House Group choose to remove the additional units in compliance with the Pflunicipal Code then in effect, this agreement shall then terminate and be of no further force and effect from the time of such removal of the -B- additional units. IN WITNESS WI3EREOF the parties have signed this agreement the day and year first above written. ,:- : ~~, , Attest:,'. City Cle ~~ ~~~ w ti ~~ ~'~~~v ~~ - ~ ~G Attest:/'~~~ ~ ~~ Se~e~-may C..~ _ ~ __.-. -. (SEAL) STATE OF COLORADO) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) CITY OF ASPEN ~' '- ~~ / - ~ r / J ~,,i l ASPEN HOLIDAY, INC. BY ~i,L~..--~ ~-rt L 2 -- .~i Pre~ident The foregoing instrument was ac}nowledged before me this i~~ day of /) ,;,:. ,,. / - 19 80 , by }~?ichael Behrendt and ~hryn Koc as Mayor ro em and 1 y er o£ the CITY OF ASPEN, respectively. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires : '~'~~ n~~" / _ ~ ~ ` NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) z The forego' g instrument was acknowledged before me this ~';X!,~~day of -,,~_/<,,,~, 1980, by HANS CANTRUP and JUNE CANTRUP. P7ITNESS my hand and official se(a~l. My Commission Expires: ~-~F ~~' / , -9- `y ~-c~.~=--~--~=- JUNE CANTRUP STATE OF COLORADO) ss. COUNTI' OF PITRIN ) s yora 41,1 . ~.; ~)~~ The fore oing 'nstrument was ack wledg b fore me this day of 1980, by ~ a-r~' as Presi nt -mgt=-~.=_Tr of ASPEN HOLIDAY, INC. VdITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission Expires: 8_ ._ . ,. i', ~ . ~~~~~. _~~" n -~n- ±l. ~t~ '. Cl ~.~ ! Exx1BZT A '~"""~-`~- That portionaf-t.he~t~llowinq_described property that is delineated in the floor plan below. --- - The East 7. 5' of Lot B and all of Lots C, D, and E, r-trc~ ~ Block 60, City and Townsite ofFAspen, Pitkin County, ~'-'~~ Colorado. ~~I_ ~ ~ ~N ~{~ 1 -k - I _ ~~"t' ~-I -~ - ~~'~- ~o~ 7~.vd ~ 231-(01 ~~!' I ,_ l ~s~ U ~~ ~ __ ~/ ("- I•~-- --------- ----- ,I---- .-- ------ I r 'u~x ; ~ . , o ~~~,~- ~I I ~_ I-~ ,~.. I ~: ' h . i ` W Y. I ~ ~pcr S~ I- ~~ 11; ~ ° V~ " ~ U ~' ~~ V ~ ~. - I I I _ - - ~ ~ I I '_ ~ -- - - _ I ~ _.L_ I -- - - ~ ~--- -- ~ _ I I -~ I ~ ,, i. 1 ~ I ISM ----- _ - ~ ®~ r ( ~ ,~ a •I j'. $ r a~ ~~ .~ I~ ~I ~' I I , '> ~I y ~ i I f rA A ~ti~. ~ I~ _ I ~ I I I I` °~ i r I I _ 1 -~ °4' ~ ~ ~3' ° ~,~FI I v ~~ I ~_ ~. I I ~ I t 1 J b + n \~ ~ 1' I U I ' ~ ~ II I' i r ; IZ r ~ ~ +_ ~' I ~~ ~ I ~% O I~i I I'1 I i I ~p ,~ I ~- N I I ,, iN ~~ :~. j~ P I~ _~ m I~m I ~ c, ~ i ~. ~~:-rt.t , . .~ -- -- - - - , i - -- - - - I - .... . ~.. I I i- ---- --J I~ ecy~'~ I I I I I~ I ~~v I I R U I I ~ ~ I I i ~' ~ r -, ^J -_S' _r S :.~ .1 /~ - r ~ , ~v V. ~ ~ c P ~~ `~" ;; ;._. 1 J M '~ ~ - _ ~:~ ;_ ~> .:~ N rvr' C c' .. ~ ~. ~ ~. ~, ...~. ~' ~:; N V ~ \ 6~ ~' .~ ~' ~~~ L>, ___ _ _. ~C n ~" .~ s-,, ~., 3 ~\._____ ~' ', d ~~ (r ~ ~~ _ i_ ~,,, ~ti ~. ^` r \1'~/ .~ ;. ~- v - ,,, I ~ _ -. ,l - X + ~ .j.~ `k' y I ~ 'ti ~`' ~' J ,~,_ ' ll~ /~ '~ Y Sy N ~+ ~ Y ~~ / J ` J a7 G ,. ,~ ~; `~---Z ~~ i I'' 4 /Y ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ 4`,i ~:..,~ ~~~ T- ~--.: ~ -~ ,:~ ~ ~, ~~ ~ -_ ~•---- .'~~" k~~.' i V.:, i II \, ~ . !~° ~ I ~~~. ~_~ ~' >> ~-- w Y ~ ~ J i i i -- ~~_ i-" W T ~ ~ _ `~ I ~ ..~ _: ~ ~ _ r ~--- c~ `. / ~ F / ~ ~ ~ ..i cj:.-. n ; Ta.. , ~'P ___-.__--- I ~ ~ ~ ;~- ~~ .~ (" 0. ~~~ s ~, rc -~ ~ ?"~ ~ -- G ~~ -- 1 \.. ~~ --~- - ~ - V , ~N ~ ~ ~~ I. -__- J ~~ '~9 --, .,., HOLIDAY HOIISE EXPANSION Prepared for Aspen Skiing Company Box 1248 Aspen, Colorado 81612 (303) 925-1220 Prepared by Glenn Horn Planning Consultant 300 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-6587 and Hairabedian Architects-Planners-IIrban Design 210G Ventnor Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-2463 .. JUN i TABLE OF CONTENTS section Paqe INTRODUCTION 1 I. DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION 3 A. Water System 3 B. Sewage System 3 C. Drainage 3 D. Fire Protection 4 E. Development Data 4 F. Traffic and Parking 6 G. Woodburning Devices 6 H. Proximity to Public Facilities 8 I. Proximity to Retail Outlets 8 J. Construction Schedule 8 K. Site Utilization Maps 8 II. LAN D USE REVIEWS A. Growth Management Quota System Exemption for Construction of Affordable Housing 14 B. Amendment to the Official Zone District Map 15 C. Amendment to the Text of the Land Use Code 21 D. Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement 22 .., ~.. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Paqe E. Special Review for Off-street Parking 23 F. Subdivision Approval 23 G. Waiver of City Fees 36 III. APPENDIR 1. May 25, 1989 Fred Smith letter Authorizing Glenn Horn and Hairabedian to represent the Aspen Skiing Company 37 2. May 30, 1989 Jay Hammond Drainage 38 Report 3. Pre-application Summary Sheet 39 4. Little Nell SPA Agreement 40 5. Deed 46 .. Y .. ,. ,~ .. ... s ar ti ~., ..... •b..., htll0 LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Holiday House Apartments Development Data 7 ,.. r w .. LIST OF FIGURES Figure I. Site Plan II. South and North Elevations III. East and West Elevations IV. Lower an8 IIpper Level Floor Plans V. Neighborhood Density Comparison ,~., .... Page 9 10 11 12 13 .. INTRODUCTION q The Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) requests land use approval from '~ the City of Aspen to construct nine studio apartments, deed restricted to the City's low and moderate income and occupancy guidelines. The new dwelling units are to be rented to ASC's ~, employee working on Aspen Mountain and at the Little Nell Hotel. The apartments are proposed for the vacant lot east of Holiday `° House apartments located at 127 Hopkins Avenue, more specifically described as lots c,d,e,f,g and the east 7.5 feet of lot b, City ~. of Aspen, original townsite. The Holiday House is presently used _, exclusively for affordable housing. The following land use approvals are requested: * Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for Construction of Affordable ,., Housing (Section 8-104 C.[1] [c]); * Amendment to the Official Zone District Map from LP to RMF (Section 7-11); * Amendment to the Text of the Land Use Code (Section 7-11); * Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA "' Agreement (Section 7-804 E.); .. * Special Review for Off-Street Parking (Section "" * Subdivision Approval (Section 7-10); and ~' * Waiver of City fees for: land use reviews, .. referrals to Engineering and Environmental Health Departments, building permit, and water taps. ~. _, 1 .. ,,, The Holiday House parcel is zoned LP (Lodge Preservation), however the ASC has never operated the Holiday House as a lodge. The lot is 5,570 square feet in size. The existing improvements on the lot include: 17 studio apartments, eight (8) one bedroom apartments and one (1) two bedroom apartment, 12 parking spaces, a swimming pool and a storage shed. The application is divided into the following three sections: I. Development Description; .a II. Land Use Reviews; and III. Appendix. - The applicant has attempted to prepare a complete land use "` application addressing all relevant City review standards. In the event further information or clarification is necessary, the applicant will be pleased to accommodate the staff as required. 2 ~-~ ~... I. DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION '" The ASC proposes to construct a new apartment building just to the east of the Holiday House containing 5 moderate income and .. 4 low income studio apartments. Each unit will be approximately 470 Square feet in size and the entire two story building will be approximately 4,425 square feet in size. Parking is proposed on '° the south side of the building with access off the alley. This ~' section describes the development in more detail. .« A. Water System The City of Aspen can provide service to the site form the .. six inch line located in Hopkins Avenue. Prior to the preparation of final plat the applicant will meet with Jim Markalunas to finalize plans for connection to the City water system. B. Sewage System Tom Bracewell, Line Superintendent for the Aspen Sanitation District, indicated in a telephone conversation on May 25, 1989 the Sanitation District has the line and plant capacity to serve °' the development. However, Tom said there is a small line problem located approximately 500 feet to the west of the site in the alley. The ASC will negotiate with the Sanitation District to r resolve the problem. ,., C. Drainage The applicant will maintain the historic drainage pattern on 3 .,, .. .. A. w ti .... The applicant will maintain the historic drainage pattern on the site. A 85 cubic foot dywell will be placed on the site. Refer to Appendix 2 for a copy of Jay Hammond's drainage report. D. Fire Protection The Holiday House is located approximately 3.5 blocks to the west of the Aspen fire station. Wayne Vandemark, Aspen Fire Marshall, indicated in a telephone conversation on May 25, 1989 the Fire District is capable of serving the development. Response time will be approximately four minutes. The Fire Marshall will require the building to contain sprinklers and fire alarms. E. Development Data Table I presents development data for the proposal demonstrating compliance with the Municipal Code. The applicant has carefully calculated building measurements reflected in the application and the table. However, since this is a conceptual submission, the data may vary upon final plat preparation. Bill Dreuding, Zoning Enforcement Officer, visited the site with the applicant on May 3, 1989 to determine the portion of the existing improvements to be included in the City's floor area calculation. The existing Holiday House includes two structures joined by an common entry. The east structure, built in 1966, contains three stories. Bill determined the bottom floor is entirely sub-grade and does not count in the floor area calculation. The west structure, built in 1972, also contains three stories, but differs from the east building because only a portion of the bottom floor is below grade. Bill and the 4 v,, ,. .. .. .. a. .~. .. .. .. .. ° --~, .~ applicant agreed that one-half of the floor area of the bottom floor should be included in floor area calculations. Based upon drainage the definition of floor area in Municipal Code Section 3- 101 and the floor area calculation methodology agreed upon by the applicant and Bill Dreuding the existing Holiday House contains approximately 11,092 square feet of floor area. The Holiday House expansion will be a free standing, two story building. On May 5, 1989, Tom Baker Senior Planner, instructed the applicant that based upon his conversation with Alan Richman, two free-standing apartment buildings are permitted uses in the RMF zone district. The applicant has chosen this option in order to preserve a large Spruce tree to the east of the existing Holiday House and to maintain adequate light for the apartments in the east wing of the existing Holiday House. The new building will contain 4,425 square feet of floor area. The combined floor area of the existing Holiday House and the addition will be 15,517 square feet. Within the LP and RMF zone districts the opens space requirement is 35 per cent of the building site. Due to the City's methodology for calculating open space, the open space requirement presents a problem for the applicant. On May 11, 1989 the applicant met with Bill Dreuding to review the site plan depicted by Figure I. Bill and the applicant agreed that the lot area on the south side of the building would not be included in the open space calculation because it was not "open to view from the street at pedestrian level" (refer to open space definition 5 -~ w Based upon this section of the Municipal Code, 1,798 square feet of lot area is not included in the open space calculation. -A Consequently, only 24 per cent of the building site or 3,742 -° square feet of lot area qualifies as open space. Due to ~' inconsistency with the Code's 35 per cent open space requirement, the applicant is requesting a Municipal Code amendment to establish the open space standard for 100 per cent affordable housing developments by special review. This request is addressed in more detail in Section II of the application. "~ F. Traffic and Parkinq Based upon transportation engineering standards, the proposed expansion of the Holiday House will generate approximately 36 to „, 63 vehicle trips per day. Most, if not all, of the Holiday House _ residents will work at the Little Nell Hotel or Aspen Mountain. '" Due to the location of the Holiday House in proximity to the downtown, Aspen Mountain and mass transit routes, it is very ,. likely vehicle trips generated by the development will be on the ~. low end of the projected range. The Holiday House will provide 12 on-site parking spaces. Parking is established by special review for affordable housing " developments and addressed in detail in Section II of the .. application. G. Woodburninq Devices The development will not contain any woodburning devices. .. ~. .. 6 ~, .,s Table I HOLIDAY HOUSE APARTMENTS DEVELOPMENT DATA ~, Category Standard* Proposal Maximum Height 25' 21' Minimum Front Setback 10' 10' w Minimum Side Setback ** 5' 10' • Minimum Rear Setback ~ 10' 10' ~~ Distance Between Buildings*** 10' 21' Lot Area NA 15,570 sq.ft. Minimum Lot Area/D.U.**** Studios 1/300 sq.ft. 25 x 300 = 7,500 sq.ft. 1 Bdr. 1/400 sq.ft. 8 x 400 = 3,200 sq.ft. 2'Bdr. 1/800 sq.ft. 1 x 800 = 800 sq.ft. Maximum F.A.R.***** 1:1 .99.1 Maximum Floor Area ***** 15,570 sq.ft. 15,517 sq.ft. ... Minimum ~ Open Space 35 ~ X24 l~ 7 q8 Open Space 5,449 sq.ft. 3,742 sq.ft. S~ ~~ Parking Special Review ' 12 spaces * Standards for RMF and LP zones are identical except as noted. ** Minimum side yard setback in LP zone is 5'. *** There is no standard for distance between principal buildings in the LP zone. **** Minimum lot area/D.U. in LP zone is established by special review. ,. ***** Maximum F.A.R. in the LP zone is established by special review. ****** Data subject to minor variation at final plat. Source: Glenn Horn, Planning Consultant May, 1989 r 7 R O .4Y ~.. H. Proximity to Public Facilities ° Paepcke Park is located within 150 feet of the Holiday House. Koch Park is located one block to the south and Wagner Park is ° only three blocks to the east. The Pitkin County Library is located two blocks to the north. I. Proximity to Retail Outlets Downtown Aspen is located two blocks to the east of the _w Holiday House. J. Construction Schedule The ASC is seeking to build the Holiday House expansion in the fall of 1989 for occupancy by employees during the 1989-90 skiing season. If approvals can not be obtained this summer, ~, construction will be postponed until the Spring of 1990. R. Site Utilization Maps °~ Refer to the following Figures: " Figure I Site Plan; Figure II South and North Elevations; Figure III: East and West Elevations; Figure IV Lower and Upper Level Floor Plans; and Figure V Neighborhood Density Comparison. 8 ~. .. ... ~. ». r ti ~. W ~. ~~+~1\1V/Id~~ %.,~~` ~_ ---------------~F~+' ~ --------- I u Z I I o ~--: -~ I J ' 1 H ~_ ~ ~ I ~ I I m ~"': I I O ~__ __ ____ _-__ __~ _~ I - - - - W'-- - - ~ I O s~ I I D. _ I ~ o I a I ' I ~~~ o ~ I i I ~ I I ~ ~ I I I I I I ~ w ' I ~ I Iw I I J I I J ~--- ------------- - 1 Q ' --------- ~I I I I t7 ~ I I z I I ~ I I H ~-~-J~-~ I I m I I I ~-- -------Z-------- ------ - ~ I H I I N I I H I 1 X I I W I I ~ I I I I I i--- ---------------- ------ - { I ~~ I L------------------------------~ Z s Q ~ J n a. 0 w= ~- " H Z C ~ U F-I W `~ H Z Q U li ~ X c W z a WH U ~ Z m W a H H Q (n = Z W Z Q Z W Q. (n I Q I 0 W O W I 0 z L7 0 O s u U H ~+ H -a H W Q t Q G C7 ~ ~ (7 M H w '' ~ J M w J b ` ~ U . , w m w . , ~ ~ a X _ ~ = W z F' w m ~ Q O O W o z o ~ ~ U w a z Cl W ~ o Z ~ O H Q "~ ~. H (~ _ m W W Q F W z W H J M W m //~~ V/ ( tl •~~~. Z H O N H I X W O Z Q N ^ M ~ H m ~ J i ° O w ~ ~ i I 0 o ~ a W O ~ ~ O ~~ ~ .. ., ~, .. ti .r .~., yr za z a z ~ o! o ! p ~ H ti H ~ H W Q ' ~ Q , ~ ~ ~ Z H = wm w ~ Q U W ~ w ., J ~ ., (L w X a ~ ~ W z ~ N a a w 3 W H ~ U w Z m W c H Q Cn = 1 W I n ^1 H 1 ~ J ~ I Z ' I W m 1 Z ~ w I Q ~ a I ~ ~ I I ~ a I W I W .~, •, i W I O I = I ^ I I ~ I Q ~ I H I J O ~\ _ W p O ~. ~. ~w ~. ~;~ z= am J- Q. " ~: Om O~ J~ CL J w w J W d. a -- ~ a -^ J I1= a d I1. ] ~ ~ O I J I ~ ~ I J I W I > I w I J I ~ I W I 3 I p I J I I I~ I I!=~ I!=? !~=' I I °- - - -0 - - - a - - - ~ - - ~ a i a a io Z rn O ~ U H W c~ ~ Z `" Q U X Q W z Q W '~" U ~ Z m W Q ^ ~ H Q (n = ~- Z W Z Q Q W Q. O 2 a a H J O I O (n O d IV ,. w ... ~._, .,~ r m o -Ni ~~; a ~ n r n -~ 'a 1 1 1 1 wH~ ~ r N N 9 t~ n \11..J CS"J ~ ~ ~ 1 3 3 tl 1 6 N 3 d 6 V Y 2 Q a w Y U a w a a m m 1 3 3 tl l fi 1 5 tl 1~ i 1' m b 1 3 3 tl 1 6 M 7 6 1 17 L Y 9 tl1 Z Y d 0 x Z S r x 1 3 3 Y 1 G O N O 7 3 fi a Z~ O~ U1 w _~ 2= Q U d Q ~ Z u~ 0 ~w F- a _¢ U1 a Z= W O O 2 m W Z V ~.., _, .~ II. LAND USE REVIEWS r This Section addresses the following reviews as identified by s Leslie Lamont and Tom Baker during the May 4, 1989 pre-application „, conference as noted on the Pre-application Summary Sheet (refer to Appendix 2): * Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for Construction of Affordable Housing (Section 8-104 C.(1] (c]); * Amendment to the Official Zone District Map from LP to RMF (Section 7-11); * Amendment to the Text of the Land Use Code (Section 7-11); °" * Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement (Section 7-804 E.); * Special Review for Off-Street Parking (Section 7-4 B.); * Subdivision Approval (Section 7-10); and * Waiver of City fees for: land use reviews, referrals to Engineering and Environmental Health Departments, building permits, and water taps. A. Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption for Construction of Affordable Housing ~ Section 8-104 C.(1)(c) - ~~ Affordable Housing. All housing '' deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the ,, City Council and its housing designee. The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a determination of the City~s need ° for such housing, considering the proposed developments com- _. pliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units . 14 w .-~ for such housing, considering the proposed developments com- °a pliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed, specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the ., size of the dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted.~~ The Aspen-Pitkin Housing Authority has identified a critical need in the community for affordable rental housing. The Housing Plan calls for the construction of low and moderate rental housing in the City limits. The Holiday House helps satisfy this need. The dwelling units will be 474 square feet studio apartments. Figure IV, Upper and Lower Level Floor Plans, shows that although the units will be studios, they offer the privacy of one-bedroom apartments. The Holiday House expansion complies with the Municipal Code criteria for a GMQS exemption. B. Amendment to the Official Zone District Map from LP to RMF Prior to the acquisition of the Holiday House by the ASC, the facility was operated as a lodge. When the L-3 zone district was adopted in 1983, the Holiday House was zoned L-3. When the Little Nell SPA was approved in 1987, 17 rooms in the Holiday House were restricted for affordable housing for the Little Nell Hotel. When the City of Aspen adopted the new Municipal Code and Official Zone '~ District Map, in 1988, the Holiday House was rezoned from L-3 to LP. The 1988 zoning change to LP may have been an oversite. The .. Holiday House probably should have been rezoned to RMF in 1988 to _ reflect the change in use of the parcel from short-term accommodations to affordable housing. 15 .., .~ The ASC discussed the following three zoning options for the •.~ Holiday House with the Tom Baker and Leslie Lamont: 1. AH rezoning; .~ 2. RMF rezoning; or 3. Maintain LP zone. .., Ideally, the Holiday House should be rezoned to the proposed . AH zone district. Unfortunately, the new zone district is still being considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission and probably will not be approved by the City Council until late July or August. The schedule for the adoption of the new zone district does not coincide with the ASC construction plans. The Holiday House expansion may be accommodated within the RMF zone district. This is the approach favored by the applicant. As demonstrated in Table I, Development Data, the plan complies with all of the zone district criteria with the exception of the 35 per cent open space requirement. As noted in the previous section, the rear court yard (1,798 square feet of the undeveloped land) is not considered to be open space because it is not visible from a public street. Therefore, if RMF rezoning is approved the Municipal Code would have to be amended to make the minimum open space requirement in the RMF a special review consideration for 100 per cent affordable housing developments. In the event the City of Aspen does not support the proposal ~. to rezone the Holiday House to the RMF district, the development could be accommodated in the LP zone district. As shown in Table 16 I, Development Data, the Holiday House expansion also complies with the development standards of the LP zone district with the exception of the 35 per cent open space requirement. Section 5- 216 B. of the Municipal Code lists affordable housing for employees of the lodge to be a permitted use in the LP zone. The ASC could restrict Holiday House affordable housing to employees of the Little Nell Hotel and comply with Section 5-216 B. of the Code. However, this approach requires a Code amendment to the LP zone district to make open space in the LP zone subject to special review. This application requests rezoning of the Holiday House site .~ from LP to RMF. Section 7-1102 establishes standards for review of rezoning requests. In the following section each of the review standards are quoted and addressed by the applicant. In the event °° RMF rezoning is denied, the ASC requests permission to construct the Holiday House expansion under the existing LP zoning. 1. Section 7-1102 A. ~~ Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter.~~ As demonstrated within this application the proposed Holiday } House expansion is in compliance with applicable portions of the Municipal Code with the exception of the open space requirement ~, for the RMF and LP zone districts. - 2. Section 7-1102 B. ~~ Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive " Plan. ~~ '~ The 1973 Land Use Plan designates the Shadow Mountain Neighborhood as a mixed use residential neighborhood. The ., 17 .~.. rezoning is consistent with the spirit of the Plan. The Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan Hosing Element calls for the production -m of affordable housing within the Aspen City limits. The rezoning ' of the site to RMF to accommodate additional affordable housing is w consistent with the Plan. 3. section 7-1102 C. "Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, con- sidering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics." The Shadow Mountain neighborhood is characterized by mixed land uses including small lodges, single-family dwelling units and small multi-family apartment buildings. Zoning in the area varies. Koch and Paepcke Parks are zoned P (Parks), the area south of mid Hopkins Avenue and east of First Street is zoned RMF (Residential Multi-family), while the area north of Hyman Avenue and west of Aspen Street is zoned R-6 (Medium-density °' Residential) . All of the small lodges in the area are zoned LP (Lodge Preservation). The applicant surveyed the area to determine the existing development density and consistency of existing land uses with zoning. Land uses located on Blocks 52, 53, 59, 60, 67, and 68 and the north half of blocks 54, 61, and 69 were inventoried. Figure V summarizes the survey. The land use densities in the site vicinity vary considerably from five to ten dwelling units .. per acre to 87-112 dwelling units per acre. The land use data ... reflect the Shadow Mountain neighborhoods "mixed residential" designation on the 1973 Land Use Plan. A review of the land uses immediately around the Holiday ,. 18 ,.~, The parcel to the west of the subject site contains two detached single-family dwelling units (d.u.) on a 6,000 square foot lot, a ,, density of 7 d.u.'s per acre. The Mollie Gibson Lodge is located ». directly across the street from the Holiday House and is developed "` at a density of 112 d.u.'s per acre. South of the Holiday House 9 are the Cottonwoods Apartments and another apartment building at 102 Hyman Avenue. The density of development is 52 and 32 d.u.'s per acre respectively. Ninety-five d.u's per acre are proposed on the Holiday house site. The proposed dwelling units would not adversely impact the two single-family dwelling units located to the west of the site because the existing Holiday House screens the view of the addition from the neighboring parcel. The single-family dwelling unit to the east of the site is the parcel most adversely impacted - by the new building. Fortunately, there are numerous very large Aspen and Spruce trees buffering the single-family house from the Holiday House lot. The applicant proposes to set back the building 10 feet from the east property line rather than the five feet required by the Municipal Code. However, the north and south staircases will encroach into the self-imposed 10 foot side yard set back. 4. Section 7-1101 D. ~' The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety.~~ As noted in Section I, the Holiday House expansion will generate approximately 36 to 63 vehicle trips per day. Since most residents will walk to work at Aspen Mountain or Little Nell, w 19 r ,~ .. `-~ ,~ residents will walk to work at Aspen Mountain or Little Nell, vehicle trips should be on the low end of the range. The City street system is capable of accommodating the increased traffic flow. 5. Section 7-1101 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 public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.~~ Public facilities serving the developments are capable of accommodating the additional demand for services resulting from the development. 6. Section 7-1101 F. ~~ Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment.~~ There will not be any adverse impacts on the natural environment. 7. Section 7-1101 G. ~~ Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. ~~ As shown by Figure V, the proposed development is consistent with the character of the Shadow Mountain neighborhood. The location of the development in proximity to downtown Aspen provides opportunities for Holiday House residents to walk or bicycle from the Holiday House to all downtown locations. 8. Section 7-1101 B. ~~ Whether there have been changed -~ conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment.~~ The deed restriction placed on the Holiday House in 1987 as part of the Little Nell SPA Agreement (refer to Appendix 4) 20 ~. upon the deed restriction LP zoning is no longer as appropriate for the parcel as RMF. w 9. Section 7-1102 I. " Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the ° purpose and intent of this chapter." Given the need for in-town affordable housing and traffic on State Highway 82, the rezoning and addition of affordable housing will help serve the public interest. . C. Amendment to the Teat of the Land IIse Code Based upon the Municipal Code's definition of open space there will be 3,742 square feet of open space on the site (24 per cent of lot area). The Code requires 35 per cent of the lot area to be open space in the RMF and LP zoned districts. The Code does not credit a development for open space if it is not visible at pedestrian level from a public street. Aback yard on an alley is not included in open space calculations. The draft of the proposed AH zone (Affordable Housing) calls for open space to be determined by special review. As previously noted, if the AH district was in effect at this time, the ASC would be requesting AH rezoning. However, in order to help alleviate the critical housing shortage in the community by next winter the applicant is trying to make the Holiday House Expansion work based upon RMF or LP zoning. The original intent of the L-3 zone district and subsequently the LP zone district was to create incentives for existing small -~ lodges to upgrade and provide limited expansion potential. To permit flexibility, floor area in the LP zone is established by 21 ..,R ~/ special review. The applicant is requesting Code amendments to also make the open space requirement a special review ~- determination. The applicant proposes the following Municipal Code w amendment. Section 5-206 D.(10)&(11) of the Code would be renumbered as 5-206 D.(11)&(12). Anew Section 5-206 D.(10) would read: .• Per cent of open space required for building site for a 100 per cent affordable housing development: Special review. Additionally, the applicant proposes that Section 7-404 A.(1) be amended to include the following additional sentence: In establishing required open space for a specific development, the Commission shall consider the quantity of unimproved lot area which enhances the site but does not meet the definition of open space. D. Minor Amendment to the Little Nell SPA Agreement The Little Nell SPA Agreement restricts the Holiday House for affordable housing (refer to Appendix 4). The agreement also commits the owner of the Holiday House to maintaining an on-site swimming pool and 12 parking spaces. The proposed expansion would eliminate the pool. The ASC believes the addition of nine affordable housing units would serve their employees more than the pool. Therefore, the applicant requests an amendment to the Little .. Nell SPA Agreement to remove the requirement to maintain the pool at the Holiday House. -^ All other conditions of the Little Nell SPA Agreement pertaining to the Holiday House have been met. 22 ~, pertaining to the Holiday House have been met. E. Special Review for Off-Street Parking Section 5-302 B. of the Municipal Code states that off-street parking requirements for affordable housing are established by special review. Section 7-404 B. (2) establishes the following special review standards for establishing off-street parking requirements. In all other zone districts, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, quests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, quests and employees. As indicated in Table I, the Holiday House will provide 12 off-street parking spaces. The Holiday House will be occupied by ASC employees. ASC is seeking to house Aspen Mountain and Little Nell Hotel employees in Aspen and Snowmass employees in Snowmass Village. Housing employees in proximity to their work place will help reduce commuting and the need for employees to have automobiles. Additionally, the proximity of the Holiday House to downtown Aspen will reduce automobile dependence. In the event ASC employees are housed in Aspen and work at Snowmass, the ASC operates special employee shuttle buses to Snowmass Village. Employees living at the Holiday House can get the shuttle on Main -. Street, one block to the north. F. Subdivision Approval ,. 23 \. .n subdivision standards are not relevant to the Holiday House because they are intended to address land subdivisions. Nevertheless, this ~> section of the application addresses all of the Code subdivision ' standards and notes which standards are not applicable to the Holiday House. During the pre-application conference, Leslie ~, Lamont and Tom Baker indicated that the applicant need not submit ti a final plat at this time and may submit the final plat prior to .~ building permit submission. ~' 7-1004 0.(1) General Requirements a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen w Area Comprehensive Plan. As noted within the text the Holiday House expansion is consistent with the 1973 Land Ose Plan and Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the '" character of existing land uses in the area. As noted in Section II.B. (Amendment to the Official Zone District Map) of the application the Holiday House expansion is consistent with the mixed residential land uses in the Shadow Mountain neighborhood. '~ c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future .. development of surrounding areas. The proposed development should not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding areas. d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all ,, applicable requirements of this chapter. This application has demonstrated compliance with applicable " sections of the Municipal Code. 24 ~1b.~ \ fI 7-1004 C. (2) Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, -.• drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, •- duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. The proposed development is located in the Shadow Mountain neighborhood several blocks from the mountain. Environmental hazards affecting the suitability of land for development do not impact the site. The proposed subdivision is readily accessible to public facilities which are already in existence. Section 7-1004 C.(3) Improvements. a. Required improvements. The following improvements shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. ~ (1) Permanent survey monuments, range points, and lot pins. Permanent survey monuments will be located when the site is surveyed for the final plat. (2) Paved streets, not exceeding the requirements for paving and improvements of a collector street. There are no streets in the development. (3) Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. The existing curb gutter and sidewalk on Hopkins Avenue will not be disturbed. (4) Paved alleys. The paved alley on the south side of the building will not be disturbed. 25 w .. ,.. ,, r .~,~. ~. The paved alley on the south side of the building will not be disturbed. (5) Traffic-control signs, signals or devices. Such devices are not necessary. " (6) Street lights. There will be no street lights. (7) street name signs. There are no new streets. (8) Street trees or landscaping. ' The landscaping plan is depicted in Figure I. (9) Water lines and fire hydrants. The building will be connected to the existing six inch waterline in Hopkins Avenue. There will be no new fire hydrants installed. ( i need to verify this with Markalunas) (lo) Sanitary sewer lines. ` The building will be connected to the existing line in the alley to the south of the Holiday House. According to Tom Bracewell of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District the line can accommodate the development. The ASC will have to negotiate with the Sanitation District to fix a small line problem in a line located approximately 500 feet to the west of the site. (il) Storm drainage improvements and storm sewers. Historic drainage on the site will be maintained as noted in . the letter in Appendix 2 from Jay Hammond, Professional Engineer. (12) Bridges or culverts. Not applicable. 26 .. f.,..... ", ~S ~.% 4 ./ ,. (14) Telephone lines. ., All telephone lines will be placed underground. (15) Natural gas lines. Natural gas lines will be placed underground. .. (16) Cable television lines. .. Cable television lines will be placed underground. ,, b. Approved clans. Construction shall not commence on any of the improvements required by Sec. 7-1004(C)(3)(a) until a plan, .. profile, and specifications have been received and approved by the City Engineer and, when appropriate, the relevant utility company. The required plan, profiles and specifications shall be submitted with the final plat. ~^ c. Oversized utilities. in the event oversized utilities are required as a part of the improvements, arrangements for reimbursement shall be made whereby the subdivider shall be allowed _. to recover the cost of the utilities that have been provided beyond the needs of the subdivision. Utilities will not have to be oversized. 4. Design standards. The following design standards shall be required for all subdivisions. a. Streets and related improvements. The following standards shall apply to streets regardless of type or size, unless the e street has been improved with paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk. (i) Conform to plan for street extension. Streets shall conform to approved plans for street extensions and shall bear a logical •' relationship to the topography and to the location of existing or planned streets on adjacent properties. Streets shall not be extended to serve the development. y (2) Right-of-wav dedication. Right-of-way shall be dedicated for the entire width for all local, collector and arterial streets. „, The applicant is not aware of the need for the City to acquire '- right-of-way in the area. If the need arises during the review process the applicant will commit the requested right-of-way. 27 .. ..~ (3) Richt-of-wav width. Street and alley right-of-way widths, curves and grades shall meet the following standards. Minimum - street Center Line Right-of- Maximum Classifi- Curve Way Width Per Cent '" cation Radius (ft.) (ft.) of Grade(%) Local 100 60 10 Collector 250 80 6 Arterial 625 100 5 Alley 50 20 5 ,r Not applicable. ' (4) Half-street dedications. Half-street dedications shall be prohibited unless they are for the purpose of increasing the width of an inadequate existing right-of-way. Not applicable. (5) Street ends at subdivision. When a street is dedicated which ends on the subdivision or is on the perimeter of the subdivision, the last foot of the street on the terminal end or outside perimeter of the subdivision shall be dedicated to the City of Aspen in fee simple and shall be designated by using outlot(s). The City shall use the dedicated land for public road and access ~` purposes. Not applicable. (6) Cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-sacs shall not exceed four hundred (4000 feet in length and shall have a turnaround diameter of one hundred (1000 feet. A Cul-de-sac of less than two hundred (200 0 feet in length in a single-family detached residential area does not require a turnaround if the City Engineer determines a ~~T~~, ~~Yu or other design is adequate turnaround for the vehicles expected to use the Cul-de-sac. Not applicable. (7) Dead end streets. Dead-end streets, except for cul-de-sacs, shall be prohibited unless they are designed to connect with future streets on adjacent lands that have not been platted. In cases where these type of dead end streets are allowed, a temporary turnaround of one hundred (100 0 feet shall be constructed. Not applicable. 28 +.1 \...e \„O (S) Centerline offset. Streets shall have a centerline offset of "' at least one hundred twenty-five (125 0 feet. Not applicable. (9) Reverse curves. Reverse curves on arterial and collectors streets shall be jointed by a tangent of at least one hundred (1000 feet in length. Not applicable. (l0) Chances in street Grades. All changes in street grades shall be connected by vertical curves of a minimum length in feet °' equivalent to the following appropriate nRn value multiplied by the algebraic difference in the street grades. -. street Classification Collector Local Arterial ~~Rn value for: Crest vertical 28 16 55 curve sag vertical 35 24 55 "° curve Not applicable. .. (li) Alleys. Alleys shall be provided in //subdivisions where commercial and industrial development is expected, except ' when other provisions are made and approved for service access. The alley is already in existence. "' (12) Intersections. Intersections shall approximate right angles an8 have a minimum tangent of fifty (50~) feet on each leg. The subdivision design shall minimize the number of local streets ti that intersect arterial streets. There will be no intersections with City streets. .. (13) Intersection grade. intersection grades shall not exceed ., four (4$) per cent for a minimum distance of one hundred (1000 feet on each leg. Flatter grades are 8esirable. r Not applicable. ,. (14) Curb return radii. Curb return radii for local street intersections shall be fifteen (15~) feet. Curb return radii and corner setbacks for all other types of intersections shall be based upon the expected types of vehicle usage, traffic volumes and r 29 ». - .~ ,-~ i..~ ., s w traffic patterns using accepted engineering standards. In case of '~' streets which intersect at acute angles, appropriate increases in curb return radii shall be made for the necessary turning move- '' ments. Not applicable. (15) Turn bv-passes and turn lanes. Right-turn by-passes or left-turn lanes shall be required at the intersection of arterial ,, streets or the intersection of an arterial street with a collector street if traffic conditions indicate they are needed. sufficient -~ right-of-way shall be dedicated to accommodate such lanes when they are required. - Not applicable. - (16) Street names and numbers. When streets are in alignment with existing streets, any new streets shall be named according to "' the streets with which they correspond. Streets which do not fit into an established street-naming pattern shall be named in a manner which will not duplicate or be confused with existing street -. names within the City or its environs. Street numbers shall be assigned by the City Building Inspector in accordance with the City numbering system. Not applicable. (17) Installation of curb nutter sidewalks or driveways. -° No finish paving, curb, gutter, sidewalks or driveways shall be constructed until one (1) year after the installation of all subsurface utilities and improvements. The applicant will comply with this standard. (18) Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be eight (8~) feet wide in all Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (C1), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), and Commercial Lodge (CL) Zone Districts and five (5~) feet wide in all other Zone Districts where sidewalks are required. Consideration shall be given to existing and proposed landscaping when establishing sidewalk locations. The applicant will adhere to these standards. .. (19) City specifications for streets. All streets and related improvements shall be constructed in accordance with City "" specifications which are on file in the office of the City Engineer. .. The applicant will adhere to the standards. ,» 30 m (20) Range point monuments. Prior to paving any street, permanent range point monuments meeting the standards of Sec. 7- 1004(C)(4)(d) shall be installed to approximately finished grade. Permanent range point boxes shall be installed during or as soon ., as practicable after paving. m Not applicable. '~ (21) Street name signs. Street name signs shall conform to ~, the type currently in use by the City. Not applicable. " (22) Traffic control signs. Any required traffic-control ,,, signs, signals or devices shall conform to the ~~Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.~~ -~ Not applicable. (23) Street lights. Street lights shall be placed at a maximum spacing of three hundred (300 0 feet. Ornamental street ~. lights are desirable. Not applicable. (24) Street tree. One (1) street tree of three-inch (3~~) caliper for deciduous trees measured at the top of the ball or root system, or a minimum of six-foot (6~) height for conifers, shall be provided in a subdivision in residential Zone Districts for each lot of seventy foot (70~) frontage or less, and at least two (2) such trees shall be provided for every lot in excess of seventy feet (70~) frontage. Corner lots shall require at least one (1) tree for each street. Trees shall be placed so as not to block sight distances at driveways or corners. The City Parks and Recreation Department shall furnish a list of acceptable trees. Trees, foliage and landscaping shall be provided in subdivisions in all other Zone Districts in the City in accordance with the adopted street landscaping plan. The applicant shall comply with this standard. d. Easements. ., (1) Utility easements. Utility easements of ten (10~) feet in width on each side of all rear lot lines and five (5~) feet in "' width on each aide of lot lines shall be provided where necessary. Where the rear or aide lot lines abut property outside of the subdivision on which there are no rear or side lot line easements ,. at least five (5~) feet in width, the easements on the rear and side lot lines in the subdivision shall be twenty (20~) feet and - ten (10~) feet in width, respectively. W 31 In the event the City requests a utility easement the applicant will dedicate it. (2) "T" intersections and cul-de-sacs. Easements twenty (20') feet in width shall be provided in "T" intersections and cul-de- sacs for the continuation of utilities or drainage improvements, if necessary. Not applicable. (3) Potable water and sewer easements. Water and sewer easements shall be a minimum of twenty (20') feet in width. The Water Department and Sanitation district do not need easements. (4) Planned utility or drainage system. Whenever a subdivision °"' embraces any part of a planned utility or drainage system designated on an adopted plan, an easement shall be provided to accommodate the plan within the subdivision. Not applicable. (5) Irrigation ditch, channel, natural creek. where an irrigation ditch or channel, natural creek or stream traverses a subdivision, an easement sufficient for drainage and to allow for maintenance of the ditch shall be provided. Not applicable. „, (6) Fire lanes and emergency access easements. Fire lanes and emergency access easements twenty (20') feet in width shall be provided where required by the City Fire Marshal. Fire lanes and emergency access easements are not needed on the site. (7) Planned street or transit alignment. whenever a subdivision embraces any part of an esistinq or planned street or transit ,,, alignment designated on an adopted plan, an easement shall be provided to accommodate the plan within the subdivision. Not applicable. (8) Planned trail system. Whenever a subdivision embraces any part of a bikeway, bridle path, cross country ski trail or hiking trail designate8 on the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Re- creation/Open Space/Trails Plan Map, an easement shall be provided ., to accommodate the plan within the subdivision. 32 ,.,. There are no planned trails traversing the site. c. Lots and blocks. (1) General. Lots shall meet all applicable regulations of this chapter. Not applicable. (2) Side lot lines. Side lot lines shall be substantially at right angles or radial to street lines. Not applicable. (3) Reversed corner lots and through lots. Reversed corner lots and through lots shall be prohibited except where essential to provide separation from arterial streets because of slope, or to prevent the development of incompatible land uses. Not applicable. (4) Front on street. All lots shall front on a public or private street. Not applicable. (5) State Highway 82. No lot shall front on, nor shall any private driveway access to State Highway 82. Not applicable. (6) Block lengths. Block lengths shall normally be at least four hundred (4000 feet in length and not more than one thousand four hundred (1,4000 feet in length between street intersections. Not applicable. (7) Compatibility. Block lengths and widths shall be suitable for the uses contemplated. Not applicable. - (8) Mid-block uedestrian walkways. In blocks over five hundred (500 0 feet long, mid-block pedestrian walkways shall be provided. -" Not applicable. `" e. Survey monuments. (1) Location. The external boundaries of all subdivisions, blocks and lots shall be monumented on the ground by reasonably permanent monuments solidly embedded in the ground. These monuments shall .., 33 «. .,, ._. be set not more than fourteen hundred (1,4000 feet apart along any '~ straight boundary line, at all angle points, and at the beginning, end and points of change of direction or change of radius of any curved boundaries. The applicant shall comply with this standard. (2) C.R.S. 1973 38-51-101. All monuments shall be set in accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. 1973 38-51-101, as amended ~- from time to time, unless otherwise provided for in this chapter. The applicant shall comply with this standard. (3) Range points and boxes. Range points and boxes meeting City a specifications shall be set on the centerline of the street right- of-way unless designated otherwise. Not applicable. f. IItilities. (1) Potable waterlines and appurtenances. All potable waterlines, fire hydrants and appurtenances shall meet the City~s standard specifications on file in the City Engineers office. The applicant shall comply with this standard. (2) Size of waterlines. All potable water lines shall be at least "' eight (8~~) inches in size unless the length of the line is less than two hundred (200 0 feet. Where the potable waterline is less than two hundred (2000 feet in length, its minimum size shall be - six (6~~) inches in width. The applicant shall comply with this standard. (3) Fire hvdranta. Fire hydrants shall be spaced no farther apart than five hundred (500 0 feet in detached residential and duplex subdivisions. Fire hydrants shall be no farther than three hundred w fifty (3500 feet apart in multi-family residential, business, commercial, service and industrial subdivisions. .. Not applicable. - (4) Sanitarv sewer. Sanitary sewer facilities shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. ,.. ,, The applicant has discussed the sanitary sewer line with the Sanitation District and will meet the standards of the district to "' connect to the line. 34 .s (5) Underground utilities. All utilities shall be placed under- -. ground, except transformers, switching boxes, terminal boxes, meter cabinets, pedestals, and ventilation ducts The applicant shall comply with this standard. (6) Other utilities. Other utilities not specifically mentioned shall be provided in accordance with the standards and regulations ~ of the applicable Utility Department or company. Not applicable. (7) Utilities stubbed out. All utilities shall be stubbed out at the property line of lots. Not applicable. q. Storm drainage. (1) Drainage plan. The drainage plan for the proposed subdivision shall comply with the criteria in the City~s ~~Urban Runoff Management Plan.~~ The historic drainage pattern on the site shall be maintained. ` (2) Detention storage. Short-term on-site detention storage shall be provided to maintain the historical rate of runoff for the 100- year storm from the undeveloped site. Refer to Appendix 2. (3) Maintain historical drainage flow. In cases where storm runoff from an upstream basin passes through the subdivision, the drainage plan shall provide adequate means for maintaining the historical drainage system. The historic drainage pattern shall be maintained. (4) Calculations and quantities of flow. The drainage plan shall include calculations and quantities of flow at the points of concentration. Refer to Appendix 2 for a copy of Jay Hammond's drainage report. „. h. Flood hazard areas. The following standards shall apply to ° special floo8 hazard areas as defined in Sec. 7-504 of the Municipal Code. (1) The proposed subdivision design shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage to public utilities and facilities w 35 FY ~. such as sewer, qas, electricity, and potable water systems; (2) Base flood elevation data shall be provided for any proposed subdivision of at least fifty (50) lots or five (5) acres, whichever is less. Not applicable. ' G. Waiver of City Fees The Applicant requests the City of Aspen to waive the following . City fees to reduce the cost of development for providing a 100 per cent affordable housing project: 1. Land use review fees ( $ 1,500); 2. Referrals fees to City Departments ($ 325); 3. Plan check fees ($ 1,195); 4. Building permit fees ($1,839); and 4. Water tap fees ($ 26,000). Total City fees are approximately $30,859. 36 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY .. P~~coF~« scx ~zae sss 5 o~,ra~.c 3[reec dsCeo. Oro2ac 81612 303`. 925 1220 F,1;(303925 !609 /t\ May 25, 1989 Alan Richmond City Planning Dept. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Co. 81611 ~' Dear Alan: The Aspen Skiing Company here-by authorizes Mr. Glen Horn to submit our application for the Holiday House expansion. if you have any questions, please give me a call. Sinc~ely,~~ ~'~~ ~. -'" L ~- ~ ~ --. -"~~"".~ Fred Smith /Vice President Design/Construction ~ SN C!V M.14 ~ ASHEN MVUNTAIN. BUTTERMILK 110CNiAIN SCHMUESER GONG( EYEA May 30, 1989 Mr. Glenn Horn Planning Consultant 300 E. Hyman Avenue, Suite B Aspen, CO 81611 CONSULTING EN GINEEflS & P.O. Box 2155 Aspen, Colorado 81612 (303)925-6727 RE: Holiday House Storm Drainage Facilities Dear Glenn; At your request, I have reviewed the proposed residential expansion at the Holiday House (Part of Lot B, All of Lots C through G, Block 60, City of Aspen) with regard to storm drainage impacts. Under Aspen Municipal Code, Section 20-17(f), all construction is required to maintain the historic rate of runoff for the 100 year event. Without belaboring the technical calculations, the project will replace an existing pool and landscaped area with a new structure. (AS you have indicated, the existing Holiday House will not change and I have, therefore, ignored it for purposes of runoff calculation.) Conversations with Phil Byrne and the building manager indicate that the existing pool does not exhibit significant leakage so I have not considered excessive artificial recharge from the site. The difference in off-site runoff associated with the development will be adequately handled by a drywell of 85 cubic feet. The building configuration suggests location in the northwest corner of Lot F, we would be pleased to provide detail design services should you or your client so desire. Very Truly Yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. -,, !' Ja'y W. Hammond, P.E. Principal, Aspen Office JWH:jwh/9112 cc: Phil Byrne, Aspen Skiing Company 1512 Grand Avenue, Suite 212 • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • (303) 945-1004 \._ ~ 1 ~~ n CITY OF ASPEN ~s 11 OPRE-APPLICATION CONFERnENICE SUMMARY /~ ~ I PROJECT: ~-1~,1~r~~T~- t]S-Q ~-~n~Cxntl]~2 ~OUJi~S (~x~'T~a~ APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: C~'IeM ~ ~ofY~ J REPRESENTATIVE' S PHONE: ~ nZ S - (oS~S~- OWNER'S NAME:f~~IG l ~C] 1. Type of Application: SUMMARY ~~~~o :, o.-..~k' 3. Areas is which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: Policy Area/ Referral Acxent Comments . Pa~ h e~ r` j n~ - v - o ~ ~ S~ - ,~~~ - i ~ ~ - {~rny ( 1 ~rmo„n ~ ~eiL~T~ - 4. Review is: (P&Z Only) (CC Only) (P&Z then to CC) ~1~a_~ ~-Ce ,~ 5. Public Hearing: (YES (NO) "' 6. Did you te~l_applicant to submit list of ADJACE PROPERTY ~ OWNERS? ~1tES)~ (NO) Disclosure of Ownership: YES (NO) ~. 7. What fee was applicant requested to submit: f;sc, o-t)as+ x~o~/gas/+ '~' 8. Anticipated date of submission: ~,~a~ ' ' `` / 1S d ~' 9. ~ COMMENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNS: ~P.v.-g,'t~l.l J GY~.r~~y~9 L -y(~ frm.pre_app M ~pc a~ -a-o !-; Fk I a, rU eib~ PAD (~.~reerv- cv 2. Describe action/type of development being requested: f`1 R ~: ~ ~_. L..-.~ ~^ - It is the express understanding of the parties that the procedure set forth in Section XI of this Agreement regarding non-compliance shall not be required with respect to the enforcement and implementation of the financial assurances w set forth herein and required by Section [20-16(c)] of the Municipal Code. VI. EMPLOYEE HOUSING. As an inducement to approve the Precise Plan ar:d grant the Growth Management Allocations necessary for the Project, Owner has agreed to and does hereby acknowledge its obligation to provide off-site employee housing for thirty-four (34) employees generated by the Project. Accordingly, Owner agrees to house thirty-four (34) employees by converting and deed restricting seventeen (17) rooms in the e<_isting Holiday House Lodge located at 127 West Hopkins Avenue. Employees shall be housed at two (2) employees per room. Each lodge room shall have a private bath and small kitchen. Lodge rooms may vary in sizes, but sha'.1 average . 172 sq. ft. of net living space per employee. The lodge ~. shall provide a swimming pool, two laundry rooms, ample .a+ storage closets and a small common lobby as on-site amenities. On-site parking spaces shall be provided at the '~ rear of the building off the alleyway to serve residents of the lodge. &o less than twelve (12) parking spaces shall be .. provided. In addition to the imprcvemen`s tc the lodge - 15 - ,a ~ i. ~ .. w C. already made by the Owner, which include painting and clean-up, and upgrading the mechanical systems, Owner agrees to add small kitchens to rooms currently without kitchens so that approximately eleven (11) new kitchens will be added to the lodge prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the hotel. All proposed improvements will be reviewed, itemized, and documented with the City Council or its housing designee. Two (2) rooms in the Holiday House shall be deed restricted at the time the gondola goes into operation. Fifteen (15) rooms of the Holiday House shall be deed restricted at the time of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the Little Nell Hotel. Rent for the rooms shall be deed restricted to the low-income rental guidelines in effect at the time of deed restriction, and may be adjusted annually according to the dnnually adopted City guidelines. Private lodge rooms vary in individual sizes, but in total the twenty-eight (28) rooms in the lodge contain 5,658 sq. ft. of net living space. Rents for the herein restricted seventeen (17) rooms, housing up to thirty-four (34) employees, shall be calculated as folloc:s: PHA,-.E ?: "' Four employees (2 rooms) shall be restricted when the gondola goes into operation. a Rental Formula: 4 (employees) S. 172 (average sq. footage X .60 (mow income . per emplo-_ ee) guidelines) ,, \ue/ a.f ^ ~ i r... ~~ This figure may be amended as the low income rental guidelines are annually adjusted. PHASE II: Thirty employees (15 rooms) shall be restricted when a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the hotel. • Rental Formula• 30 (employees) X.172 (average sq. footage X .60 (low income per employee) guidelines) •, This figure may be amended as the low income rental guidelines are annually adjusted. Rents shall include all commonly metered or assessed utilities, management costs and taxes. Employees employed directly by Owner shall be given first priority to occupy the units. No rooms shall be rented for a period of less than ' thirty (30) days without the permission of the City Council or its housing designee. If vacancies occur, Owner shall be permitted to rent to other employees and music students in accordance c;ith the low-income price and income guidelines adopted by the City. The City Council or its housing designee shall have the right to review rents and confirm emplo;~ee status prior to and as a condition of employees occupanc;• fer compliance with adopted City guidelines. The ,. employee housing to be provided in accordance with this ., sectior. shall comply with the housing size, type, income and - 17 - 1 ,. ». f 1 ~. 6 4. occupancy guidelines of the City of Aspen and the provisions of Section 24-11.10 of the Municipal Code. The employee housing commitments described herein shall be performed in the following manner. Contemporaneously with the execution of this Agreement, Owner has signed, acknowledged and delivered into escrow with the Aspen City Clerk a "Dedication of Real Property to Employee Housing Restrictions and Guidelines" covering the Holiday House, which Dedication is to be held by the City Clerk subject to the following instructions: at the same time that the City issues and delivers to Owner a valid and effective Certificate of Occupancy for the Little Nell Hotel, the City Clerk shall and is hereby authorized, empowered and instructed to record in the Pitkin County, Colorado real property records the Dedication covering the fifteen (15) rooms in the Holiday House. At the time the gondola goes into operation, the City Clerk shall and is hereby authorized, empowered and instructed to record in the Pitkin County, Colorado real property records the Dedication covering the two (2) rooms in the Holiday House. Owner agrees to confirm to City the status of title to the above-4escribed employee housing property as follows: At ,, the time that Owner applies for a Certificate of Gccupancy ,. for Hotel, Owner shall deliver to the City Attorney a current Owners' and Encumbrancers' Report issued by a local title insura:.ce company coveri.^.g the prepert}~, together witr. either - 18 - w , ~,~~ ~~ ~ „~ ,,, a release or a subordination of any monetary liens disclosed -_ by such Reports as those liens may affect the subject "' Dedications. Finally, Owner covenants that from and after the date hereof any entities lending funds secured by such employee housing properties shall be given actual notice of the Dedication requirements contained in this Agreement. ,., VII. PARKING. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Little Nell Hotel, and as a condition precedent thereto, Owner shall construct 118 subsurface parking spaces for the Project. The forty-six (46) spaces required to be provided through approvals granted to the Aspen Mountain Ski Area Master Plan contained in Resolution No. 85-44 of the Board of County Commissioners shall be in addition to the one hundred eighteen (118) spaces required on-site. Owner has expressed a willingness to consider providing additional parking spaces if a parking structure is built proximate to the ski lifts. VIII. SITE IMPROVEMENTS. ,, A. Owner shall and hereby agrees to accomplish the following improvements in the Project area. y ~' 1. Utility Plan. Owner shall relocate underground all r electrical, telephone and cable television lines, and upgrade - 19 - 1YARRANT1' UEED o a " " ~ ~~ N c rv za ,r THIS UEED. \ladc mi• 2nd J.,, ,n December ~ ~ V a ~> w JOHN H. ROBEAT9, JR. r as 85 "' nfluecn w 114 West Commerce, Third Floor, San Antonio, TX 18205 ru ~ i ~ ~ ox - ,uh,. c„~~,I, ,,I Bexar ,~~.I ,~.n„~I 2 am ~..~ "~ Texas o ms f-, ItJSJr/,f, s:,m.,r ,nJ ASPEN SKIING COMPANY ~+'] " a pip „n,,,elc.alaadre,.i, P. 0. Box 1248, Aspen, Colorado 81612 M Q ~,n,._ of m.. c„nl,,. ,n Pitkin ...J ,~,~, ..I r,.h•i.,J,,. . ++ Z W 2 tiITFE.SSETH. Tha me oramrr hm end w „~n•w. eun~n w In. .,iii,.•I TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER GOOD AND ~~ ~~ // VALUABLE CONSIDERATION d,~dl.(J, .+ 1aa 1 aQNJ/ lhe 'fplnJ Ili-I '. Iwh ch .hu.M a:A I.d~..J.l I n. ~ :d. II. J ,:I II I ~PI J ~ _ M1 .:II LL~~ :n ,anJ- mm. un^, hv:remu.h.n. r.aW _.I ru. Il 1. cll r, pn I:. n., Irn 1, ,. I.w u.lc 1, n_AJ M1' _min. ..... Or~ ~ a c„~ .n Pitkin ,n,nul„~Ir~.l.~„d,~J...I~n~J .. I,dn•,,. nl. ,., r U ~'~ ~ the East 7.5 feet of Lot Band all of Lots C, D, E, F and C, Block 60, ~ City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado; i . ~-' I:.. w,~ -+ Q . . J~MP~NNN1 PFf'NI+Y~NdINvFA~I TU4ETHER .nh all ,nJ. :uWr me hcmJnan,cin~,nJ ,rpu 1. u.nl..~lh:wo•~.d,.i, _. ,~n ,i ,.,. .ippanan _ nW .n. i.,.i.~,n.u,. •^• rtA~I,IUn.. rcnfJ:nJCr anJ fC l„plnJir.. rc111•.:`•n~"aJ Pmm.:I,Jm,I~.:nJ .: inCi t::. nCln 9111 m44~i ~J.ina .uW J:nunJ „nw-.'v~C, .,I IIV ••run¢rt. usher m lam ~. ryum..~l. m onJ to the ,Fr,. hanvincJ pmnu~..-,+ilO the h: ~.JU, m.nl-,nJ ,pi~,. n,~i.un:. .. TO HA\ F. aVD TU HOLU Inc •.nJ rnnu•a. .,M., narcuncJ .mJ d:.a:n.~l ,.,In nm .ggwn:n.n,,.- ono, m: p.:m.e. hr Ia~....,J ,.,:..,. IirteKr.>nJlhecramor. mrhmnch.nnncln. mJPCr.nnv arrc.cnl.en:...b c..,.. u,.uuy nJ•.nv.in~. nW,_p. 1. in•luilell,._ n.a nnM1cn.,ud .y .. mal9 me mne„I me en.calln; Jlld Jal,:n nl lhha r,e:nl..hrn.,.I.uNJ el ma r:..nn,..in,„,..n,,.ed, h,.,v~ud..wC. ra rc.l. ,•,alul. a _ dnJ:nJ¢luablecNalenl lnh¢nwnce.In lux.In la:~:nlplc. mJnn e:~~W me n,-uJI I•.•.rand l,iu ml.nnll~nn.e m. hnram..:J,uJ,.~l, .In:.,:n:o m manner anJ wrm a. nurc.aN, anJ Ihal Inc .uu. .nc vec ,n.l ,I:.rc Innu ~ I e,nucr ni,l ~~ a u.un.. .~i.,~,~. .,IC.. hau. ,.n,.. .n...an. nl. • . mbrana•,a^J manai,•n.,n,.narcmr kiml ~~, ...m... •,,.,,c. .q•I terms, conditions, provisions and obligat loAs as contained in Agreement recorded April 3, 1985 in Book 483 at .~ page 961. The eramor shall unJ x JI 0.ARRA~T A\D FURE~ ER UEFESU the ahme-FarpamcJ fronnc• m the ymn mJ ree:eahle p,•••c.•o~n ~n ma _emm:. ., hi. hors anJ:uagn,. upmna all anJ neq person ar ptnon. Wululh :Immm.the xhalc Dram p+n mcrvnl Tha vn_ular numncnnall mduJnhe Pluul. the plural the sin¢uWr anJ the u.e nl arse gcnJer .hall h arphcaMe lu all icnJcn . 19 \e ITS ESS N HEREOF. the emmor ha, e.c: umJ Ihi. JccJ .,n Inc J.m -:I u•.y ,n,,,. _ ~ , y, ~ , /~i / ,- OBER~IS-~R. -- ~ STATE OF COLORADO C„nnl, .,1 Pitkin r The Ibrc¢mn¢ Imwmem xas aaknmsleJgeJ hemrc me In Iha CulrruJO. Ih I. 2nd da. nr December \I,:,,n,mi.,~„n¢.p~r.• 7TYau~c.h. Z9 II m Ucmcr. uncn 'Cm .,nJ ., G~mu .n Pitkin .slag •n .lu 85 .n. John H. Roberts, Jr. w89 ++Ilnc•. I,I. haw ,Ira „Inaal .,... ~ ~ .. 1... rm.mr.¢h„ x......a .I, ,... ,, .,. ~ ~ ,.. .._ .... fin. VJ=\. Re,. ].MJ. 1\\M¢\~I1 IIIIIn ~'-" ~~•. . r` ~,.. ,~- ., PUBLIC NOTICE RE: HOLIDAY HOUSE AMENDMENT GMQS El~'PION, REZONING, CODE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 11, 1989, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 P.M. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado to consider an application submitted by Glenn Horn on behalf of his client, the Aspen Skiing Company, requesting approval of the Holiday House Expansion. The applicant proposes to construct nine studio apartments deed restricted to the low and moderate income Affordable Housing Guidelines. In order to accomplish this the applicant is requesting rezoning of the parcel from LP to R/MF; GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing; Amendment to the R/MF Zone District allowing open space requirements for 100 Affordable Housing Projects to be a Special Review; Special Review for off- street Parking and a minor amendment to the Little Nell SPA. The project is proposed for the vacant lot east of Holiday House apartments at 127 Hopkins Avenue, the east 7.5 feet of Lot B and Lots C - G, Block 60, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, (303) 920-5090. s/C. Welton Anderson, Chairman Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in The Aspen Times on June 22, 1989. City of Aspen Account. ..... .~,. CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED:6 1 8 DATE COMPLETE • 4S °~ PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. 2735-124-59-002 55A-89 STAFF MEMBER' PROJECT NAME: Holiday House Rezoning. Code Amendment, GMOS Exemption, Special Review for Off-street Parkins SPA Amendment Project Address: Legal Address: East 7.5' Lot B, Lots C, D, E, F, & G, Block 60 APPLICANT: The Aspen Skiing Company Applicant Address: P. O. Box 1248 Aspen, CO 81612 REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn Horn Representative Address/Phone: 300 East Hyman Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 5-6587 PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: 1 950.00 //O. OF CO,~IES C.IVED: 21 ~C/ L. ~.e., f. LGh e'en; ;;~ ~0 ~ °7o~~vrv~0.~i/E. TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 ST P: 2 STEP: ~ fed" ~'"'' ~o P&Z Meeting Date //// PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO Planning Director Approval: Paid: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date: REFERRALS: City Attorney C City Engineer _~ Housing Dir. X Aspen Water City Electric Envir. Hlth. K Aspen Consol. S.D. Mtn. Bell Parks Dept_ Holy Cross ~ Fire Marshall Building Inspector Roaring Fork Energy Center School District Rocky Mtn Nat Gas State Hwy Dept(GW) State Hwy Dept(GJ) Other DATE REFERRED: / INITIALS: U~d" FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL: City Atty City Engineer Zoning Env. Health Housing Other' FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: >,. d~, TO: City Engineer Housing Director Aspen Water Department Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Fire Marshall FROM: Francis Krizmanich, Planning Office RE: Holiday House Expansion Parcel ID# 2735-124-59-002 DATE: June 14, 1989 Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Glenn Horn on behalf of his client, The Aspen Skiing Company requesting approval of rezoning, code amendment, GMQS exemption, Special Review for off-street parking and SPA Amendment in .order to construct 9 studio apartments which will be 100$ affordable housing. City Council has directed staff to expedite this application, therefore, we would appreciate it if you give this referral priority in your work schedule. The P&Z will be reviewing this on July 11th. May we please have your comments no later than June 30th. Thank you very much. ,~.. t,, ASPEN/PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 June 14, 1989 Glenn Horn 300 East Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Holiday House Application Dear Glenn, This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that your application is complete. We have scheduled your application for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing on Tuesday, July 11, 1989 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to your application is available at the Planning Office. Glenn, just a reminder that notice of the public hearing needs to be mailed to adjacent property owners and a sign must be posted on the property. If you have any questions, please call Francis Krizmanich, the planner assigned to your case. Sincerely, Debbie Skehan Administrative Assistant