Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19990629Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 Mayor Richards called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. with Councilmembers Hershey, McCabe, Markalunas and Paulson present. RESOLUTION #58, SERIES OF 1999 – Appeal of HPC Decision 134 W. Hopkins John Worcester, city attorney, told Council under the land use code, an applicant who has been denied a request may appeal to Council. Council reviews the record only and should affirm the HPC decision unless there was an abuse of discretion or denial of due process. Worcester said the code does not require Council to get into the merits of the case itself. Sarah Oates, community development department, told Council this is a historically landmarked house with a shed built on the back of the house. There was no building permit or any HPC approval; it exceeds the site coverage allowance for the property and it infringes into the setback allowing only a 22-inch setback to the building next to it. Ms. Oates told Council on April 14 HPC denied the application stating they felt a detached shed as an outbuilding on the back alley would be the most appropriate. Staff received an appeal citing an abuse of discretion, arbitrary and capricious conduct and/or denial of due process by the HPC. Ms. Oates told Council HPC followed all code requirements and procedures for the public hearing. Both staff and applicant’s representative were permitted to present their case and the public was permitted to speak. HPC chose to deny the structure and the reasons are cited in the minutes. Ms. Oates said Council should be concerned only with the procedures. Chad Schmidt, representing the Budingers, gave Council notices of posting and of mailing. Schmidt said this is an appeal of an April 14, 1999, HPC decision denying the Budinger’s request for a variance for a small shed allegedly illegally attached to their structure. Schmidt said the foot print of this shed is 9’ by 5’9”. Schmidt showed petitioner’s exhibit #4, which is a picture of the shed. Schmidt said the shed was used for storage of lawn equipment and lawn furniture. Schmidt said HPC claimed this shed was not proper because it did not comply with the 4 standards set forth for development of historical properties. The sole reason they claim this did not comply is that it is not typical of the historic characteristics of this historic property. 1 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 Schmidt said HPC did not have the benefit nor were they fully informed of what was in the city’s records. There are some records that this historic property had the characteristics of a shed-like structure on the premises. Schmidt noted there was a certificate of occupancy issued in 1994. Schmidt said there is a letter from Julie Wycoff, owner of the property in 1994, shedding light on the storage shed and the CO. Ms. Wycoff said there was always a shed-like structure on this property. Schmidt said the purpose of HPC is to preserve and protect the historical characteristics of historical properties. Schmidt said that is what the Budingers are trying to do; they feel the historical characteristics of this property are always to have had a shed. The Budingers feel they have been denied due process; the HPC abused its discretion and there was an arbitrary and capricious decision when they did not have the opportunity to review the complete city file. Schmidt said the staff’s response was that an outbuilding on the alley would be more in keeping with the historic property. HPC did not have the benefit of the additional information to make an informed decision. Schmidt said the sections involving the standards and those concerning non- conforming structures of the land use code were either misapplied or misconstrued. The Budingers are requesting one of 3 potential remedies; (1) have this sent back to HPC so they can make an informed decision, looking at the entire file; (2) send the matter back to the building department so they may agree a permitted non-conformity existed when the C/O was issued so the Budingers can be issued a building permit and reconstruct the shed, correcting the height; (3) reverse the HPC’s decision. Ms. Oates said this structure was at the site coverage limit prior to having any shed on the back. Anything placed on the back will exceed the site coverage. Worcester asked if the C/O was before the HPC. Ms. Oates said it was not because the building permit application did not include a shed on the back. Dave Rybeck said he has a survey document dated 1994, which shows the shed on the back of the lot. Rybeck said they have no information showing the shed was permitted but the structure did receive a certificate of occupancy. 2 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 Worcester asked if the applicant felt it is the responsibility of the city staff to prepare the file and record for development. Rybeck said the Budingers were informed they were doing work illegally and staff directed them to a variance process. The Budingers purchased the house in 1997 and did not have documentation to anything that occurred prior to that. This information was in the building department file. Schmidt said as a result of lack of information, his clients misapplied and misconstrued the laws and it is a violation of their due process. Julie Ann Woods, community development director, noted the CO was for a shed and subsequent to that was a reconstruction of the shed without permits or review. The CO was for the previous property owner and does not pertain to the shed built by the Budingers. Rybeck said his clients bought the property in the winter and in the summer found the shed to be in disrepair. They repaired the shed, having to repair more than they realized and did not know they had to have a building permit. The Budingers were trying to maintain their property, not knowing the scope of the building regulations. Ms. Oates told Council a 1988 survey, which was submitted for a building permit with the previous work, shows no evidence of a shed on the back of the house. Ms. Oates said no shed received a site coverage variance or any approval from HPC. Mayor Richards said this is only 22 inches from the property line and asked if the houses were constructed in that way because they are historic. Rybeck said in 1988 only the house on lot K existed; the former owner condominiumized lots K and L and a historic structure was moved to lot L and a garage addition was added to the back. The shed was relocated in 1988 and existed from then to present. Julie Wycoff said in the condominium documents, there are no setback rules. Ms. Oates said condominium restrictions cannot be less restrictive than underlying zone district. Mayor Richards opened the public hearing. Schmidt said the Budingers are willing to lower the roof to accommodate the neighbors. The Budingers feel the structure is appropriate, as they need storage for their lawn equipment. The HPC suggested an outbuilding, 3 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 something on the alley. This property has historically had a structure on the back and the HPC did not consider that. Ms. Oates said that is because HPC was not reviewing a conceptual proposal but something that was already existing. Julie Wycoff supports keeping the shed where it is. Ms. Wycoff said she had this house designated and moved to this location. Ms. Wycoff said both she and the Budingers have a great deal of concern for historic preservation. The shed has been in that location since 1988. Mayor Richards closed the public hearing. Councilman Paulson asked if Council allows this request, will it set a precedence for other requests. Schmidt said there are many structures throughout Aspen that allow sheds on the back. Each case is individually reviewed. Councilman Paulson said he would like to see this sent back to HPC and reviewed again so it does not set a precedent. Councilman Hershey agreed. Mayor Richards said she would like to find a solution in permitting the original shed as a non-conforming use in its size and having it rebuilt to that size so that neighbors can get some relief from the height. Mayor Richards noted this is just a storage shed and it has been on the property for a long time. The applicants created an error by building it larger than it was; however, it would be a burden to go back to HPC to change where the shed is located. Mayor Richards suggested this be sent back to the building department to permit the original size as a non-conforming use, go back to the original height before it was rebuilt. Mayor Richards said she feels this is a common sense solution. Councilman Markalunas agreed he would like to see it re-permitted as a non-conforming structure and brought into compliance. Councilman McCabe agreed with the solution; however, he would like the building department to look at the storage of fuel in this structure. Councilman Paulson said he is concerned about the HPC and the function they serve if Council does not honor their findings. Council agreed that HPC did not abuse their power in this review. Councilman McCabe moved that Council finds there was a lack of due process by HPC and in accordance with 26.72.040(c), Council’s remedy is 4 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 to refer this back to the building department for them to issue a building permit which would be consistent with the original shed as it was in place prior to the time of the last remodel; seconded by Councilman Markalunas. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Paulson, no; Markalunas, yes; McCabe, yes; Hershey, no; Mayor Richards, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 1999 – Burlingame/MAA Seasonal Housing Mayor Richards said she has discussed this issue with Bob Blacih and Ron Erickson, both P & Z members. However, this did not influence her thinking on the issue. Councilman Hershey said he discussed it with Tim Semrau, P & Z member, who provided him information on P & Z’s decision. Chris Bendon, community development department, reminded Council at last night’s Council meeting they were presented with a series of questions by Mickey Herron, attorney for the Maroon Creek Club. Staff is going to respond to these issues. John Worcester, city attorney, told Council the Maroon Creek Club has raised the issues that the conceptual PUD application was filed before the city had jurisdiction. MCC states the petition for annexation was filed January 1999 and the conceptual PUD application was filed October 1998. Worcester reminded Council a petition for annexation was filed January 20, 1998, Council passed Resolution #58, Series of 1998, on July 27, 1998, and a public hearing was held on that annexation petition September 28, 1998. The conceptual PUD application was filed after that hearing. After the public hearing and after the PUD application was filed, Council adopted Resolution #71, Series of 1998, November 9, 1998, finding compliance with state statues. When the annexation ordinance, #54, came to Council, the county expressed some concerns about the entire parcels being annexed. A new petition was filed January 20, 1999, and the city already had jurisdiction to hear the rezoning application. Worcester pointed out that Ordinance #54 passed on first reading and it is still out there. Dave Lenyo, Maroon Creek Limited Liability Company, asked if the first petition was not for a different piece of property with a different legal description. Worcester said the original petition was for a parcel that was 37 acres larger than the petition filed January 1999. However, the area of 5 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 concern, the rezoning application, was the same. Worcester stated it is his opinion the city has jurisdiction to consider an application for rezoning. Worcester said the next issue raised by MCC is that the project fails to meet open space requirements. Worcester pointed out this is a PUD and the purpose of a PUD is to look at the project as a whole and under certain circumstances, Council may vary certain requirements. Bendon told Council MCC is correct is saying that none of the space on this parcel technically qualifies as open space. Bendon said Council has full authority through the PUD to vary the open space requirements, the percentage of open space of the underlying zoning. Bendon said staff supports the application; the grade modifications are an important component of the site plan in mitigating the effects of the road noise and airport noise as well as the visual effects from the highway. Worcester said another issue is the requirement for reducing the required off street parking. Worcester said in the PUD, Council can vary the parking requirements. Bendon reminded Council throughout conceputal and final review, staff has encouraged the applicant to reduce parking to a practical minimum based on proximity to transit, also in an attempt to minimize site impacts. Worcester said another issue is that the city has failed to demonstrate that there is legal access to New Stage Road for the Burlingame housing project. Worcester opined the city does have legal access. Worcester said the MCC questions how much access the MAA has, that the amount of access that is required for the seasonal housing project will interfere with the Maroon Creek Club’s retained easement rights. Worcester said the Maroon Creek Club raises the issue that the city is not adhering to material representations made regarding traffic mitigation, that the applicant showed a separate golf cart underpass. Bendon told Council he cannot recollect this issue being raised during conceptual. Jim Curtis, representing the MAA, said neither verbally nor in writing has there ever been a representation of traffic mitigation involving a golf cart underpass. Curtis said in discussions about what might happen to the balance of the property, there have been drawings that conceptually show how a golf cart could be placed on the property. Bendon said the feasibility study was done for the entire parcel, not just the seasonal housing. 6 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 Bendon told Council he reviewed this plan in conjunction with the Aspen Area Community Plan and with the update of the AACP. Bendon said there is not weighting or scoring in the plan. Bendon said his notes indicate that in reviewing this project including the citizen housing plan, the project rates well with the primary philosophies of the community. Bendon told Council this was referred to the city engineering and street departments. Bendon said there is adequate access to this one parcel. The fire department reviewed this and noted there is adequate access. Bendon reminded Council at conceptual, the parking was in the center of the project with easier access but little green space. Worcester said the Maroon Creek raises the issues that the applicant has not considered the effects of the development on adjacent properties. Bendon said under PUD reviews, one criteria is whether the project is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surround area. Bendon said the Maroon Creek Club has affordable housing to the east, the other sides are Deer Hill and the highway. Staff felt this proposal was consistent with development of the Maroon Creek Club and is essentially an extension of that style of development. Bendon told Council criteria (c) says that proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding areas. The city’s transportation planner determined that Stage Road has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development without unduly burdening surrounding properties. The summer traffic will only be a 10 percent increase; the winter use will increase 42 percent; however, the starting number is very low. Bendon said the winter use is only 70 percent of the current peak during the summer. Worcester pointed out the intentional use of this property for affordable housing was known by MCC since 1993 when they entered into an agreement with the Paepcke Trust Estate when they recognized there might be some access issues. The agreement refers to an affordable housing project in this same location. Worcester said another issue raised by MCC is incrementalization, that the city has failed to consider the combined accumulative effect this project with another other projects on the larger portion of Burlingame. Worcester said there is no formal application; however Council and P & Z have been aware of the potential for a housing project on Burlingame. Bendon agreed 7 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 nothing has been applied for and there is no certainty than anything will come to fruition. Bendon said any project, whether they are on the same fathering parcel or not, has to stand on its own merits. Bendon said staff did look at the changes happening to highway 82, the changed alignment, the pedestrian underpass, and changes at Buttermilk. Worcester said the Maroon Creek Club alleges this may be contract zoning. Worcester said he feels this is not contract zoning. The MCC also bring up denial of due process. One allegation is that the Council has ignored P & Z recommendations. Worcester noted, under the city’s land use code, Council does not need to follow P & Z’s recommendation. Worcester said the MCC also raises the issue that the City Attorney is in a conflict of interest situation. Worcester said he does not agree with their interpretation. Curtis noted there is a condition 24(b), regarding transit operations, based on request of RFTA. The MAA supports this condition. Mayor Richards asked if the operating costs for RFTA bus service are in the rent pro forma or are they an additional expense that MAA will contract with RFTA. Curtis said these numbers are not in the pro forma and it will be an additional contract cost. Claude Morelli, transportation planner, read the amendment, “provide adequate transit service to the project on a year round basis. The adequacy of said service shall be defined in a formal transportation plan developed and approved prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy by the city transportation department working in close cooperation with the master lease holder, the MAA. The transportation plan shall be reviewed and adjusted by the city transportation department and master leaseholder at least every two years. The cost of the transit service shall be divided between the land owner and the master lease holder in proportion to the length of the tenancy”. Worcester told Council if this ordinance is adopted, the city will enter into a subdivision improvement agreement, which will spell out some of these issues in detail. Morelli told Council the costs for summer bus service will be $63,000. Curtis said the MAA and RFTA agree to serve this area however they can for the best dollar value. This may mean entering into an agreement with a limousine service for the summer, rather than bus service. Mayor Richards re-opened the public hearing. 8 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 Dave Lenyo, representing the Maroon Creek Club, said jurisdiction is an important issue. In October 1998, this land was in Pitkin County and the application could have been submitted to Pitkin County. Lenyo noted the property for the first annexation was significantly different; it was 40 acres larger. That annexation petition lapsed. Lenyo said under Colorado law, if jurisdiction did not exist, all action prior is void and has no effect. Lenyo said open space is an issue whenever any applicant comes before the city. The purpose of open space is not just to preserve lawns but to preserve natural topography and the environmental. Lenyo stated every inch of what is being considered open space does not meet the requirement that it not be 2 feet below or 4 feet above grade. Lenyo said to allow for a variance of the open space requirement, the applicants have to show it is beneficial and dedicated to a public use. Lenyo said the separate underpass was mentioned in previous meetings. Lenyo said his point about conflict of interest is the concept of impartial decision making. The City Attorney is the city’s advocate in a lawsuit and he is also giving advice on administrative issues. The city should bring in independent counsel. David Mylar, representing the Music Associates of Aspen, said this process has been very thorough. There have been numerous changes made in response to public concerns. There has been adequate notice and adequate opportunity for people to participate. Mylar said PUD authority under the city’s land use code allows discretion to consider waivers of open space requirement. Mylar told Council this property is the only place the MAA is going to house their students and it is how the MAA can be sure the music school will survive. Mayor Richards closed the public hearing. Curtis noted the special election June 1998 at which one of the questions was whether the city be authorized to sell 3 acres of Burlingame Ranch to the MAA for the development of a public/private affordable housing project, including but not limited to music students in the summer and seasonal employees in the winter. This question was approved and this is what is before Council. 9 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 Mayor Richards asked if Council had any discussion on the stacked parking being somewhat dug into the berm versus a total carport. Councilman Paulson said he feels this application is not fully cooked and that they the parking could be pushed more under the berm. Councilmembers Hershey and Markalunas said they are comfortable with the parking proposal. Councilman Paulson said the proposal Council objected to was a long wall exposed to the highway. This proposal has the building broken up, which is good; however there is only 8 feet of space between each building, which is smaller than before. There is not green space where people can hang out. Mayor Richards said at the last meeting, Council had a poll and said they were happy with the new site design. There was a chart indicating that the amount of open space is the same. Councilman Paulson said the amount may be the same but it is split up into unusable pieces, 8 feet between buildings is not usable open space. Curtis said that 8 feet is not counted in the total open space numbers. Councilman Markalunas said he feels this is a better site design. Councilman Paulson said building this housing this will consume a lot of open space. This project should be as dense as possible to house seasonal people. Councilman McCabe said he is concerned about metal decks and the noise this may make. The applicants said they will look into what could be done to mitigate the noise. Councilman Hershey noted that with this design, a smaller amount of people will be using the stair cases. Mayor Richards said she can support a crusher fine trail over the berm to allow people to walk over to Buttermilk. Council agreed. Mayor Richards said although she would like to keep the costs down for the MAA, she cannot support calling this two-bedroom project dormitory rooms for the purpose of the parks dedication and school impact fees. Mayor Richards said she agrees this is a better design. Mayor Richards noted it may have been a mistake to exempt dormitories from payment of school impact fees in the past. Mayor Richards said this project could be converted into a year round project, which would impact both the parks and the school district. Councilmembers agreed. Council said they would like staff to look into amending the code and not exempt dormitory-style units from the payment of fees. 10 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 Councilman Paulson said he would like the building department to come up with green building guidelines for the future. Councilman Paulson said projects here should exceed the standards for mechanical aspects by 10 or 20 percent. Michael Hassig, architect for the project, told Council under the terms of conventional fossil fuels engineering, this project is about as efficient as it can get. The next logical step is alternative sources. Mayor Richards noted this project is somewhat limited because of the airport’s request that there be no reflective materials. Councilman Paulson said there is technology available that is not reflective. Councilman Paulson said it seems this project was done in a rush and is not fully cooked. Mayor Richards pointed out two of these buildings will be used for year round use, not seasonal housing for the MAA. The housing office has requested 3 buildings be for year round use, with the MAA having the ability to master lease two of these for their year round employees. Curtis said converting a third building to year round housing would lower the number of beds to 176. The Grand Aspen is housing 190 students and with two buildings in year round, the number of beds is 184. Councilman Markalunas said this was conceived as a seasonal housing project to take care of the MAA’s needs. Councilman Markalunas supported staying with two buildings for year round occupancy. Councilmembers McCabe and Hershey agreed. Councilman Paulson said adding a third floor would get a lot more housing in this location and satisfy the needs of the housing board. Curtis said the two buildings will be converted into one- bedroom units, a nice design layout that works well. Councilman Markalunas moved to amend the ordinance to include a Whereas clause on handicap access as suggested by Worcester; 24(b) as read by Morelli; number 8 and the language change to number 27 as noted by Bendon; seconded by Councilman Hershey. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Markalunas moved to adopt Ordinance #23, Series of 1999, as amended; seconded by Councilman Hershey. Councilman Paulson said he feels there is a serious issue with this project and what is going on in the world with the consumption of resources. Councilman Paulson said the project could better use resources and contain more units. The city needs to maximize projects to satisfy the community’s housing needs. Councilman Paulson said he is against an intersection on to 11 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 highway 82. Councilman Paulson reiterated the project is not fully cooked and these issues should be addressed. Councilman Hershey said the MAA is a great asset to this community. The MAA has a great need for housing; it is vital for the MAA to be able to continue in Aspen. Mayor Richards said she supports in-town density and maximizing projects, but not to the detriment of livability. Mayor Richards noted people did not move to Aspen to live stacked tightly. Mayor Richards said she feels this has gone through a thorough process. Councilman Markalunas said this project meets a lot of concerns that have been raised. The applicants have broken down the mass and scale of the buildings, to which Council objected. Councilman Markalunas said as a result of Aspen’s success as a resort and cultural center with the music festival, the price of real estate has been driven up and it has been difficult to house music students. Councilman Markalunas said it is not the music students that are consuming natural resources as much as it is the trophy homes and the affluent lifestyle. Councilman Markalunas said there is a need in this community for seasonal housing. Councilman McCabe agreed the Council should look more closely at future projects to squeeze more efficiency in them and also to make them greener. Councilman McCabe said the MAA exemplifies everything that is wanted in this community. Councilman McCabe said the project may not be perfect but it is fully cooked. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Markalunas, yes; Hershey, yes; Paulson, no; McCabe, yes; Mayor Richards, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #57 1999 – Agreement with MAA for Operation of Burlingame Housing Steve Barwick, assistant city manager, told Council if this agreement is approved, a 6320 Corporation will be set up. This is a non-profit corporation to be controlled by the city with 5 board members appointed by Council. There will be at least one MAA representative on that board. The project will revert to city-ownership after 34 years and the 6320 corporation will disappear. The land will be sold to the corporation for $615,000. Barwick said this is a 1/3 (MAA) 2/3 (City) sharing of development and operating expenses. The corporation will issue two types of bonds; 12 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 series A 30-year bond to pay for the majority of the development of the project. The revenue from rents in the project will pay these bonds. Series B bonds will be sold 2/3 to the city and 1/3 to the MAA, total amount $2.4 million. The city will pay for their $1.6 million share with cash from the housing/day care funds. The city will get paper saying they will receive repayment of the $1.6 million. The MAA is guaranteed repayment of their $800,000; the city is not. Barwick told Council Series B bonds allow for an early repayment if there is a positive cash flow. There is a 15 percent per year coverage factor on these bonds; in order to sell the bonds, additional revenue has to be generated out of rents to cover all expenses out of the bonds plus 15 percent. This will generate $83,000 per year, which is not dedicated to any specific thing. Barwick suggested in the first 5 to 10 years this money be put into capital or operating reserves. Mayor Richards noted the city will put up $375,000 for these coverage funds and suggested this money be paid off early as it is a lot of housing day care funds to have tied up. Barwick said that is a possibility. Barwick said staff agrees with the pro formas supplied by the MAA. There is a 10 percent contingency in the budget, which is adequate. Any budget overages will be brought back to Council. Barwick told Council the main disagreement between the city and the MAA is the interest rate on the Series B bonds. Series B bonds are a unique vehicle for the MAA to recapture all of their investment. The MAA has suggested they earn 3 percent interest on top of this over time. Barwick said this could create a large obligation of the project in the next 30 years. The MAA will own $800,000 of the Series B bonds. If they earn 1 percent, simple interest is $300,000 over the 30 years. If the MAA gets 3 percent interest, the city will not get their reserve back at the end of the project. Barwick said the MAA is getting a lot out of this project as well as their original investment back, without interest. Barwick said the primary security for the bonds is this property Dave Mylar, representing the MAA, said through this unique borrowing, the MAA is becoming an equity partner and investing $800,000 in the project and sharing the risks. Mylar said the MAA is not sharing equally in the rewards. The MAA is getting a master lease, which has tremendous value to 13 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 them. At the end of the lease, the MAA has nothing; the city owns the project. Mylar said the MAA would like to get their money back with interest to keep up with inflation. Mayor Richards noted the city is entering into a 34 year program so the MAA will have a long master lease. The city’s policy is to bond for as short a term as possible in order not to carry long term debt. Mayor Richards said she favors not paying the MAA interest for this 34 year period. Mayor Richards said Council has a fiduciary responsible to the taxpayers for how the money is invested, what the return will be, how much housing money will be tied up in any one project. Council agreed with staff recommendation. Barwick said there is an amendment to the transit service operations and cost. Mayor Richards said the city will have to pick up transit for Burlingame in the winter until the Buttermilk intersection is operable. This is a large expense that was not considered at budget time. This cost cannot be added to the rent. The amendment is “MAA shall be required to provide and pay for transit service directly to the project during the term of the master Lease. The frequency, span and other characteristics of such service shall be described in a transportation plan to be developed by the MAA, for the review and approval of the City Transportation & Parking Department”. Councilman Paulson said he feels the transportation plan has holes in it. Councilman Hershey moved to amend the operating agreement by adding #8, transit service operations and cost; seconded by Councilman McCabe. All in favor with the exception of Councilman Paulson. Motion carried. Myler brought up the debt reserve equal to one-year’s payments, which the underwriters have requested to facilitate the marketability of the bonds. Myler said the city had requested the MAA participate in this at one-third or $185,000. Myler said this is an unanticipated capital cost for this project and it will be difficult for the MAA to raise. Myler said the MAA is obligated under this contract to be responsible for one-third of any shortfalls, any operating deficits. Myler requested the city fund this entire debt reserve and allow the MAA to rely on the existing obligation to replenish that reserve or replace that reserve out of project funds when there is excess cash. Barwick said that will increase the cost to the housing/day care fund to $2.2 million. Mayor Richards said she is not interested in locking up more 14 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 housing day care funds for 30 years. Mayor Richards suggested working out a payment schedule with the MAA over 3 or 5 years. Mayor Richards also said any excess revenues could be used to pay this back. Council agreed a payment of 3 to 5 years. Myler noted the MAA should have no obligation to fund the Series B bonds for the buildings they are not using, there should be a slight adjustment, maybe one-third less. Council agreed that would be fair. Mayor Richards suggested RFTA might be interested in some of the year-round units. Barwick said two buildings will be removed from the agreement. Councilman McCabe moved to approve Resolution #57, Series of 1999, to enter into a contract with the MAA for the operation of the Burlingame Seasonal Housing with the amendment that the city will finance the MAA’s surety portion of the bond over a 5 year period with payments annually towards that, amortized over five years and not a balloon, and that there will be two buildings for year round use and a pro rata share of the project will be adjusted to reflect that and the MAA will not pay interest on the Series B bonds; seconded by Councilman Markalunas. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman Paulson. Motion carried. Councilman Markalunas moved to adjourn at 8:55 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Paulson. All in favor, motion carried. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 15 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council June 29, 1999 RESOLUTION #58, SERIES OF 1999 – Appeal of HPC Decision 134 W. Hopkins ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 1 ORDINANCE #23, SERIES OF 1999 – Burlingame/MAA Seasonal Housing ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 5 RESOLUTION #57 1999 – Agreement with MAA for Operation of Burlingame Housing ................................ ................................ ................... 12 16