Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
coa.lu.gm.West Hopkins Townhomes AH.A57-91
WEST HOPKINS TOWNHOMES AFFO:D. u A57-91 ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611, (303) 920-5090 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES City 00113 -63250-134 GMP/CONCEPTUAL -63270-136 GMP/FINAL -63280-137 SUB/CONCEPTUAL -63300-139 SUB/FINAL -63310-140 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63320-141 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REFERRAL FEES: 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00115 -63340-163 ENGINEERING SUBTOTAL County 00113 -63160-126 GMP/GENERAL -63170-127 GMP/DETAILED -63180-128 GMP/FINAL -63190-129 SUB/GENERAL -63200-130 SUB/DETAILED -63210-131 SUB/FINAL -63220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63230-133 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS -63450-146 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REFERRAL FEES: 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00113 -63360-143 ENGINEERING PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 -63080-122 CITY/COUNTY CODE -63090-123 COMP. PLAN -63140-124 COPY FEES -69000-145 OTHER SUBTOTAL TOTAL Name: Phone: Address: Project Check # Date: - ) Copies received: _ #of Hours: E 1 11 WEST HOPKINS TOWNHOMES I GMQS EXEMPTION APPLICATION AN APPLICATION FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION AND SUBDIVISION/PUD APPROVAL FOR THE WEST HOPKINS TOWNHOMES AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT Submitted by Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 ' (303) 920-5050 Prepared by VANN ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning Consultants 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-6958 PROJECT CONSULTANTS Sunny Vann, AICP Vann Associates, Inc. 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-6958 ARCHITECT Heidi Hoffmann, AIA Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd. 510 East Hyman, Suite 21 Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-2867 ENGINEER Jay Hammond, P.E. Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. 1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2E Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (303) 945-1004 SURVEYOR Ken Wilson, R.L.S. Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. 1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2E Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (303) 945-1004 i TABLE OF CONTENTS section Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. PROJECT SITE 2 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 5 IV. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS 21 A. Growth Management Exemption 22 B. Subdivision 22 C. Planned Unit Development 29 D. Special Review 32 E. Condominiumization 33 F. Vested Property Rights 34 APPENDIX A. Exhibit 1, Pre -Application Conference Summary Exhibit 2, Title Insurance Commitment Exhibit 3, Permission to Represent Exhibit 4, List of Adjacent Property Owners B. Exhibit 1, City Council Ordinance No. 27-91 C. Exhibit 1, Letter from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. ii 1 u I 1 F I. INTRODUCTION The following application requests an exemption from the growth management quota system (GMQS) for the develop- ment of an eleven (11) unit, affordable housing project on an approximately 0.28 acre parcel of land located adjacent to West Hopkins Avenue in the City of Aspen. Subdivision, planned unit development, special review, and condominiumi- zation approval are also requested, as is vested property rights status for the approved project (see Pre -Application Conference Summary, Exhibit 1, Appendix A). The application is submitted pursuant to Sections 8- 104.C.1.c., 7-1004.C., 7-903, 7-400 and 7-1007 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA), the owner of the property (see Title Insurance Commitment, Exhibit 2, Appendix A). The Appli- cant's representative is Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, Inc., Planning Consultants (see Permission to Represent, Exhibit 3, Appendix A). A list of property owners located within three hundred (300) feet of the property is provided as Exhibit 4, Appendix A. The application has been divided into three (3) parts. The first part, or Section II. of the application, provides a brief description of the project site, while Section III. describes the Applicant's proposed development. The third part, or Section IV., addresses the proposed development's 1 1 compliance with the applicable review requirements of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. For the reviewer's convenience, all pertinent supporting documents relating to the project (e.g., proof of ownership, etc.) are provided in the various appendices to the application. While the Applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Land Use Regulations, and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evalu- ation of the application, questions may arise which result in the staff's request for further information and/or clarification. The Applicant would be pleased to provide such additional information as may be required in the course of the application's review. II. PROJECT SITE The project site consists of Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen, and is located at the north- east corner of West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street near the base of Shadow Mountain. The property contains approximately twelve thousand three hundred and thirty (12,330) square feet of land area, and is presently zoned AH, AffoY'dable Housing. The property was specifically acquired by APCHA from the City of Aspen for affordable housing purposes, and was rezoned from R-6, Medium -Density Residential, to AH by the City Council on August 12, 1991 (see Ordinance No. 27-91, Exhibit 1, Appendix B). 2 1 As the existing conditions survey on the following page illustrates, the topography of the site slopes gently from West Hopkins Avenue to the alley located at the rear of the property. Although the site is devoid of manmade improve- ments, a portion of the adjacent Skandia Condominiums' parking lot encroaches onto the site along the property's eastern boundary. A small gravel parking area is located adjacent to the alley in the property's northwest corner. Natural vegetation within the property's boundaries consists primarily of native grasses and weeds. Two (2) small cottonwoods, however, are located along the property's southeastern boundary. Numerous larger cottonwoods are located within the South Seventh Street right-of-way. Existing utilities in the immediate site area include water, sewer, electric, telephone, natural gas, and cable TV. A twelve (12) inch water main is located in West Hopkins Avenue and a six (6) inch main is located on South Seventh Street. An eight (8) inch sanitary sewer is located ' in both South Seventh Street and in the alley at the rear of the property. Electric, telephone, natural gas and cable TV are also located in the adjacent alley. Fire hydrant #501 is conveniently located on South Seventh Street across from the southwest corner of the property. An open irrigation ditch parallels the property's western and southern bound- aries within the West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street right-of-ways. 3 m = = m = r m m m m = = m= m m GRAPHIC SCALE i➢ Yw�l Contour Interval V ESTC:-5ZE P7 SMAOLEME'R ADRD(N MEYnX /AC rml amw AMDAC S VF 7—C •Af-r Ar.�iAr-e�i mrcwao (J) MOO Existing Conditions Map Lots K,L,MN, Block 19 Aspen, Colorado . rOlA, / / / Lots A-N, Blk 19 Existing Conditions Map ...... ii4A 1 III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Applicant proposes to construct eleven (11) deed restricted, affordable housing units on the project site pursuant to the provisions of the City's AH, Affordable Housing, zone district. The project, which will be known as the West Hopkins Townhomes, is designed to address the housing shortfall identified in APCHA's 1990 Affordable Housing Production Plan. The Applicant's objectives with respect to the project are to create the best possible living environment for the project's residents, to create an individual unit expression within a multi -family context, to respect the concepts of community and privacy while creating opportunities for social interaction, and to create an architectural image which is both appropriate to Aspen and enhances neighborhood quality. As the site development plan on the following page illustrates, two (2) clusters of four (4) townhouse units each are located adjacent to South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. Three (3) so-called "carriage house" units are clustered adjacent to the alley above a portion of the project's on -site parking. The size and income category of the individual units will vary within these two basic unit configurations to accommodate APCHA's specific program requirements and the City's 1991 Affordable Housing Guide- lines. The proposed unit mix, and the resulting net livable 5 I HAGMANYAW ARCIUI ECTS ALLEY ..�I..o ,..,Parking \ 1 Category 2-3BR rltlllNf . y Category 2-2 BR I I w r I Category 2-2 BR m I Category 3-3 BR I _ I I — Carport rriagWabrove-11 (1 BR1 1r r + i� Skandia Parking I Ca2 gory 3 Category 2 Category 2 Cate ory 3 \\ BR 2 BR 2 BR 2 R \ I WEST HOPKINS STREET SKANDIA TOWNHOUSES I maw�rlw SITE PLAN, 0 . o s ral square footage, of the West Hopkins Townhomes project is summarized in Table 1, below. Table 1 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Income Category, Unit Mix and Net Livable Areal 1. Category 1 2 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 1,000 Units @ 500 Sq. Ft.Z 2. Category 2 1 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 520 Unit @ 520 Sq. Ft. 4 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 3,600 Units @ 900 Sq. Ft. 1 - 3 Bedroom/2-1/2 Bath Townhouse 990 Unit @ 990 Sq. Ft. 3. Category 3 2 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,960 Units @ 980 Sq. Ft. 1 - 3 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,140 Unit @ 1,140 Sq. Ft. 4. Total Units/Bedrooms 11/21 5. Total Net Livable Area (Sq. Ft.) 9,210 1 Net livable square footage calculated based on interior living area, including interior storage area, measured interior wall to interior wall, including all interior partitions. Excludes exterior storage. z All numbers rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. The project's three building clusters are located adjacent to the street and alley to create a "streetfront" 7 I u presence and an internal courtyard for the residents' use. The building clusters are limited to a maximum of four (4) units each to give the project an appropriate street scale and to enhance pedestrian accessibility. The units are also staggered to create individual unit expression and to reduce the project's perceived mass. The various floor plans are organized with living areas on the ground level to allow direct use of the front and backyard spaces created by the proposed site design, and to encourage a "porch society" which could help regenerate the more external street life of a nineteenth century Aspen neighborhood. Individual "backyard" spaces are provided for within the internal courtyard which allow convenient access to the project's on -site parking, storage and trash collection areas. As the site development plan illustrates, eleven (11) parking spaces, or one (1) space per dwelling unit, will be provided adjacent to the alley. The project's dumpster area is directly accessible to the alley, and a recycling area is also provided. A rolled curb and gutter will be installed adjacent to the edge of the existing West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street pavement to define the perimeter of the project and enhance on -street parking. It should be noted that the recently adopted Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway System Plan identifies West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street as "Primary" pedestrian n ' routes, and recommends that sidewalks be installed within ' the public right-of-way. However, as no sidewalks presently exist in the immediate site area, the Applicant proposes to defer the installation of sidewalks adjacent to the project site until such time as an appropriate neighborhood improve- ment district has been formed. ' As the proposed floor plans on the following pages ' illustrate, the two-story townhouse units will have their living areas located on the ground floor while the bedroom ' areas will be located on the upper level. The ground floor ceiling height will be approximately nine (9) feet, with gable roofs providing a similar spaciousness upstairs. Roof ' extensions and architectural projections will allow a third bedroom to be provided in the two end units located adjacent ' to South Seventh Street. While all of the townhouse units 1 are designed to include semi -private backyard spaces within the project's common courtyard area, it is anticipated that backyard improvements will be made by the individual unit owners. The carriage house units are located adjacent to the alley with entry access provided from the project's internal courtyard. These unique units will be constructed above six of the project's on -site parking spaces, and are designed as two-story, one bedroom loft units. A large south facing deck will be provided off the unit's living space. A series 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ll I E- Q I I L-------------I 7 29 HAGMAN YAW r - ARCHCIECTS — LTD 'WSOUTH GALBA L- WEV.COL0AAD081611 133.9252862 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � I — HAGMAN YAW r' — ARCHITECTS LTD— 'IOSOON GUEM — _ bPNcOLOMDO81611 _ 303 925-n67 YI 4 —— — 0 41 n- ��.,o-Z I I r�O -- W be qk. 4 +`� A. I r:. i I I ' ao I r i r „o-,m 3 E� ,1 [ jo� �- I I a 1 I W 7 a 'I i w i ,10-109 I ]is - HAGMAN YAW - ARCHITECTS '- - LTD '10 ATH GALENA .ASKN,COLOW81611 _ 303 9252867 of enclosed storage areas for the project's residents will ' be provided adjacent to the grade level parking area. The carriage units will provide excellent views of the courtyard ' space below and of Shadow Mountain beyond. The living spaces of all of the project's units, however, are designed to achieve an internal front to rear visual connection and Ito maximize views and sun at end walls. ' As the building elevations on the following pages illustrate, the architectural character of the project is based on the miner's cottage prototype, a style that has strong roots in Aspen's history. The project's architecture ' responds to essentially the same design determinants as the ' original prototype; i.e., simple, easily constructed forms; which are directly responsive to climatic conditions, economic systems and materials; and which are culturally responsive to the built environment. The project's exterior ' building elevations are based on a simple gable roof form with a projecting bay for upper level windows and entry protection. The gable roofs on each unit will divert roof drainage and snow at critical surfaces, permit additional sunlight into the courtyard area, and accentuate the ' individual units within each building cluster. Exterior building surfaces will be clad with two (2) patterns of stained board and batten wood material and will ' be further accentuated through the use of different colors 13 1 11 I Il I I 1 11 I 1 r n 11 U V C oC o 1 1 L ' to create diversity, scale and neighborhood fit. Roof ' surfaces, which will consist of composition shingle and galvanized metal, will vary between the three building clusters. The two townhouse clusters located adjacent to West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street are twenty-five (25) feet high measured to the top of the roof. The height I of the carriage house cluster is thirty (30) feet. ' The West Hopkins Townhomes project has been designed in compliance.with the dimensional requirements of the AH zone district and the applicable subdivision design standards of Section 7-1004.C.4. of the Land Use Regulations. As Table 2, below, indicates, the minimum required lot area for the proposed unit mix is substantially less than the property's total site area. Similarly, the project's proposed external floor area is also less than the maximum allowed. It should be noted, however, that the proposed building setbacks are less than the minimum required. The Applicant proposes to vary the applicable requirement via the planned unit development review process. Table 2 DEVELOPMENT DATA 1. Existing Zoning AH, Affordable Housing 2. Total Site Area (Sq. Ft.)' 12,330 3. Minimum Required Lot Area/Dwelling Unit (Sq. Ft.) 1 Bedroom 400 19 11 2 Bedroom 800 3 Bedroom 1,200 4. Minimum Required Lot Area (Sq. Ft.) 8,400 3 - 1 Bdrm. Units @ 400 Sq. Ft. 1,200 /Unit 6 - 2 Bdrm. Units @ 800 Sq. Ft. 4,800 /Unit 2 - 3 Bdrm. Units @ 1,200 Sq. Ft. 2,400 /Unit 5. Minimum Required Setbacks (Feet) Front Yard 10 Side Yards 5 Rear Yard 10 6. Proposed Setbacks (Feet )2 West Hopkins Avenue 5 South Seventh Street 1.5 Alley 1 East Side 5 7. Maximum Allowable External Floor 13,560 Area @ 1.1:1 (Sq. Ft.) 8. Proposed External Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) 10,400 9. Maximum Building Height (Feet )3 25 10. Proposed Building Height (Feet)4 Townhouses 25 Carriage Houses 30 11. Minimum Required Open Space Special Review 12. Proposed Site Coverage (Sq. Ft.) Building Footprints 9,680 Parking 770 Remainder of Site 1,880 Area Attributable to Open Space None 13. Minimum Required Parking Special Review 14. Proposed Parking Spaces 11 @ 1 Space/Unit 20 1 F, All numbers rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. Z Measured from the closest building wall to the property line. 3 Increasable to thirty (30) feet by Special Review. 4 Measured to the ridge of the roof. 5 The maximum number of spaces required cannot exceed one (1) space per bedroom or two (2) spaces per dwelling unit, whichever is less. As the site development plan illustrates, the project's courtyard and entry area will be landscaped, and additional trees will be planted in the West Hopkins Avenue right-of- way. A system of internal concrete walkways will connect the various building clusters, while individual hard surface paths will connect the streetfront townhouse units to West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street. The proposed landscaping is designed to soften the spaces between the building clusters and to provide privacy from the adjacent Skandia Condominiums. The central courtyard will be sodded to facilitate its use for temporary storm water detention purposes. A detailed landscaping plan will be submitted prior to final plat review. III. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS The West Hopkins Townhomes project is subject to the receipt of a GMQS exemption for the construction of the proposed affordable housing units. Subdivision, planned 21 ' unit development, special review and condominiumization approval are also required, and vested property rights status is requested. Each of these review requirements is discussed below. IA. Growth Management Exemption IPursuant to Section 8-104.C.1.c. of the Regula- tions, the City Council may exempt dwelling units deed restricted in compliance with the Housing Authority's affordable housing guidelines from the growth management quota system. The applicable review criteria address such issues as the need for the units, their compliance with an adopted housing plan, the proposed unit mix, and the price categories to which the units will be deed restricted. As the project site was specifically rezoned for affordable housing purposes, and the proposed units comply with all requirements of APCHA's affordable housing guidelines, the above review criteria are believed to have been met. B. subdivision 1 Pursuant to Section 3-101 of the Land Use Regula- tions, land to be used for condominiums, apartments or any other multiple dwelling units is by definition a subdivi- sion. Consequently, the Applicant's proposed development of a multi -family residential project is subject to the City's 1 review and approval. Such developments are reviewed 22 L I I pursuant to the provisions of Section 7-1004.C. of the Regulations. The various subdivision review criteria, and the proposed development's compliance therewith, are summa- rized as follows. 1. "The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.$$ The 1973 Aspen Land Use Plan indicates that the project site is located within the "Mixed Residential" land use category. The property's AH zoning classification is consistent with the purpose of this category, as is the Applicant's proposed development of multi -family affordable housing units. The proposed development is also consistent with the Housing Element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in that it geographically disperses affordable housing among the City's existing residential neighborhoods. To the best of the Applicant's knowledge, no other element of the Comprehensive Plan contains recommendations which preclude, or otherwise pertain to, the proposed development. 2. "The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas." The proposed development is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area, and 23 I will have no adverse effect on the area's future develop- ment. The immediate site area consists primarily of mixed residential development, including numerous multi -family rental and condominium structures, several duplexes, and a variety of single-family residences. As the area is essentially fully developed, the proposed project should have little if any effect on the development potential of neighboring properties. 3. "The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of the Land Use Regulations." The proposed development has been designed to comply with the applicable requirements of the underlying AH zone district and all relevant requirements of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. 4. '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.' No natural hazards adversely affect the develop- ment of the property. Consequently, no adverse affect upon 24 the health, safety or welfare of the project's residents is anticipated. 5. "The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficien- cies, duplication or premature extension of public facili- ties and unnecessary public costs.11 No governmental inefficiencies, duplication of facilities, or unnecessary public costs will occur as a result of the provision of public services to the proposed development. All required utilities are currently available in the immediate site area. All costs associated with the installation of public improvements to serve the project will be borne by the Applicant as may be required. In addition to compliance with the preceding review criteria, the subdivision regulations also require that various improvements be provided in connection with the proposed development, and that specific standards be adhered to in the project's design. Mr. Jay Hammond, P.E., of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. has reviewed the applicable requirements of the Land Use Regulations and discussed the project with the City's referral agencies (see Exhibit 1, Appendix C). The improvements and design standards which pertain to the Applicant's proposed development, and the project's compliance with Schmueser Gordon Meyer's recommen- dations, are summarized as follows. 25 ' 1. Water. Potable water service to the proposed development will be provided via the existing lines located in West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street. It is anticipated that separate service lines will be extended from the mains to each of the project's three (3) multi- family buildings. All units, however, will be individually I I metered as required by the Aspen Water Department. The Department has indicated that connection to the existing mains is acceptable, and that the municipal water system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the project. 2. Sewer. The proposed development will be served by the existing eight (8) inch sanitary sewers located in South Seventh Street and the adjacent alley. According to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, anticipated flows can be accommodated with no improvements to the existing sewer system or treatment plant. 3. Electric, Telephone, Natural Gas and Cable TV. Electric, telephone, natural gas and cable TV service is presently located in the adjacent alley and will be extended to serve the proposed development as necessary. All required extensions of these utilities will be located underground, and will conform to the applicable extension policies of the individual utility companies. 4. Easements. Easements to accommodate utility extensions will be provided in compliance with the applica- 26 ' ble provisions of Section 7-1004.C.4.b. of the Regulations ' as may be required by the individual utility companies. All utility easements to be conveyed by the Applicant will be depicted on the project's final subdivision plat. ' 5. Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter. There are presently no sidewalks or curbs and gutters within the immediate site area. As discussed previously, the Applicant ' proposes to install rolled curb and gutter adjacent to the existing West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street pavement on the project side of the right-of-way. The Applicant also proposes to join a sidewalk improvement district for the installation of sidewalk at such time as a district is formed. 6. Fire Protection. Fire protection for the proposed development will be provided by the Aspen Volunteer Fire Department. The project site is located approximately ten (10) blocks from the fire station, resulting in a response time of approximately five (5) to ten (10) minutes. As noted previously, a fire hydrant is conveniently located ' across from the southwest corner of the property. The proposed development is readily accessible to emergency and fire protection vehicles via the surrounding street system. ' The project will be constructed in compliance with all applicable uniform building code requirements, and each unit will be equipped with smoke detectors. 27 I I 7. Drainage. The proposed development's storm drainage system will be designed to maintain historic flow rates with respect to surface water runoff and groundwater recharge. On -site drywells and/or surface detention areas will be utilized to intercept and detain runoff from building roofs and impervious areas, and to control the rate of groundwater recharge. A detailed stormwater drainage plan will be submitted in conjunction with the Applicant's final plat submission. 8. Roads. No improvements to the existing streets in the immediate site area are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Assuming a vehicular trip generation rate of three (3) to five (5) trips per day per dwelling unit, the project would theoretically generate approximately thirty-three ( 33 ) to fifty-five ( 55 ) vehicular trips per day. Given the proximity of the project site to the City's Main Street bus routes and the commercial core, vehicular trips are anticipated to approximate the lower of these two figures. In either case, the capacity of the surrounding street system is believed to be more than adequate to accommodate the increased traffic levels resulting from the proposed development. 9. Final Plat. Section 7-1004.D.2.a.(1) of the Land Use Regulations requires the preparation of a final plat prior to City Council review of a subdivision applica- 28 tion. As the proposed subdivision does not involve the creation of separate lots, and since the City Council may require revisions to the project's design, it would appear appropriate to delay the preparation of the final plat until after Council review. This approach has been discussed with both the Planning Office and the City Engineer. The submis- sion of a recordable final plat and improvements agreement for staff review and signature, however, is acceptable to ' the Applicant as a condition of subdivision approval. I C. Planned Unit Development ' As noted previously, the proposed site development plan does not meet the minimum setback requirements of the AH zone district. While the AH zone provides considerable flexibility with respect to its dimensional requirements, it does not provide for variances in required setbacks. The only vehicle, therefore, which is available to achieve the desired setback reductions is the City's planned unit ' development review process. IAs the project site was not designated mandatory PUD in connection with its rezoning to AH, Affordable Housing, the Applicant requests that a mandatory PUD designation be applied to the property concurrent with the ' project's subdivision review. Given the limited extent of ' the issues involved in the proposed development in relation to the required review procedures, the Applicant further 29 fl L 1 u CI requests that the project be reviewed pursuant to Section 7- 903.C.3. of the Regulations as a consolidated two (2) step PUD application. Mandatory PUD designation by the City is required as individual property owners may only apply for planned unit development review on properties obtaining a minimum of twenty-seven thousand (27,000) square feet. It should be noted that the basic PUD review criteria are identical to those of the subdivision regula- tions, and have been addressed in Section IV.B. of this application. The project site is suitable for development and sufficient land area is available to accommodate the proposed density. Existing roads and utilities are adequate to serve the project, and no adverse impacts upon the area's air or water quality are anticipated. The proposed site development plan is compatible with the site's existing topography and minimal regrading will be required. The majority of the site's existing mature vegetation will be retained and additional landscaping will be provided to enhance privacy and reduce visual impacts. The proposed development complies with all of the dimensional requirements of the AH zone district except the district's minimum setback criteria. As the site develop- ment plan illustrates, the Applicant proposes to locate the three building clusters as close as possible to the West Hopkins Avenue, South Seventh Street and alley property 1 1 ri lines in order to enhance the livability of the project. The required setbacks for these three frontages are ten (10) feet, seven (7) feet and ten (10) feet, respectively. The proposed setbacks are five (5) feet, one and one-half (1- 1/2) feet and one (1) foot. The east side yard, however, will comply with the minimum requirement of the AH zone district to minimize potential impacts on the adjacent property owner. Pursuant to Section 7-903.B.4. of the Regulations, reductions in the minimum setback requirements of the underlying zone district may be granted in connection with PUD review and approval. While there are no specific review criteria for such reductions, the resulting project must comply with the basic standards for PUD development. In this case, the applicable standard would appear to be whether the proposed reductions adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood. No adverse affect is in fact anticipated, as the site's property lines are located a substantial distance from the edge of the existing pavement. As the existing conditions survey illustrates, West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street are located approximately eighteen (18) feet and thirty (30) feet, respectively, from the site. As a result, the perception of a generous residential setback from the street will be preserved. The impact of the 31 reduced setbacks will be further diminished by keeping the height of the streetfront townhouses five (5) feet lower than the maximum allowed. D. Special Review The open space and on -site parking require- ments of the AH zone district are established by special review pursuant to Section 7-400 of the Regulations. Each of these special review issues, and their applicability to the proposed development, is discussed below. 1. Open Space. As Table 2 indicates, approxi- mately one thousand eight hundred and eighty (1,880) square feet, or fifteen (15) percent, of the project site will remain undeveloped. None of this area, however, meets the Regulation's open space requirements with respect to visibility, minimum street frontage or depth. The project's courtyard and other undeveloped areas nonetheless contribute significantly to the livability of the proposed affordable housing units. The project's streetfront design is consis- tent with neighboring development, and the large amount of unimproved right-of-way contributes significantly to the perception of setback and open space. 2. Parking. As discussed previously, eleven (11) parking spaces, or one (1) space per dwelling unit, will be provided adjacent to the alley at the rear of the 32 property. Pursuant to section 5-208.E.1., the maximum ' number of parking spaces required in the AH zone district is limited to the lesser of one (1) space per bedroom or two (2) spaces per dwelling unit. As the proposed development contains eleven (11) units and twenty-one (21) bedrooms, the maximum amount of on -site parking cannot exceed twenty-one (21) spaces. While the eleven (11) spaces proposed by the Applicant is roughly half the maximum allowed, it should be sufficient to accommodate the parking requirements of the project's residents. Guest and additional resident parking, however, will be accommodated on the adjacent street system. I D. Condominiumization I Pursuant to Section 7-1007 of the Regulations, the condominiumization of new affordable housing units is isubject only to the receipt of City Council approval and the recordation of a condominium plat and declaration which meets the requirements of the City's Engineering Department. As the proposed development will be fully deed restricted to the Housing Authority's affordable housing guidelines, no impact fee is required. The Applicant will submit a condominium plat and declaration for review by the Engineer- ing Department upon substantial completion of construction. ' The plat and declaration will be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's office prior to the conveyance ' of the project's individual units. 1 33 L� ID. Vested Property Rights 1 n In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of this application, the Applicant hereby requests vested property rights status pursuant to the provisions of Section 6-207 of the Land Use Regulations. It is understood by the Applicant that, to establish such status, final approval of the proposed development must be granted by ordinance of the City Council. It is also the Applicant's understanding that no specific submission requirements, or review criteria other than a public hearing, are required to confer such status. 34 F� I [J ril u F� APPENDIX A EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PROJECT: APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: I f� REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE: C, _ C� OWNER'S NAME • 1-(Z" �- SUMMARY . 1. Type of pplication:so(: � t rQk3 ; e�J 2. D scribe action/type of development being requested: t , � — n 1J7 —1 oc� J 3. Areas is which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: Policy Area/ Referral Agent Comments 1 4. Review is: (P&Z Only) C Only) (P&Z then to CC) 5. Public Hearing: < (YES) (NO) 6. Number of copies of the application to be submitted: 7. What fee was applicant requested to submit- 8. Anticipated date of submission: 9. COMMENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNS: frm.pre app Form No. 1343 i' 9821 ABTA Plain Language Commitment EXHIBIT 2 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company AGREEMENT TO ISSUE POLICY We agree to issue a policy to you according to the terms of this Commitment. When we show the policy amount and your name as the proposed insured in Schedule A, this Commitment becomes effective as of the Com- mitment Date shown in Schedule A. If the Requirements shown in this Commitment have not been met within six months ?f*er the Commitment Date, our obligation under this Commitment will end. Also, our obligation under this Commitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligation under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B-1. The Exceptions in Schedule B-2. The Conditions on the other side of this page 1. This Commitment is not valid without SCHEDULE A and Sections 1 and 2 of SCHEDULE B. First American Title Insurance Company BY PRESIDENT ATTEST �/i..�. lam, /)�,,w/SECRETARY BY L 9 u (J _b�e 10 COUNTERSIGNED Page 1 CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS (a) "Mortgage" means mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument. (b) "Public Records" means title records that give constructive notice of matters affecting the title according to the state law where the land is located. 2. LATER DEFECTS The Exceptions in Schedule B - Section 2 may be amended to show any defects, liens or encumbrances that appear for the first time in the public records or are created or attached between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Requirements (a) and (c) of Schedule B - Section 1 are met. We shall have no liability to you because of this amendment. 3. EXISTING DEFECTS If any defects, liens or encumbrances existing at Commitment Date are not shown in Schedule B, we may amend Schedule B to show them. If we do amend Schedule B to show these defects. liens or encumbrances, we shall be liable to you according to Paragraph 4 below unless you knew of this information and did not tell us about it in writing. 4. LIMITATION OF OUR LIABILITY Our only obligation is to issue to you the Policy referred to in this Commitment, when you have met its Requirements. If we have any liability to you for any loss you incur because of an error in this Commitment, our liability will be limited to your actual loss caused by your relying on this Commitment when you acted in good faith to: comply with the Requirements shown in Schedule B - Section 1 1 or eliminate with our written consent any Exceptions shown in Scheduwe B - Section 2. We shall not be liable for more than the Policy Amount shown in Schedule A of this Commitment and our liability is subject to the terms of the Policy form to be issued to you. 5. CLAIMS MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT Any claim, whether or not based on negligence, which you may have against us concerning the title to the land must be based on this Commitment and is subject to its terms. Form 1756-A Commitment, Schedule A Aspen/Pltkin Co. Housing Auth. Attn: Dave Tolen 39551 Hwy 82 rAspen, CO 81611 SCHEDULE A Custcmer Reference No. 7:00 401581-C 1. Effective Date: August 23, 1991 at A.M. Commitment No: SM/kb 2. Policy Policies to be issued: or (a) ❑ ALTA Owner's Policy $ Proposed Insured: TO BE DETERM INED r(b) ❑ ALTA Loan Policy $ Proposed Insured: (c) ❑ $ 1 Amount 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this commitment and covered herein is fee simple and ' title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: ASPEN/P I TK I N COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY, a multi -jurisdictional housing authority 1 4. The land referred to in this commitment is LEGAL DESCRIPTION SET FORTH ON SHEET ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE INCORPORATED HEREIN AND MADE A PART HEREOF. Owner's Premium: $ Lender's Premium: $ Tax Certi f icate: $ Endorsement Chg: $ TBD Charges: $ 198.00 Additional Chgs: $ TOTAL CHARGES: $ 198.00 r CC' s to: Aspen/Pitkin Co. Housing Auth. Order No. 401581-C Plat I.D. # SCHEDULE A (continued) Covering the Land in the State of Colorado, County of Pitkin, Described as follows: PARCEL A: A tract of land lying and being situated in the SE1/4 of Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, consisting of Lots M and N, Block 19, City of Aspen; and a portion of "Lot 16" (as shown on the Bureau of Land Managmeent Plat of the Dependent Resurvey and Survey for Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, 1 Colorado, approved February 14, 1980, and recorded December 8, 1986, in Pitkin County Records in Book 524 at Page 552); and a portion of the HOME STAKE Lode Mining Claim (United States Mineral Survey No. 4211); and a portion of the MARY B. NO 2 Lode Mining Claim (United States Mineral Survey No. 19640), and being more fully described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest Corner of Lot M, Block 19, City of Aspen; thence South 14°50149" West, along the West line and the Southerly extension thereof of Lot M, Block 19, City of Aspen, a distance of 100.00 feet to a point on the Westerly extension of the North I ine of West Hopkins Avenue of the City of Aspen; thence South 75109111" East, along the Westerly extension of the North line of West Hopkins Avenue of the City of Aspen, a distance of 60.00 feet; ' thence North 14050149/1 East, along the East line and the Southerly extension thereof of Lot N, Block 19, City of Aspen, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence North 75°09111" West, along the South line of the alley in Block 19, City of Aspen, a distance of 60.00 feet, to the Point of Beginning. ' PARCEL B: A parcel of land and being situated in the SE1/4 of Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, consisting of Lots K and L, Block 19, City of Aspen; and a portion of "Lot 15" (as shown on the Bureau of Land Management Plat of the Dependent Resurvey and Survey for Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., Colorado, approved February 14, 1980, and recorded December 8, 1986, in Pitkin County Records in Book 524 at Page 552); and a portion of the HOMESTAKE Lode Mining Claim (United States Mineral Survey No. 4211), and being more fully described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of -,e East line of South Seventh ' Street extended of the City of Aspen and the South line of the alley in Block 19 extended Westerly from whence the North Corner of Block 19, City opf Aspen, bears North 14°5 Or49" East, a distance of 121.01 feet; thence South 14°50149" West, along the East line of South Seventh Street extended a distance of 100.00 feet to a point on the North line of West Hopkins Avenue of the City of Aspen extended Westerly, thence South 75*09111" East, along the Westerly extension of the North line of ' (Continued) j Commitment No. 401581 -C LEGAL DESCRIPTION -continued West Hopkins Avenue, a distance of 60.00 feet; thence North 14°50149" East, along the East line and the Southerly extension thereof Lot L, Block 19, City of Aspen, a distance of 100.00 feet; thence North 75*0911111 West, along the South line and the Westerly extension thereof Lot L, Block 19, City of Aspen, a distance of 60.00 feet, to the Point of Beginning. ' PARCEL C: A portion of the Homestake Lodge patented Mining Claim U.S.M.S. No. 4211, descr i bed as fol I ows: Beginning at the point of intersection of line 4 - 1 of the Homestake Lode and the Westerly extension of the North line of West Hopkins Avenue of the City of Aspen; thence North 9*371 West along said line 4 - 1 of the Homestake Lode to the point of intersection with the Southerly extension of the East side line of Lot N, Block 19, City of Aspen, as described in that certain deed recorded in Book 588 at Page 992 of the Pitkin County records; thence South 14°50149" West along said Southerly extension of the East Line of Lot N, City of Aspen, to the point of intersection with the Westerly extension of the North line of West Hopkins Avenue of the City of Aspen; thence South 75°00111" East along said Westerly extension of the North line of West Hopkins Avenue to the point of beginning. I rj I Form 1 756 - 81 Commitment, Schedule B-1 SCHEDULE B - Section 1 No. Requirements 401581-C The following are the requirements to be complied with: Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record, to -wit: 1. Release by the Public Trustee of Pitkin County of the Deed of Trust from John Tedesco for the use of Aspen Savings and Loan Association, to secure $481,250.00, dated March 31, 1989, and recorded March 31, 1989, in Book 588 at Page 994. 2. Release by the Public Trustee of Pitkin County of the Deed of Trust from Richard Stanzoine for the use of Aspen Savings and Loan Association, to secure $481,250.00, dated March 31, 1989, and recorded March 31, 1989, in Book 589 at Page 19. 3. -red from Aspen/Pltkin County Housing Authority to a buyer to be aterm ined. NOTE: Duly executed real property transfer declaration, executed by either the Grantor or Grantee, to accompany the Deed mentioned above, pursuant to Article 14 of House Bill No. 1288 - CRA 39-14-102. 4. Evidence satisfactory to the Company or its duly authorized agent either (a) that the "real estate transfer taxes" imposed by Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979), and by Ordinance No. 13, (Series of 1990), of the City of Aspen, Colorado have been paid, and that the liens imposed thereby have been fully satisf led, or (b) that Certificates of Exemption have been issued pursuant to the provisions thereof. u I Order No. 401581-C SCHEDULE B - Section 2 Exceptions 1 fie policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the sallsfaction of the Company. Any loss or damage, Including attorney fees, by reason of the matters shown below: 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or clairns which are not shown by the public records but which could ascer- talned by an inspection of said land or, by making inquiry of persons In possession thereof. 2. Easements or claims of easement which are not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundnry lines, shortage In area, encroachments and any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are riot shown by public records. 1 4. Any water rights or claims or title to water In, on or under the land. 5. Any lien, or right to a lion, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, Imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 6. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, If any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the dale the proposed Insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this commitment. 7. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessments, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service, or for any other special taxing district. 8. Right of the Proprietor of a Vein or Lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted, as reserved in United States Patent recorded April 23, 1897, In Book 39 at Page 35. 9. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States, as reserved in United States Patent recorded April 27, 1923, in Book 135 at Page 405. 10. Any and all unredeemed tax sales. NOTE: Upon receipt of a Certificate of Taxes Due evidencing that there are no existing open tax sales, the above exception will not appear on the policies to be issued hereunder. Exceptions number. are hereby omitted. EXHIBIT 3 � I IOctober 1, 1991 IHAND DELIVERED Ms. Leslie Lamont Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Permission to Represent Dear Ms. Lamont: Please consider this letter authorization for Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, Inc., Planning Consultants, to represent the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority in the processing of our application for a GMQS exemption and subdivision/PUD approval for the development of the West Hopkins Townhomes affordable housing project. Mr. Vann is hereby authorized to act on our behalf with respect to all matters reasonably pertaining to the aforementioned application. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, l J' Curtis �Ch hirman �s en/Pitkin County Housing Authority �51 Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 (303) 925-5050 ISV:cwv 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ASPEi1 TITLE CORPORATION NCRMAN E. LARKINS PRESIDENT : ME ASPEN PROFESSIONAL SUILDING. SUITE 1 C2 600 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO 91611 July 26, 1991 -Ei_coN.N EXHIBIT 4 '15FEN 303V 92C-AC ©ASALT 203)927-4' CENVER DIR 303)595-& Mr Robert Nevins Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 39551 Hwy 82 Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Mr Nevins, The following list of names and addresses requested by the Housing Authority was obtained from the most current records available to me at this time and those being from the Clerk & Recorder's office of Pitkin County, Colorado in reference to the fallowing property in the Townsite of Aspen. Rezoning of lots K, L, M & N of Block 19, Original 'Townsite of Aspen, from R-15 to R-6 to create uniform zoning with annexed and zoned land of the Block 19 Annexation. List of Property owners within 300 feet of lots K, L, M & N of Block 19 City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado are as follows: Sincerely, Barbara J Mample Aspen Title Corp. EAGLE COUNTY: EAGLE COUNTY TITLE CORPORATION THE VAIL PROFESSIONAL BUILDING. SUITE 301 a53 SOUTH FRONTAGE: ROAD WEST VAIL, COLORADO 81657 (303)475.6423 Please see the attached list) AFFILIATED OFFICES. GRANO COUNTY: THE TITLE COMPANY, INC. FRASER VALLEY CENTER. FRASER POST OFFICE BOX 06 WINTER PARK. COLORADO "2 (3Q3)726.60T7 1303) 920 SUMMIT COUNTY: SI:NT.MIT COUNTYABSTRACT CONIP i08 NORTH RIDGE STREET POST CRFCE BOX 510 SRECKENRIME. COLORADO W924 '3Q31453-6120 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 State of Colorado ) )ss. County of Pitkin ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 26th day of July , 19 91 , by Barbara J. Ma►nple Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires; 12/19/93 'PAM A L r�i -� Notary. Pub is F I F i BLOCI 12 Lots iKLMN0P Lots R S Block ' East ?26of lot C Lots�D E F G H I Bealgear Subdivision lots :1 2 3 4 5 Adam4 Subdivision Lot I; Lot 3 1 I Sawmill Subdivision Lot 1 Block 18 Lots'K L LOTSMN0P Q & West 20' of lot R S & East 10' of Lot R Block 19 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIPI 600 E Cooper ST Aspen, Cl 81611 att: Joe Imbriani� I RICHARD E & LOIS NiLONG j l Asp k), I ELEANOR BERGER BEALMEAR c/o James Daggs &,Assoc 720 E Hyman Ave. STE #302 Aspen, CO 81611 ; ELEANOR BERGER BEALMEAR JERRY & ESTHER L rrLS (as trustees of Fens FamilyTrust) 3645 Valley Meadow!Rd Sherman Oaks, CA §1403 I SANDRA K & ARCHER N BISHOP JR (as Life Tenants uider Joinff Purchase Agreement & Remain erman Jo n W Barker Jr as Trustee of thhe Kabt Irrevocable Trust) P.O. Box 11146 i 4734 Lyons View Knoxville, TN 37419 DENNIS H & LINDA H VAUGHN 1299 Ocean Ave I i 5th Floor Santa Monica, CA 90401 I CHRISTIAN SCIENCE SOCIETY AiPEN/SNOWMASS II' 734 W Main St. Aspen, CO 81611 i EVERETT W ELEANOR 8 BIGGS WILLIAM D BIGGS 1 1036 Craigland Ct.' is i Knoxville; TN 379I19 j I JOSEPH B KRABACIIER 201 N Mill St. ST�E VOI i Aspen. CO 81611 ESTATE OF ALFRED BRAUN f c/o David E Stapl�'�eeton STAPLETON AGENDY IiVC. 533 E Hopkins Ave.; Aspen, CO 81611 i ; LotslA 6 C SEVENTH & MAINS VENTURE (a Colorado Gener&l Partnership) 1444 Lower River Pod I, j Snowmass, CO 816514 Lots D E F IN,8 BL ( 9 SSOCIitES c/ 1 t ssl d i 4�1 staf tar to Bul r, CO OOI RYAUCO PARTNERS L*ITED AXX41 201 N Mill St.. 51.1E P106 i Aspen, CO 81611 i � I , , Lot G Robert J Weien P.O. Box 3506 Aspen, CO 81612 Lots •H I f WESTON ANSON P.O. Box 7953 Aspen, CO 81612 Lots K L and portion of land ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSINGIAUTHORITY within Block 19 Annexation Lots;m n and portion of land within Block 19 Annexation James Peter Lorier; I 145 Lincoln Ave. Apt 5R I Lots Staten Island, NY 10306 0 P SKANDIA TOWNHOUSES�CONDOMINI,UMS ;Unit A Christopher Maridee P.O. Box 1325 I Aspen, CO 81612 t :Unit B i Col Robert B Piper. 3415 Morrison St NW Washington DC 20015 .Unit C t Henry Pedersen P.O. Box 144 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit D Terry End 700 Gillespie St. Aspen, CO 81611 Unit E Richard A Sherriff, P.O. Box 11108 Aspen, CO 81612 j Lots Q R S 700 HOPKINS CONDOMINIUMS ' i :Unit 1 Suzanah Reid P.O. Box 11453 Aspen, CO 81612 1 Unit 2 Marcia A Southwick 2915 So 29th St. Lincoln, NE 68502 ;Unit 3 Nancy J Haddad P.O. Box 11453 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit 4 John W Taylor 31050 W Thompson Ln Hartland, WI 53025 i Unit 5 Suzi R Cochran i P.O. Box 11673 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit 6 Christine 14 & Robert A Lester Norma E Lester P.O. Box 9696 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit 7 Thomas M Marshall 300 Riverside Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 Unit 8 Cheryl Barker Shock 7457 So Clarkson : I Littleton, CO 80122 Unit 9 Gale M Parker f P.O. Box 1490 1 Aspen, CO 81612 'Unit 10 Ted Lenio P.O. Box 9854 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit 11 Brian & Suzanne O'Neil I 11995 SW 222 St. I Miami, FL 33170 I .Unit 12 Janice M Schubert 101E Cooper Aspen, CO 81611 Unit 13 Sheilah Judith Bryan P.O. Box 976 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit 14 Merle Ellen Jablin P.O. Box 9724 Aspen, CO 81611 � Unit 15 I Edgar F Barber P.O. Box 9678 Aspen, CO 81612 i Homestake Lode USMS #4211 Hans R Gramiger P.O. Box 67 Aspen, CO 81612 Portion of the Mary B Lode N2 Starford Properties NV USMS?19640; Portion of Home- c/o William Keon' stake Lode USMS 4211 and portion 550 Biltmore Way ; USMSt5792 9th Floor Coral Gables, FL i33134 Block 25 Lot A j undivided interest Richard J Fleischer & I.F. associates c/o Barry Yaker I 280 N Woodward SITE #216 Birmingham, MI 4Q011 Lot B Ronald H Jacobs P.O. Box 4736 Aspen, CO 81612 Lots:C D 617 West Main St.'Condominium Units A & H I K.D. Stout & CompOny (a Colorado Corporation) 3980 Quebec STE 151 Denver, CO 80207: Unit B Brian Busch 617 W Main St. SIE B Aspen, CO 81611 Unit C Robert H & Phylis;A Throm j Douglas H Throm 617 W Main St. Aspen, CO 81611 j Unit 0 Michaele S Dunsdo4 & David A Borkenhagon P.O. Box 2225 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit E Donald L Young P.O. Box 4444 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit F & G I Richard E Rudolph, P.O. Box 1089 Aspen, CO 81612 Unit I & L Patricia J Straiglit P.O. Box 4706 i Aspen, CO 81612 1 1 Lots K & L I ALFRED P & LORALEEIS WEST 634 W Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 I Lots M & N Don McGill Inc (a.Texas Corporation) 11800 Old Katy Rd ; Houston, TX 770791 i Mary $ Lot/Spkit Subdivision Lot 1 TIMOTHY W TERRAL Parlour Car, Inc. Restaurar# P.O. Box 3595 I Aspen, CO 81612 i i 1 I i i 1 i i I I 1 I 1 I a APPENDIX B j EXHIBIT 1 ORDINANCE NO. 27 (SERIES OF 1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING A REZONING FROM MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-6) TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING (AH) LOTS K,L,M, 6 N BLOCK 19, THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WEST HOPKINS AVENUE AND SOUTH SEVENTH STREET, ASPEN COLORADO WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code the applicant, the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority, has submitted an application for a map amendment for the rezoning of Lots K, L, M, and N, Block 19, the southwest corner of West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street, from R-6 (medium -density residential) to AH (affordable housing); and WHEREAS, a duly noticed Public Hearing was held by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter "Commission") on June 4, 1991 to consider the map amendment at which time the Commission reviewed the application; and WHEREAS, the Commission considered the representations and commitments made by the applicant and finds that the rezoning application complies with Section 24-7-1102 and is not in conflict with any applicable portions of Chapter 24, is consistent with the elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission recommends approval to the City Council rezoning the parcel from R-6 to AH; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council having considered the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation for a map amendment does wish to grant the requested map amendment for the southwest corner of West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street, Aspen Colorado. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1• tThat it does hereby grant rezoning of the southwest corner of West Hopkins Avenue and Seventh Street, Lots K, L, M, & N Block 19, Aspen Colorado from R-6 (medium -density residential) to AH (affordable housing. Section 2: The Official Zone District Map for the City of Aspen, Colorado, shall be and is hereby amended to reflect those rezoning actions 1 as set forth in Section 1 above and such amendments shall be promptly entered on the Official Map in accordance with Section 24-5-103B of the Municipal Code. Section 3• -That the City Clerk be and hereby is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6• A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day of August 12, 1991 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published one in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the Cit Council of the City of Aspen on the 9*, day of 1991. John'Bennett, Mayor ATT ST: Kathryn �$. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this /--P c"'� day of 19 91. John nnett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn 6; Koch, v City Clk LI, I Ll �l APPENDIX C I j SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. �� P.0. Box 2155 Fax (303 ) 925-4157 EXHIBIT 1 --_�--� October 14, 1991 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8,SURVEYORS/ Mr. Sunny Vann VANN ASSOCIATES INC. 230 East Hopkins Ave. Aspen, CO. 81611 ' RE: West Hopkins Street Affordable Housing, Engineering Report Dear Sunny: 1 This letter comprises an engineering report regarding the West Hopkins Street Affordable Housing proposal. This report represents the results of a site visit as well as discussions with utility representatives and members of the Aspen City staff. Introduction The project site is located at the intersection of Hopkins Avenue and Seventh Street on Lots K,L,M and N of Block 19 of the Original Aspen Townsite. The site was annexed to the City of Aspen through the Block 19 Annexation as recorded in Plat Book 22, Page 7 of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder in December of 1988. The proposal comprises 11 individual sale units with a total of 21 bedrooms in units ranging from one to three bedrooms in size. The site plan incorporates 11 off-street parking spaces fronting on the alley as well as pedestrian access to both Seventh Street and Hopkins Avenue. I have endeavored herein to identify engineering related elements of the development plan and to present the results of my discussions with relevant agencies. Water I met with Judy McKenzie and Larry Ballenger of the City of Aspen Water Department. Basically, i water service is available from either the existing 12 inch diameter steel line in Hopkins Avenue or the 6 inch line in Seventh Street (the site plan suggests that taps to both lines will be needed). Final tap sizes would be determined when detailed designs can be reviewed by Judy but we were approximating that about a 2 inch diameter tap and service per building would probably be appropriate. The Water Department would require that the tap then split into individual service lines (probably 3/4 inch) and individual meters for each sale unit. Judy notes that their planning for this project does not anticipate that domestic (treated) water would be used for irrigation purposes. As you may be aware, there are raw water irrigation ditches along both the Hopkins and Seventh frontages of the project site. These ditches were re-established by the City back in the 70's for the specific purpose of encouraging raw water use instead of treated water for irrigation. The City would therefore prefer to have the project place a small pump vault adjacent to the ditch to supply the irrigation system rather than use treated water from the structures. As you are probably also aware, the City of Aspen has a policy of waiving water tap fees for affordable housing projects. Once Judy has had the opportunity of establishing a specific figure 1 1001 Grand Avenue. Suite 2-E • Glenwood Springs. Colorauo 81601 • (303) 945-1004 u October 14, 1991 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 2 from the architectural plans, it is appropriate to request a tap fee waiver through the City Manager's office. This waiver has been policy for the last few years but recent discussions of budget deficit problems in the City lead me to feel we should request this waiver as soon as possible. Sewer I met with Tom Bracewell of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District on September 25th. Tom indicated that adequate service was available with collection lines located in both Seventh Street and the alley north of the site. He noted that the line in the alley was recently slip -lined and that there were no particular problems with the collection system that will be impacted by this project. One minor issue that arose in talking to Tom is the fact that sewer lines adjacent to this j roect P site appear to be fairly shallow (7 to 9 feet below grade). My current understanding is that ' basements are not contemplated in the project design so this should not be a problem. Should basements be considered or added to the design at a later date, however, it is possible that sewage from any lower level facilities would have to be pumped to the collection system. Miscellaneous Utilities Electric- Jinx Capparella indicated that primary power is available from the City of Aspen but that a transformer and easement will be required on the project site to accommodate the load requirements of 11 units. Gas- Ray Patch told me that gas is available in the alley north of the site (if needed). Phone- Gary Gibson states that adequate phone service is available from the alley. Cable- Unitec mists Cable indicates that the West Hopkins site is serviceable, again from ' existing lines located in the alley. Street Improvements 1' I met with Roxanne Eflin of the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office on September 25th to discuss the requirements of the recently adopted "Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway System Plan for the City of Aspen, Colorado". This plan indicates a sidewalk, curb and gutter requirement for both the Hopkins and Seventh Street corridors on the map titled "Proposed Pedestrian System". ' With regard to the sidewalk requirement, I would suggest that there are two options. The first would be simply to build sidewalk as part of the project construction. I observe, however, that the ''Existing Sidewalk'' map contained in the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Plan indicates that there are no sidewalks on any frontage of Block 19 as well as most of the Hopkins and Seventh Street corridors. It may be more appropriate for the West Hopkins project to agree at this time to join a sidewalk improvement district at such time as one is formed. Given the overall lack of sidewalk on most frontages where the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway System Plan would require them in this neighborhood, I would suggest that the formation of an improvement district ISCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC 1 i October 14, 1991 Mr. Sunny Vann Page 3 I at some point in time is the only feasible way to assure sidewalk construction to the extent required by the plan. The same options exist with respect to the construction of curb and gutter (roll curb would be appropriate in this area). I am of the opinion, however, that curb and gutter along the street frontages will aid in defining on -street parking beneficial to this project. Eleven on -site parking spaces will assure one space per unit and will meet any code requirements of the City (which allows a waiver of parking for employee units). Roll -curb and gutter will also improve available parking on the street in further support of the on -site spaces. Drainage ' The construction of impervious surfaces on a currently undeveloped lot will require provision of on -site storm water detention facilities to maintain historic runoff conditions. I would suggest that the site plan offers a variety of locations for the placement of drywells or even surface containments for storm runoff, The central landscape area, if it can be designed as a swale with overflow to the alley or irrigation ditches, offers the possibility of an on -site ponding area for additional runoff generated by the development. If that is not feasible, subgrade drywells could be located in the same area or in the parking area on the northwest corner of the site. While I anticipate that on -site detention requirements may be significant, perhaps several drywells, I feel that the site plan offers more than adequate opportunity to address those needs. Our firm will be assisting the architects with specific sizing and routing requirements for on -site drainage. I hope this letter report will be adequate for development application purposes. Please feel free to contact me if I may provide any further information or detail. Respectfully Submitted, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. I Jay . Hammond, P.E. Prin ipal, Aspen Office i JH/jh 91133SV I cc: Heidi Hoffman, Hagman Yaw Architects Ltd. Dave Tolen, Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER. INC. WEST HOPKINS TowNHo,M,,,'l.,,,'-,-.Es Exjstin, Conditions Map 7930� 4' Rim = 79294 Lo(s / A',I,MN lock 19 9 6' over _ ss ss`923.3 _-_ _ A,o�p on Colora do ss— l /J79e% _ Ie I Rebor and Cap ``-- 9 L5. 16129 � Rim - 930.EInv In 79233 = 79232 _... .. a/nvOut l . 04 1 ss / Oro, Parking ve/ i • Q � iron Post te/ .. _ _ _ , r e 2_5- High Aretcl Post `s - e �__ �' �s / O _ ._ Irfn Posts f5 Rebor7933 N /9J33, C_ / 7932 / �--- v� - 7931 7931 jtot A - i G.2`i3 7933 ; '� ' _ / I Legend and Notes: o indicates found monument as described. °t " indicates set monument rebar and cap L.S. 15710. indicates control point h \ l 7932 — Survey Orientation based on found monuments as shown. Asphalt — / — Elevations are based on an elevation of 79,31.70' at the Under Lot N / monument found for the SE corner of Block 19 as shown. g5 iHOCK- rl i \ P Roof Peak Elevation - ?959 ? +; �- —te/— BURIED TELEPHONE LINE SIGN ! i BURLED CAS LINE CAS VALVE / \ / Gravel Parkin �E--�E--fF FENCE LINE YJ CURB STOP ROCK WALL `t1+ POWER POLE / Rebor and Cap , S. 7168 / % � ��� / —ty-- CABLE 7fZEV15/ON (/Nf # ClCH7 POLE 04L ELECTR/LINE WATER LINE � VALVE Rebar and Cop q0/ SATARY SEWER LINE U nREHYDRANT [.S2376 O IECEPHONE RISER OVERHEAD U7ILITY LINE O C46LE R/SER S SEWER 0 L—� �..�� t I 0 STORM DOWNINLETLE 2� EXIST CULVERTS / --� 7934 I o 'j / p D£CIOUOUS TREE Lj ELECTRIC TR4NSFOR4/ER 3 09.7, a r� Do EVERGREEN /RFE ANCHOR BO[T WV \� Surveyor's Certificate: 0`\ w,` \ a,�T��7T6j2 1 KENNETH R. WILSON, being o Registered Land Surveyor in of moo- r / the State of Colorado, do hereby certify that this map of existing conditions was prepared by me and under my supervision from a survey made by me and under my supervision and that both the survey and map are true and "^ Rebor and Cap --- t accurate to the best of my nowledge and belief. wvRetaining Woli ��, tla Q�vt�l'r• \�� wi -.-. //; S, or •aavement �. 11 y -1 - ��- KENNE H R WIL SON L. S. 75710 DATE _ Rebor and Cap d n ` - _7934�- GRAPHIC SCALE DIP wi ( IN FEET) I inch = 10 tt. (''nnfn»r Irnt,-rr7a1 Notice: SURVEYORS SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. According to Colorado low, you must commence --���r ENGINEERS any legal action based upon any defect in - C this survey within three years after you .�J1 1001 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 2—E first discover such defect. In no event may any legal action based upon any defect in GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 this survey be commenced more than ten years 003 945-1004 (FAX.) 945-5948 from the date of the certification shown I hereon. ' YER — __ _ ASPEN, COLORADO (JOJ) 925-6727 Lots A' -A" 171-k 19 7933 BER REVISION DATE BY 1 Added Utility Lines 9/10/91 R.F 2 Added telephone lines 1 9120191 R.F Alum Cap City Monument Block Corner Job No. 91 133 T Existing s tl ng Drawn by: R. F. Con d1 tl on s Map Dote: 915191 VOFF11 Appr. by: K. W. ale: B19AHAL-C ALLEY 1 I I SKANDIA TOWNHOUSES t SITE PLAN 0 5 10 20 RAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS LTD \ 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 8161 303/925-2867 � O 4� U a O O v/L V1 O x ■■®ii�ii ....i I "r, .TD. HOPKINS STREET ELEVATION 0 1 5 - 10 20 RAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS LTD 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303/925-2867 SEVENTH STREET ELEVATION ► 1 5 10 20 � • �ulliilil HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS LID 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303/925-2867 ALLEY ELEVATION (NORTH) RAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS 0 1 5 10 20 LTD 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303/925-2867 BUILDING ELEVATION (EAST) 0 1 5 10 20 HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS LTD 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303/925-2867 COURTYARD ELEVATION(LOOKING NORTH) 01 5 10 20 IN ���IIIIIII HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS LTD 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303/925-2867 a „ 7- J 1, I w I > w � w I 0 � o I � x r , III v HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS LTD 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 816l l 303/925-2867 �o o C) E-1 U� 4j � o ISSUE: REVISIONS: 01988 HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS,LTD. 00 Lo O W O 4 W W � W� O � a Q O x O � � W W Wi W ®■■■■M■ ■■■■■■■ ■■ mo ■■ ■■ O z 0 01988 HAGMAN YAW ARCHITEC-B, ). K, m „0-Z �- Eli Q ' o L r� ' U i CZ$ t- �- - • > 04 T7 m i o to j -i bA A • ►-+ 9 _ Q E1 o HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS LTD 210 SOUTH GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 303/925-2867 ■■®■■■®i 01988 HAGMAN YAW ARCHITECTS, IT[). ►r r CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen DATE RECEIVED: 10 15 91 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: ��5-�a3-/®�OO.S A57-91 STAFF MEMBER: LL PROJECT NAME: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing Project Address: Legal Address: Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City of Aspen APPLICANT: Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority Applicant Address: REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann, Vann Associates, Inc. Representative Address/Phone: 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 925-6958 -------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: N/C NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED 15/6 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP: V P&Z Meeting Date 3 I PUBLIC HEARING: YES, NO VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO ��O CC Meeting DateZ)4PUBLIC HEARING: E -� NOt VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO Planning Director Approval: Paid: Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date: --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- RE7RRALS : Al I City Attorney Mtn Bell School District �i,��" ✓ City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn NatGas i� Housing Dir. Holy Cross State HwyDept(GW) "Aspen Water Fire Marshall State HwyDept(GJ) � City Electric Building Inspector J Envir.Hlth. Roaring Fork Other z/ Aspen Con.S.D. Energy Center r� DATE REFERRED: /G l (v %/ INITIALS: FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED:1r:1==== a 3 INITIAL: 0" City Atty City Engineer Zoning Env. Health Housing Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: #345941 C)6/1e/9? 10:30 Rec $21S.i;( B[::: 681 PG 156 Silvia Davis, Fitk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc SUBDIVISION/P.U.D. AGREEMENT FOR THE WEST HOPKINS TOWNHOMES THIS SUBDIVISION/P.U.D. AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 17th day of June , 1992, by and between ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY ("Owner") and THE CITY OF ASPEN, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ("City"). W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Owner owns that certain real property (the "Property") located in the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, known as Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen. A complete metes and bounds description of the Property is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on January 13, 1992, the City Council of the City of Aspen granted approval pursuant to Sections 24-7-903, 24-7-904, 24- 7-1004, 24-7-1005 and 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen (the "Code") for the development of eleven (11) deed restricted dwelling units and condominiumization thereof to be situated on the Property (see Ordinance No. 52, Series of 1991, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B); and WHEREAS, the approval of such development of eleven (11) deed restricted dwelling units and condominiumization by the City was conditioned upon the Owner complying with certain requirements, including the entering into and execution of a Subdivision/P.U.D. Agreement for the property; and WHEREAS, the Owner has submitted to the City for approval, execution and recordation a plat for the Property (the "Plat") and the City agrees to approve, execute and record the Plat on the agreement of the Owner to the matters described herein, subject to the provisions of the Code, the conditions contained herein and other applicable rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, the City has imposed conditions and requirements in connection with its approval, execution and acceptance of the Plat and such matters are necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public health, safety and welfare and, pursuant to the Code, the City is entitled to assurances that the matters set forth herein will be faithfully performed by the Owner and the Owner's successors and assigns; and WHEREAS, the Owner is willing to enter into such agreement with the City and to provide assurances to the City; #34590 06/18/92 1Q:3i; Rec $215.9_B8::: 681 PC 157 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk:, DOC NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and the approval, execution and acceptance of the Plat for recordation by the City, it is agreed as follows: 1. Description of Project. The project which the City Council approved consists of two (2) parcels, the legal descriptions of which are set forth on the attached Exhibit A. Parcel 1 contains approximately 12,000 square feet and is approved for development of eleven (11) affordable housing units with the following development mix: A. Category 1 Deed Restriction: i. Two (2) one bedroom/one bath carriage house units. B. Category 2 Deed Restriction: i. One (1) one bedroom/one bath carriage house unit; ii. Four (4) two bedroom/one and one-half bath townhouse units; and iii. One (1) three bedroom/two and one-half bath townhouse unit. C. Category 3 Deed Restriction: i. Two (2) two bedroom/one and one-half bath townhouse units; and ii. One (1) three bedroom/one and one-half bath townhouse unit. Parcel 2 will contain approximately 307 square feet and will be restricted against any further development, although it may be used for access and parking purposes. 2. Acceptance of Plat. Upon execution of this Agreement by all parties hereto, and upon approval of the final plat by the Engineering Department and Planning Office, the City agrees to approve and execute the final plat for the project submitted herewith, which conforms to the requirements to Section 24-7-1004 of the Code. The City agrees to accept such plat for recording in the offices of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon payment of the recordation fee and cost to the City by Owner. Reduced size copies of the following documents, representing plats and plans that have been approved as part of this Subdivision Improvement Agreement, are attached hereto as the following Exhibits: 2 #3459#06 / 1 B/ 9< 0 10:30 Rec $215.00 BK 681 PC 158 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.00 a. Final Subdivision Plat, Exhibit C b. PUD Site Development Plan, Exhibit D C. Building Elevations, Exhibit E d. Grading Plan, Exhibit F e. Drainage Plan, Exhibit G f. Landscape Plan, Exhibit H g. Irrigation Plan, Exhibit I 3. Construction Schedule and Phasing. The City and Owner mutually acknowledge that exact construction schedules cannot be determined for the project at this time. However, it is anticipated that construction of the project will begin no later than the summer of 19921 with completion occurring within Nine months thereafter, unless extended by mutual agreement of the parties. 4. Parking and Open Space Requirements. Owner shall provide one (1) on -site off-street parking space per dwelling unit for the project. By special review approval pursuant to Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 9 2- 1 , dated November 19, 1991, the project's open space requirement is reduced to zero. 5. Public Improvements and LandscaDin A. Special Improvement District. Owner hereby agrees to join any special improvements district(s), in the event one is formed, which includes the project site. B. Curb and Gutter. Owner hereby agrees that it shall install, at its expense in connection with the improvements to be placed on the Property, curb and gutter adjacent to West Hopkins Avenue and the South Seventh Street rights of way as depicted on the P.U.D. Site Development Plan which is attached hereto as Exhibit D. In addition, Owner shall install additional pavement to connect the new curb and gutter to the existing street surfaces, as required. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is an itemization of the estimated cost of these improvements, prepared by Schmeuser, Gordon & Meyer on February 19 , 1992 . C. Sidewalks. The Owner hereby agrees to pay for the cost of installing sidewalks along West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street in accordance with the guidelines of the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Plan. These sidewalks shall be installed in accordance with and at such time as the special improvements district referred to in Paragraph 5.A., above, is created. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a copy of a cost estimate prepared for the construction of such sidewalks by Schmeuser, Gordon & Meyer on February 19 , 1992 . If required or requested by the City, Owner shall enter into 0 0 #345941. (__)6/ l.8/92 Rec $'21.5. 00 8K: 681 F'G 159 Silvia. Davis, Pitk.in Cnty Clerk, Doc a Curb, Sidewalk and Gutter Agreement for South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. D. The Owner hereby agrees that it shall, at its expense, install the landscaping as required by and in accordance with the Landscape Plan attached hereto as Exhibit H. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a copy of a cost estimate prepared for the acquisition and installation of such landscaping prepared by Landforms, Inc. on Marsh 20 , 1992. E. Security for Public Improvements and Landscaping. In order to secure the performance of the construction and installation of the public improvements described above, the Owner shall provide a bond, letter of credit, cash or other guarantee in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney in the sum of $ 37,994 • Said guarantee shall be delivered to the City prior to the issuance to the Owner of a building permit for the project. The documents shall give the City the unconditional right, upon clear and unequivocal default by the Owner in its obligations specified herein, to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation of such public improvements. As portions of the improvements are completed, the City Engineer shall inspect the same and, upon approval and acceptance, the City Engineer shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated costs for such completed improvements. The Owner shall require all contractors to provide a warranty that all improvements were constructed to accepted standards of good workmanship for the benefit of the City for the installation of the public improvements described herein for one (1) year from the date of acceptance. In the event that any existing municipal improvements are damaged during project construction, on request by the City Engineer, a bond or other suitable security for the repair of those municipal improvements shall be provided by Owner to the City. 6. Drainacte. Prior to the recordation of the final plat and issuance of a building permit for the project, a drainage plan shall be submitted to the City in accordance with Section 24-7- 1004 (C) (4) (f) of the Code and shall be approved by the Engineering Department. The drainage plan shall include calculations showing that the historic rate of run-off will be maintained. A copy of the approved plan is attached hereto as Exhibit G. 7. Public Rights of Way. The Owner must obtain an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public 4 #345941 06/1.8/92 1ci; ci Rec $_2I.5.(:)ci Bf::: 681 r'C 160 Silvia Davis, Pitk.in Cnty Clerk:, Doc �.00 rights of way. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have twelve inch (12") culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan guidelines in effect at the time of development. The location of the irrigation ditch may be modified subject to the approval of the Engineering Department. 8. Sanitation District Approval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project, detailed plans shall be submitted to and reviewed by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to insure that surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains and any other clear water drains are not connected to or tapped into the sanitary sewer. Adequate oil and grease interceptors must be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas in the event they are connected to the sanitary sewer. 9. Trees. All existing trees shall be staked and fenced to protect them from excavation and construction activities. Owner shall obtain a permit from the City Parks Department for the removal of any tree with a trunk diameter of six inches (611) or greater measured four and one-half feet (4.51) above grade. 10. Deed Restrictions. The project is to be deed restricted pursuant to applicable Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority ("APCHA") requirements. The APCHA shall review and approve all deed restrictions for the project prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project. Attached hereto as Exhibit L is a draft Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction, Agreement and Covenant. Prior to the sale of any individual unit in the project to a purchaser, such purchaser shall be required to execute such deed restriction, which shall then be recorded in the Pitkin County Real Property Records and placed on file with the APCHA. 11. Snow Protection. Owner shall design and construct the improvements on the project in such a way as to protect internal sidewalks, dumpsters and walkways from snow shedding. 12. Front Porches. Excess floor area may be used for front porches, which may be added to each individual unit in the future without further land use review. However, the review and approval of the APCHA and Zoning Officer shall be required and, if appropriate, a building permit will be obtained prior to the installation of a front porch. 13. Lease Restrictions. Each unit in the project is hereby restricted to minimum six (6) month leases, with no more than two (2) shorter tenancies allowed per year. This covenant runs to the benefit of the City and may be enforced by the City by an action for an injunction and/or specific performance, together with all other remedies available at law. 5 #345941 06/1.8/92 10:30 Rec Bk:: 681 PG 161 Silvia Davis, Pitk.in Cnty Clerk, Doc 14. Condominium Map. Upon substantial completion of the project, a condominium map and condominium declaration for the project must be prepared and reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and the Planning Office. The condominium map and declaration shall be approved and recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to the conveyance of any of the individual units within the project. 15. Material Representations. All material representations made by the Owner on record to the City in accordance with the approval of the project shall be binding upon the Owner, its successors and assigns. 16. Enforcement. In the event the City determines the Owner is not in substantial compliance with the terms of this Agreement or the final plat, the City may serve a Notice of Non -Compliance and request that the deficiency be corrected within a period of forty-five (45) days. In the event the Owner believes that it is in compliance or that the non-compliance is insubstantial, the Owner may request a hearing before the City Council to determine whether the alleged non-compliance exists or whether any amendment, variance or extension of time to comply should be granted. On request, the City shall conduct a hearing according to standard procedures and take such action as it then deems appropriate. The City shall be entitled to all remedies at equity and at law to enjoin, correct and/or receive damages for any non-compliance with this Agreement. 17. Notices. Notices to the parties shall be sent by the United States Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, Postage Prepaid, to the addresses set forth below or to any other address which the parties may substitute in writing. Such notices shall be deemed received, if not sooner received, three (3) days after the date of mailing of same. To the Owner: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, Colorado 81611 With a copy to: To the City of Aspen: Thomas Fenton Smith, Esquire Austin, Peirce & Smith 600 East Hopkins Avenue Suite 205 Aspen, Colorado 81611 c/o City Manager 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 #3-041 06/18/92 i.Cr;3ci f:ec $^i.rCr Bh:: 681 PG 162 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.C>(-) With a copy to: City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 18. Binding Effect. The provisions of this Agreement shall run with and constitute a burden on the land on which the project is located and shall be binding on and enure to the benefit of the Owner, its successors and assigns and to the City, its successors and assigns. 19. Amendment. This Agreement may be altered or amended only by written instrument executed by all the parties hereto with the same formality as this Agreement is executed. 20. Severability. If any of the provisions of this Agreement are determined to be invalid, it shall not effect the remaining provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Subdivision/P.U.D. Agreement the day and year first above written. ATTEST: Kath"PWS. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: t� At orney City Manager 7 CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal corporation By: l� John bennett, Mayor ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY B / Y: l Tom Baker, Executive Director M 0 ##345941. 06/1.8/92 10:30 Rec $2215.00 Bf::: 681 PG 163 Silvia Davis, Pit4::in Cnty Clerk, Doc STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss: COUNTY OF PITKIN ) j The foregoipq instrument is hereby acknowledged before me this day of 1992 by John Bennett, as Mayor, and Katherine S. Koc , as City Clerk of the City of Aspen. Witness my hand and seal. My commission expires: STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss: COUNTY OF PITKIN ) my Cwwftwm expires er7192 The foregg-Li;g instrument is hereby acknowledged before me this day of , 1992 by Tom Baker , as *et+ng--Ch of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. Executive Director Witness my hand and seal. "100111#1,,,, . DADy "low commission expires: :�• tARy �''• P U B �-� =•P Notary Publi '1j�• o�. CQ�aq;. N #345941. i;6/18/92 10:3C} Rec $215.i)C Df::: 681 PG 164 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.i;i; LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Legal Description Exhibit B Ordinance No. 52, Series of 1991 (City of Aspen) Exhibit C Final Subdivision Plat Exhibit D P.U.D. Site Development Plan Exhibit E Building Elevations Exhibit F Grading Plan Exhibit G Drainage Plan Exhibit H Landscape Plan Exhibit I Irrigation Plan Exhibit J Itemization of the estimated cost for curbs, gutters and si w lks (Schmeuser, Gordon & Meyer, dated _, 1992) Exhibit K Cost estimate for acquisition and installatio o landscaping (Landforms, Inc., dated 1992 ) Exhibit L Draft Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction, Agreement and Covenant 4 C:\WP5I\APCHA\SUB-PUD.AGT 9 #345941 06/ 18/9�, 10; 30 Rec Bs ::: 681 PC:. 165 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc_.i�i; EXHIBIT A A tract of land situate in Block 19, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado and Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West, and a portion of government Lot 16 and a portion of Homestake Lode Mining Claim MS 4211 and a portion of Mary B No. 2 Lode Mining Claim MS 19640 all of the 6th Principal Meridian being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot N of said Block 19; thence S 14*50149" W 63.25 feet along the east line of said Lot N and a southerly projection of said lot line; thence S 09*37,00" E 40.37 feet along line 4-1 of said Homestake Lode to the north right-of-way line of Hopkins Avenue produced westerly; thence N 75'09'11" W 136.72 feet along said right-of-way line; thence N 14'50'49" E 100.00 feet along the east right-of-way line of Seventh Street produced southerly; thence S 75*09111" E 120.00 feet along the north line of Lots K, L, M and N to the point of beginning, containing 12306 square feet more or less. 4 C:\WP5I\APCHA\EXAIBIT.A Exhibit B • 0 # 45941 06/19/9^ 10:30 Rec $2 15.00 DI::: 681 PG 166 Cilvia. Davis, PitE::in Cnty C1er-L::, Doc ORDINANCE NO. 52 (SERIES OF 1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING SUBDIVISION, PUD DESIGNATION, DIMENSIONAL VARIATIONS, GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, CONDOMINIUMIZATION FOR ALL UNITS AND VESTED RIGHTS FOR LOTS R, L, M and N, Block 19, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 24-7-903, 24-7-1004, and 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code the applicant, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, submitted an application for a PUD review and subdivision for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units and condominiumization to be situated on Lots K, L, M, and N, Block 19, City and County of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 24-6-207 and 24-8-104, of the Municipal Code, the applicant has also requested Vested Rights and GMQS Exemption for 11 affordable housing units; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held November 19, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposal and the representations of the applicant; and WHEREAS, the Commission amended the staff's recommended conditions of approval, approved the special review for reduction in parking and open space, and recommended the following setbacks: front - 5 feet, rear - 1 foot, side (east) - 5 feet, and side (west) -1.5 feet; and WHEREAS, the Commission recommends to the City Council approval of subdivision, designation of PUD, consolidated PUD process, and conceptual PUD with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That it does hereby approve Subdivision and PUD designation as recommended by the Aspen Planriing'and Zoning Commission for Lots K,' L, M and N, Block 19; City, and Townsite of Aspen, with the following conditions as amended by this Ordinance: 1. Prior to recordation of the final plat: a. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final plat. The drainage plan shall include calculations showing that the historic rate of runoff will be maintained. b. A final subdivision plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and a subdivision agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. The plat shall #345941 06/18/92 10:30 Rec $215.00 ELK: 681 PG 141P Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk., Doc $.00 include all utility easements of adequate width for utility /I requirements; the triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey shall be indicated as part of the Homestake mining claim. The ability to subdivide the triangular section, for access and parking purposes only, is also included within this subdivision approval. c. The final subdivision/PUD plat and Subdivision Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of final subdivision/PUD approval. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permits: a. Detailed plans shall be reviewed by Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer and if basements are added. b. Adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas if they are connected to the sewer. c. Existing trees shall be staked to protect them from excavation and construction activities. 3. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan Guidelines then in effect at the time of development. 4. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 5. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicant shall file a subdivision/PUD agreement with approved Deed Restrictions restricting the 11 units to the price and income guidelines as defined by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The individual deed restrictions shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon sale of the units. 6. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall adhere to all representations as made in its application for approval and at the public hearing which shall include but not limited to: landscaping, building materials, and the following setbacks: front - 5 feet; rear - 1 foot; side (east) 5 feet; and side (west) 1.5 feet. 7. A tree removal permit is required for the removal of any tree greater than 6" in caliper. 8. Internal sidewalks, dumpsters, walkways shall be protected from snow shedding. 9. Front porches may be added in the future without further land 0 0 #3459,41. (-)6/18/92 1 i:3(_) Rec $213.c_Mia Fif:: 681 PG 168 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc use review. The review and approval of the Housing Authority and Zoning Officer shall be required. Section 2 That is does hereby approve GMQS Exemption for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units with the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicant shall file a subdivision/PUD agreement with approved Deed Restrictions restricting the 11 units to the price and income guidelines as defined by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The individual deed restrictions shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon sale of the units. 2. All representations of this application and during public hearings shall be addressed and adhered to during the development and sale of these units. 3. The applicant shall agree to join a special improvement district if one is formed for this area, and prior to filing the Final Plat the applicant shall sign a Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk agreement for South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. When sidewalks are installed, the guidelines of the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway plan shall be followed. 4. The Subdivision Agreement shall stipulate that excess floor area may be used for front porches while future development shall be reviewed by the Housing Authority and the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of any building permits. Section 3 That is does hereby grant a subdivision exemption for the condominiumization of the eleven dwelling units with the following conditions: 1. The project shall be restricted by agreement between the applicant and the City of Aspen to six month minimum lease, with no more than two shorter tenancies per year. This agreement will be contained in the PUD/Subdivision agreement and in the price and income deed restrictions, and will be duly recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County. 2. A condominiumization plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments and shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4 That is does hereby grant Vested Rights for this PUD/Subdivision for a period of three (3) years from the effective date hereof in accordance with the terms and provision of Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code. #345941 06/ 1.8/92 10: 30 Rec 15. 00 Bk:: 681 PG 169 11via Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.00 Section 5• That the City Clerk be and hereby is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 7• This ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 8• A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 13 day of January at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by e City Council of the City of Aspen on the /(- day of 19 9:t• John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this /3 day of 1992. (7 John Bennett, Mayor AT T ST: Kathryn . Koch, City C erk O N rnq-4 V m 1�l ,�Izi � W U C. U7 L C a! U U �a/ LL 4J C 0 U ri rf ,11 T (V•4 V •ri " u- N -4 Uf f A cn Lapane tlM Nole,. - Es �";, q°H C N�an;mNwv'I Na: .DrJ9• r _x 1 SN Oswlaymml pon � on,ntlpr S abn 9 fNwMan, West Hopkins To wnh om es Subdivision Lot 2 EMG4hEERs I SCHMUESER CORDON MEYER INC. SURVEtpPs 100! CRWO AVENUE, SUO 2-E CLENWOOp SPR/NCi COLORq� BJ601 (JOJ 9I5-10 //FAX.J 9I3-591B COLORAUO (J°J) 925-6727 4 GRAPHIC SCALE �^^"'p O•wrrw Agwvwl Cif, Enroatr Ae9nvw4 IM, n+o/ qbf o/ waal Nm.4m, le.ManNa Suytlm M C/Y lapnaaa e/ rM C, el 7l/ ,^W'a. �, ' umnnnna one M AW�_oi iw�. ��E&yi�7S,d�_59e n1 ti —__-. -J�9w_S]9 ➢t_ ..LwS;�oSa.eEwss!mN_ ____ ro a: ��, aunemaron ,ueI to M I xn M SUDeiwew WEST HOPh7,V,,' TOWXHOME:5 �.�„NaI,� a/ aeroarNn aM o.n.,,nb AWOw A4 N^D !eY roN3° yRESfNIJ I'll Q>Nrn/PifM;n County M,u,bq gYbnnCou Y. CMeneo, yr,rnpeel o, /ylbaa. wryn bn a m M wYuay ,n fyx4 19. G}y oI Aryan, Cowry o/ q}Nn, _ errs Sraf �)° a.nanp ID Saufn, Ponp BS MYir. a yortNn/r/ manl�mwa yyKF� oI ha+NelMr Itatla ran4.q Conn NS III y Ba9;^^�M �!� n°'rM°sl r^'^a M Bvr4 19: fnaMr S le-Jp_e9 eb fMrrea S 09-J1-LG E e9JI -I a N )3-99- I W rJb q)Nn9 /Sul eynaaafbn a/ yes fo n nt-°/-roY Ima vb Napbne Aronw pnewae M°e I] /eef I oltlnp rpnr-o/-vyY NM wa, �' IW��Mc 9SfM 3 roat .NnC rr- y d'na rr Sewnln tlMm yrotlucae�-19rE (M ]p GY ebnrM vI Nra I° ! erpeu.wp, Ienap IJ(M /asr man w _ .N ens h wrq rn.aa� N be w.r. a.Nrr% mtl aM r ,nwaaa Sunems ° °ia�'ON My/ mms�xyal nby44u sror CwN.oe., � my er Ayn,, tcanfy rl p/b'n, M Sryy e/ Cebreee , �;nafnm I aaa ac4M.iwbro Myna m. fMa— NY •?' _Lim — C'Y Aaynw/ aM A—- enae er•„pr a"q rMa"ny Arpen yunutlnl m pyJn°nra Nv 3/,.1 avp'Msm °^° a .en Cam � S,fure� e fMno% l and ,rol M naI wwaen I,s IS71B -- IMJ Mal °/ WYaf INM:na IyrMa,M., SwpmNn N M Ier oMaa o rM t,N/4 9rrwbr, prydr Cawry, o4yv°o,'nn __ _rtlaYe Pops —_____ oM 9roapfron Ny. - ASPEN eY 1 COLORADO P•� +� � : & RE..I 4 6bf.>deEfBIL -F CD �, + 0 ( 4 i � r i i~n M-, z r C N N N VQ i `��:- n�� �h„n_I ,)�l•• %C ram'. ALLEY _— WEST HOPKINS STREET �yR+nCE "A4 N(N` PLAN NOTES - lx COMTTMOT TO nNiCEL IZD • ttA • IROT TIE TRlM1OOlM SECTIOfO MCMECTUW. ORME TBB'P _SITE GFVZE TEN REFER TO SEFNMTE OMWEq ♦1 J TO V. FOR PROTECT EX*- TREES TO 5 COO-TE LOGTM)•I Of FOSTK SERVICE BOX N F BM55 JOOfIE55 ROMBERSVIIM NM,fETECi E. REf ER TO 1AM09CwPE AlL FQI IMID SUf/ICE N]EA BEVORORIgTElBK T COORd- LOCATION OF CONIETE COMROI J FER O MGRECT E f4FER TO OfuE4WE FOR CUI16'OOTTER wD HNOfN LUI� CVT AT IgAN OEiAIB a r0 u5 • .x. rv+rFie� I I li I I MANDIA TOWNHOUSES i I I I i ii SITE r,-,,DEV'T PLAN 0 6 10 RO C)(-)"$ ::)O(j Aju3 u-r::lqT,:j 'c-;TAeCl �TATTS ELT ad 189 -:j�j D B y (- T Z6 / 8T / 9 C) T t6 S'V 2 # 00"$ OOG 'l-JaTo Aju3 u-[..i-4Td 'S-EAle(3 e-CATTS 9d T89 AEA C)O'gTZ$ Da%J 02:OT Z6/BT/90 Ti769t,2# z Al z PG F-I z 0 PC -T- z 0 0 u :DoQ ':y.aaT� A-.u3 ul::i-4t,:j `sineQ ti-in1zg >T�LI J':j T69 -Aa i)i)'S-[Zs �l i)2 OT `•6/81/9tj Tt,69b2# .................. OU 0 S G k" �— r t I I tftft Au ......... ........ � /\%\ � ::. / \ :::.�;:::���{}\ .. .. ' f-)(-)'$ --IOCI AJU3 U-L::14T.-4 'STAeCI 'ETAIT.S .:j T ag de (4w TZ$ Da,9 02:0T Z-6/8'f/90 T ot,2# (-)C)*$ -30C '::l-,IBT3 A4U3 UT::J-4T,:j 'STAeCl eTATTS 9ZT Sd T89 :)a;q 02,C)l Z Z I L 2 cq C-4 SO= T— r cq cn M clq N, M, C O 0 to bo bi) cis E JLHHHIS HINHAHS 0 1 0 DOCI °;1.a8T3 A-4U3 UT::i-.T,j 'STAea eTnjtg LLT Jj T89 ::ie (-W)'rT� ::)a,y U �OT Z6/8T/9ci '[t6St,9_# ''il 0I'l�r_ 0 00 00 00 O ONO 00 00 040 O 00 00 00' O 00 00 00l00 00 (-)(-)-$ ::)OCI A4U3 UT::J:IT,:j 'STAeCI e-.rAITS 1139 Z'6/81/90 1 t, 6 S'V 2 # oil Ax Z Z 4 =7 0 , ijlc0*A-A 199111S HINHAaS I E- 0 :4 ro 00'$ oog 4MaaI3 «iuo ulaild `s!&@g @!&I*S 6zT gd T89 aG 00'g*z$ aaa 02:0I z6Z8IZ90 IV69172# d 2 { - \ \ � §\ P || ^2 { ƒ �e � § f2© }, j \- E-4 2 i t/7t !' k . . � 121HU LIS§IMHAHS E | a DON MEYER INC. P.O. Box 2155 Aspen, Colorado 81612 (303) 925-6727 Fax (303) 925-4157 Exhibit J February 19, 1992 Mr. David Tolen ASPEN/PITKIN HOUSING AUTHORITY 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: West Hopkins Townhomes Proiect Dear Dave: CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS Enclosed for your use are copies of my calculation sheets regarding storm drainage, schedules of both general public improvements and on -site drainage improvements and a cost estimate for both public and on -site construction of these facilities. These items are provided in follow-up to my letter proposal to you dated February 11, 1992. Drainage calculations yield an on -site storage requirement of 197 cubic feet which is accomplished on our site drainage plan with two (2) drywell structures which are five (5) feet in diameter and approximately twelve (12) feet deep. These drywells are relatively large due to the relatively high percentage of impervious surface created by the project design when compared to the existing site which is a grassy area without structures of any kind. The City of Aspen requires that the net difference in flow between the undeveloped and developed conditions be retained on -site. The drywells are interconnected to allow flow between them if one should fill up first. The design also allows surface overflow from the eastern drywell via an off -site graded swale. Roof drains within the courtyard area are piped directly to the drywells. The schedule of improvements is an item I have given to Heidi Hoffman already for use by the cost estimators and includes quantities only. The cost estimate sheet is for use as a cross- reference for the estimator's work as well as for Sunny Vann's use in negotiating the financial assurances requirements with the City for the public improvements. Please feel free to call me if I may discuss these figures further or provide further information. Very Truly Yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. Jay W. Hammond, P.E. Principal, Aspen Office JH/jh91133CE cc: Sunny Vann Heidi Hoffman #t.;45941 ��b/iB/92iv::30 f;ec $��15.�)C? F�SF.: 681 PG 190 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnt•y Cler-k, Doc $.)() 1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2-E • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • (303) 945-1004 i#345941 Ob/ 1.8/9^ 10: 30 Rec $221.5. 00 Bt -.: 681 PCB 181 Silvia Davis, F'it[::in Cnty Cler4-:, Doc $.iii; February 18, 1992 West Hopkins Townhomes Drainage Calculations Peak Run-off Q = CIA in cfs C = Runoff Rainfall Existing Total site = 0.283 acres + = 12,327.48 ft. Proposed SF C %A Wtd Gravel Parking 500 .50 4.o6 .0203 Grass 11,827.48 .20 95.94 .1919 .2122 QME _ (.2122) (.365 ft/hr) (12,327.48 ft2 = 954.8003 ft3lhr = .2652 cfs SF C %A Wtd Building Coverage 6,230 .98 50.54 .4953 Paving/Walkways 11990 .98 16.14 .1582 Landscape 4,107.48 .25 33.32 .0833 .7368 Q1Uao = (.7368) (.365ft/hr) (12,327.48 ft2) = 3315.2539 ft3lhr = .9209 cfs :.Difference of existing to developed =.6557 cfs. For 10 minute design storm, storage volume = 393.47ft3 With 2 drywell structures = 197 ft3ldrywell Use 6011 ID structures 0 #34594 ]. 06/ 1 P/92 10: 3C i Rec $ 11j. CiC i BI-'. 681 PG 182 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty CIL-rk, Doc West Hopkins Townhomes Public Improvements Schedule Curb & Gutter 245 L.F. Excavation (245' x 10, x 1211) 75 Cu. Yd. Class 6 Base Course 6o Cu. Yd. HBP Patch (3" x 1470 ft2) 30 Tons Sidewalk (not to be constructed at this time) (240 L.F. x 5' x 4") 1,200 S.F. (15 Cu.Yd) Relocate irrigation ditch - 130 L.F. Extend existing 12" CMP Irrigation Culvert - 5 L.F. Install 18" CMP riser w/grate On -site Drainage Schedule Roof drain connections to drywells - 150 L.F. 4" PVC Drywell to Drywell overflow 31 L.F. 6" PVC Drywell structures (2 total) 4 ea. 60" ID Perforated concrete pipe sections 2 ea. 60" ID Solid wall concrete pipe sections 2 ea. Gast -in -place pads @ 1.1 cu.yd. ea. 2 ea. Precast 60" reinforced concrete lids w/2411.access hole 2 ea. Neenah #R-2112 Manhole frames w/type "A" grate 4 tons Cl 6 Roadbase 20 tons 1 1/2" washed rock #345941 i)bi 1092' 10:3c_) Rec $2'15. 00 Df::: 60 PG 183 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.0C) West Hopkins Townhomes Public Improvements Cost Estimate Curb & Gutter 245 L.F. @ $15/L.F. $3,675.00 Unclassified Exc. 75 O.Y. @ $ 9/0-Y. 675.00 Cl. 6 Base Course 120 Tons @ $14/Ton 1,680.00 HBP Patching 30 Tons @ $50/Ton 1,500.00 Sidewalk 135 S.Y. @ $30/SY 4,050.00 Relocated Irrigation Ditch 1,560.00 (Bentonite-Lined) 130 L.F. @ $12/L.F. Extend Existing 12" CMP 5 L.F. @ $25/L.F. 125.00 Install 1811 CMP Riser & 250.00 Grate Lump Sum Total $13,515.00 (W/0 Sidewalk) $ 9,465.00 On -Site Drainage Improvements Cost Estimate Roof Drains 150 L.F. 4" PVC @ $20/F.F. $ 3,000.00 Drywell interconnect 31 L.F. 61, PVC @ $28/L.F. 868.00 Drywell structures 2 each @ $3,000 ea. $ 6,000.00 Total, on -site items $ 9,868.00 0 1 March L , 199� West Hopkins Townhomes Landscape Cost Estimate Flagstone Sod Topsoil & spreading Fine Grading 3" Cottonwoods 2" Aspen 3" Shubert Choke Cherry 12' Colorado Spruce Sprinkler System Submersible Pump Respectfully submitted, 0 Exhibit K INC. MARK BEDELL 536 SF @ $9.00/5F $ 4,824.00 71200 SF @ $.30/5F 2,160.00 140 CuYds @ $20.00/CuYd 2,800.00 865.00 8 @ $185.00/ea 1,4K00 6 @ $125.00/ea 750.00 8 @ $225.00/ea 1,800.00 4 Co $550.00/ea 2,200.00 6,000.00 1,60000 Total Cost Estimate $ 24,479.00 1� Mark Bedell, President L andforms, Inc. #34 5941. 06/ 18/9- 10: 3C) Rec 681 PG 184 MB/mek Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc $.0(-I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE CONSTRUCTION Post Office Box 1381 Aspen. Colorado 81612 303/920-3939 Exhibit L: Dee4striction MASTER DEED RESTRICTION OF THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY'S OCCUPANCY AND RESALE DEED RESTRICTION, AGREEMENT, AND COVENANT THIS OCCUPANCY AND RESALE DEED RESTRICTION, AGREEMENT AND COVENANT (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this day of , 19_, by ** ("Owner"), for the benefit of the parties and enforceable by the ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY (hereinafter referred to as "APCHA"), a duly constituted Multi -jurisdictional Housing Authority established pursuant to the AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado (the "City") and Pitkin County, Colorado (the "County"), dated September 26, 1989 and recorded in Book 605 at Page 751 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Owner has purchased from APCHA at a price of $** and owns as a result of that certain warranty deed executed on the date hereof, an approximate ** square foot dwelling ("Dwelling") located on the real property more specifical- ly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. For purposes of this Agreement, the dwelling, the real property and all appurtenances, improvements and fixtures associat- ed therewith shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, as a condition of the sale to the Owner of the Property, the Owner is required to enter into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, Owner agrees to restrict the acquisition or transfer of the Property to "Qualified Buyers," as that term is defined in this Agreement, who fall within the Category 1, 2 or 3 income range established and adopted by the APCHA from time to time in it's Affordable Housing Guidelines. All other priorities to purchase a unit being equal according to the Guidelines, priority to purchase this property will be given to a Category ** applicant. In addition, the Owner agrees that this Agreement shall constitute a resale agreement setting forth the maximum sale price for which the Property may be sold ("Maximum Sale Price"), the amount of appreciation and the terms and provisions controlling the resale of the Property should Owner desire to sell the Property at any time after the date of this Agreement. Finally, by this Agreement, Owner agrees to restrict the Property against use and occupancy inconsistent with this Agreement. **To be determined by a later recorded memorandum encumbering each individual condominium unit. #345941 06/18/92 10:30 Rec $215.00 BK 681 PG 185 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 WHEREAS, "Qualified Buyers" are natural persons meeting the income, residency and all other qualifications set forth in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Affordable Housing Guide- lines, or its substitute, as adopted by the APCHA, or its succes- sor, and in effect at the time of the closing of the sale from Owner to the Qualified Buyer ("the Affordable Housing Guidelines") and who must represent and agree pursuant to this Agreement to occupy the Property as their sole place of residence, not to engage in any business activity on the Property, and not to sell or otherwise transfer the Property for use in a trade or business. NOW THEREFORE, for value received, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Owner hereby represents, covenants and agrees as follows: 1. The use and occupancy of the Property shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for natural persons who meet the definition of Qualified Buyers and their families. 2. Owner is a Qualified Buyer and, in connection with the purchase of this Property, Owner agrees (i) to occupy the Property as his or her sole place of residence during the time that the Property is owned by the Owner, (ii) not to engage in any business activity on or in the Property, (iii) to sell or otherwise transfer the Property only in accordance with this Agreement and the Affordable Housing Guidelines, (iv) not to sell or otherwise transfer the Property for use in a trade or business, and (v) not to permit any use or occupancy of the Property except in compliance with this Agreement. 3.(a) It shall be a breach of this Agreement for Owner to default in payments or other obligations due or to be performed under a promissory note secured by a first deed of trust encumbering the Property. Owner hereby agrees to notify the APCHA, in writing, of any notification Owner receives from a lender, or its assigns, of past due payments or default in payment or other obligations due or to be performed under a promissory note secured by a first deed of trust, as described herein, within five calendar days of Owner's notification from lender, or its assigns, of said default or past due payments. (b) Upon notification from Owner, as provided above,or other notice of such default, the APCHA may offer loan counseling or distressed loan services to Owner, if any of these services are available, and is entitled to require Owner to sell the Property to avoid the commence- ment of any foreclosure proceeding against the Property. In the event that the APCHA determines that sale of the Property is necessary, Owner shall immediately execute a -2- #34 5941 06/ 18/92 10: 30 Rec $215. 00 BK 681 PG 186 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 standard Listing Contract on forms approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission with the APCHA, providing for a 30-day listing period. If a sales contract has not been executed within the initial 30-day period, Owner shall extend the listing period for an additional 180 days, provided such extension does not conflict with the statutory rights of any secured creditors. The APCHA shall promptly advertise the Property for sale by competitive bid to Qualified Buyers. Owner shall, upon closing, pay a fee to the APCHA in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the sales price, or such other amount as required by APCHA guidelines, to be distributed as provided in paragraph 5. In the event of a listing of the Property pursuant to this Paragraph 3., the APCHA is entitled to require Owner to accept the highest of any qualified bids which satisfies the Owner's financial or other obligations due under the promissory note secured by a first deed of trust and deed of trust in favor of APCHA, as described herein, and to sell the Property to such qualified bidder. (c) Upon receipt of notice as provided in paragraphs 3 (a) and (b), APCHA shall have the right, in it's sole discretion, to cure the default or any portion thereof. In such event the Owner shall be personally liable to APCHA for past due payments made by APCHA together with interest thereon at the rate specified in the promissory note secured by the first deed of trust, plus one percent (1%), and all actual expenses of APCHA incurred in curing the default. Owner shall be required by APCHA to execute a promissory note secured by deed of trust encumbering the Property in favor of APCHA for the amounts expended by APCHA as specified herein, including future advances made for such purposes. Owner may cure the default and satisfy it's obligation to APCHA under this subparagraph at any time prior to execution of a contract for sale, upon such reasonable terms as specified fy APCHA. Otherwise, Owner's indebtedness to APCHA shall be satisfied from the Owner's proceeds at closing. 4. This Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the real property, described in Exhibit A, as a burden thereon, for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by APCHA, the City Council for the City (the "City Council") and their respective successors and assigns, as applicable, by any appropriate legal action including but not limited to specific performance, injunction, reversion, or eviction of non -complying owners and/or occupants. -3- #345941 06/ 18/92 10: 30 Rec $215. 00 Eck:: 681 PG Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 5. In the event that the Owner desires to sell the Property, Owner shall execute a standard Listing Contract on forms approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission with the APCHA providing for a 180-day listing period, or such other time period as required by the APCHA Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at time of listing.. The APCHA shall promptly advertise the Property for sale by competitive bid to Qualified Buyers. Owner shall, upon closing, pay a fee to the APCHA in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the sales price, or such other amount as required by the APCHA Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at the time of closing. If FNMA type financing is used there may be a fee charged by the APCHA, based on the amount financed. The amount of this fee to be paid by the Owner shall be as set forth in the current Affordable Housing Guidelines and will be distributed to the APCHA Mortgage Fund Account. MAXIMUM SALE PRICE 6. In no event shall the Property be sold for an amount ("Maximum Sale Price") in excess of the lesser of: (a) $** , plus an increase of three per- cent (3%) of such price per year from the date of purchase to the date of Owner's notice of intent to sell (prorated at the rate of .25 percent for each whole month for any part of a year); or (b) an amount (based upon the Consumer Price Index, All Items, U.S. City Average, Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (Revised), published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics) calculated as follows: the Owner's purchase price multiplied by the Consumer Price Index last pub- lished prior to the date of Owner's notice of intent to sell divided by the Consumer Price Index current at the date of this Agreement. In no event shall the multiplier be less than one (1). For purposes of this Agreement, "date of intent to sell" shall be the date of execution of a listing contract when required by this agreement, or if a listing contract is not otherwise necessary, the date shall be determined to be the date upon which a requirement for the Owner to sell is first appli- cable. NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO CONSTITUTE A REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE BY THE APCHA OR THE CITY THAT ON SALE THE OWNER SHALL OBTAIN THE MAXIMUM SALE PRICE. -4- #345941 06/18/92 10:30 Rec $215.00 BK: 681 PG 188 Silvia Davis, Fitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc s.00 7. (a) For the purpose of determining the Maximum Sale Price in accordance with this Section, the Owner may add to the amount specified in Paragraph 6 above, the cost of Permitted Improvements (as defined in Exhibit "B" ) in a total amount not to exceed $** , which is ten percent (10%) of the initial listed purchase price set forth in paragraph 6(a) above. In calculating such amount only those Permitted Improvements identified in Exhibit B hereto shall qualify for inclusion. All such Permitted Improvements installed or construct- ed over the life of the unit shall qualify. Howev- er, the allowance permitted by this subsection is a fixed amount, which shall be calculated on a cumu- lative basis applicable to the owner and all subse- quent purchasers, and shall not exceed the maximum dollar amount set forth in this subsection 7(a). (b) Permitted Improvements shall not include any chang- es or additions to the Property made by the Owner during construction or thereafter, except in accor- dance with Paragraph 7(a) above and Exhibit B hereto. Permitted Improvements shall not be in- cluded in APCHA's listed purchase price, even if made or installed during original construction. (c) In order to qualify as Permitted Improvements, Owner must furnish to APCHA the following informa- tion with respect to the improvements which the Owner seeks to include in the calculation of Maxi- mum Sale Price: (i) Original or duplicate receipts to verify the actual costs expended by the Owner for the Permitted Improvements; (ii) Owner's affidavit verifying that the receipts are valid and correct receipts tendered at the time of purchase; and True and correct copies of any building permit or certificate of occupancy required to be issued by the Aspen/Pitkin County Building Department with respect to the Permitted Improvements. (d) For the purpose of determining the Maximum Sale Price in accordance with this Section, Owner may also add to the amount specified in Paragraphs 6 and 7(a), the cost of any permanent improvements constructed or installed as a result of any re- quirement imposed by any governmental agency, -5- #345941 06/18/92 10:30 Rec $215.00 Bk:: 681 PG 189 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.0C) provided that written certification is provided to the APCHA of both the applicable requirement and the information required by Paragraph 7(c)(i)- (iii) . (e) In calculating the costs under Paragraphs 7(a) and 7(d), only the Owner's actual out-of-pocket costs and expenses shall be eligible for inclusion. Such amount shall not include an amount attributable to Owner's "sweat equity" or to any appreciation in the value of the improvements. 8. All disputes between Owner and the administrative staff of the APCHA shall be heard in accordance with the grievance procedures set forth in the Affordable Housing Guidelines. 9. Owner shall not permit any prospective buyer to assume any or all of the Owner's customary closing costs nor accept any other consideration which would cause an increase in the purchase price above the bid price so as to induce the Owner to sell to such prospective buyer. 10. In the event that one qualified bid is received equal to the Maximum Sale Price herein established, the Property shall be sold to such bidder at the Maximum Sale Price; and in the event Owner receives two or more such bids equal to the Maximum Sale Price, the Qualified Buyer shall be selected according to the priority for Sale Units set forth in the Affordable Housing Guidelines; and, in the event that all such qualified bidders are of equal priority pursuant to the Affordable Housing Guidelines, the Qualified Buyer shall be selected by lottery among the qualified bidders, whereupon the Property shall be sold to the winner of such lottery at the Maximum Sale Price. Owner shall have a period of two (2) business days in which to consider and accept or reject any purchase offer less than the Maximum Sale Price. Bids in excess of the Maximum Sale Price shall be rejected. If all bids are below Maximum Sale Price, Owner may accept the highest qualified bid. If all bids are below Maximum Sale Price and two or more bids are for the same price, the Qualified Buyer shall be selected by lottery from among the highest qualified bidders. 11. In the event that title to the Property vests by descent in individuals and/or entities who are not Qualified Buyers as that term is defined herein, (hereinafter "Non - Qualified Transferee (s)"), the Property shall immediately be listed for sale as provided in Paragraph 5 above (including the payment of the specified fee to the APCHA) , and the highest bid by a Qualified Buyer, for not #345941 06/18/92 10:30 Rec $215. ci0 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnt y Clerk, Docc s.cjci 00 PG 190 less than ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price or the appraised market value, whichever is less, shall be accepted; if all bids are below ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price or the appraised market value, the Property shall continue to be listed for sale until a bid in accordance with this section is made, which bid must be accepted. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the Non -Qualified Transfer- ee(s). (a) Non -Qualified Transferee(s) shall join in any sale, conveyance or transfer of the Property to a Quali- fied Buyer and shall execute any and all documents necessary to do so; and (b) Non -Qualified Transferee(s) agree not to (i) occupy the Property, (ii) rent all or any part of the Property, except in strict compliance with Para- graph 15 hereof; (iii) engage in any other business activity on or in the Property, (iv) sell or other- wise transfer the Property except in accordance with this Agreement and the Affordable Housing Guidelines, or (v) sell or otherwise transfer the Property for use in a trade or business. (c) The APCHA and the City, or their respective succes- sors, as applicable, shall have the right and option to purchase the Property, exercisable within a period of fifteen (15) calendar days after re- ceipt of any sales offer submitted to the APCHA by a Non -Qualified Transferee(s), and, in the event of exercising their right and option, shall purchase the Property from the Non -Qualified Transferee(s) for a price of ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price, or the appraised market value, whichever is less. The offer to purchase shall be made by the Non -Qualified Transferee within fifteen (15) days of acquisition of the Property. (d) Where the provisions of this Paragraph 11 apply, the APCHA may require the Owner to rent the Proper- ty in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 15, below. OWNER RESIDENCE 12. Owner represents and warrants that the Property shall be and is to be utilized only as the sole and exclusive place of residence of Owner. -7- #345941. {?6/ ].8/9^ 10:3(') Rec $22i.5. 0C-) Bf:: 681 PG 191 Silvia Davis, Pitk.in Cnty Clerk, Doc $.if(=) 0 0 13. Owner agrees that, in the event Owner changes domicile or ceases to utilize the Property as his sole and exclusive place of residence, the Property will be offered for sale pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 11 of this Agreement. Owner shall be deemed to have changed Owner's domicile by becoming a resident elsewhere or accepting permanent employment outside Pitkin County, or residing on the Property for fewer than nine (9) months per calendar year without the express written approval of the APCHA. Where the provisions of this Paragraph 13 apply, the APCHA may require the Owner to rent the Property in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 15, below. 14. If at any time the Owner of the Property also owns any interest alone or in conjunction with others in any developed residential property or dwelling unit(s), Owner agrees to immediately list said other property or unit for sale and to sell owner's interest in such property at a sales price comparable to like units or properties in the area in which the property or dwelling unit(s) are located. In the event said other property or unit has not been sold by Owner within one hundred twenty (120) days of its listing, then Owner hereby agrees to immedi- ately list this Property for sale pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 11 of this Agreement. It is understood and agreed between the parties hereto that, in the case of an Owner whose business is the construction and sale of residential properties or the purchase and resale of such properties, the properties which consti- tute inventory in such an Owner's business shall not constitute "other developed residential property" or "dwelling unit(s)" as those terms are used in this Paragraph 14. RENTAL 15. Owner may not, except with prior written approval of the APCHA, and subject to the APCHA's conditions of approval, rent the Property for any period of time. Prior to occupancy any tenant must be approved by the Homeowner's Association, if applicable, and the APCHA in accordance with the income, occupancy and all other qualifications established by the APCHA in its Affordable Housing Guidelines. The APCHA shall not approve any rental if such rental is being made by Owner to utilize the Property as an income producing asset, except as provided below, and shall not approve a lease with a rental term in excess of twelve (12) months. A signed copy of the lease must be provided to the APCHA prior to occupancy by any tenant. Any such lease approved by the APCHA shall be the greater of owner's cost or the rent established in accordance with the Affordable Housing Guidelines for units which were constructed in the year in which the -8- #345941 06/18/92 10:30 Rec $215.00 BK 681 F-C 192 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.00 subject unit was deed restricted at the appropriate indome category. Owner's cost as used herein includes the monthly expenses for the cost of principal and interest payments, taxes, property insurance, condominium or homeowners assessments, utilities remaining in owner's name, plus an additional twenty dollars ($20.00) and a reasonable (refundable) security deposit. The requirements of this Paragraph shall not preclude the Owner from sharing occupancy of the Property with non - owners on a rental basis provided Owner continues to meet the obligations contained in this Agreement, including Paragraph 12. 16. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE OWNER CREATE AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT, AS DEFINED IN THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE, IN OR ON THE PROPERTY. 17. NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO REQUIRE THE APCHA TO PROTECT OR INDEMNIFY THE OWNER AGAINST ANY LOSSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE RENTAL INCLUDING (NOT BY WAY OF LIMITATION) NON-PAYMENT OF RENT OR DAMAGE TO THE PREMIS- ES; NOR TO REQUIRE THE APCHA TO OBTAIN A QUALIFIED TENANT FOR THE OWNER IN THE EVENT THAT NONE IS FOUND BY THE OWNER. BREACH 18. In the event that the APCHA has reasonable cause to believe the Owner is violating the provisions of this Agreement, the APCHA by its authorized representative may inspect the Property between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner with no less than 24 hours' written notice. 19. The APCHA, in the event a violation of this Agreement is discovered, shall send a notice of violation to the Owner detailing the nature of the violation and allowing the Owner fifteen (15) days to cure. Said notice shall state that the Owner may request a hearing before the APCHA within fifteen (15) days to determine the merits of the allegations. If no hearing is requested and the viola- tion is not cured within the fifteen (15) day period, the Owner shall be considered in violation of this Agreement. If a hearing is held before the APCHA, the decision of the APCHA based on the record of such hearing shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred. #345941 06/18/92 10:30 Rec $215.00 BK 681 PG 193 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.00 REMEDIES 20. There is hereby reserved to the parties hereto any and all remedies provided by law for breach of this Agreement or any of its terms. In the event the parties resort to litigation with respect to any or all provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 21. In the event the Property is sold and/or conveyed without compliance herewith, such sale and/or conveyance shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the purported buyer. Each and every conveyance of the Property, for all purposes, shall be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, the covenants herein contained, even without reference therein to this Agreement. 22. In the event that the Owner fails to cure any breach, the APCHA may resort to any and all available legal action, including, but not limited to, specific performance of this Agreement or a mandatory injunction requiring sale of the Property by Owner as specified in Paragraphs 3, 11, 13, and 14. The costs of such sale shall be taxed against the proceeds of the sale with the balance being paid to the Owner. 23. In the event of a breach of any of the terms or condi- tions contained herein by Owner, his heirs, successors or assigns, the APCHA's initial listed purchase price of the Property as set forth in Section 6(a) of this Agreement shall, upon the date of such breach as determined by the APCHA, automatically cease to increase as set out in paragraph 6 of this Agreement, and shall remain fixed until the date of cure of said breach. FORECLOSURE The APCHA and the City Council may, pursuant to that certain Option to Buy executed and recorded of even date herewith, the terms of which are incorporated in this Agreement by this reference as if fully set forth herein, agree to release and waive their ability to enforce the resale deed restrictions contained herein, in the event of foreclosure, provided that said Option to Buy grants to the APCHA and the City Council, as the designee of the APCHA, the option to acquire the Property within thirty (30) days after the issuance of a public trustee's deed to the holder (including assigns of the holder) of the promissory note secured by a first deed of trust for an option price not to exceed the redemption price on the last day of all statutory redemption period(s) and any -10- #345941 06/ 18/92 10: 30 Rec $21 5. 00 BK 681 PG 194 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk., Doc $.00 additional reasonable costs incurred by the holder during the option period which are directly related to the foreclosure. In the event that the APCHA and the City Council, as the designee of the APCHA, exercise the option pursuant to the terms of that certain Option to Buy, described above, the APCHA, and/or its designee, may sell the Property to Qualified Buyers as that term is defined herein, or rent the Property to qualified tenants who meet the income, occupancy and all other qualifications, established by the APCHA in its Affordable Housing Guidelines until sale to a Qualified Buyer is effect- ed. GENERAL PROVISIONS 24. Notices. Any notice, consent or approval which is required to be given hereunder shall be given by mailing the same, certified mail, return receipt requested, properly addressed and with postage fully prepaid, to any address provided herein or to any subsequent mailing address of the party as long as prior written notice of the change of address has been given to the other parties to this Agreement. 25. Said notices, consents and approvals shall be sent to the parties hereto at the following addresses unless other- wise notified in writing: To Owner: ** To APCHA: Director Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, Colorado 81611 26. Exhibits. All exhibits attached hereto, (Exhibits A & B) are incorporated herein and by this reference made a part hereof. 27. Severability. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement and any other related document shall be interpreted in such manner as to be valid under applica- ble law; but, if any provision of any of the foregoing shall be invalid or prohibited under said applicable law, such provisions shall be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or prohibition without invalidating the remaining provisions of such document. -11- #345941 06/1.8/9? 10:3i? Rec $C115.00 R::' 681 F'G 195 Silvia Davis, Pitk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc 28. Choice of Law. This Agreement and each and every related document is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 29. Successors. Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions and covenants contained herein shall inure to and be binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties. 30. Section Headings. Paragraph or section headings within this Agreement are inserted solely for convenience of reference, and are not intended to, and shall not, govern, limit or aid in the construction of any terms or provisions contained herein. 31. Waiver. No claim of waiver, consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this Agreement shall be valid against any party hereto except on the basis of a written instrument executed by the parties to this Agreement. However, the party for whose benefit a condition is inserted herein shall have the unilateral right to waive such condition. 32. Gender and Number. Whenever the context so requires herein, the neuter gender shall include any or all genders and vice versa and the use of the singular shall include the plural and vice versa. 33. Personal Liability. Owner agrees that he or she shall be personally liable for any of the transactions contemplat- ed herein. 34. Further Actions. The parties to this Agreement agree to execute such further documents and take such further actions as may be reasonably required to carry out the provisions and intent of this Agreement or any agreement or document relating hereto or entered into in connection herewith. 35. Modifications. The parties to this Agreement agree that any modifications of this Agreement shall be effective only when made by writings signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. Notwithstanding the foregoing, APCHA reserves the right to amend this Agreement unilaterally where deemed necessary to effectuate the purpose and intent of this Agreement, and where such unilateral action does not materially impair the Owner's rights under this Agree- ment. -12- #345941 06/ 18/92 10: 30 Rec $215. 00 ELF:: 681 PG 196 Silvia Davis, Ritkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 #--*q.i, ia6/18/92 1C_):3C) Rec $2 (iif 9� : 681 F'G 197 Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler::, Doc $.C1i) 36. Owner and Successors. The term "Owner" shall mean the person or persons identified at the beginning of this Agreement and any other person or persons who shall acquire an ownership interest in the Property in compli- ance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement; it being understood that such person or persons shall be deemed an "Owner" hereunder only during the period of his, her or their ownership interest in the Property and shall be obligated hereunder for the full and complete performance and observance of all covenants, conditions and restrictions contained herein during such period. -13- 1-*94 ]. 06/ 18/922 10: 30 Rec $ - 00 Bf: 681 PG 198 Silvia Davis, Fitkin Cnty Cle Doc $.0(-) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the day and year above first written. OWNER: ** By: Name: Title: Mailing Address: OWNER: ** By: Name: Title: Mailing Address: STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19_, by and Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public **To be determined by a later recorded memorandum encumbering each individual condominium unit. -14- CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK R"ROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) WHEREAS, APCHA are owners of the real property located at (as described in P xh i b i t A , Aspen, Colorado, (hereinafter "Owners"); and WHEREAS, owner is contemplating new construction and desires to obtain final plat approvals; and WHEREAS, owner's property is within a zone district or other area as designated on the City of Aspen adopted sidewalk, curb and gutter plan requiring construction of sidewalk prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy or, in lieu thereof, an agreement for future construction pursuant to Section 19-100 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at this time, the City deems the construction of sidewalk on public right-of-way adjacent to owner's property unfeasible due to existing improvements or conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. Owner agrees to construct sidewalk along the frontage of owner's property (approximately 240 feet) at such time as the City of Aspen deems construction necessary and feasible. It is acknowledged by all parties that the present requirement is for five (5) foot wide concrete sidewalk. 2. In the alternative, at the City's option, the City may construct the above improvements and owner shall reimburse the City for all costs of such construction. Reimbursement shall be made to the City within ninety (90) days after receipt of invoice. #346069 06/: :�/?2D (-)9: 4!? Rec Bk:: 691 PG 501 Silvia Davis, Pitki.n Cnty Clerk:, Doc $.00 • #346069 06/23/9' 09.40 lac $IC).CC Bf: 681 PCB 502 Silvia Davis, Pitk.in Cnty Clerk, Doc 3. This agreement shall be binding and shall insure to the benefit of the heirs, assigns, and successors in title of the parties hereto. Entered into this i 7 day of :7 19�? B J Y• � J'�z - State of Colorado )� t'` �f y` *--Az r- County of Pitkin ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this / day of ::�-i,,— , 19'r-,-. by ui lil ::� iVyitriess my hand and official seal. A Y. commission expires: �n .PU 103 Notary Public Address: 6� 638 CITY OF AS EN, COLORADO A Municipal Corporation By: 5' �� MAYOR Attest: �____z!C;gU (CITY CLERK) cr/KM92.126 F L-1 0 ORDINANCE NO. 52 (SERIES OF 1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING SUBDIVISION, PUD DESIGNATION, DIMENSIONAL VARIATIONS, GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, CONDOMINIUMIZATION FOR ALL UNITS AND VESTED RIGHTS FOR LOTS K, L, M and N, Block 19, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 24-7-903, 24-7-1004, and 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code the applicant, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, submitted an application for a PUD review and subdivision for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units and condominiumization to be situated on Lots K, L, M, and N, Block 19, City and County of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 24-6-207 and 24-8-104, of the Municipal Code, the applicant has also requested Vested Rights and GMQS Exemption for 11 affordable housing units; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held November 19, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposal and the representations of the applicant; and WHEREAS, the Commission amended the staff s recommended conditions of approval, approved the special review for reduction in parking and open space, and recommended the following setbacks: front - 5 feet, rear - 1 foot, side (east) - 5 feet, and side (west) -1.5 feet; and WHEREAS, the Commission recommends to the City Council approval of subdivision, designation of PUD, consolidated PUD process, and conceptual PUD with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That it does hereby approve Subdivision and PUD designation as recommended by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission for Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen, with the following conditions as amended by this Ordinance: 1. Prior to recordation of the final plat: a. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final plat. The drainage plan shall include calculations showing that the historic rate of runoff will be maintained. b. A final subdivision plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and a subdivision agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. The plat shall include all utility easements of adequate width for utility requirements; the triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey shall be indicated as part of the Homestake mining claim. The ability to subdivide the triangular section, for access and parking purposes only, is also included within this subdivision approval. c. The final subdivision/PUD plat and Subdivision Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of final subdivision/PUD approval. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permits: a. Detailed plans shall be reviewed by Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer and if basements are added. b. Adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas if they are connected to the sewer. c. Existing trees shall be staked to protect them from excavation and construction activities. 3. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan Guidelines then in effect at the time of development. 4. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 5. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicant shall file a subdivision/PUD agreement with approved Deed Restrictions restricting the 11 units to the price and income guidelines as defined by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The individual deed restrictions shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon sale of the units. 6. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall adhere to all representations as made in its application for approval and at the public hearing which shall include but not limited to: landscaping, building materials, and the following setbacks: front - 5 feet; rear - 1 foot; side (east) 5 feet; and side (west) 1.5 feet. 7. A tree removal permit is required for the removal of any tree greater than 6" in caliper. 8. Internal sidewalks, dumpsters, walkways shall be protected from snow shedding. 9. Front porches may be added in the future without further land use review. The review and approval of the Housing Authority and Zoning Officer shall be required. Section 2 That is does hereby approve GMQS Exemption for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units with the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicant shall file a subdivision/PUD agreement with approved Deed Restrictions restricting the 11 units to the price and income guidelines as defined by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The individual deed restrictions shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon sale of the units. 2. All representations of this application and during public hearings shall be addressed and adhered to during the development and sale of these units. 3. The applicant shall agree to join a special improvement district if one is formed for this area, and prior to filing the Final Plat the applicant shall sign a Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk agreement for South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. When sidewalks are installed, the guidelines of the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway plan shall be followed. 4. The Subdivision Agreement shall stipulate that excess floor area may be used for front porches while future development shall be reviewed by the Housing Authority and the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of any building permits. Section 3 That is does hereby grant a subdivision exemption for the condominiumization of the eleven dwelling units with the following conditions: 1. The project shall be restricted by agreement between the applicant and the City of Aspen to six month minimum lease, with no more than two shorter tenancies per year. This agreement will be contained in the PUD/Subdivision agreement and in the price and income deed restrictions, and will be duly recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County. 2. A condominiumization plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments and shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4 That is does hereby grant Vested Rights for this PUD/Subdivision for a period of three (3) years from the effective date hereof in accordance with the terms and provision of Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code. Section 5: That the City Clerk be and hereby is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 7• This ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 8• f,. A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 13 day of January at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by e City Council of the City of Aspen on the /(off- day of 19 0,�v i3 John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this /3 day of 1992. John Bennett, Mayor AM�ST:� Kathryn . Koch, City C erk MEMORANDUM Mi 0 TO: Mayor and Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager N THRU: Diane Moore, City Planning Directo FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning RE: West Hopkins Affordable Housing Subdivision, PUD (consolidated two-step), Dimensional Variations, GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing, Condominiumization, and Vested Rights - Second Reading Ordinance 52. DATE: January 13, 1992 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The applicant seeks Subdivision, PUD designation, consolidated PUD review, GMQS Exemption, Condominiumization and Vested Rights for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units on an Affordable Housing zoned parcel. Please review the application that was attached to your memo dated December 16, 1991. Subdivision is a two step process with final approval at City Council. Although the property has already been rezoned to AH, the applicant now requests a PUD overlay. Because the parcel is not 27,000 square feet, the City, responding to an applicant's request, may designate a PUD overlay. Because the overlay is attached to the existing zoning, requiring review and approval by the P&Z and CC, staff recommends that consolidated PUD review occur as part of this project. Pursuant to Section 7-903 C.3, a four step PUD review process may be consolidated to two steps. The applicants request consolidation to the two step process, Conceptual at P&Z and Final at City Council. The P&Z having reviewed this proposal at their November 19, 1991 meeting recommends, with conditions, approval of subdivision, PUD designation, and consolidated PUD. The Commission also approved parking and open space requirements through Special Review. COUNCIL'S GOALS: This application is consistent with Council's Goals #1: to ensure adequate amount of affordable housing is available; and #2: to encourage growth that will reinforce our sense of community and re -enfranchise those who now are forced to move away. APPLICANT: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority as represented by Sunny Vann and Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd. LOCATION: Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen • ZONING: AH - Affordable Housing BACKGROUND: This parcel was purchased by the City for the future development of affordable housing in June of 1990 and rezoned from R-6 to AH in August of 1991. Council approved First Reading of Ordinance 52 at the December 16, 1991 meeting. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: A. Project Description The 12,330 square foot vacant parcel is located at the corner of West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street near the base of Shadow Mountain. To the east is a three story building containing five townhomes. To the northeast, across the alley, is a neo- Victorian office building and directly across the alley is a vacant parcel. Across South Seventh Street, to the west, are stables, corrals, and pasture/open space. A contemporary, single-family residence is located to the southwest and an older, single-family residence, barn and remnant tramway are directly across the street on West Hopkins Avenue. The townhomes to the east are zoned R-15, the block along Main Street is zoned Office, and the parcels to the west of South Seventh Street and across West Hopkins Avenue are in the County and zoned R-15. According to the application, the objectives of the project are ... "to create individual unit expression within a multi -family context, to respect the concepts of community and privacy while creating opportunities for social interaction, and to create an architectural image which is both appropriate to Aspen and enhances neighborhood quality." The applicant proposes to construct 11 deed restricted, affordable housing units on the site. The proposal consists of two clusters, four townhouse units each, located adjacent to South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. Three carriage house units, located on the alley, are proposed above a portion of the on -site parking. The 11 on -site parking spaces are all located off of the alley. The proposal includes an internal courtyard requiring the three buildings to push up onto the street and alley creating a "streetfront" presence. Individual backyard spaces are also provided with each unit however specific backyard improvements will be made by individual unit owners. In order to avoid future PUD amendments when homeowners wish to add onto their units, the development team will identify future improvements. A rough estimate of the comparison between the K 0 allowable floor area for the project and the proposed is described in the following paragraph. The maximum allowable floor area for the site is 13,560 sq. ft. The proposed development is approximately 10,400 sq. ft. Theoretically, there is 3,160 sq. ft. (overall) that homeowners could add to their units. However, because of the size limitations for units within certain income categories, expansions will be reviewed by the Housing Authority. Specific improvements utilizing the extra floor area will be identified in the Subdivision Agreement. Please refer to the attached application for more specific details regarding the development proposal. In addition the unit size and income categories are summarized in Table 1 and the Development Data in Table 2. B. Referral Comments: The following is a summary of referral comments from other agencies. For more detail, please see attached comments. Engineering: 1. The existing irrigation ditch must be maintained and pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts. 2. All easements need to be depicted on the final PUD plan. Easements shall be of adequate widths for all the utility requirements. 3. The development is within the area of the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan requiring the construction of sidewalks or walkways. 4. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final PUD plan. The drainage plan needs to include calculations showing that this historic rate of runoff will be maintained. 5. The ROW width is not adequate at this location, however the neckdown occurs on the south side of the street, which is in the County. Future review of redevelopment on the south side of the street should ensure dedication of the necessary ROW. 6. The triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey needs to be shown as part of the Homestake mining claim. 7. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 3 • Table 1 0 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Income Category, Unit Mix and Net Livable Areal Y 1. Category 1 2 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 11000 Units @ 500 Sq., Ft.2 2. Category 2 1 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 520 Unit @ 520 Sq. Ft. 4 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 3,600 Units @ 900 Sq. Ft. 1 -.3 Bedroom/2-1/2 Bath Townhouse 990 Unit @ 990 Sq. Ft. 3. Category 3 2 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,960 Units @ 980 Sq. Ft. 1 - 3 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,140 .Unit @ 1,140 Sq. Ft. 4. Total Units/Bedrooms 11/21 5. Total Net Livable Area (Sq. Ft.) 9,210 1. Net livable square footage calculated based on interior living area, including interior storage area, measured interior wall to interior wall, including all interior partitions. Excludes exterior storage. 2 All numbers. rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. Table 2 DEVELOPMENT DATA 1. Existing Zoning AH, Affordable Housing 2. Total Site Area (Sq. Ft.)' 12,330 3. Minimum Required Lot Area/Dwelling Unit (Sq. Ft.) 400 1 Bedroom 4 I 2 Bedroom 800 3 Bedroom 1,200 4. Minimum Required Lot Area (Sq. Ft.) 8,400 3 - 1 Bdrm. Units @ 400 Sq. Ft. 1,200 /Unit 6 - 2 Bdrm. Units @ 800 Sq. Ft. 4,800 /Unit 2 - 3 Bean. Units @ 1,200 Sq. Ft. 2,400 /Unit 5. Minimum Required Setbacks (Feet) Front Yard 10 Side Yards 5 Rear Yard 10 6. Proposed Setbacks (Feet)2 West Hopkins Avenue 5 South Seventh Street 1.5 Alley 1 East Side 5 7. Maximum Allowable External Floor 13,560 Area @ 1.1:1 (Sq. Ft.) 8. Proposed External Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) 10,400 9. Maximum Building Height (Feet)3 25 10. Proposed Building Height (Feet)4 Townhouses 25 Carriage Houses 30 11. Minimum Required Open Space Special Review 12. Proposed Site Coverage (Sq. Ft.) Building Footprints 9,680 Parking 770 Remainder of Site 1,880 Area Attributable to Open Space None 13. Minimum Required Parking5 Special Review 14. Proposed Parking Spaces 11 @ 1 Space/Unit E1 In addition, the Engineering Department has the following amendments to the referral comments of October 30, 1991: The Engineering Department continues to support the construction of sidewalks on both streets adjacent to the project and at the time that the project is constructed. The Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan has designated Hopkins Street in this area as a pedestrian corridor. The Plan did not specifically state that sidewalks are to be provided on both sides of the street, but the concept of providing sidewalks on only one side of the street was discussed during the preparation of the Plan. It is potentially unworkable to provide sidewalks on only one side of the street because of questions such as the fairness of who pays for the sidewalk and who cleans the sidewalk if sidewalks are only provided on one side. Generally, sidewalks are both paid for and maintained and kept clear of snow by the adjacent property owner. Therefore it would be unfair to burden only property owners on one side of a street. There are a number of reasons for requiring sidewalk construction on both streets at this development. One reason is because of the density of the development. With this project the sidewalks would provide a function for the development itself and not just for pedestrians passing by in one direction or another. If a resident or a visitor parks on the street at any point near the site and must walk to a distant point of the development, the sidewalk will be there to provide appropriate internal pedestrian circulation. Another reason is that it would be best for the project to design the sidewalks in at this time in order to be part of the comprehensive site design. Coming back to site years later after the area is built out might result in design difficulties considering the trees and irrigation ditch. There are at least a couple of instances in town where sidewalks meander and actually cross private property. If Council decides not to require construction of the Hopkins Street sidewalk at this time, we recommend that the applicant at least be required to indicate on the final plat where the sidewalk will be located. One of the applicant's representative's comments in favor of postponing sidewalk construction on Hopkins was the issue of right- of-way width. The assertion was made that if future development resulted in a 75 foot wide right-of-way, then the location of the sidewalk would be different than for a sixty foot wide right-of- way. This assertion is correct, however it is doubtful that a 75' wide right-of-way will be achieved. Although the right-of-way widths in the Original Aspen Townsite are 75' wide, the municipal code only requires 60' widths for the service level of this street. (At this location, Hopkins is classified as a local street.) Also, the right-of-way width factor would affect the location of the curb and gutter which the applicant has already planned to install at 11 • 0 the time of construction. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: 1. Detailed plans will be reviewed for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer. 2. If basements are added plans need to be reviewed. 3. Floor drains in the vehicle parking areas are to be tied to the sanitary sewer, adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed. 4. All tap fees shall be paid by the applicant to the District prior to connection to the main sewer line. Parks Department: The Parks Department requested that stakes encircle existing trees to ensure that they will not be damaged during excavation. Environmental Health: 1. The applicant should install bike racks to enhance auto disincentives. 2. The applicant should consult a mechanical/ventilation engineer to ensure that carports do not result in excessive exhaust fumes entering the dwellings above them. Public Project Review Group: The PPRG reviewed this project November 6, four members participated in the review and had the following comments: 1. One of the four members perceived the proposed density (11 units) as a problem. 2. The provision of 11 on -site parking spaces was not considered problematic. 3. Three of the four members commenting believed that sidewalks would be inappropriate with one member wanting to preclude the installation of a curb. 4. Living space downstairs with bedrooms upstairs is a good concept, due to the relationship this creates to the street. 5. The group expressed concern with snow shedding particularly due to metal roofs proposed. Several pedestrian walks do not appear protected from sliding snow. The architect team responded that snow shedding had been considered and internal drains and overhangs have been considered to mitigate those problems. 7 6. Individual units should be better identified either through restudy in roof form, use of color, mailboxes etc. 7. The dumpster and recycling area should be covered. 8. The entire group emphasized the necessity to not skimp on material or landscape budgets. Quality materials were considered to be a fundamental need in order for the AH project to contribute to the character of the community and immediate neighborhood. C. Review Process I. Subdivision - Pursuant to Section 7-1004 C.1., the General Requirements for subdivision are as follows: 1. (a) The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The Land Use Plan identifies this site as "Mixed Residential". The proposal is a multi -family development permitted in the AH zone district. The project is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan because it is dispersing affordable housing among the City's existing residential neighborhoods. (b) The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. RESPONSE: The project is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. The surrounding land uses are mixed residential including adjacent high density multi -family. The Office zone district is also across the alley from this parcel. (c) The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. RESPONSE: The proposed multi -family development is compatible with surrounding development. The neighborhood is comprised of both tourist and local oriented housing. The neighborhood is also "essentially fully developed" and this project should not adversely affect the future development of the neighborhood. (d) The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this chapter. RESPONSE: This proposal is 100% deed restricted and is in compliance with the AH zone district and is not in conflict with any other sections of the Land Use Code. Pursuant to Section 7-1004 C. 2 - 5, the pertinent subdivision requirements are as follows: E1 0 • 2. (a) Land Suitability - The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudf low, rock slide, 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. RESPONSE: There are no natural hazards that exist on the site that would endanger the welfare of future residents. (b) Spatial Pattern - 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. RESPONSE: There are no unnecessary public costs associated with this proposal. All utilities are available near the site. According to the application, all public improvements to serve the project will be borne by the applicant. 3 & 4. Improvements and Design Standards - following is a review of the relevant subdivision standards: (a) Water - According to the application, water service will be provided via the area's existing mains. Separate service lines will be extended from the mains to each of the project's three multi -family buildings. All units will be individually metered. The City water system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the project. (b) Sewer - According to the application, the proposed development will be served by the existing 8 inch sanitary sewer located in South Seventh Street and the alley. Please see ACSD referral comments. There is sufficient treatment capacity to service the project. The lines are somewhat shallow in this area and if basements are eventually provided, a pump system may need to be installed for lower facilities. (c) Electric, Telephone, Natural Gas, and Gable TV - According to the application, these services are presently located in the alley and will be extended for the development. All required extensions will be located underground. (d) Easements - Utility easements will be provided and will be included in the subdivision agreement and depicted on the final plat. (e) Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter - There are no sidewalks or curbs and gutter within the site area but sidewalks do appear sporadically along Hopkins Avenue closer to the commercial core. The applicant proposes to install a curb and gutter adjacent to West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street. The applicant has also agreed to join an improvement district for the installation of a sidewalk at such time a district is formed because sidewalks do not exist for the other three properties on this block. The Pedestrian Walkway and Bike System Plan identifies Hopkins Avenue as a primary bike and pedestrian thoroughfare. The Plan also indicates that this is a street that should have "complete sidewalks." The West Hopkins parcel is unique in that there are existing cottonwoods and an irrigation ditch along both West Hopkins and South Seventh Street. The design standards and guidelines for "Special Conditions for Irrigation Ditches" recommend a 5 foot buffer between the curb and 5 foot wide sidewalk. The irrigation ditch should be located in the buffer area. These guidelines may be altered to make the sidewalk and buffer area work within the confines of existing trees and the irrigation ditch. Additionally Seventh Street has become an important pedestrian link from Marolt Housing north to the music tent. Sidewalks or creatively designed walkways were identified in the Plan as being very necessary along this corridor. The Plan calls for the construction of sidewalks in areas so defined whenever new development occurs. The Planning and Zoning commission recommends that the provision of a sidewalk on Seventh Street be deferred until such time that an Improvement District is created. The Commission however does not agree with the Pedestrian Plan that a sidewalk on both sides of West Hopkins Avenue is necessary and recommends that a sidewalk be installed on the south side through an Improvement District if one is ever formed. Planning staff recommends that the Seventh Street sidewalk be installed at the time of development. Seventh Street has been identified as an important connection between the Marolt housing and the Meadows. It is a pedestrain link that should be provided as soon as possible. Staff also recommends that if an Improvement District is developed, that the West Hopkins project shall join and the installation of a sidewalk either on the south side or on both sides of Hopkins Avenue will become the responsibility of that Improvement District. As an alternative, the Engineering Department recommends the use of a Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk Agreement. This agreement enables the installation of sidewalk absent formation of an Improvement District. 10 0 ! (f) Fire Protection - According to the application, the project is 10 blocks from the fire station. A fire hydrant is located across the street from the property. The proposed development is readily accessible to emergency and fire protection vehicles. Each unit will be equipped with smoke detectors and will be constructed in compliance with all applicable uniform building code requirements. (g) Drainage - The project will maintain the historic flow rates for surface water runoff and groundwater recharge. On - site drywells and/or surface detention areas will be used to accept runoff from building roofs and impervious areas. A detailed drainage plan will be submitted at the time of final plat submission. (h) Roads - No road improvements are anticipated to the existing streets. A curb and gutter will be provided and the ragged edge of pavement will be finished off for on -street parking. According to the application, an assumed "vehicular trip generation rate of three to five trips per day per dwelling unit, the project would theoretically generate approximately 33 to 55 vehicular trips per day." Because of the sites' proximity to the commercial core and Main Street bus route, vehicular trips are anticipated to be around 33 trips per day. The capacity of the surrounding street system is adequate to accommodate the increased traffic. 5. Final Plat - The Code requires the preparation of a final plat before City Council reviews the subdivision application. The applicant intends to delay the preparation of the final plat until after Council review thus incorporating project revisions at that time. A condition of approval shall be submission of a final plat for staff review. It should be noted that the plat must be recorded within 180 of final subdivision/PUD approval. II. PUD Review - The applicant did not request a PUD overlay at the time the parcel was rezoned from R-6 to AH. The applicant now requests that a PUD designation be applied to the property together with the subdivision and other development review. As was discussed previously in this memo, PUD is an overlay that adheres with the underlying zoning and is intended to allow site design flexibility within the confines of underlying zoning. According to the Code, if a parcel is less than 27,000 square feet an applicant may only apply for PUD review. Therefore, if the P&Z and City Council do not designate PUD overlay, the applicant would be required to adhere to the zoning requirements of the AH zone. The PUD review criteria are essentially the same as the General Requirements for Subdivision, 7-1004 C.1, and have already been addressed in that review. Although the development complies with all the dimensional 11 i requirements of the AH zone district, the desire to provide a functional internal courtyard for the residents has dictated the location of the buildings as close as possible to West Hopkins Avenue, South Seventh Street, and the alley. The required and proposed setbacks are as follows: AH Setbacks Proposed Variations West Hopkins - front 10 ft. 5 ft. South Seventh - side 5 ft. 1.5 ft. Alley - rear 10 ft. 1 ft. East Side (adjacent to Skandia Condos.) - side 5 ft. 5 ft. The east side yard setback is maintained in order to reduce potential conflicts with the adjacent townhomes. This side of the project is not essential to the viability of the courtyard space. The Land Use Code does not identify specific review criteria for dimensional variations. However, the review of a reduction in dimensional requirements should consider whether the variation will adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood. Reduced front and side yard setbacks are common throughout the downtown area and in some residential neighborhoods. The most important setback, the east side yard, is still being maintained to reduce the impacts to the adjacent townhomes. In addition, the three carriage house units are consistent with the cottage infill program. That program incorporates historic site design patterns allowing a zero rear yard setback. Installation of sidewalks may have several ramifications for the reduced setbacks with respect to hard surfaces (a presentation will be made by the applicant of proposed setbacks). On West Hopkins Avenue (proposed 5 foot setback) , according to the submitted plans, the site's property line is located 19.5 ft. from the edge of the pavement. The applicant has agreed to install curb and gutter. Using the Pedestrian Plan standards, a conservative estimate of the curb and sidewalk improvements would include a 5 foot buffer/green space to include the irrigation ditch and a 5 foot sidewalk which leaves 2.5 feet of open/green space between a sidewalk and the property line. Thus, a total of 7.5 feet of open/green space would remain between the sidewalk and building. The proposed side yard setback for South Seventh Street is 1.5 feet. According to the submitted plans, the property line is approximately 30 ft. from the edge of pavement on South Seventh Street. Using the Pedestrian Plan standards the conservative estimate of improvements would include the 5 foot buffer and 5 foot sidewalk leaving over 11 feet of open/green space between the 12 • 0 sidewalk and property line. A total of 12.5 feet of open/green space would remain between the sidewalk and building. Drawings will be provided at the meeting for the Council to review the proposed reduction in setbacks and Pedestrian Plan recommendations for all street fronts. The design team not only believes it is important to provide the best possible open space for residents via the internal courtyard, but they have also expressed a strong desire to not provide standard sidewalks in order to encourage a west end feeling. Moreover, the team contends that hard surfaced sidewalks are not necessary for project circulation and would not connect to other walkways because the other properties on that block do not have sidewalks. However, if in the future it is determined that sidewalks are necessary the applicant has agreed to join an improvement district for the installation of sidewalks and other improvements in the area. III. GMQS Exemption - Pursuant to Section 24-8-104 C.(c), the City Council may exempt deed restricted housing that is in accordance with the affordable housing guidelines. A review of an exemption request 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. Please refer back to Table 1, page 4, for unit size and mix data. IV. condominiumization - Pursuant to Section 24-7-1007, when a subdivision of a parcel of land is to be used for condominium development the applicant must also comply with the following requirements during review of an application for a final plat. Condominiumization of a residential development requires providing purchase rights for existing tenants, minimum lease restrictions, affordable housing impact fee, and building inspection required. Because condominiumization is occurring during subdivision there are no existing tenants and building inspections will occur as required of all new developments. A housing impact fee is not required as all the units shall be fully deed restricted with minimum lease restrictions that restrict the units to six-month minimum leases, with no more than two shorter tenancies per year. The applicants shall be required to file a condominiumization plat upon completion of the building. The plat shall be reviewed by the Engineering and Planning Departments. V. Vested Rights - Pursuant to Section 24-6-207 the applicant has requested Vested Rights status. Vested rights status may be 13 granted by ordinance of the City Council. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Rey Issues: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed at length the inclusion of sidewalks on Seventh Street and West Hopkins. The majority of the Commissioners did not believe that sidewalks on both sides of West Hopkins were necessary preferring the south side of the street for the installation of sidewalks. A sidewalk on Seventh Street will be needed in the future but installation should be deferred. 2. In general, the Commission did not object to the reduced front yard setback, but some members suggested eliminating either the third bedroom of the W. Hopkins and Seventh St. corner unit or pushing the building back toward the alley. That bedroom extends into the reduced front yard setback and privacy, proximity to the street, and the potential sidewalk on West Hopkins gave cause for concern. However, the Commission voted to approve the reduced setbacks and did not require the applicant to reconfigure the buildings. 3. Front porches should be built with the project and walkways, dumpsters and recycling areas should be protected from snowshed from the roof. The Commission urged the applicant to reduce the danger of snow shedding onto walkways with appropriate measures. APPLICANT RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS: 1. Small roof sheds have been added to various building elevations to protect he project's internal pedestrian areas from snow slides. Avalanche guards and gutters will also be used in some areas as may be required to reduce potential hazards attributable to sliding snow. 2. A site plan depicting a preliminary sidewalk alignment on the north side of West Hopkins Avenue and along South Seventh Street has been submitted. This site plan will be presented at the Council meeting. Please note that the installation of the sidewalks as depicted will most likely require the relocation of the existing irrigation ditch which parallels both street frontages but the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan establishes guidelines for protecting these types of landscape features. 3. The width of the right-of-ways are being surveyed. The survey is attempting to define the southern and western property lines of the adjoining parcels for purposes of establishing undisputed right-of-way widths. Because the opposite sides of West Hopkins and South Seventh are within the County property lines do not 14 0 C appear on the Aspen Townsit surveys and additional title right-of-way width for these layout will be submitted to Department for review that widths. e maps the result being that field work are necessary to establish the two streets. A revised sidewalk the Engineering, Parks and Planning is based upon proper right-of-way 4. The applicant wishes to include front porches on the project's Hopkins and Seventh Street facades. However, the applicant would like to keep the installation of front porches optional. If the budget permits, at grade front porch areas will be included in the construction bid package. RECOMMENDATION: A. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the Council approval of subdivision, designation of PUD, consolidated PUD process, and conceptual PUD with the following conditions: 1. Prior to final plat approval: a. A sidewalk plan, for Seventh Street, shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments. The standards and guidelines of the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan, then in effect at the time of development, for the construction of Seventh Street sidewalk shall be applied. b. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final plan. The drainage plan needs to include calculations showing that this historic rate of runoff will be maintained. c. A final subdivision plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and a subdivision agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. The plat shall include all utility easements of adequate width for utility requirements; the triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey shall be indicated as part of the Homestake mining claim. d. The final subdivision/PUD plat and Subdivision Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of final subdivision/PUD approval. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits: a. Detailed plans shall be reviewed by ACED for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer and if basements are added. b. Adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas if they are connected to the sewer. 15 C. Existing trees shall be staked to protect from excavation and construction activities. 3. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan Guidelines. 4. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 5. Deed restrictions shall be reviewed and approved by the Housing Authority and Planning Department prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. All representations the applicant has made in its application for approval shall be adhered to including but not limited to: landscaping, building materials, and setback variations which are: front - 5 feet; rear - 1 foot; side (east) 5 feet; and side (west) 1.5 feet. 7. A tree removal permit is required for the removal of any tree greater than 6" in caliper. 8. Internal sidewalks, dumpsters, walkways shall be protected from snow shedding. 9. Front porches shall be added at the time of development. 10. A disclaimer shall be added on the final plans, warning potential purchasers of the unit on the corner of W. Hopkins and Seventh St., that a sidewalk and/or a fixed guideway (trolley) system may be installed within 5 feet of the bedroom window. B. Staff recommends to Council approval of the GMQS Exemption for 11 deed restricted dwelling units, condominiumization and vested rights with the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy all deed restrictions shall be filed with the housing authority. 2. All representations that the applicant has made in its application for approval shall be adhered to during the development and sale of these units. 3. The project shall be restricted by agreement between the applicant and the City of Aspen to six month minimum lease, with no more than two shorter tenancies per year. This agreement will be contained in the PUD/Subdivision agreement and will be duly recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County. 16 4. The Subdivision Agreement shall include language stipulating future improvements that may utilize the additional 3,160 square feet of floor area that remains available on the parcel. The Subdivision Agreement shall require additional increases in floor area to be reviewed by the Housing Authority and the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of any building permits. C. Staff also recommends that the Seventh Street sidewalk shall be installed at the time of development and the sidewalk shall adhere to the guidelines of the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Systems Plan then in effect at the time of development. D. Staff also recommends that the applicant agree to join a Special Improvement District if one is formed for this area. Staff also recommends that, prior to filing the Final Plat, the applicant shall sign a Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk agreement E. Staff does not recommend that the applicant provide a sidewalk on the north side of West Hopkins Avenue. However, having required the applicant to join a Special Improvement District and sign the Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk agreement ensures that this project will be a participant in future improvements along West Hopkins, including a sidewalks on either side of the street. (All recommendations, as noted above, have been included in the Ordinance.) PROPOSED MOTION: I move to read Ordinance 52, Series of 1991. I move to adopt Ordinance 52, Series of 1991 on Second Reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Referral Comments 2. Ordinance 52 3. Application (please bring the application that was attached to the memo dated December 16) 17 • 17J MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer Date: December 6, 1991 Re: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption, Subdivision/PUD, Special Review and Condominiumization This memo is written as an addendum to the engineering department memo of October 30, 1991. The engineering department continues to support the construction of sidewalk on both streets adjacent to the project and at the time that the project is constructed. The Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan has designated Hopkins Street in this area as a pedestrian corridor. The Plan did not specifically state that sidewalks are to be provided on both sides of the street, but the concept of providing sidewalks on only one side of the street was discussed during the preparation of the Plan. It is potentially unworkable to provide sidewalks on only one side of the street because of questions such as the fairness of who pays for the sidewalk and who cleans the sidewalk if sidewalks are only provided on one side. Generally, sidewalks are both paid for and maintained and kept clear of snow by the adjacent property owner. Therefore it would be unfair to burden only property owners on one side of a street. There are a number of reasons for requiring sidewalk construction on both streets at this development. One reason is because of the density of the development. With this project the sidewalks would provide a function for the development itself and not just for pedestrians passing by in one direction or another. If a resident or a visitor parks on the street at any point near the site and must walk to a distant point of the development, the sidewalk will be there to provide appropriate internal pedestrian circulation. Another reason is that it would be best for the project to design the sidewalks in at this time in order to be part of the comprehensive site design. Coming back to site years later after the area is built out might result in design difficulties considering the trees and irrigation ditch. There are at least a couple of instances in town where sidewalks meander and actually cross private property. If Council decides not to require construction of the Hopkins Street sidewalk at this time, we recommend that the applicant at least be required to indicate on the final plat where the sidewalk will be located. One of the applicant's representative's comments in favor of postponing sidewalk construction on Hopkins was the issue of right- of-way width. The assertion was made that if future development resulted in a 75 foot wide right-of-way, then the location of the sidewalk would be different than for a sixty foot wide right-of- way. This assertion is correct, however it is doubtful that a 75' wide right-of-way will be achieved. Although the right-of-way widths in the Original Aspen Townsite are 75' wide, the municipal code only requires 60' widths for the service level of this street. (At this location, Hopkins is classified as a local street.) Also, the right-of-way width factor would affect the location of the curb and gutter which the applicant has already planned to install at the time of construction. cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director cr/M91.270 0 • MEMORANDUM TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: Jim Gibbard, Engineering Department Q% DATE: October 30, 1991 RE: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption, Subdivision/PUD, Special Review and Condominiumization Having reviewed the above application and having made a site visit, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. This application meets all of the applicable requirements of the APCHA Affordable Housing Guidelines as required for an Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption to comply with Municipal Code Chapter 24, Section 8-104 C. 2. There is an irrigation ditch located in the public right-of- way on the south and east sides of this property. Care must be taken during the development of this project that this ditch must be maintained. According to the Parks Department, the proposed pathways that cross this ditch must have culverts at least YQ_1 inches in diameter and be constructed of non -corrugated material. 3. This development will create no additional demand on public facilities since all the required utilities are available and meet the required standards at this location. 4. The applicant has indicated that easements will be provided to accommodate utility extensions and that these easements will be depicted on the final plat. These easements need to be of an adequate width which is in agreement with the needs of the respective utility companies. 5. The applicant is proposing not to construct a sidewalk at this time but to join a sidewalk improvement district at such time as a district is formed. It should be noted that this development is within the area that the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan requires the construction of sidewalks and that other developments in this area have been required to construct them. 6. The applicant has indicated that the historic rate of runoff will be maintained and that on -site drywells and/or surface detention areas will be provided for this development. The detailed drainage plan that is submitted with the final plan needs to include calculations that show that this historic rate of runoff will be maintained. • 0 7. The width of the right-of-way at this location is less than the 75 feet that the adjacent streets have. The neckdown of this street occurs on the south side of the street which is not within the boundaries of the City but in the County. The County should be asked to make it a requirement of any landuse review on that property to dedicate the rest right-of-way that is needed to make the width the required 75 feet. 8. The submitted survey shows a boundary for triangular section of property on the southeast part of the map. The final plat survey needs to show that this survey boundary is part of the Homestake mining claim. 9. The applicant proposes 11 off-street parking spaces for this development and that guest and additional resident parking be accommodated on the adjacent street system. There is a potential for at least 21 residents in this development. It should be noted that there is potential for impact to the existing on -street parking, if all the residents of this project have cars and need parking. 10. The applicant Streets Department Department for any jg/whopk cc: Chuck Roth needs to get an excavation permit from the and design approval from the Engineering work done in the public right-of-way. .{aspen Consolidated Sanitation District 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tele. (303) 925-3601 October 28, 1991 Leslie Lamont City/County Planning Office 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Tele. (303) 925-2537 RE: Sewer Service for West Hopkins Townhomes GMQS Dear Leslie, At the present time the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District has adequate wastewater treatment plant and collection line capacity. Once detailed plans are available, we would like to review the plans for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer. We should also review the detailed plans if basements are to be built in this project. If floor drains in the vehicle parking areas are to be tied to the sanitary sewer, adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed. As usual all tap fees shall be paid by the applicant to the District prior to District allowing any connection to the District's main sewer line. S i n c al- , TF:6rnas D�L2r�nc�ae 1 Collection Systems Superintendent MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office From: Environmental Health Department . Date: October 23, 1991 Re: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption, Subdivision/PUD, Special Review and Condominiumization Parcel ID# 2735-123-10-005 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the above -mentioned land use submittal for the following concerns. The authority for this review is granted to this office by the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office as stated in Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Connection to Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District lines is in conformance with policies of this office. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Service from the Aspen Water Department is in conformance with policies of this office. AIR QUALITY: The location of this project where residents do not have to drive to get to downtown Aspen is ideal for reducing air pollution. To encourage uses of alternatives to auto$ the applicant would need to consider placing bike racks on the site, preferably in a covered, secure location. The applicant has gone beyond the requirements of the law by not installing woodstoves or gas log fireplaces. We recommend that benefit be guaranteed for the future by the applicant agreeing not to have stoves and fireplaces installed in the future. Provision of the minimum number of parking spaces is consistent with efforts to encourage alternatives to auto use. We recommend the applicant consult a mechanical/ventilation engineer to ensure that carports do not result in excessive exhaust fumes entering the dwellings above them. The Clean Air Advisory Board served on the Committee which 0 • developed the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway System Plan and encourages the development of the Hopkins Ave. route as soon as possible. While the other side of the street may be more desirable and sidewalks are not needed on both sides of the street, there is a concern about whether the trail on the other side of the street will be built in a timely manner. There is also a concern that including affordable housing in an improvement district might be financially difficult enough to interfere with later sidewalk/trail construction. However, we would defer to the Planning Office's recommendations about the trail system and only wish to note the CAAB's desire to encourage development of the trail system as soon as feasible. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: The applicant will need to comply with city noise regulations during construction. ORDINANCE NO. -a_ (SERIES OF 1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING SUBDIVISION, PUD DESIGNATION, DIMENSIONAL VARIATIONS, GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, CONDOMINIUMIZATION FOR ALL UNITS AND VESTED RIGHTS FOR LOTS R, L, M and N, Block 19, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 24-7-903, 24-7-1004, and 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code the applicant, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, submitted an application for a PUD review and subdivision for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units and condominiumization to be situated on Lots K, L, M, and N, Block 19, City and County of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 24-6-207 and 24-8-104, of the Municipal Code, the applicant has also requested Vested Rights and GMQS Exemption for 11 affordable housing units; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held November 19, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposal and the representations of the applicant; and WHEREAS, the Commission amended the conditions of approval, approved the special review for reduction in parking and open space, and recommended approval of the setback variations of front - 5 feet, rear - 1 foot, side (east) - 5 feet, and side (west) - 1.5 feet; and WHEREAS, the Commission recommends to the City Council approval of subdivision, designation of PUD, consolidated PUD process, and conceptual PUD with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That it does hereby approve Subdivision and PUD designation as recommended by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission for Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen, with the following conditions as amended by this Ordinance: 1. Prior to final plat approval: a. A sidewalk plan, for Seventh Street, shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments. The standards and guidelines of the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan then in effect at the time of development shall be applied to the sidewalk construction. b. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final plan. The drainage plan needs to include calculations showing that • • the historic rate of runoff will be maintained. c. A final subdivision plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and a subdivision agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. The plat shall include all utility easements of adequate width for utility requirements; the triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey shall be indicated as part of the Homestake mining claim. d. The final subdivision/PUD plat and Subdivision Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of final subdivision/PUD approval. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permits: a. Detailed plans shall be reviewed by Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer and if basements are added. b. Adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas if they are connected to the sewer. c. Existing trees shall be staked to protect them from excavation and construction activities. 3. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan Guidelines then in effect at the time of development. 4. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 5. Deed restrictions shall be reviewed and approved by the Housing Authority and Planning Department prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall adhere to all representations as made in its application for approval and at the public hearing which shall include but not limited to: landscaping, building materials, and setback variations which are: front - 5 feet; rear - 1 foot; side (east) 5 feet; and side (west) 1.5 feet. 7. A tree removal permit is required for the removal of any tree greater than 6" in caliper. 8. Internal sidewalks, dumpsters, walkways shall be protected from snow shedding. 9. Front porches shall be added at the time of development. • 10. A disclaimer shall be added on potential purchasers of the unit on the Seventh St., that a sidewalk and/or a system may be installed within 5 feet of Section 2 the final plans warning corner of W. Hopkins and fixed guideway (trolley) the bedroom window. That is does hereby approve GMQS Exemption for the development of it deed restricted dwelling units with the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy all deed restrictions shall be filed with the Housing Authority. 2. All representations of this application and during public hearings shall be addressed and adhered to during the development and sale of these units. 3. The Seventh Street sidewalk shall be installed at the time of development and the sidewalk shall adhere to the guidelines of the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Systems Plan then in effect at the time of development. 4. The applicant shall agree to join a special improvement district if one is formed for this area, and prior to filing the Final Plat the applicant shall sign a Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk agreement 5. The Subdivision Agreement shall include language stipulating future improvements that may utilize the additional 3,160 square feet of floor area that remains available on the parcel. The Subdivision Agreement shall require additional increases in floor area to be reviewed by the Housing Authority and the Zoning Officer prior to the issuance of any building permits. Section 3 That is does hereby grant a subdivision exemption for the condominiumization of the eleven dwelling units with the following conditions: 1. The project shall be restricted by agreement between the applicant and the City of Aspen to six month minimum lease, with no more than two shorter tenancies per year. This agreement will be contained in the PUD/Subdivision agreement and in the price and income deed restrictions, and will be duly recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County. 2. A condominiumization plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments and shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4 That is does hereby grant Vested Rights for this PUD/Subdivision for a period of three (3) years from the effective date hereof in accordance with the terms and provision of Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code. Section 5: That the City Clerk be and hereby is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 7: This ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 8: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 13 day of January at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 1992. John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of 1992. John Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk � Lei 1 Y TO: Mayor and Council f THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: Diane Moore, City Planning Direct r FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning RE: West Hopkins Affordable Housing Subdivision, PUD (consolidated two-step), Dimensional Variations, GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing, Condominiumization, and Vested Rights - First Reading Ordinance;;-. DATE: December 16, 1991 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The applicant seeks Subdivision, PUD designation, consolidated PUD review, GMQS Exemption, Condominiumization and Vested Rights for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units on an Affordable Housing zoned parcel. Subdivision is a two step process with final approval at City Council. Although the property has already been rezoned to AH, the applicant now requests a PUD overlay. Because the parcel is not 27,000 square feet the City, responding to an applicant's request, may designate a PUD overlay. Because the overlay is attached to the existing zoning, requiring review and approval by the P&Z and CC, staff recommends that consolidated PUD review occur as part of this project. Pursuant to Section 7-903 C.3, a four step PUD review process may be consolidated to two steps. The applicants request consolidation to the two step process, Conceptual at P&Z and Final at City Council. The P&Z has reviewed this proposal at their November 19, 1991 meeting and recommends, with conditions, approval of subdivision, PUD designation, and consolidated PUD. The Commission also approved parking and open space requirements through Special Review. COUNCIL'S GOALS: This application is consistent with Council's Goals #1: to ensure adequate amount of affordable housing is available; and #2: to encourage growth that will reinforce our sense of community and re -enfranchise those who now are forced to move away. APPLICANT: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority as represented by Sunny Vann and Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd. LOCATION: Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen ZONING: AH - Affordable Housing BACKGROUND: This parcel was purchased by the City for the future development of affordable housing in June of 1990 and rezoned from R-6 to AH in August of 1991. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: A. Project Description The 12,330 square foot vacant parcel is located at the corner of West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street near the base of Shadow Mountain. To the east is a three story building containing five townhomes. To the northeast, across the alley, is a neo- Victorian office building and directly across the alley is a vacant parcel. Across South Seventh Street, to the west, are stables, corrals, and pasture/open space. A contemporary, single-family residence is located to the southwest and an older, single-family residence, barn and remnant tramway are directly across the street on West Hopkins Avenue. The townhomes to the east are zoned R-15, the block along Main Street is zoned Office, and the parcels to the west of South Seventh Street and across West Hopkins Avenue are in the County and zoned R-15. According to the application, the objectives of the project are..."to create individual unit expression within a multi -family context, to respect the concepts of community and privacy while creating opportunities for social interaction, and to create an architectural image which is both appropriate to Aspen and enhances neighborhood quality." The applicant proposes to construct 11 deed restricted, affordable housing units on the site. The proposal consists of two clusters of four townhouse units each located adjacent to South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. Three carriage house units, located on the alley, are proposed above a portion of the on -site parking. The 11 on -site parking spaces are all located off of the alley. The proposal includes an internal courtyard requiring the three buildings to push up onto the street and alley creating a "streetfront" presence. Individual backyard spaces are also provided with each unit however specific backyard improvements will be made by individual unit owners. In order to avoid future PUD amendments when homeowners wish to add onto their units, the architects will attempt to identify future improvements that may be approved with this review. A rough estimate of the comparison between the allowable floor area for the project and the proposed is described in the following paragraph. K The maximum allowable floor area for the site is 13,560 sq. ft. The proposed development is approximately 10,400 sq. ft._ Theoretically, there is 1,160 sq. ft. (overall) that homeowners` could add to their units. However, because of the size limitations for units within certain income categories, expansion may be a problem. The Housing Authority and architects are reviewing this development potential and will respond to the City Council C regarding future improvements. S Please refer to the attached application for more specific details regarding the development proposal. In addition the unit size and income categories are summarized in Table 1 and the Development Data in Table 2. B. Referral Comments: The following is a summary of referral comments from other agencies. For more detail, please see attached comments. Engineering: 1. The existing irrigation ditch must be maintained and pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts. 2. All easements need to be depicted on the final PUD plan. Easements shall be of adequate widths for all the utility requirements. 3. The development is within the area of the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan requiring the construction of sidewalks or walkways. 4. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final PUD plan. The drainage plan needs to include calculations showing that this historic rate of runoff will be maintained. 5. The ROW width is not adequate at this location, however the neckdown occurs on the south side of the street, which is in the County. Future review of redevelopment on the south side of the street should ensure dedication of the necessary ROW. 6. The triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey needs to be shown as part of the Homestake mining claim. 7. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 3 i Table 1 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Income Category, Unit Mix and Net Livable Areal Y 1. Category 1 2 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 1,000 Units @ 500 Sq. Ft.2 2. Category 2 1 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 520 Unit @ 520 Sq. Ft. 4 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 3,600 Units @ 900 Sq. Ft. 1 -.3 Bedroom/2-1/2 Bath Townhouse 990 Unit @ 990 Sq. Ft. 3. Category 3 2 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,960 Units @ 980 Sq. Ft. 1 - 3 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,140 Unit @ 1,140 Sq. Ft. 4. Total Units/Bedrooms 11/21 5. Total Net Livable Area (Sq. Ft.) 9,210 1. Net livable square footage calculated based on interior living area, including interior storage area, measured interior wall to interior wall, including all interior partitions. Excludes exterior storage. 2 All numbers rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. Table 2 DEVELOPMENT DATA 1. Existing Zoning AH, Affordable Housing 2. Total Site Area (Sq. Ft.)' 12,330 3. Minimum Required Lot Area/Dwelling Unit (Sq. Ft.) 400 1 Bedroom 4 il� 2 Bedroom 800 3 Bedroom 1,200 4. Minimum Required Lot Area (Sq. Ft.) 8,400 3 - 1 Bdrm. Units @ 400 Sq. Ft. 1,200 <46 /Unit 6 - 2 Bdrm. Units @ 800 Sq. Ft. 4,800 /Unit 2 - 3 Bdrm. Units @ 1,200 Sq. Ft. 2,400 /Unit 5. Minimum Required Setbacks (Feet) Front Yard 10 Side Yards 5 Rear Yard 10 6. Proposed Setbacks (Feet )2 West Hopkins Avenue 5 South Seventh Street 1.5 Alley 1 East Side 5 7. Maximum Allowable External Floor 13,560 Area @ 1.1:1 (Sq. Ft.) 8. Proposed External Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) 10,400 9. Maximum Building Height (Feet)3 25 10. Proposed Building Height (Feet)4 Townhouses 25 Carriage Houses 30 11. Minimum Required Open Space Special Review 12. Proposed Site Coverage (Sq. Ft.) Building Footprints 9,680 Parking 770 Remainder of Site 1,880 Area Attributable to Open Space None 13. Minimum Required Parking Special Review 14. Proposed Parking Spaces 11 @ 1 Space/Unit 5 In addition, the Engineering Department has the following amendments to the referral comments of October 30, 1991: The Engineering Department continues to support the construction of sidewalks on both streets adjacent to the project and at the time that the project is constructed. The Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan has designated Hopkins Street in this area as a pedestrian corridor. The Plan did not specifically state that sidewalks are to be provided on both sides of the street, but the concept of providing sidewalks on only one side of the street was discussed during the preparation of the Plan. It is potentially unworkable to provide sidewalks on only one side of the street because of questions such as the fairness of who pays for the sidewalk and who cleans the sidewalk if sidewalks are only provided on one side. Generally, sidewalks are both paid for and maintained and kept clear of snow by the adjacent property owner. Therefore it would be unfair to burden only property owners on one side of a street. There are a number of reasons for requiring sidewalk construction on both streets at this development. One reason is because of the density of the development. With this project the sidewalks would provide a function for the development itself and not just for pedestrians passing by in one direction or another. If a resident or a visitor parks on the street at any point near the site and must walk to a distant point of the development, the sidewalk will be there to provide appropriate internal pedestrian circulation. Another reason is that it would be best for the project to design the sidewalks in at this time in order to be part of the comprehensive site design. Coming back to site years later after the area is built out might result in design difficulties considering the trees and irrigation ditch. There are at least a couple of instances in town where sidewalks meander and actually cross private property. If Council decides not to require construction of the Hopkins Street sidewalk at this time, we recommend that the applicant at least be required to indicate on the final plat where the sidewalk will be located. One of the applicant's representative's comments in favor of postponing sidewalk construction on Hopkins was the issue of right- of-way width. The assertion was made that if future development resulted in a 75 foot wide right-of-way, then the location of the sidewalk would be different than for a sixty foot wide right-of- way. This assertion is correct, however it is doubtful that a 75' wide right-of-way will be achieved. Although the right-of-way widths in the Original Aspen Townsite are 75' wide, the municipal code only requires 60' widths for the service level of this street. (At this location, Hopkins is classified as a local street.) Also, the right-of-way width factor would affect the location of the curb and gutter which the applicant has already planned to install at the time of construction. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: 1. Detailed plans will be reviewed for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer. 2. If basements are added plans need to be reviewed. 3. Floor drains in the vehicle parking areas are to be tied to the sanitary sewer, adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed. 4. All tap fees shall be paid by the applicant to the District prior to connection to the main sewer line. Parks Department: The Parks Department requested that stakes encircle existing trees to ensure that they will not be damaged during excavation. Environmental Health: 1. The applicant should install bike racks to enhance auto disincentives. 2. The applicant should consult a mechanical/ventilation engineer to ensure that carports do not result in excessive exhaust fumes entering the dwellings above them. Public Project Review Group: The PPRG reviewed this project November 6, four members participated in the review and had the following comments: 1. One of the four members perceived the proposed density (11 units) as a problem. 2. The provision of 11 on -site parking spaces was not considered problematic. 3. Three of the four members commenting believed that sidewalks would be inappropriate with one member wanting to preclude the installation of a curb. 4. Living space downstairs with bedrooms upstairs is a good concept, due to the relationship this creates to the street. 5. The group expressed concern with snow shedding particularly due to metal roofs proposed. Several pedestrian walks do not appear protected from sliding snow. The architect team responded that snow shedding had been considered and internal drains and overhangs have been considered to mitigate those problems. 7 0 • 6. Individual units should be better identified either through restudy in roof form, use of color, mailboxes etc. 7. The dumpster and recycling area should be covered. 6 8. The entire group emphasized the needjlto not skimp on material or landscape budgets. Quality materials were considered to be a fundamental need in order for the AH project to contribute to the character of the community and immediate neighborhood. C. Review Process I. Subdivision - Pursuant to Section 7-1004 C.1., the General Requirements for subdivision are as follows: 1. (a) The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The Land Use Plan identifies this site as "Mixed Residential". The proposal is a multi -family development permitted in the AH zone district. The project is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan because it is dispersing affordable housing among the City's existing residential neighborhoods. (b) The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. RESPONSE: The project is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. The surrounding land uses are mixed residential including adjacent high density multi -family. The Office zone district is also across the alley from this parcel. (c) The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. RESPONSE: The proposed multi -family development is compatible with surrounding development. The neighborhood is comprised of both tourist and local oriented housing. The neighborhood is also "essentially fully developed" and this project should not adversely affect the future development of the neighborhood. (d) The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this chapter. RESPONSE: This proposal is 100% deed restricted and is in compliance with the AH zone district and is not in conflict with any other sections of the Land Use Code. Pursuant to Section 7-1004 C. 2 - 5, the pertinent subdivision requirements are as follows: E? 2. (a) Land Suitability - The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rock slide, 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. RESPONSE: There are no natural hazards that exist on the site that would endanger the welfare of future residents. (b) Spatial Pattern - 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. RESPONSE: There are no unnecessary public costs associated with this proposal. All utilities are available near the site. According to the application, all public improvements to serve the project will be borne by the applicant. 3 & 4. Improvements and Design Standards - following is a review of the relevant subdivision standards: (a) Water - According to the application, water service will be provided via the area's existing mains. Separate service lines will be extended from the mains to each of the project's three multi -family buildings. All units will be individually metered. The City water system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the project. (b) Sewer - According to the application, the proposed development will be served by the existing 8 inch sanitary sewer located in South Seventh Street and the alley. Please see ACSD referral comments. There is sufficient treatment capacity to service the project. The lines are somewhat shallow in this area and if basements are eventually provided, a pump system may need to be installed for lower facilities. (c) Electric, Telephone, Natural Gas, and Gable TV - According to the application, these services are presently located in the alley and will be extended for the development. All required extensions will be located underground. (d) Easements - Utility easements will be provided and will be included in the subdivision agreement and depicted on the final plat. (e) Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter - There are no sidewalks or curbs and gutter within the site area but sidewalks do appear sporadically along Hopkins Avenue closer to the commercial core. The applicant proposes to install a curb and gutter 9 adjacent to West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street. The applicant has also agreed to join an improvement district for the installation of a sidewalk at such time a district is formed because sidewalks do not exist for the other three properties on this block. The Pedestrian Walkway and Bike System Plan identifies Hopkins Avenue as a primary bike and pedestrian thoroughfare. The Plan also indicates that this is a street that should have "complete sidewalks." The West Hopkins parcel is unique in that there are existing cottonwoods and an irrigation ditch along both West Hopkins and South Seventh Street. The design standards and guidelines for "Special Conditions for Irrigation Ditches" recommend a 5 foot buffer between the curb and 5 foot wide sidewalk. The irrigation ditch should be located in the buffer area. These guidelines may be altered to make the sidewalk and buffer area work within the confines of existing trees and the irrigation ditch. Additionally Seventh Street has become an important pedestrian link from Marolt Housing north to the music tent. Sidewalks or creatively designed walkways were identified in the Plan as being very necessary along this corridor. The Plan calls for the construction of sidewalks in areas so defined whenever new development occurs. The Planning and Zoning commission recommends that the provision of a sidewalk on Seventh Street be deferred until such time that an Improvement District is created. The Commission however does not agree with the Pedestrian Plan that a sidewalk on both sides of West Hopkins Avenue is necessary and recommends that a sidewalk be installed on the south side through an Improvement District if one is ever formed. Planning staff recommends that the Seventh Street sidewalk be installed at the time of development. Seventh Street has been identified as an important connection between the Marolt housing and the Meadows. It is a pedestrain link that should be provided as soon as possible. Staff also recommends that if an Improvement District is developed, that the West Hopkins project shall join and the (' installation of a sidewalk whether on the south side or both sides of Hopkins Avenue will become the responsibility of that � � L Improvement District. ---In addition, the Engineering Department ` recommends the use of Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk Agreement. � This agreement �eea�bal��the installation of sidewalk -without jgw_-the formation of an Improvement District. -if" a sidewall on the north side of West Hopkins is to be installed in the future. (f) Fire Protection - According to the application, the 10 � a 6c c J� • project is 10 blocks from the fire station. A fire hydrant is located across the street from the property. The proposed development is readily accessible to emergency and fire protection vehicles. Each unit will be equipped with smoke detectors and will be constructed in compliance with all applicable uniform building code requirements. (g) Drainage - The project will maintain the historic flow rates for surface water runoff and groundwater recharge. On - site drywells and/or surface detention areas will be used to accept runoff from building roofs and impervious areas. A detailed drainage plan will be submitted at the time of final plat submission. (h) Roads - No road improvements are anticipated to the existing streets. A curb and gutter will be provided and the ragged edge of pavement will be finished off for on -street parking. According to the application, an assumed "vehicular trip generation rate of three to five trips per day per dwelling unit, the project would theoretically generate approximately 33 to 55 vehicular trips per day." Because of the sites' proximity to the commercial core and Main Street bus route,vehicular trips are anticipated to be around 33 trips per day. The capacity of the surrounding street system is adequate to accommodate the increased traffic. 5. Final Plat - The Code requires the preparation of a final plat before City Council reviews the subdivision application. The applicant intends to delay the preparation of the final plat until after Council review thus incorporating project revisions at that time. A condition of approval shall be submission of a final plat for staff review. It should be noted that the plat must be recorded within 180 of final subdivision/PUD approval. II. PUD Review - The applicant did not request a PUD overlay at the time the parcel was rezoned from R-6 to AH. The applicant now requests that a PUD designation be applied to the property together with the subdivision and other development review. As was discussed previously in this memo, PUD is an overlay that adheres with the underlying zoning and is intended to allow site design flexibility within the confines of underlying zoning. According to the Code, if a parcel is less than 27,000 square feet an applicant may only apply for PUD review. Therefore, if the P&Z and City Council do not designate the PUD overlay, the applicant's \required to adhere to the zoning requirements of the AH zone. The PUD review criteria are essentially the same as the General Requirements for Subdivision, 7-1004 C.1, and have already been addressed in that review. Although the development complies with all the dimensional 11 • • requirements of the AH zone district, the desire to provide a functional internal courtyard for the residents has dictated the location of the buildings as close as possible to West Hopkins Avenue, South Seventh Street, and the alley. The required and proposed setbacks are as follows: AH Setbacks Proposed Variations West Hopkins - front 10 ft. 5 ft. South Seventh - side 5 ft. 1.5 ft. Alley - rear 10 ft. 1 ft. East Side (adjacent to Skandia Condos.) - side 5 ft. 5 ft. The east side yard does GQ:Mnly in order to reduce potential conflicts with the adjacent townhomes, aitd-Athat side is not essential to the viability of the courtyard space . The Land Use Code does not identify specific review criteria for dimensional variations. However, the review of a reduction in dimensional requirements should consider whether the variation will adversely affect the s und' neighborhoo In addition, the \ { re of sidewalkgaiie several ramifications for the reduced' set ack On West Hopkins 'b oo etback), according to the submitted plans, the site's property line is located 19.5 ft. from the edge of the pavement. The applicant has agreed to install a curb and gutter. Using the Pedestrian Plan standards, a conservative estimate of the curb and sidewalk improvements would include a 5 foot buffer/green space to include the irrigation ditch and a 5 foot sidewalk which leaves 2.5 feet of open/green space between''' sidewalk an"operty line-.'', :_A total of 7.5 feet of f open/green space would remain between the sidewalk and building. The proposed sides back for South Seventh Street is 1.5 feet. According to the submitted plans, the property line is approximately 30 ft. from the edge of pavement on South Seventh;.' Using the Pedestrian Plan standards the conservative estimate)1k improvements would include the 5 foot buffer and 5 foot sidew leaving over 11 feet of open/green space between the sidewalk property line. A total of 12.5 feet of open/green space wo remain between the sidewalk and building. Drawings will provided at the meeting for the Council to review the propo reduction in se—t-backs and Pedestrian Plan recommendations�L_ �taf f h.Ys expressed —some t1concern regarding the West Hopkins I,South Seventh setbacks in the event a sidewalk is installed. However_, educed front and side yard setbacks are common throughout the downtown area and in some residential neighborhoods. The most important setback, the east side yard, is still being maintained to reduce the impacts to the adjacent townhomes. In addition, the three carriage house units are consistent with the cottage infill program. That program incorporates historic site design patterns 12 allowing a zero rear yard setback. ' The design team not only believes it is important to provide the best possible open space for residents via the internal courtyard, but they have also expressed a strong desire to not provide 2,�, standard sidewalks in order to encourage a west end feeling. The team also contends that hard surfaced sidewalks are not necessary V for project circulation. Moreover, because sidewalks do not exist �i for the other three properties on this block, the applicant would like to defer the installation of sidewalks until such time that the rest of the sidewalks are installed, possibly through an improvement district or until such time that it is determined that a sidewalk eps West Hopkins on the north side of.,the street is necessary. III. GMQS Exemption - Pursuant to Section 24-8-104 C.(c), the City Council may exempt deed restricted housing that is in accordance with the affordable housing guidelines. A review of an exemption request shall include a determination of the (s6ity'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. Please refer back to Table 1, page 4, for unit size and mix data. IV. Condominiumization - Pursuant to Section 24-7-1007, when a subdivision of a parcel of land is to be used for condominium development the applicant must also comply with the following requirements during review of an application for a final plat. Condominiumization of a residential development requires providing purchase rights for existing tenants, minimum lease restrictions, affordable housing impact fee, and building inspection required. Because condominiumization is occurring during subdivision there are no existing tenants and building inspections will occur as required of all new developments. A housing impact fee is not required as all the units shall be fully deed restricted zrnd�a-- minimum lease restriction restrict-=iig- ffnra&b_1& (- nits to six- / month minimum leases, with no more than two shorter tenancies per years will be inclu d with-i-n those deeds_._, � � 7�e P �E- `� -�"�'��. The applicants shall be required to file a condom' iumization plat upon completion of the building subject -te revie��Tr�-apP�,-�- the Engineering Department and thePlanningDepartmen-l. V. Vested Rights - Pursuant to Section 24-6-207 the applicant has requested Vested Rights status. Vested rights status may be granted by ordinance of the City Council. 13 0 • PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST Rey Issues: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed at length the inclusion of sidewalks on Seventh Street and West Hopkins. Several members did not believe that sidewalks on both sides of West Hopkins are necessary. A sidewalk on Seventh Street will be needed in the future but installation should be deferred. 2. In general, the Commission did not object to the reduced front yard setback, but some members suggested eliminating either the third bedroom of the W. Hopkins and Seventh St. corner unit or pushing the building fur h -back toward the alley. That bedroom extends into the reduced front yard setback and privacy, proximity to the street, andpotential sidewalk on West Hopkins gave cause for concern. However the Commission voted to approve the reduced setbacks and did not require the applicant to reconfigure the buildings. 3. Front porches should be built with the project and walkways, dumpsters and recycling areas phot4d be protected from snowshed � m the roof.,,, RECOMMENDATION: m vS A. T° h Planning and Zoning Commission recommends to the Council approval of subdivision, designation of PUD, consolidated PUD process, and conceptual PUD with the following conditions: 1. Prior to final plat approval: a. A sidewalk plan, for Seventh Street, shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments. The standards and guidelines of the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan, then in effect at the time of development, for the construction of Seventh Street sidewalk shall be applied. b. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final plan. The drainage plan needs to include calculations showing that this historic rate of runoff will be maintained. c. A final subdivision plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and a subdivision agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. The plat shall include all utility easements of adequate width for utility requirements; the triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey shall be indicated as part of the Homestake mining claim. d. The final subdivision/PUD plat shall be recorded within 180 14 days of final subdivision/PUD approval. (to-t; 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permits: a. Detailed plans shall be reviewed by ACSD for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer and if basements are added. b. Adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas if they are connected to the sewer. C. Existing trees shall be staked to protect from excavation and construction activities. 3. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan Guidelines. 4. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 5. Deed restrictions shall be reviewed and approved by the Housing Authority and Planning Department prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. All representations the applicant has made in its application for approval shall be adhered to including but not limited to: landscaping, building materials, and setback variations which are: front - 5 feet; rear - 1 foot; side (east) 5 feet; and side (west) 1.5 feet. 7. A tree removal permit is required for the removal of any tree greater than 6" in caliper. 8. Internal sidewalks, dumpsters, walkways shall be protected from snow shedding. 9. Front porches shall be added at the time of development. 10. A disclaimer shall be added on the final plans, warning potential purchasers of the unit on the corner of W. Hopkins and Seventh St., that a sidewalk and/or a fixed guideway (trolley) system may be installed within 5 feet of the bedroom window. B. Staff recommends to Council approval of the GMQS Exemption for 11 deed restricted dwelling units, condominiumization and vested rights with the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permits all deed 15 restrictions shall be filed with the housing authority. 2. All representations that the applicant has made in its application for approval shall be adhered to during the development and sale of these units. 3. The project shall be restricted by agreement between the applicant and the City of Aspen to six month minimum lease, with no more than two shorter tenancies per year. This agreement will be contained in the PUD/Subdivision agreement and will be duly recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County. C. Staff also recommends to Council that the Seventh Street sidewalk shall be installed at the time of development and the sidewalk shall adhere to the guidelines of the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Systems Plan then in effect at the time of development. Staff does not recommend that the applicant provide a sidewalk on the north side of West Hopkins Avenue. However, having required the applicant to join an Improvement District ensures that this project will be a participant in future improvements along West Hopkins, including A sidewalks on either side of the street. (All recommendations, as noted above, have been included in the Ordinance.) PROPOSED MOTION: I move to read Ordinance .TJ, Series of 1991. I move to approve Ordinance,, Series of 1991 on first reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance S.')- Application l . 3. 16 0 0 DRAF;r RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 19 1991 Chairlady Jasmine Tygre called meeting to order at 4:32pm. Answering roll call were Sara Garton, Richard Compton, Bruce Kerr, Roger Hunt and Jasmine Tygre. David Brown arrived shortly after roll call and Tim Mooney shortly after that. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Roger: This has to do not with the stop sign by Original and Cooper but change of parking from angle to parallel which is a travesty. I think we should give our support to getting it back to angle parking because there is one heck of lot of parking spaces that got lost with this change. Their rational was sight distance to the sign but how does that rational work when one block away on Aspen Square is exactly the same situation. So I don't buy that rational and we really need to get the parking supply back up there for the winter time. By doing this we must have lost at least 10 spaces. Jasmine: I am glad you brought that up because I walk by there a lot. I know a lot of people use that when the City Market lot is full. A lot of people who are 'shopping at City Market need to do this because they don't want to walk that far with 10 pounds of groceries. I think most people are very annoyed by it because they don't see a purpose behind it. MOTION Roger: I would move to ask the Planning Dept to pass our dissatisfaction with parallel parking on Cooper between Spring and Original. The reason is the loss of the supply of parking at a very essential high turnover parking area necessary for City Market. When we have gone through City Market approvals we realized their shortage of spaces on site and in effect though it is not legal or anything else we have considered that street parking an essential part of their parking system. Bruce seconded the motion with all in favor except Sara. STAFF COMMENTS Diane: Brought up the scheduled work session on the 26th of November at the Library. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. • U MINUTES OCTOBER 22, 1991 After corrections: MOTION PZM11.19.91 Richard: I move to approve minutes of October 22, 1991. Roger seconded the motion with all in favor. MINUTES NOVEMBER 5, 1991 Roger made a motion to adopt minutes of November 5, 1991. Bruce seconded the motion with all in favor. WEST HOPRINS AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUBDIVISION CONCEPTUAL PUD AND SPECIAL REVIEW Leslie: Presented affidavit of public notice. (attached in record) She then made presentation as attached in record. In my recommendation I would say that staff recommends approval of the subdivision. I would add subdivision, designation of PUD, consolidated PUD process, conceptual PUD approval and special review for parking open space with the following condition. The conditions --the first would say "Prior to final plat approval". And then A, B, C and D would all be prior to final plat approval. And letter C--it should be a final subdivision plat shall be reviewed or approved by the Engineering Dept and a subdivision agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Dept. That is part of C. And then we would have #2 where we would say "Prior to the issuance of a building permit. And then E, F and G are A, B and C. Penny Evans called me today and Penny Evans represented some people who bought a piece of property across the street from this parcel. And actually I got a call last week on this and told them to call the Housing Authority but they are proposing the people who just bought this property would like to make a proposal to the Housing Authority and the City that they swap land. They swap this West Hopkins parcel with the parcel that they just bought. Their thinking is that it would be more land. We could get more parking on site. We don't have to reduce setback requirements. Jasmine: Under this process as we are doing it now if we give conceptual PUD approval here, this is the last time we will see 2 PZM11.19.91 this. Leslie: Correct. Jasmine: And the PUD is merely to vary the placement of the various things on the site. It does not increase or decrease the density or increase or decrease the FAR. Leslie: Correct. They are asking for specific variance under the PUD overlay. And that is the front, one side yard and the rear yard. The would go to special review for open space because of the AH zoning with you all and the same with the parking. Roger: I have one major concern and that is the encroachment in the setback. We were still thinking of the possibility of a transit system going around this corner and having to cut fairly close to this property. And to have the buildings go into the setback --and I think it was stated in the conceptual that we would like to see that withdrawn from the corner a little bit in case that ever happened. Well obviously City Council has indicated the Rio Grande ROW for the down valley rail. However, there is still the need to keep this available for the future for an alternative conveyance to Snowmass as one possibility for some sort of a fixed guideway system going out and supporting the airport and Airport Business Center. So I have got real problems there. What has happened here is exactly the opposite of what was recommended in the conceptual. Sara: During the conceptual, we didn't talk with Yaw. Some of the things that were brought up in conceptual haven't come through on a couple of things at all. For instance less of a back yard because we felt people didn't use their back yards. So what happened to all of tHat, Bob? Bob: Right. That was after the re -zoning we discussed that and we have taken it back and have explored it and it was our opinion that it was important to provide that semi-public space in the back as well. Larry Yaw: We have organized these buildings in clusters. 4 townhouse units which are 2 level. And 3 carriage houses which are units above enclosed parking. One of the design premises which worked with internal space was to give these buildings a street presence characteristic of the west end particularly the victorian west end. So that in this cluster we brought them very close and one of the social reasons for that is try to re-create the porch society where people are really outside hanging out and talking and enjoying each other. Internally we wanted to provide a semi -private space --a court 3 0 space. There are 11 parking spaces covered. The internal court area was space where kids could play where some go on outside the house. PZM11.19.91 provided on site. 6 are conceived as a semi -private of the social action could Yaw continued his presentation using sketches, drawings and site plans. If we use the setbacks as prescribed it would result in about a 22ft space between these. This takes all the way to the top of the roof. There being gables starting here and here. But it really creates we think problems with sunlight coming into there. It creates privacy problems just being that far away. These units don't see out in this direction. And really you are under everybody's thumb in a quite small open space. By moving the setbacks to what we are proposing we are able to achieve something pretty special and a 12ft difference makes a lot of difference here. It does allow sun between these roofs to get into here. It allows enough room off the units to be considered somewhat private in between. And generally just a whole lot better in terms of the living environment. And at no expense to the community character. Roger: Didn't the pedestrian bikeway plan identify Hopkins as a pedestrian and bike corridor? And therefore I think we need to discuss potential sidewalks in this area. I think that is going to be a suggestion of the pedestrian bikeway plan that Hopkins over a period of time be designated as a pedestrian corridor and that usually means sidewalks. Jasmine: That also has to do with the setbacks and so these are all related. Richard: I notice people tend to use the south side of the street as is. Given the choice of the side of the street people go to the south side where it is more open. There are fewer cars parked and a lot of the use is rollerbladers and runners and people on their bikes. The only people I can see using it as a straight commuting walking route would be people coming from the Marolt housing project. My concern would be to have more space on the street itself for rollerbladers and bikers rather than taking up space with sidewalks that might not be used. Hans Gramiger: I have served on the Neighborhood Advisory Committee and in connection with this project I think that the conventional sidewalk --pedestrian, bicycle trail will be on the south side of Hopkins Ave. I finally have educated myself that 4 • PZM11.19.91 possibly I have to donate a strip of land on the south side of West Hopkins along with other neighbors that are working on it. I only interject this thought because I don't think we should be sidetracked. I think we are able on the south side of West Hopkins to take care of the needs of the community for the future and therefor I personally have no objections whether there is going to be a sidewalk on the other side or not. The consultant with the study has come out and has declared West Hopkins Ave as the primary pedestrian bicycle commuter route going from east to west. Vann: The applicants really don't take issue with the pedestrian plan. Our concern at this point is location and timing. Our premise in asking that sidewalks be omitted at this time in addition to the design considerations of the architects was that sidewalk along this frontage is not necessary to accommodate circulation within this project and that there are no sidewalks anywhere else along here at this time. The issue on 7th St is somewhat different. There is a desire to create a link between the Marolt Bridge and traffic moving in this direction --pedestrian traffic down to the sidewalks that are on portions of Main St and down to the music tent. I believe we could accommodate a sidewalk in this location at this time because there is adequate ROW and width to place that sidewalk in this location. So we suggested as part of the application that the sidewalks be deferred until the Sidewalk Improvement District is formed. One of the concerns was if a Sidewalk Improvement District is formed in the future --these are primarily low income spectrum affordable housing units --who pays for the sidewalk. This can be resolved by earmarking either the amount of the sidewalks as part of the improvements agreement at this time and agreeing on behalf of the applicant to pay it which removes the individual low income affordable housing units from that obligation. Roger: I have no problem with not putting the sidewalks in immediately. I am looking at the future and maybe the need for sidewalks and if it happens to shift to the south side of the street that is one thing. My problem in this is going to be is there going to be sufficient space for sidewalk in the future and if a sidewalk does go into the future my concern is running into the setbacks in those areas where the sidewalks are going to be. Leslie: We were trying to figure out if we were to require a sidewalk on this parcel --did we have the room. And we do have the room to put a sidewalk and a buffer on West Hopkins and on 7th St without encroaching beyond the property line. 5 • • PZM11.19.91 The pedestrian plan identifies as guidelines that they would like to see a 5ft buffer and a 5ft sidewalk. However in my discussions with Roxanne those things can be modified given the constraints. For example we have the irrigation ditch and we have existing trees that we are not in any way recommending removal of so we could have our 5ft and 5ft. Tim: I like the 7th St idea and I think that is an important sidewalk. I am willing to put off putting the sidewalks in until we determine what is going to happen on both sides of the street. It is more obvious to me that on the south side there is a straighter line. There aren't a lot of houses over there. And there is more possibilities over there. I really like the ditch. I like the big Cottonwoods that are along that ditch and I think if we decide that we want to include but put off the sidewalks, we can maybe modify the width of the sidewalk. I know economics are a key in doing a project like this. But it dawns on me that there is an easy solution to let the light enter into this common area courtyard if you just drop the whole front building down 2ft. And then work within the setbacks. I really like the project and I like the ideas but I also like the scale that the community is designed on and for everybody who comes in with a unique project to say "Well we want to change the scale just for this one corner of this one block and we want a variance on that". I always wonder why the team just can't figure out how to work within the guidelines. Bob ?: I would like to address playing by the rules within the affordable housing regulations. For the 8 townhomes are 25ft which is the maximum allowable without special review within an affordable housing district. So those are played by the rules. What originally we had hoped for when we designate those rear units as carriage units was a mistake on my part. I was hoping we could use the Cottage Infill Program to gain the flexibility on that rear yard setback which would potentially allow 0 rear yard setback a gain of 10 or 15ft in that shift of the carriage houses back. But since those were new units they didn't meet by definition true carriage house. The spirit was there but the letter of the law was not there. So that is where we lost that flexibility on the rear yard setback. And that has required us to change the front and the side. Roger: I definitely favor the variance into the setbacks on the alleys for the carriage houses. I think that just makes sense. But it seems to me what an help this situation with the setback on West Hopkins --because this corner unit is a ground floor bedroom and if this whole unit and we are not talking about the 7th St setback yet but if this whole unit was slid to the north up to 2 • • PZM11.19.91 where the upper level bedroom hits the setback or actually possibility encroaches in the setback, then it cloves this first floor bedroom a lot less into the setback where --it looks like it is a bedroom above and I have little less problem with upper levels encroaching into the setback particularly on an alley than I do a first floor bedroom encroaching on a setback on a streetscape. So I am wondering about moving this as much as you can towards the north to minimize this encroachment down here maybe by half of what you have shown it. Yaw: That would simply mean no pedestrian access here because you would be slamming into it. The only solution to that problem --I have been through this so many times --is to talk to the Housing Authority out of one more 3-bedroom unit. That is the only solution I think physically and really available. I think this coming down to a low shed here really has the effect of changing the scale. Roger: It does do that but that puts that bedroom window 5ft within a potential sidewalk. That's my problem. The question comes down to are we trying to put too much into too small a parcel. Jasmine: That is one of the options we can consider would be to have that bedroom removed and whether it is worthwhile having the tradeoff of having one less bedroom in an affordable housing project which is designed to provide maximum amount of affordable housing and whether that is an acceptable tradeoff for setback. Roger: The setbacks are there for a reason and it to me needs a tremendous overpowering reason of community good to allow a tremendous encroachment into the setback. Jasmine opened the public portion of the hearing. Terry ?: I live right here in the Scandia Townhouse. Larry, you have done a great job. This property is really important because it is a prototype. I am appalled at the density that there is so much there. But Larry has done a great job with the property. Is this higher than the other? Yaw: Yes, it is. It is 5ft higher here. Terry: This is great because the traffic coming around Main St is really awful so that will buffer it a bit. And there is a lot of traffic through here. We try to keep cars from going there, but we can't. A lot of traffic over from this office building. I spend a lot of time in by bedroom upstairs. My site views and everything and thinking how high are these building going to be. 7 PZM11.19.91 It really cuts out a lot from our building. How much lower is it than my building? Yaw: It is loft anyway. And then it tilts back with that gabled roof. Terry: In the last year the traffic has increased incredibly on 7th St. Foot traffic and car traffic. The automobiles come whizzing through there. Penney Evans: I am here on behalf of Archer Bishop. They just purchased property and they are interested in spending some time with the Housing Authority --not taking away from any of the effort that has been done so far. It is a new development for them and consider trading a parcel for a larger parcel on the property. Some of the questions that you are talking about here would be a larger land parcel to work with. Hans Gramiger: The irrigation ditch, I just want to interject that our plan to vacate a 24ft wide pedestrian bicycle path along west hopkins ave is would incorporate possibly relocating the ditch from the north side to the south side. There is 2 reasons for it. Namely the City has acquired water rights from the Meadows property and therefore they can irrigate more downtown property. That is a thought to consider in your plan. The affordable housing designation has bonuses for private family. I have no objection to that but I think it should be used more ingenious. Namely I would be more in favor of height variance because what you are looking at that your have a million dollar property --the housing Authority paid a million dollars and everybody says you have got to squeeze 9 units out of it to justify that price. I go on the theory they could --the City can very easily say "Well, that is fine in private industry but so what? So we got to be accused of squandering your money. That is not the first time". I am saying the real problem in the neighborhood is going to be that you here in this room gave a variance to this white house that was built on Main St across from the Hickory House that victorian. You gave a variance eon the parking. Then comes the improvement district and takes another space away with a transformer. And now if you look every day you will see 4 or 5 cars from that building parked on your property which is the affordable housing site you are talking about and another 4, 5 or 6 on the lot which is referred to as the Christmas Tree lot. Now what has been happening let's say --with this affordable housing --we must assume that everybody who has a unit there will have to park a regular car and a jeep. And I think that in the long range that you are putting into there another use that generates more parking on the street E? • E PZM11.19.91 which is not available. I wish there was a way --whether you have to sacrifice a unit or whether you had to compel the applicant to build underground parking --to take care of your own off street parking. You see if a private builder would build these units multiply the bedrooms and each requires an off street parking. That is why the Scandia apartment which is all 5 units are 2 units require 2 off street parking. One where you park now and one under the building. And Terry is right only she forgot to say that out of the 3 people who still have a garage the 2 other ones illegally converted their garage to something else. So that already creates another problem. So we have all these infractions and the next building approved if you look at the condominium plat of that building called 700 West Hopkins Condominium it shows exactly where that parking was and somebody removed that by bringing that yard out further. So we have a problem there. When you really look at it you are going to create a tremendous mess with parking around there. That is what I am really concerned about. And I think somewhere we cannot sweep that under the carpet. There were no further public comments and Jasmine closed the public portion of the hearing. Bruce: One point about densities. Unless my map is wrong the Scandia has 5 units on 6,OOOsgft which is basically 1,200sgft per unit. 700 Hopkins has 15 units on roughly 9,OOOsgft which is only 600sgft per unit. This project has 11 units on 12,330sgft which is 1,021sgft--nearly the same density as the Scandia. So it's density is not out of line with the rest of the projects that are already on that block. So it is not as if we are somehow slapping a whole bunch of density on this site that is not already in the neighborhood. Richard: I do have a bit of discomfort with that category 3, 3 bedroom on the corner there being the furthest toward the street. I think visually and everywhere you want the building to pull back on the corner if possible. And on the other end of that block of 4 units they have the category 2 3-bedroom which when compared to the 2 bedrooms manage to squeeze a bath and a bedroom into 90 additional square feet. And I think that is really shoehorning things in in order to get that category 2 3-bedroom in the project. (put in new tape) was in category 2. And you forget that sidewalk going to the back of the building. People want to go around to the back units, the alley is only 20ft further around that west side. And pull that 7 • PZM11.19.91 unit back and get that shed roof back into the setback or back at least in line with the other 4 units. Sara: Regarding pulling it all back, I think you would really lose that late afternoon sun. I know the sun sets right at that angle. That would be too bad for everybody to pull it back because that thing sticking out is on the second level. I think it would interfere with that. Regarding parking: I appreciate very much what Hans is saying. Parking is always my issue. And this is going to be deed restricted housing. I would like to propose a suggestion that a restriction be that only 1 car per unit be on premises. I live at Midland Park and I can't have a dog. We are only permitted 1 car per bedroom. And it is really controlled there. I think you can control that by towing or the property manager. I think you can put that into the deed restriction so that the only parking on the street would be guest parking. Hans Gramiger asked about underground parking for this project. Yaw: You could not afford underground parking for this project under any circumstances. All the cost you put--$15,000 per space- -all that money goes into the construction cost of this which is then delineated into what income groups can afford this. Essentially it means that only the one level richer guy --higher income employee --can live here. It does not address the guys who we are trying to address who have less income. Tim: On Hopkins I think that the setbacks are inadequate and I think that I am in favor of making sure that there is a provision in the future for some kind of modified sidewalk. I concur that the corner unit could be modified so that it doesn't encroach even more than the rest of the units. I think that we ought to stay within the proposed setbacks. David: I like this project very much. I think that this piece in particular is really great contextual piece and takes into consideration the house catiecorner over here with the hip roofs and brings the whole mass of the project at this corner down to a 1-story height. And I think that the massing in general from it's original conception is very good. The 4 unit structures are really break up what could otherwise be a Centennial massing or even a Scandia massing on this site. And I think this breaks it up and brings it down. As far as the setbacks go I think they are fine. I think they should be decreased in favor of building. I think it should be a requirement that the applicant builds the porches to encourage the porch society. I don't see porches on this yet --porches where you 10 • • PZM11.19.91 could put a chair or even 2 chairs per unit with a little rail around it and I think we are missing something here. So I would encourage the applicant to take those porches right up to the property line and build them now rather than waiting for the tenant over the next 40 years to actually build them themselves. Especially knowing that they will stretched from an income standpoint once they move in. It will probably never happen. So I think that setbacks on both sides are just fine. I think the porches should be added. And I think as far as the sidewalks go with due respect tot he pedestrian plan and being sensitive to the pleasant pastoral character of this part of town and a part time participant of pedestrian pursuits of this parcel, I propose paved paths be preempted at this time. Roger: Generally I like the project very much. However, I do have a grave problem with the setback encroachment on that corner 3 bedroom unit. I like Richard's option very much. Basically I would like it at a minimum to see the encroachment of that setback of the 3-bedroom unit plus or minus a foot in line with the remainder of the units on Hopkins. The other 4 units on Hopkins I can live with that sort of minimal encroachment. I have no problems with deferring the sidewalks. However I do want to know that There is space for a sidewalk in the future. Bruce: I agree completely with David. In fact I am prepared to either make a motion or vote in favor on a motion to approve the project based on the memo that we have got from staff. I am not going to hold the project up over setbacks on either street. Sara: I agree with David and Bruce too. I really like the porches. I would like to see the porches built now if it is in the budget. And I think there should be the variety of bedrooms to encourage the different kind of families that would be for the 3- bedroom. If you put everything down to 2 bedroom, you are going to get all one kind of society there. Richard: I find in general the encroachment into the setback on West Hopkins is all right. Ideally maybe bring the main front of those 4 units into line with the Scandia. It looks like about a 2ft difference at the most along that front property line. It seems to be the only thing that is forcing the west side --the 7th St units south is a pedestrian walkway between the parking spaces and the 3-bedroom unit that I would certainly be in favor of eliminating that walkway which is 15ft from the alley in order to move it all back 5ft so that the second story bedroom goes back to the 10ft rear yard setback and that would satisfy me completely. 11 PZM11.19.91 In general I like the project. Jasmine: I like the way the project looks on paper. And I know that in the past I have liked a lot of drawings that didn't turn out to be the way I liked when they were actually built. And so originally I was kind of in favor of Richard's re -design. I think we all have a desire to tinker with a project. It seems to me however that a lot of the workings of the project have been very carefully tied in together and that sometimes when you think you are making an improvement by moving something back a few feet it really causes a lot of problem and doesn't really accomplish what you thought it would accomplish. And so I am inclined to go along with Bruce's decision that I think this project works as a whole the way it is designed and when you start monkeying around with one little piece of it you really can ruin it without necessarily accomplishing what you wanted to accomplish. So I would be inclined to approve it as far as the Hopkins Ave setbacks as long as we are sure that we have enough room for the sidewalk if it should ever take place. I am not quite sure about what is going to happen on 7th St and I am kind of worried about that because I am really more concerned about that as pedestrian access than I am on Hopkins. Sara: There is a enough room on 7th isn't there? Jasmine: So we don't really need to worry about 7th St? General consensus was that there was enough room on 7th St. David: As far as the auto impact goes I am sensitive to the impact on the neighborhood. However going through here I don't see that there is a lot of parking on the street and I think even there were 1 car per unit parked on 7th and West Hopkins in this area I think the neighborhood streets can handle it at this location. So to me it is acceptable to do that for this parcel. At the first PPRG meetings we recommended the encroachment into the setbacks on this site and I think at our first review of this project we considered, especially on the alley side, that I think the applicant has done a good job responding to that request from the PPRG to encroach into the setbacks in order to make it a better project. Another comment PPRG made was to recommend was to protect the internal sidewalks from snow. The dumpster and the passageway here and here instead of shedding off of this. From what I can tell that hasn't been responded to yet. So those are the only comments that I have that I think that other than my recommendation for including porches at this time and the snow protection for the 12 • • PZM11.19.91 internal walkways be included as condition to the final building permit. MOTION David: I would like to move that P&Z approve this project with the staff recommendations of approval of the subdivision (attached in record) conceptual PUD and Special Review for parking and open space with the following conditions as noted and as previously amended by Leslie with the following additional conditions: That internal sidewalks and walkways and dumpsters and recycling areas be protected from snowshed from the roof. That front porches be added to the project and built at it's initial construction and that those conditions be subject to review at the time of the building permit application. Bruce seconded the motion. Jasmine: David has made the motion with the 2 additional conditions which would be numbered 8 and 9 and the motion has been seconded by Bruce. Roger: I would like to see an additional condition that the corner unit on the corner of 7th and West Hopkins have included as a disclosure item in it's lease agreement or sales agreement or whatever that the plans with the City could include a sidewalk within 5ft of it's bedroom and also the possibility of a fixed guideway system cutting that corner on 7th and West Hopkins coming fairly close to that unit so that those people know that those plans are in there and it is a disclosure item for that unit to know that that could happen some day to them. This would be a protection for us. Bruce: I don't think we have any legal or moral obligation to put those kinds of things in the notice. Any time there is a street you know certain things are maybe going to happen on that street. I don't see any point in having in adding that condition. Roger: The difference here is that they are encroaching into a setback which is supposed to give them some minimal protection from that type of thing that does occur on the street. Vann: We are not saying that sidewalks don't have to be installed. We are deferring the issue at least Hopkins Street. And therefore we probably have to address it as part of the subdivision improvements agreement and we also have to note it on the filed plat that we submit and then we have to provide a budget for it in the financial guarantee that is provided along with the subdivision improvements agreement all of which will be available to 13 • CJ MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning RE: West Hopkins Affordable Housing Subdivision, PUD (consolidated two-step) and Special Review DATE: November 19, 1991 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The applicant seeks Subdivision, consolidated PUD review and Special Review for the development of 11 deed restricted dwelling units on an Affordable Housing zoned parcel. Subdivision is a two step process with final approval at City Council. Although the property has already been rezoned to AH, the applicant now requests a PUD overlay. Because the parcel is not 27,000 square feet the City, responding to an applicant's request, may designate a PUD overlay. Because the overlay is attached to the existing zoning, requiring review and approval by the P&Z and CC, staff recommends that consolidated PUD review occur as part of this project. Pursuant to Section 7-903 C.3, a four step PUD review process may be consolidated to two steps. The applicants request consolidation to the two step process, conceptual at P&Z and Final at City Council. The Affordable Housing zone district requires parking and open space to be established by special review. The P&Z has reviewed this proposal at a work session last spring and approved the rezoning from R-6 to AH in June. APPLICANT: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority as represented by Sunny Vann and Hagman Yaw Architects, Ltd. LOCATION: Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen ZONING: AH APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Subdivision, consolidated PUD Review and Special Review for it affordable housing units. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The following is a summary of referral comments from other agencies. For more detail, please see attached comments. Engineering: The Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. The existing irrigation ditch must be maintained and pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts. 2. All easements need to be depicted on the final PUD plan. Easements shall be of adequate widths for all the utility requirements. 3. The development is within the area of the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan requiring the construction of sidewalks or walkways. 4. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final PUD plan. The drainage plan needs to include calculations showing that this historic rate of runoff will be maintained. 5. The ROW width is not adequate at this location, however the neckdown occurs on the south side of the street, which is in the County. Future review of redevelopment on the south side of the street should ensure dedication of the necessary ROW. 6. The triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey needs to be shown as part of the Homestake mining claim. 7. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: 1. Detailed plans will be reviewed for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer. 2. If basements are added plans need to be reviewed. 3. Floor drains in the vehicle parking areas are to be tied to the sanitary sewer, adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed. 4. All tap fees shall be paid by the applicant to the District prior to connection to the main sewer line. Parks Department: The Parks Department requested that stakes encircle existing trees to ensure that they will not be damaged during excavation. Environmental Health: 1. The applicant should install bike racks to enhance auto disincentives. 2. The applicant should consult a mechanical/ventilation engineer to ensure that carports do not result in excessive exhaust fumes 2 0 . entering the dwellings above them. Public Project Review Group: The PPRG reviewed this project November 6, four members participated in the review and had the following comments: 1. One of the four members perceived the proposed density (11 units) as a problem. 2. The provision of 11 on -site parking spaces was not considered problematic. 3. Three of the four members commenting believed that sidewalks would be inappropriate with one member wanting to preclude the installation of a curb. 4. Living space downstairs with bedrooms upstairs is a good concept, due to the relationship this creates to the street. 5. The group expressed concern with snow shedding particularly due to metal roofs proposed. Several pedestrian walks do not appear protected from sliding snow. The architect team responded that snow shedding had been considered and internal drains and overhangs have been considered to mitigate those problems. 6. Individual units should be better identified either through restudy in roof form, use of color, mailboxes etc. 7. The dumpster and recycling area should be covered. 8. The entire group emphasized the need to not skimp on material or landscape budgets. Quality materials were considered to be a fundamental need in order for the AH project to contribute to the character of the community and immediate neighborhood. STAFF COMMENTS: A. Project Description The 12,330 square foot vacant parcel is located at the corner of West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street near the base of Shadow Mountain. To the east is a three story building containing five townhomes. To the northeast, across the alley, is a neo- Victorian office building and directly across the alley is a vacant parcel. Across South Seventh Street, to the west, are stables, corrals, and pasture/open space. A contemporary, single-family residence is located to the southwest and an older, single-family residence, barn and remnant tramway are directly across the street on West Hopkins Avenue. The townhomes to the east are zoned R-15, the block along Main Street is zoned Office, and the parcels to the west of South 3 Seventh Street and across West Hopkins Avenue are in the County and zoned R-15. According to the application, the objectives of the project are..."to create individual unit expression within a multi -family context, to respect the concepts of community and privacy while creating opportunities for social interaction, and to create an architectural image which is both appropriate to Aspen and enhances neighborhood quality." The applicant proposes to construct 11 deed restricted, affordable housing units on the site. The proposal consists of two clusters of four townhouse units each located adjacent to South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. Three carriage house units, located on the alley, are proposed above a portion of the on -site parking. The 11 on -site parking spaces are all located off of the alley. The proposal includes an internal courtyard requiring the three buildings to push up onto the street and alley creating a "streetfront" presence. Individual backyard spaces are also provided with each unit however specific backyard improvements will be made by individual unit owners. In order to avoid future PUD amendments when homeowners wish to add onto their units, the architects will attempt to identify future improvements that may be approved with this review. A rough estimate of the comparison between the allowable floor area for the project and the proposed is described in the following paragraph. The maximum allowable floor area for the site is 13,560 sq. ft. The proposed development is approximately 10,400 sq. ft. Theoretically, there is 1,160 sq. ft. (overall) that homeowners could add to their units. However, because of the size limitations for units within certain income categories, expansion may be a problem. The Housing Authority and architects are reviewing this development potential and will respond to the City Council regarding future improvements. Please refer to the attached application for more specific details regarding the development proposal. In addition the unit size and income categories are summarized in Table 1 and the Development Data in Table 2. 4 0 • Table 1 DEVELOPMENT PROGR* Income Category, Unit Mix and Net Livable Areal 1. Category 1 2 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 1,000 Units @ 500 Sq. Ft.2 2. Category 2 1 - 1 Bedroom/1 Bath Carriage House 520 Unit @ 520 Sq. Ft. 4 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 3,600 Units @ 900 Sq. Ft. 1 - 3 Bedroom/2-1/2 Bath Townhouse 990 Unit @ 990 Sq. Ft. 3. Category 3 2 - 2 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,960 Units @ 980 Sq. Ft. 1 - 3 Bedroom/1-1/2 Bath Townhouse 1,140 Unit @ 1,140 Sq. Ft. 4. Total Units/Bedrooms 11/21 5. Total Net Livable Area (Sq. Ft.) 9,210 Net livable square footage calculated based on interior living area, including interior storage area, measured interior wall to interior wall, including all interior partitions. Excludes exterior storage. z All numbers rounded to the nearest ten (10) square feet. Table 2 DEVELOPMENT DATA 1. Existing Zoning AH, Affordable Housing 2. Total Site Area (Sq. Ft.), 12,330 3. Minimum Required Lot Area/Dwelling Unit (Sq. Ft.) 400 1 Bedroom 19 �-� 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4. Minimum Required Lot Area (Sq. Ft.) -- 3 - 1 Bdrm. Units @ 400 Sq. Ft. L /Unit 6 - 2 Bdrm. Units @ 800 Sq. Ft. t 1 /Unit 2 - 3 Bdrm. Units @ 1,200 Sq. Ft. /Unit 5. Minimum Required Setbacks (Feet) --I J Front Yard Side Yards Rear Yard 1 6. Proposed Setbacks (Feet )2 West Hopkins Avenue South Seventh Street Alley East Side 7. Maximum Allowable External Floor Area @ 1.1:1 (Sq. Ft.) 8. Proposed External Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) 9. Maximum Building Height (Feet )3 ' 10. Proposed Building Height (Feet)4 j Townhouses Carriage Houses 11. Minimum Required Open Space 12. Proposed Site Coverage (Sq. Ft.) Building Footprints Parking Remainder of Site Area Attributable to Open Space 13. Minimum Required Parking 14. Proposed Parking Spaces @ 1 Space/Unit 20 800 1,200 8,400 1,200 4,800 2,400 15 10 5 1.5 1 5 13,560 10,400 25 25 30 Special Review 9,680 770 1,880 None Special Review 11 B. Review Process I. Subdivision - Pursuant to Section 7-1004 C.1., the General Requirements for subdivision are as follows: 1. (a) The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The Land Use Plan identifies this site as "Mixed Residential". The proposal is a multi -family development permitted in the AH zone district. The project is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan because it is dispersing affordable housing among the City's existing residential neighborhoods. (b) The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. RESPONSE: The project is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. The surrounding land uses are mixed residential including adjacent high density multi -family. The Office zone district is also across the alley from this parcel. (c) The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. RESPONSE: The proposed multi -family development is compatible with surrounding development. The neighborhood is comprised of both tourist and local oriented housing. The neighborhood is also "essentially fully developed" and this project should not adversely affect the future development of the neighborhood. (d) The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this chapter. RESPONSE: This proposal is 100% deed restricted and is in compliance with the AH zone district and is not in conflict with any other sections of the Land Use Code. Pursuant to Section 7-1004 C. 2 - 5, the pertinent subdivision requirements are as follows: 2. (a) Land Suitability - The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rock slide, 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. RESPONSE: There are no natural hazards that exist on the site that would endanger the welfare of future residents. 7 C� E (b) Spatial Pattern - 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. RESPONSE: There are no unnecessary public costs associated with this proposal. All utilities are available near the site. According to the application, all public improvements to serve the project will be borne by the applicant. 3 & 4. Improvements and Design Standards - following is a review of the relevant subdivision standards: (a) WATER - According to the application, water service will be provided via the area's existing mains. Separate service lines will be extended from the mains to each of the project's three multi -family buildings. All units will be individually metered. The City water system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the project. (b) SEWER - According to the application, the proposed development will be served by the existing 8 inch sanitary sewer located in South Seventh Street and the alley. Please see ACSD referral comments. There is sufficient treatment capacity to service the project. The lines are somewhat shallow in this area and if basements are eventually provided, a pump system may need to be installed for lower facilities. (c) ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE, NATURAL GAS AND CABLE TV - According to the application, these services are presently located in the alley and will be extended for the development. All required extensions will be located underground. (d) EASEMENTS - Utility easements will be provided and will be included in the subdivision agreement and depicted on the final plat. (e) SIDEWALK, CURB, AND GUTTER - There are no sidewalks or curbs and gutter within the site area but sidewalks do appear sporadically along Hopkins Avenue closer to the commercial core. The applicant proposes to install a curb and gutter adjacent to West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street. The applicant has also agreed to join an improvement district for the installation of a sidewalk at such time a district is formed because sidewalks do not exist for the other three properties on this block. The Pedestrian Walkway and Bike System Plan identifies Hopkins Avenue as a primary bike and pedestrian thoroughfare. The Plan also indicates that this is a street that should have "complete sidewalks". The West Hopkins parcel is unique in 8 that there are existing cottonwoods and an irrigation ditch along both West Hopkins and South Seventh Street. The design standards and guidelines for "Special Conditions for Irrigation Ditches" recommend a 5 foot buffer between the curb and 5 foot wide sidewalk. The irrigation ditch should be located in the buffer area. These guidelines may be altered to make the sidewalk and buffer area work within the confines of existing trees and the irrigation ditch. Additionally Seventh Street has become an important pedestrian link from Marolt Housing north to the music tent. Sidewalks or creatively designed walkways were identified in the Plan as being very necessary along this corridor. The Plan calls for the construction of sidewalks in areas so defined whenever new development occurs. The Engineering Department will need a survey to determine the exact width of the right-of-way and the location of the property line across the street. This information will need to be obtained for both West Hopkins and South Seventh. That information will enable the applicant and the Engineering Department to determine the location of the curb and sidewalk improvements for this project. However, in an attempt to define the issues, staff has estimated that a cut curb could either be installed as little as 2 feet from the existing pavement edge or 11 feet from the property line (11 feet provides the least amount of room between the curb and property line). Staff will discuss this issue further at the Commission meeting. (f) FIRE PROTECTION - According to the application, the project is 10 blocks from the fire station. A fire hydrant is located across the street from the property. The proposed development is readily accessible to emergency and fire protection vehicles. Each unit will be equipped with smoke detectors and will be constructed in compliance with all applicable uniform building code requirements. (g) DRAINAGE - The project will maintain the historic flow rates for surface water runoff and groundwater recharge. On - site drywells and/or surface detention areas will be used to accept runoff from building roofs and impervious areas. A detailed drainage plan will be submitted at the time of final plat submission. (h) ROADS - No road improvements are anticipated to the existing streets. A curb and gutter will be provided and the ragged edge of pavement will be finished off for on -street parking. According to the application, an assumed "vehicular trip generation rate of three to five trips per day per dwelling unit, the project would theoretically generate approximately 33 to 55 vehicular trips per day." Because of E • • the sites' proximity to the commercial core and Main Street bus route,vehicular trips are anticipated to be around 33 trips per day. The capacity of the surrounding street system is adequate to accommodate the increased traffic. 5. FINAL PLAT - The Code requires the preparation of a final plat before City Council reviews the subdivision application. The applicant intends to delay the preparation of the final plat until after Council review thus incorporating project revisions at that time. A condition of approval shall be submission of a final plat for staff review. It should be noted that the plat must be recorded within 180 of final subdivision/PUD approval. II. PUD Review - The applicant did not request a PUD overlay at the time the parcel was rezoned from R-6 to AH. The applicant now requests that a PUD designation be applied to the property together with the subdivision and other development review. As was discussed previously in this memo, PUD is an overlay that adheres with the underlying zoning and is intended to allow site design flexibility within the confines of underlying zoning. According to the Code, if a parcel is less than 27,000 square feet an applicant may only apply for PUD review. Therefore, if the P&Z and City Council do not designate the PUD overlay, the applicant's would be required to adhere to the zoning requirements of the AH zone. The PUD review criteria are essentially the same as the General Requirements for Subdivision, 7-1004 C.1, and have already been addressed in that review. Although the development complies with all the dimensional requirements of the AH zone district, the desire to provide a functional internal courtyard for the residents has dictated the location of the buildings as close as possible to West Hopkins Avenue, South Seventh Street, and the alley. The required and proposed setbacks are as follows: AH Setbacks West Hopkins - front 10 ft. South Seventh - side 5 ft. Alley - rear 10 ft. East Side (adjacent to Skandia Condos.) - side 5 ft. Proposed Variations 5 ft. 1.5 ft. 1 ft. 5 ft. The east side yard does comply in order to reduce potential conflicts with the adjacent townhomes and that side is not essential to the viability of the courtyard space. The Land Use Code does not identify specific review criteria for dimensional variations. However, the review of a reduction in dimensional requirements should consider whether the variation will 10 • 0 adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood. In addition, the requirement of sidewalks has several ramifications for the reduced setbacks. On West Hopkins (5 foot setback), according to the submitted plans, the site's property line is located 19.5 ft. from the edge of the pavement. The applicant has agreed to install a curb and gutter and it is still unclear whether it could be at 2 ft. from the edge of pavement or 9 ft. from the edge of pavement. Using the Pedestrian Plan standards, a conservative estimate of the curb and sidewalk improvements would include a 5 foot buffer/green space to include the irrigation ditch and a 5 foot sidewalk which leaves 2.5 feet of open/green space between sidewalk and property line. A total of 7.5 feet of open/green space would remain between the sidewalk and building. The proposed side setback for South Seventh Street is 1.5 feet. According to the submitted plans, the property line is approximately 30 ft. from the edge of pavement on South Seventh. Using the Pedestrian Plan standards the conservative estimate of improvements would include the 5 foot buffer and 5 foot sidewalk leaving over 11 feet of open/green space between the sidewalk and property line. A total of 12.5 feet of open/green space would remain between the sidewalk and building. Drawings will be provided at the meeting for the Commission to review the proposed reduction in setbacks and Pedestrian Plan recommendations. Staff has expressed some concern regarding the West Hopkins and South Seventh setbacks in the event a sidewalk is installed. The installation of a hard surface may negatively affect the perception of a large setback thus pulling the buildings closer than has been visualized or desired. However, reduced front and side yard setbacks are common throughout the downtown area and in some residential neighborhoods. The most important setback, the east side yard, is still being maintained to reduce the impacts to the adjacent townhomes. In addition the three carriage house units are consistent with the cottage infill program. That program incorporates historic site design patterns allowing a zero rear yard setback. The design team not only believes it is important to provide the best possible open space for residents via the internal courtyard, but they have also expressed a strong desire to not provide standard sidewalks in order to encourage a west end feeling. The team also contends that hard surfaced sidewalks are not necessary for project circulation. Moreover, because sidewalks do not exist for the other three properties on this block, the applicant would like to defer the installation of sidewalks until such time that the rest of the sidewalks are installed, possibly through an improvement district. II. Special Review - Pursuant to Section 7-400, open space and on - site parking are established by Special Review by the P&Z. 11 �.p . , 1. Open Space - Approximately 1,880 square feet or 15% of the site will remain undeveloped. However, none of the area meets the open space standards with respect to visibility, minimum street frontage or depth. The internal courtyard contributes to the liveability of the project and the large amount of unimproved right-of-way lend Q to the projects perception of the open space. ,( 2. Parking - Eleven on -site parking spaces will be provided for (� `� 11 units and 21 bedrooms adjacent to the alley at the rear of the `l! project. The Code requires only a maximum of 2 spaces per unit for development in the AH zone. The amount proposed is roughly half of what the maximum would allow and it should be sufficient given the proximity to the Main Street bus route and the 10 blocks into downtown. It is anticipated that guest parking will be accommodated on the street and sufficient roadway right-of-way exists. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the subdivision, conceptual PUD, and Special Review for parking and open space with the following conditions• 1. Prior t ssuance a. A sidewalk �lan s'h 11 be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning Departments. The standards and guidelines of the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan for the construction of sidewalks shall be applied. b. A detailed drainage plan shall be submitted with the final plan. The drainage plan needs to include calculations showing that this historic rate of ru off will be maintained. c. A final plat shall be reviewe and approved by the Engineering Department. The plat shall include all utility easements of adequate width for utility requirements; the triangular section of the property on the southeast part of the survey shall be indicated as part of the Homestake mining claim. d. The final subdivision/PUD plat shall be recorded within 180 days of final subdivision/PUD approval. 'e.. Detailed plans shall be reviewed by ACSD for surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, and any other clear water drains to be sure that they are not tapped into the sanitary sewer and if basement are added. U.". Adequate oil and grease interceptors shall be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas 'v 4t or � ` g.. Existing trees shall be staked to protect from excavation and C construction activities. 12 2.. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have 12" culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan Guidelines. 3. The applicant needs an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public right-of-way. 4. Deed restrictions shall be reviewed and approved by the Housing Authority and Planning Department prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The applicant shall adhere to all representations of this approval which shall include but not limited to: landscaping, building materials, and setback variations. 6. A tree removal permit is required for the removal of any tree greater than 6" in caliper. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application 13 Aspen/Pit ' ing Office 130 len treet Asp 611 (303) 92 920-5197 Y _Y 0 TO: City Attorney City Engineer Water Department Electric Department Environmental Health Department Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Parks Department Aspen Fire Marshal Holy Cross Electric Public Projects Review Group FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office RE: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption, Subdivision/PUD, Special Review and Condominiumization Parcel ID# 2735-123-10-005 DATE: October 16, 1991 Attached for your review and comments is an application from the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requesting approvals for the West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing project. Please return your comments to me no later than November 4, 1991. Thank you. recycled paper • Iq DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE SUMMARY SHEET Date: Armes V��ws • �/ J 2 Chairperson: REFERRAL COMMENTS SUMMARY: City Engineer: (memo fo thcomin : yes no County Engineer: (memo yes no ) Environmental Health (memo: yes no ) -4ire (memo: yes no ) Parks Department: (memo: yes no Building Department: (memo: yes no ) Housing Authority: (memo: yes no ) I-Attarneln: (memo: yes no ) Other: - r tk Qr�lk k.Q lA General Comments: 0 0 40 MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer Date: April 12, 1992 Re: West Hopkins Affordable Housing I have reviewed the blueprints and submittals dated March 26 that you provided to our office for the above referenced project. 1. Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights - of -way, we would advise the applicant as follows: The applicant shall consult city engineering (920-5080) for design considerations of development within public rights -of -way and shall obtain permits for any work or development within public rights -of -way from city streets department (920-5130). a. The location of the curb and gutter on 7th Street as shown would require that no parking be permitted on that side of the street. Land use approvals are not to be construed either as building permits or permits for work in the right-of-way nor design approvals. If the applicant wishes to preserve parking on its side of 7th Street, it will be necessary to install the curb and gutter in its typical location (17 1/2 feet from the property line) and "elephant ear" around the trees, if the ROW is 75'. I have called the applicant's surveyor to obtain documentation on the 75' ROW on 7th Street (the other side of 7th Street is in the county). We have not made contact, but if the ROW is less than 75', then the location of the curb from the property line would be different, and there may not be sufficient space for parking. b. New tree plantings shall be located so as to permit future installation of five foot wide sidewalks in the right-of-way. Trees shall be pruned up at least seven feet in order to permit pedestrian use of the sidewalk area. No obstructions shall be permitted which preclude pedestrian use of a five foot wide portion of the right- of-way in the interim before sidewalk is constructed. Trees should not be planted so as to compound the non -conformity of the existing trees on 7th Street. That is, depending the on the ROW width, trees should not be planted outside of a space 10' or 17 1/2' from the property line. In order to preserve vehicle operator sight distance at the corner, no trees shall be planted within 30' of the corner. The plat must reflect these design considerations. c. Details of irrigations systems in the right-of-way must be approved by both the Parks and Streets Departments. The fixtures nearest to the alley may be a problem for snow removal and alley maintenance. 2. It appears from the drawings that snow shed from roofs will not be a problem, but the Site Development Plan sheet should contain a general note that explicitly states that there will be no snow shed from roofs onto public rights -of -ways. 3. I have spoken with the project engineer, and he has agreed to add filter fabric to the drywell on the drainage plan to prevent soil fines from migrating into the drywell. The CMP Extension detail for the irrigation ditch as shown on this sheet should be reviewed and approved by the parks superintendent. 4. Note that any construction activity proposed to be occurring within the drip line of any tree greater than 6" in diameter must be approved by the Parks Department 5. The final plat must indicate easements for utility pedestals. Such easements are typically 4'x4'. However with a project of this size, more space may be needed for utility pedestals. Utility pedestals may not be installed in the alley or street rights -of -way. There are three existing utility pedestals which are not shown on the plat. These must be shown. It is preferable that the pedestals be relocated onto private property, but in any event, no new pedestals will be permitted to be installed in the right-of-way. There are two approximately four inch steel pipe stanchions alongside the property which must be shown on the plat and which must be removed when the property is developed if they are in the right-of-way. 6. I believe that the Planning Office now requires a certificate for the Planning Director. The plat does not contain one. The plat is lacking a City Council approval certificate. The first sheet of the plat must contain an index. cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director Jack Reid, Street Superintendent George Robinson, Parks Superintendent M92123 i�au a- 0• Cj eo R , MEMORANDUM atlz4c, To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office, From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer a-f— )e, Zd a � r' Date: April 12, 1992 Y Re: West Hopkins Affordable Housing x-, I have reviewed the blueprints and submittals dated March'26 that'you provided to our _ °�°" office for the above referenced project. l?VIA- .t4 761 01-e 1. Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights- o7x4 :.. C'N., of -way, we would advise the applicant as follows: Alai isc a y4 The applicant shall consult city engineering (920-5080) for design w� a considerations of development within public rights -of -way and shall obtain permits for any work or development within public rights -of -way from city' streets department (920-5130). 6 a. The location of the curb and gutter on 7th Street as shown would require that C S no parking be permitted on that side of the street. Land use approvals are not to be construed either as building permits or permits for work in the right-of-way nor design approvals. If the applicant wishes to preserve parking on its side of 7th Street, it will be necessary to install the curb and gutter in its typical location (17 1/2 feet from the property line) and "elephant ear" around the trees, if the ROW is 75'. I have called the applicant's surveyor to obtain documentation on the 75' ROW on 7th Street (the other side of 7th Street is in the county). We have not made contact, but if the ROW is less than 75', then the location of the curb from the property line would be different, and there may not be sufficient space for parking. b. New tree plantings shall be located so as to permit future installation of five foot wide sidewalks in the right-of-way. Trees shall be pruned up at least seven feet in order to permit pedestrian use of the sidewalk area. No obstructions shall be permitted which preclude pedestrian use of a five foot wide portion of the right- of-way in the interim before sidewalk is constructed. Trees should not be planted so as to compound the non -conformity of the existing trees on 7th Street. That is, depending the on the ROW width, trees should not be planted outside of a space 0 EJ 10' oir 17 1/2' from the property line. In order to preserve vehicle operator sight distance at the corner, no trees shall be planted within 30' of the corner. The plat must reflect these design considerations. c. Details of irrigations systems in the right-of-way must be approved by both the Parks and Streets Departments. The fixtures nearest to the alley may be a problem for snow removal and alley maintenance. 2. It appears from the drawings that snow shed from roofs will not be a problem, but the Site Development Plan sheet should contain a general note that explicitly states that there will be no snow shed from roofs onto public rights -of -ways. 3. I have spoken with the project engineer, and he has agreed to add filter fabric to the drywell on the drainage plan to prevent soil fines from migrating into the drywell. The 4 ;MP Extension detail for the irrigation ditch as shown on this sheet should be reviewed and approved by the parks superintendent. 4. Note that any construction activity proposed to be occurring within the drip line of any tree greater than 6" in diameter must be approved by the Parks Department 5. The final plat must indicate easements for utility pedestals. Such easements are typically 4'x4'. However with a project of this size, more space may be needed for utility pedestals. Utility pedestals may not be installed in the alley or street rights -of -way. There are three existing utility pedestals which are not shown on the plat. These must be shown. It is preferable that the pedestals be relocated onto private property, but in any event, no new pedestals will be permitted to be installed in the right-of-way. There are two approximately four inch steel pipe stanchions alongside the property which must be shown on the plat and which must be removed when the property is developed if they are in the right-of-way. 6. I believe that the Planning Office now requires a certificate for the Planning Director. The plat does not contain one. The plat is lacking a City Council approval certificate. The first sheet of the plat must contain an index. cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director Jack Reid, Street Superintendent George Robinson, Parks Superintendent M92 ]2 • MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Dave Tolen CC Leslie Lamont CC George Robinson From: Chuck Roth Postmark: May 15,92 1:56 PM Subject: West Hopkins Housing - Trees in 7th St. Message: We met with George on the site. He has given us permission to remove the trees that are in the typical roadway and replace in kind. Please get with him for further assistance with tree details. Therefore, please locate the curb and gutter on 7th Street at a distance of 17.5 feet from your property line. Thank you. • • Wir Aspen/Pit J920 ng Office 130 reet Asp 611 (303) 92 -5197 MEMORANDUM ,4000.00"- City Attorney City Engineer Water Department Electric Department Environmental Health Department Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Parks Department Aspen Fire Marshal Holy Cross Electric Public Projects Review Group 40�• Leslie Lamont, Planning Office RE: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption, Subdivision/PUD, Special Review and Condominiumization Parcel ID# 2735-123-10-005 DATE: October 16, 1991 Attached for your review and comments is an application from the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority requesting approvals for the West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing project. Please return your comments to me no later than November 4, 1991. Thank you. C-0C)e Foje i /,r'6 pi�)c7Fc 7104-' J recycled paper 0 r� MEMORANDUM To: Public Project Review Group From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: West Hopkins Affordable Housing Project review Date: October 25, 1991 MEETING DATE: WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 4-5:00 p.m. CITY HALL - 3rd FLOOR PLANNING OFFICE --------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has submitted an application to the Planning Office for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Public Projects Review Group is one of the referral agencies required to review and comment on the project prior to the P&Z meeting. BACKGROUND: Earlier this year the PPRG met to consider the conceptual aspects of this project regarding the rezoning of the parcel. The project is to be reviewed now for design, site planning and neighborhood compatibility. Please familiarize yourself with the site and context prior to the meeting, and be prepared to comment. The public is invited to this meeting. The PPRG elected to review each project on its own merit, and has not developed any design criteria or standards from which to base a review. Therefore, staff's comments will follow general discussion at the meeting. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends the PPRG review the project carefully and come prepared to take action to either: 1) Approve the project as presented 2) Approve with conditions to be met prior to the issuance of a building permit 3) Table action and continue the meeting, to allow the applicant additional time to prepare necessary information 4) Deny, finding that the project is incompatible with the parcel and/or neighborhood. PPRG's recommendation will be referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their consideration in overall project review. Member comments: memo.pprg.w.hopkins • M E M O R A N D U M TO: LESLIE LAMONT, PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: LARRY BALLENGER, DIRECTOR F WATER DATE: MAY 6, 1991 SUBJECT: WEST HOPKINS REZONING The City of Aspen does have adequate facilities to supply water to this proposed development. Both Hopkins Avenue and Seventh Street have water mains of sufficient size to provide fire suppression and potable water. The Water Department would request that the existing Pacific States fire hydrant located on the southwest 'corner of 7th and Hopkins be replaced with a new City Standard hydrant. The City will supply the hydrant. ----- �r LB:11 • TO: LARRY BALLENGER, WATER SUPERINTENDENT FROM: ROBERT GISH, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 2, 1992 RE: WEST HOPKINS - CITY DEVELOPMENT HOUSING This is to confirm my earlier conversations regarding the hydrant replacement on West Hopkins. Have the Water Department replace it when you schedule warrants. The Housing Authority will not be responsible to replace the hydrant as requested in your memo of May 6, 1991. I feel that you responded to the development correctly however somehow it was lost in the process and construction estimate. Amy pointed out that she felt that the memo may not have been written clearly and that your last paragraph may have been interpreted that the City of Aspen would provide and install the hydrant. I didn't read it that way as I knew what your replacement policy was regarding developments and the elimination of the Pacific States hydrants. Continue your review of future projects with similar remarks. The new hydrants will improve fire safety to the community and new housing projects. Amy has a point that you can read whatever you want to in a paragraph depending on how you want it to be interpreted. A lesson to be learned is that we must be very clear in our communications. Thank you. RFG/sp/m75.92 VANN ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning Consultants December 10, 1991 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Leslie Lamont Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: West Hopkins Affordable Housing Project Dear Leslie: Summarized below is some additional information regarding the West Hopkins Townhomes project for inclusion in your memoran- dum for the December 12, 1991, City Council meeting. The information is submitted in response to various concerns identified in connection with the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of the application. Jl As the accompanying architectural roof plan illustrates, small shed roofs have been added to various building elevations to protect the project's internal pedestrian areas from snow slides. Avalanche guards and gutters will also be used in some areas as may be required to reduce potential hazards attributable to sliding snow. .2� A site plan depicting a preliminary sidewalk alignment on both West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street is also attached. Please note that the installation of the sidewalks as depicted will most likely require the relocation of the existing irrigation ditch which parallels both street frontages. 3. Schmueser Gordon Meyer is presently researching the width of the property's adjacent right-of-ways. As the streets in question are located outside of the original Aspen Townsite, it is possible that the right-of-ways were never platted and/or dedicated to the public. We are attempting, however, to define the southern and western property lines of the adjoining parcels for purposes of establishing undisputed right-of-way widths. r These widths will be provided to the Planning Office as soon as they are available, and will be depicted on the final subdivision plat. 230 East Hopkins Avenue • Aspen, Colorado 81611 •303/925-6958 • 0 Ms. Leslie Lamont December 10, 1991 Page 2 4. It is the Applicant's desire to include front porches on the project's Hopkins and Seventh Street facades. The decision to include the porches, however, is dependent upon final project costs. Hagman Yaw, Architects, is presently developing more detailed architectural plans for the project, from which detailed cost estimates will be prepared. Additional information with respect to the Applicant's ability to include the porches within the project's budget will be provided as soon as it is available. Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, v' ltY/J VANN A OCIATES, INC. Sunny Va AICP SV:cwv Attachments cc: Dave Tolen ASPEN/PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 FAX# (303) 920-5197 October 17, 1991 Sunny Vann Vann Associates 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Re: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing Case A57-91 Dear Sunny, The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined that this application is complete. We have scheduled this application for review at a public hearing by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, November 19, 1991 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. Should this date be inconvenient for you please contact me within 3 working days of the date of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. All applications are now being scheduled for the Development Review Committee. This case is scheduled for November 7th at 2:00 p.m. A memo explaining the DRC is enclosed. The Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining to the application is available at the Planning Office. Please note that it is your responsibility to mailing notice to property owners within 300' and to post the subject property with a sign. Please submit a photograph of the posted sign as proof of posting and an affidavit as proof of mailing prior to the hearing. If you have any questions, please call Leslie Lamont, the planner assigned to your case. Sincerely, Debbie Skehan, Office Manager • 0 March 26, 1992 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Leslie Lamont, AICP Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: West Hopkins Townhomes Affordable Housing Project Dear Leslie: Enclosed for your review are drafts of the various plans and documents which must be recorded for the West Hopkins Townhomes affordable housing project prior to issuance of a building permit. More specifically, I have enclosed the following. 1. Documents a) Subdivision/PUD Agreement b) Occupancy and Resale Deed restriction, Agreement and Covenant c) Public Improvements and Landscaping Cost Esti- mates d) Drainage Calculations 2. Plans a) Final Subdivision Plat b) PUD Site Development Plan c) Building Elevations d) Grading Plan e) Drainage Plan f) Landscape Plan 230 East Hopkins Avenue • Aspen, Colorado 81611 •303'925-6958 • Fax 3031920-9310 Ms. Leslie Lamont, AICP March 26, 1992 Page 2 g) Irrigation Plan As the project is a PUD, I suggest that all of the above plans be recorded with the Final Subdivision Plat and attached to the Subdivision/PUD Agreement as exhibits. Please note that the plat does not depict the building footprints. These will be shown on the condominium map to be recorded upon substantial completion of the project. The footprints are depicted, however, on the PUD Site Development Plan. No utility easements are depicted on the plat, as utility service will be limited to the extension of individual service lines. As the Applicant has submitted plans for a building permit, I would appreciate it if you would review the attached material at your earliest convenience so that we may make any revisions that may be required. The building permit cannot be issued until all plans and documents are approved by the Planning Office and recorded. Should you have any questions, or require additional infor- mation, please do no hesitate to call. Sincerely, VANN ASSOCIATES SV:cwv Enclosures cc: Dave Tolen (w/enclosures) Heidi Hoffmann SUBDIVISION/P.U.D. AGREEMENT FOR THE WEST HOPKINS TOWNHOMES THIS SUBDIVISION/P.U.D. AGREEMENT is made and this day of , 1992, by ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY ("Owner") and ASPEN, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ("City"). W I T N E S S E T H: entered into and between THE CITY OF WHEREAS, Owner owns that certain real property (the "Property") located in the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, known as Lots K, L, M and N, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen. A complete metes and bounds description of the Property is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on January 13, 1992, the City Council of the City of Aspen granted approval pursuant to Sections 24-7-903, 24-7-904, 24- 7-1004, 24-7-1005 and 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen (the "Code") for the development of eleven (11) deed restricted dwelling units and condominiumization thereof to be situated on the Property (see Ordinance No. 52, Series of 1991, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B); and WHEREAS, the approval of such development of eleven (11) deed restricted dwelling units and condominiumization by the City was conditioned upon the Owner complying with certain requirements, including the entering into and execution of a Subdivision/P.U.D. Agreement for the property; and WHEREAS, the Owner has submitted to the City for approval, execution and recordation a plat for the Property (the "Plat") and the City agrees to approve, execute and record the Plat on the agreement of the Owner to the matters described herein, subject to the provisions of the Code, the conditions contained herein and other applicable rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, the City has imposed conditions and requirements in connection with its approval, execution and acceptance of the Plat and such matters are necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public health, safety and welfare and, pursuant to the Code, the City is entitled to assurances that the matters set forth herein will be faithfully performed by the Owner and the Owner's successors and assigns; and WHEREAS, the Owner is willing to enter into such agreement with the City and to provide assurances to the City; 0 C� NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and the approval, execution and acceptance of the Plat for recordation by the City, it is agreed as follows: 1. Description of Proiect. The project which the City Council approved consists of two (2) parcels, the legal descriptions of which are set forth on the attached Exhibit A. Parcel 1 contains approximately 12,000 square feet and is approved for development of eleven (11) affordable housing units with the following development mix: A. Category 1 Deed Restriction: i. Two (2) one bedroom/one bath carriage house units. B. Category 2 Deed Restriction: i. One (1) one bedroom/one bath carriage house unit; ii. Four (4) two bedroom/one and one-half bath townhouse units; and iii. One (1) three bedroom/two and one-half bath townhouse unit. C. Category 3 Deed Restriction: i. Two (2) two bedroom/one and one-half bath townhouse units; and ii. One (1) three bedroom/one and one-half bath townhouse unit. Parcel 2 will contain approximately 307 square feet and will be restricted against any further development, although it may be used for access and parking purposes. 2. Acceptance of Plat. Upon execution of this Agreement by all parties hereto, and upon approval of the final plat by the Engineering Department and Planning Office, the City agrees to approve and execute the final plat for the project submitted herewith, which conforms to the requirements to Section 24-7-1004 of the Code. The City agrees to accept such plat for recording in the offices of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon payment of the recordation fee and cost to the City by Owner. Reduced size copies of the following documents, representing plats and plans that have been approved as part of this Subdivision Improvement Agreement, are attached hereto as the following Exhibits: a. Final Subdivision Plat, Exhibit C b. PUD Site Development Plan, Exhibit D C. Building Elevations, Exhibit E d. Grading Plan, Exhibit F e. Drainage Plan, Exhibit G f. Landscape Plan, Exhibit H g. Irrigation Plan, Exhibit I 3. Construction Schedule and Phasing. The City and Owner mutually acknowledge that exact construction schedules cannot be determined for the project at this time. However, it is anticipated that construction of the project will begin no later than the summer of 1992, with completion occurring within months thereafter, unless extended by mutual agreement of the parties. 4. Parking and Open Space Requirements. Owner shall provide one (1) on -site off-street parking space per dwelling unit for the project. By special review approval pursuant to Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 91- , dated November 19, 1991, the project's open space requirement is reduced to zero. 5. Public Improvements and Landscaping. A. Special Improvement District. Owner hereby agrees to join any special improvements district(s), in the event one is formed, which includes the project site. B. Curb and Gutter. Owner hereby agrees that it shall install, at its expense in connection with the improvements to be placed on the Property, curb and gutter adjacent to West Hopkins Avenue and the South Seventh Street rights of way as depicted on the P.U.D. Site Development Plan which is attached hereto as Exhibit D. In addition, Owner shall install additional pavement to connect the new curb and gutter to the existing street surfaces; as required. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is an itemization of the estimated cost of these improvements, prepared by Schmeuser, Gordon & Meyer on , 199_. C. Sidewalks. The Owner hereby agrees to pay for the cost of installing sidewalks along West Hopkins Avenue and South Seventh Street in accordance with the guidelines of the Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway Plan. These sidewalks shall be installed in accordance with and at such time as the special improvements district referred to in Paragraph 5.A., above, is created. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a copy of a cost estimate prepared for the construction of such sidewalks by Schmeuser, Gordon & Meyer on , 199_. If required or requested by the City, Owner shall enter into 3 11 C� a Curb, Sidewalk and Gutter Agreement for South Seventh Street and West Hopkins Avenue. D. The owner hereby agrees that it shall, at its expense, install the landscaping as required by and in accordance with the Landscape Plan attached hereto as Exhibit H. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a copy of a cost estimate prepared for the acquisition and installation of such landscaping prepared by Landforms, Inc. on , 1992. Security for Public Improvements and Landsc ping. In order to secure the performance of the construction and installation of the public improvements described above, the Owner shall provide a bond, letter of credit, cash or other guarantee in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney in the sum of $ • Said guarantee shall be delivered to the City prior to the issuance to the Owner of a building permit for the c� project. The documents shall give the City the unconditional right, upon clear and unequivocal default by the Owner in its obligations specified herein, to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation of such public c� improvements. As portions of the improvements are , completed, the City Engineer shall inspect the same and, upon approval and acceptance, the City Engineer shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated costs for such completed improvements. The Owner shall require all contractors to provide a warranty that all improvements were constructed to accepted standards of good _ workmanship for the benefit of the City for the installation of the public improvements described herein for one (1) year from the date of acceptance. In the event that any existing municipal improvements are damaged during project construction, on request by the City Engineer, a bond or other suitable security for the repair of those municipal improvements shall be provided by Owner to the City. 6. Drainage. Prior to the recordation of the final plat and issuance of a building permit for the project, a drainage plan shall be submitted to the City in accordance with Section 24-7- 1004 (C) (4) (f) of the Code and shall be approved by the Engineering Department. The drainage plan shall include calculations showing that the historic rate of run-off will be maintained. A copy of the approved plan is attached hereto as Exhibit G. 7. Public Rights of Way. The Owner must obtain an excavation permit from the Street Department and design approval from the Engineering Department for any work done in the public 4 ! 0 rights of way. The existing irrigation ditch must be preserved and maintained. Pathways crossing the ditch must have twelve inch (12") culverts and adhere to the Pedestrian Plan guidelines in effect at the time of development. The location of the irrigation ditch may be modified subject to the approval of the Engineering Department. 8. Sanitation District Approval. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project, detailed plans shall be submitted to and reviewed by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to insure that surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains and any other clear water drains are not connected to or tapped into the sanitary sewer. Adequate oil and grease interceptors must be installed in the floor drains for vehicle parking areas in the event they are connected to the sanitary sewer. 9. Trees. All existing trees shall be staked and fenced to protect them from excavation and construction activities. Owner shall obtain a permit from the City Parks Department for the removal of any tree with a trunk diameter of six inches (611) or greater measured four and one-half feet (4.51) above grade. 10. Deed Restrictions. The project is to be deed restricted pursuant to applicable Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority ("APCHA") requirements. The APCHA shall review and approve all deed restrictions for the project prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project. Attached hereto as Exhibit L is a draft Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction, Agreement and Covenant. Prior to the sale of any individual unit in the project to a purchaser, such purchaser shall be required to execute such deed restriction, which shall then be recorded in the Pitkin County Real Property Records and placed on file with the APCHA. 11. Snow Protection. Owner shall design and construct the improvements on the project in such a way as to protect internal sidewalks, dumpsters and walkways from snow shedding. 12. Front Porches. Excess floor area may be used for front porches, which may be added to each individual unit in the future without further land use review. However, the review and approval of the APCHA and Zoning Officer shall be required and, if appropriate, a building permit will be obtained prior to the installation of a front porch. 13. Lease Restrictions. Each unit in the project is hereby restricted to minimum six (6) month leases, with no more than two (2) shorter tenancies allowed per year. This covenant runs to the benefit of the City and may be enforced by the City by an action for an injunction and/or specific performance, together with all other remedies available at law. 5 0 • 14. Condominium Map. Upon substantial completion of the project, a condominium map and condominium declaration for the project must be prepared and reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department and the Planning Office. The condominium map and declaration shall be approved and recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to the conveyance of any of the individual units within the project. 15. Material Representations. All material representations made by the Owner on record to the City in accordance with the approval of the project shall be binding upon the Owner, its successors and assigns. 16. Enforcement. In the event the City determines the Owner is not in substantial compliance with the terms of this Agreement or the final plat, the City may serve a Notice of Non -Compliance and request that the deficiency be corrected within a period of forty-five (45) days. In the event the Owner believes that it is in compliance or that the non-compliance is insubstantial, the Owner may request a hearing before the City Council to determine whether the alleged non-compliance exists or whether any amendment, variance or extension of time to comply should be granted. On request, the City shall conduct a hearing according to standard procedures and take such action as it then deems appropriate. The City shall be entitled to all remedies at equity and at law to enjoin, correct and/or receive damages for any non-compliance with this Agreement. 17. Notices. Notices to the parties shall be sent by the United States Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, Postage Prepaid, to the addresses set forth below or to any other address which the parties may substitute in writing. Such notices shall be deemed received, if not sooner received, three (3) days after the date of mailing of same. To the Owner: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, Colorado 81611 With a copy to: Thomas Fenton Smith, Esquire Austin, Peirce & Smith 600 East Hopkins Avenue Suite 205 Aspen, Colorado 81611 To the City of Aspen: c/o City Manager 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 • With a copy to: City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 18. Binding Effect. The provisions of this Agreement shall run with and constitute a burden on the land on which the project is located and shall be binding on and enure to the benefit of the Owner, its successors and assigns and to the City, its successors and assigns. 19. Amendment. This Agreement may be altered or amended only by written instrument executed by all the parties hereto with the same formality as this Agreement is executed. 20. Severability. If any of the provisions of this Agreement are determined to be invalid, it shall not effect the remaining provisions hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Subdivision/P.U.D. Agreement the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal corporation Katherine S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney City Manager 7 By: John Bennett, Mayor ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY By: , Director STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss: COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument is hereby acknowledged before me this day of , 1992 by John Bennett, as Mayor, and Katherine S. Koch, as City Clerk of the City of Aspen. Witness my hand and seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss: COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument is hereby acknowledged before me this day of , 1992 by , as Director of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. Witness my hand and seal. My commission expires: Notary Public 4 C:\WP5I\APCHA\SUB-PUD.AGT 8 EXHIBIT A A tract of land situate in Block 19, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado and Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West, and a portion of government Lot 16 and a portion of Homestake Lode Mining Claim MS 4211 and a portion of Mary B No. 2 Lode Mining Claim MS 19640 all of the 6th Principal Meridian being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lot N of said Block 19; thence S 14*50149" W 63.25 feet along the east line of said Lot N and a southerly projection of said lot line; thence S 09*37,00" E 40.37 feet along line 4-1 of said Homestake Lode to the north right-of-way line of Hopkins Avenue produced westerly; thence N 75'09'11" W 136.72 feet along said right-of-way line; thence N 14*50,49" E 100.00 feet along the east right-of-way line of Seventh Street produced southerly; thence S 75'09111" E 120.00 feet along the north line of Lots K, L, M and N to the point of beginning, containing 12306 square feet more or less. 4 C:\WP51\APCHA\EXHIBIT.A U • LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Legal Description Exhibit B Ordinance No. 52, Series of 1991 (City of Aspen) Exhibit C Final Subdivision Plat Exhibit D P.U.D. Site Development Plan Exhibit E Building Elevations Exhibit F Grading Plan Exhibit G Drainage Plan Exhibit H Landscape Plan Exhibit I Irrigation Plan Exhibit J Itemization of the estimated cost for curbs, gutters and sidewalks (Schmeuser, Gordon & Meyer, dated , 1992) Exhibit K Cost estimate for acquisition and installation of landscaping (Landforms, Inc., dated , 1992) Exhibit L Draft Occupancy and Resale Deed Restriction, Agreement and Covenant 4 C:\WP5I\APCHA\SUB-PUD.AGT 9 0 i THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY'S OCCUPANCY AND RESALE DEED RESTRICTION, AGREEMENT, AND COVENANT THIS OCCUPANCY AND RESALE DEED RESTRICTION, AGREEMENT AND COVENANT (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this day of , 19_, by ("Owner"), for the benefit of the parties and enforceable by the ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY (hereinafter referred to as "APCHA"), a duly constituted Multi -jurisdictional Housing Authority established pursuant to the AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado (the "City") and Pitkin County, Colorado (the "County"), dated September 26, 1989 and recorded in Book 605 at Page 751 of the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, Owner has purchased from Pitkin County at a price of $ and owns as a result of that certain warranty deed executed on the date hereof, an approximate square foot dwelling ("Dwelling") located on the real property more specifical- ly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. For purposes of this Agreement, the dwelling, the real property and all appurtenances, improvements and fixtures associat- ed therewith shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, as a condition of the sale to the Owner of the Property, the Owner is required to enter into this Agreement; and WHEREAS, Owner agrees to restrict the acquisition or transfer of the Property to "Qualified Buyers," as that term is defined in this Agreement, who fall within the Category 2 income range established and adopted by the APCHA from time to time in it's Affordable Housing Guidelines. In addition, the Owner agrees that this Agreement shall constitute a resale agreement setting forth the maximum sale price for which the Property may be sold ( "Maximum Sale Price"), the amount of appreciation and the terms and provisions controlling the resale of the Property should Owner desire to sell the Property at any time after the date of this Agreement. Finally, by this Agreement, Owner agrees to restrict the Property against use and occupancy inconsistent with this Agreement. WHEREAS, "Qualified Buyers" are natural persons meeting the income, residency and all other qualifications set forth in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Affordable Housing Guide- lines, or its substitute, as adopted by the APCHA, or its succes- sor, and in effect at the time of the closing of the sale from Owner to the Qualified Buyer ("the Affordable Housing Guidelines" U and who must represent and agree pursuant to this Agreement to occupy the Property as their sole place of residence, not to engage in any business activity on the Property, and not to sell or otherwise transfer the Property for use in a trade or business. NOW THEREFORE, for value received, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Owner hereby represents, covenants and agrees as follows: 1. The use and occupancy of the Property shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for natural persons who meet the definition of Qualified Buyers and their families. 2. Owner is a Qualified Buyer and, in connection with the purchase of this Property, Owner agrees (i) to occupy the Property as his or her sole place of residence during the time that the Property is owned by the Owner, (ii) not to engage in any business activity on or in the Property, (iii) to sell or otherwise transfer the Property only in accordance with this Agreement and the Affordable Housing Guidelines, (iv) not to sell or otherwise transfer the Property for use in a trade or business, and (v) not to permit any use or occupancy of the Property except in compliance with this Agreement. 3. (a) It shall be a breach of this Agreement for Owner to default in payments or other obligations due or to be performed under a promissory note secured by a first deed of trust encumbering the Property. Owner hereby agrees to notify the APCHA, in writing, of any notification Owner receives from a lender, or its assigns, of past due payments or default in payment or other obligations due or to be performed under a promissory note secured by a first deed of trust, as described herein, within five calendar days of Owner's notification from lender, or its assigns, of said default or past due payments. (b) Upon notification from Owner, as provided above,or other notice of such default, the APCHA may offer loan counseling or distressed loan services to Owner, if any of these services are available, and is entitled to require Owner to sell the Property to avoid the commence- ment of any foreclosure proceeding against the Property. In the event that the APCHA determines that sale of the Property is necessary, Owner shall immediately execute a standard Listing Contract on forms approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission with the APCHA, providing for a 30-day listing period. If a sales contract has not been executed within the initial 30-day period, Owner shall extend the listing period for an additional 180 days, provided such extension does not conflict with the -2- 0 • statutory rights of any secured creditors. The APCHA shall promptly advertise the Property for sale by competitive bid to Qualified Buyers. Owner shall, upon closing, pay a fee to the APCHA in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the sales price, or such other amount as required by the APCHA Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at time of the sale. In the event of a listing of the Property pursuant to this Paragraph 3., the APCHA is entitled to require Owner to accept the highest of any qualified bids which satisfies the Owner's financial or other obligations due under the promissory note secured by a first deed of trust and deed of trust in favor of APCHA, as described herein, and to sell the Property to such qualified bidder. (c) Upon receipt of notice as provided in paragraphs 3 (a) and (b), the APCHA shall have the right, in it's sole discretion, to cure the default or any portion thereof. In such event the Owner shall be personally liable to the APCHA for past due payments made by the APCHA together with interest thereon at the rate specified in the promissory note secured by the first deed of trust, plus one percent (1%) of the sales price, and all actual expenses of the APCHA incurred in curing the default. owner shall be required by the APCHA to execute a promissory note secured by deed of trust encumbering the Property in favor of the APCHA for the amounts expended by the APCHA as specified herein, including future advances made for such purposes. Owner may cure the default and satisfy it's obligation to the APCHA under this subparagraph at any time prior to execution of a contract for sale, upon such reasonable terms as speci- fied by the APCHA. Otherwise, Owner's indebtedness to the APCHA shall be satisfied from the Owner's proceeds at closing. 4. This Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the real property, described in Exhibit A, as a burden thereon, for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by the APCHA, and/or the Board of County Commissioners of the County (the "Board"), the City Council for the City (the "City Council") and their respective successors and assigns, as applicable, by any appropriate legal action including but not limited to specific performance, injunction, reversion, or eviction of non -complying owners and/or occupants. 5. In the event that the Owner desires to sell the Property, Owner shall execute a standard Listing Contract on forms approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission with the APCHA providing for a 180-day listing period, or such other time period as required by the APCHA Affordable -3- M_ Housing Guidelines in effect at time of listing. The APCHA shall promptly advertise the Property for sale by competitive bid to Qualified Buyers. Owner shall, upon closing, pay a fee to the APCHA in an amount equal to two percent (2%) of the sales price, or such other amount as required by the APCHA Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at time of closing. If FNMA type financing is used there may be a fee charged by the APCHA, based on the amount financed. The amount of this fee to be paid by the owner shall be as set forth in the current Affordable Housing Guidelines and will be distributed to the APCHA Mortgage Fund Account. MAXIMUM SALE PRICE In no event shall the Property be sold for an amount ("Maximum Sale Price") in excess of the lesser of: (a) $ plus an increase of three percent (3%) of such price per year from the date of this agreement to the date of Owner's notice of intent to sell (prorated at the rate of .25 percent for each whole month for any part of a year); or (b) an amount (based upon the Consumer Price Index, All Items, U.S. City Average, Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (Revised), published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics) calculated as follows: the Owner's purchase price multiplied by the Consumer Price Index last pub- lished prior to the date of Owner's notice of intent to sell divided by the Consumer Price Index current at the date of this Agreement. In no event shall the multiplier be less than one (1). For purposes of this Agreement, "date of intent to sell" shall be the date of execution of a listing contract when required by this agreement, or if a listing contract is not otherwise necessary, the date shall be determined to be the date upon which a requirement for the Owner to sell is first appli- cable. NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO CONSTITUTE A REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE BY THE APCHA, THE CITY OR THE COUNTY THAT ON SALE THE OWNER SHALL OBTAIN THE MAXIMUM SALE PRICE. 7. (a) For the purpose of determining the Maximum Sale Price in accordance with this Section, the Owner may add to the amount specified in Paragraph 6 above, the cost of Permitted Improvements (as defined in Exhibit "B" ) in a total amount not to -4- exceed $ , which is ten percent (10%) of the initial listed purchase price set forth in paragraph 6(a) above. In calculating such amount only those Permitted Improvements identified in Exhibit B hereto shall qualify for inclusion. All such Permitted Improvements installed or construct- ed over the life of the unit shall qualify. Howev- er, the allowance permitted by this subsection is a fixed amount, which shall be calculated on a cumulative basis applicable to the owner and all subsequent purchasers, and shall not exceed the maximum dollar amount set forth in this subsection 7 (a) . (b) In order to qualify as Permitted Improvements, Owner must furnish to the APCHA the following information with respect to the improvements which the Owner seeks to include in the calculation of Maximum Sale Price: (i) Original or duplicate receipts to verify the actual costs expended by the Owner for the Permitted Improvements; (ii) Owner's affidavit verifying that the receipts are valid and correct receipts tendered at the time of purchase; and (iii) True and correct copies of any building permit or certificate of occupancy required to be issued by the Aspen/Pitkin County Building Department with respect to the Permitted Improvements. (c) For the purpose of determining the Maximum Sale Price in accordance with this Section, Owner may also add to the amount specified in Paragraphs 6 and 7(a), the cost of any permanent improvements constructed or installed as a result of any re- quirement imposed by any governmental agency, provided that written certification is provided to the APCHA of both the applicable requirement and the information required by Paragraph 7(c)(i)- (iii) . (d) In calculating the costs under Paragraphs 7(a) and 7(d), only the Owner's actual out-of-pocket costs and expenses shall be eligible for inclusion. Such amount shall not include an amount attributable to Owner's "sweat equity" or to any appreciation in the value of the improvements. -5- 1] 8. All disputes between of the APCHA shall grievance procedures Guidelines. Owner and the administrative staff be heard in accordance with the set forth in the Affordable Housing 9. Owner shall not permit any prospective buyer to assume any or all of the Owner's customary closing costs nor accept any other consideration which would cause an increase in the purchase price above the bid price so as to induce the Owner to sell to such prospective buyer. 10. Unless specified otherwise by the current APCHA Afford- able Housing Guidelines, the following procedures shall apply upon resale; in the event that title vests by descent in individuals and/or entities who are not qualified Buyers as that term is defined herein, (hereinafter "Non-Qualif ied Transferee(s)"), the Property shall immediately be listed for sale as provided in Paragraph 5 above (including the payment of the specified fee to the APCHA) , and the highest bid by a Qualified Buyer, for not less than ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price or the appraised market value, whichever is less, shall be accepted; if all bids are below ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price or the appraised market value, the Property shall continue to be listed for sale until a bid in accordance with this section is made, which bid must be accepted. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the Non - Qualified Transferee(s). 11. In the event that title to the Property vests by descent in individuals and/or entities who are not Qualified Buyers as that term is defined herein, (hereinafter "Non - Qualified Transferees) " ), the Property shall immediately be listed for sale as provided in Paragraph 5 above (including the payment of the specified fee to the APCHA) , and the highest bid by a Qualified Buyer, for not less than ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price or the appraised market value, whichever is less, shall be accepted; if all bids are below ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price or the appraised market value, the Property shall continue to be listed for sale until a bid in accordance with this section is made, which bid must be accepted. The cost of the appraisal shall be paid by the Non -Qualified Transfer- ee(s). (a) Non -Qualified Transferee(s) shall join in any sale, conveyance or transfer of the Property to a Quali- fied Buyer and shall execute any and all documents necessary to do so; and (b) Non -Qualified Transferee(s) agree not to (i) occupy the Property, (ii) rent all or any part of the Property, except in strict compliance with Para- graph 15 hereof; (iii) engage in any other business activity on or in the Property, (iv) sell or other- wise transfer the Property except in accordance with this Agreement and the Affordable Housing Guidelines, or (v) sell or otherwise transfer the Property for use in a trade or business. (c) The APCHA, the County, and the City, or their respective successors, as applicable, shall have the right and option to purchase the Property, exercisable within a period of fifteen (15) calen- dar days after receipt of any sales offer submitted to the APCHA by a Non -Qualified Transferees) , and, in the event of exercising their right and option, shall purchase the Property from the Non -Qualified Transferee(s) for a price of ninety-five percent (95%) of the Maximum Sale Price, or the appraised market value, whichever is less. The offer to purchase shall be made by the Non -Qualified Trans- feree within fifteen (15) days of acquisition of the Property. (d) Where the provisions of this Paragraph 11 apply, the APCHA may require the Owner to rent the Proper- ty in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 15, below. OWNER RESIDENCE 12. Owner represents and warrants that the Property shall be and is to be utilized only as the sole and exclusive place of residence of Owner. 13. Owner agrees that, in the event Owner changes domicile or ceases to utilize the Property as his sole and exclusive place of residence, the Property will be offered for sale pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 11 of this Agreement. Owner shall be deemed to have changed Owner's domicile by becoming a resident elsewhere or accepting permanent employment outside Pitkin County, or residing on the Property for fewer than nine (9) months per calendar year without the express written approval of the APCHA. Where the provisions of this Paragraph 13 apply, the APCHA may require the Owner to rent the Property in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 15, below. 14. If at any time the Owner of the Property also owns any interest alone or in conjunction with others in any developed residential property or dwelling unit (s), Owner -7- agrees to immediately list said other property or unit for sale and to sell owner's interest in such property at a sales price comparable to like units or properties in the area in which the property or dwelling unit(s) are located. In the event said other property or unit has not been sold by Owner within one hundred twenty (120) days of its listing, then Owner hereby agrees to immedi- ately list this Property for sale pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 11 of this Agreement. It is understood and agreed between the parties hereto that, in the case of an Owner whose business is the construction and sale of residential properties or the purchase and resale of such properties, the properties which consti- tute inventory in such an Owner's business shall not constitute "other developed residential property" or "dwelling unit(s)" as those terms are used in this Paragraph 14. RENTAL 15. Owner may not, except with prior written approval of the APCHA, and subject to the APCHA's conditions of approval, rent the Property for any period of time. The APCHA shall notify the Homeowner's Association of any request to rent and provide the Association the opportunity to review and comment on the request to rent prior to its determination. Prior to occupancy any tenant must be approved by the APCHA in accordance with the income, occupancy and all other qualifications established by the APCHA in its Affordable Housing Guidelines. The APCHA shall not approve any rental if such rental is being made by Owner to utilize the Property as an income producing asset, except as provided below, and shall not approve a lease with a rental term in excess of twelve (12) months. A signed copy of the lease must be provided to the APCHA prior to occupancy by any tenant. Any such lease approved by the APCHA shall be subject to the following rent calculations: (a) A rental rate not to exceed the monthly expenses for the cost of principal and interest payments, taxes, property insurance, condominium or homeowner assessments, utilities plus an additional Twenty Dollars ($20.00) and a reasonable (refundable) security deposit; or (b) In the event that there is no outstanding mortgage on the Property, the rental rate shall be based on the most current Affordable Housing Guidelines as adopted from time to time. The requirements of this Paragraph shall not preclude the Owner from sharing occupancy of the Property with non- -8- i owners on a rental basis provided Owner continues to meet the obligations contained in this Agreement, including Paragraph 12. 16. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE OWNER CREATE AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT, AS DEFINED IN THE PITKIN COUNTY OR CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE, IN OR ON THE PROPERTY. 17. NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO REQUIRE THE APCHA TO PROTECT OR INDEMNIFY THE OWNER AGAINST ANY LOSSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE RENTAL INCLUDING (NOT BY WAY OF LIMITATION) NON-PAYMENT OF RENT OR DAMAGE TO THE PREMIS- ES; NOR TO REQUIRE THE APCHA TO OBTAIN A QUALIFIED TENANT FOR THE OWNER IN THE EVENT THAT NONE IS FOUND BY THE OWNER. BREACH 18. In the event that the APCHA has reasonable cause to believe the Owner is violating the provisions of this Agreement, the APCHA by its authorized representative may inspect the Property between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner with no less than 24 hours' written notice. 19. The APCHA, in the event a violation of this Agreement is discovered, shall send a notice of violation to the Owner detailing the nature of the violation and allowing the Owner fifteen (15) days to cure. Said notice shall state that the Owner may request a hearing before the APCHA within fifteen (15) days to determine the merits of the allegations. If no hearing is requested and the viola- tion is not cured within the fifteen (15) day period, the Owner shall be considered in violation of this Agreement. If a hearing is held before the APCHA, the decision of the APCHA based on the record of such hearing shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred. REMEDIES 20. There is hereby reserved to the parties hereto any and all remedies provided by law for breach of this Agreement or any of its terms. In the event the parties resort to litigation with respect to any or all provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 21. In the event the Property is sold and/or conveyed without compliance herewith, such sale and/or conveyance shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the purported buyer. Each and every conveyance of the Property, for all purposes, shall be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, the covenants herein contained, even without reference therein to this Agreement. 22. In the event that the Owner fails to cure any breach, the APCHA may resort to any and all available legal action, including, but not limited to, specific performance of this Agreement or a mandatory injunction requiring sale of the Property by Owner as specified in Paragraphs 3, 11, 13, and 14. The costs of such sale shall be taxed against the proceeds of the sale with the balance being paid to the Owner. 23. In the event of a breach of any of the terms or condi- tions contained herein by Owner, his heirs, successors or assigns, the APCHA's initial listed purchase price of the Property as set forth in Section 6(a) of this Agreement shall, upon the date of such breach as determined by the APCHA, automatically cease to increase as set out in paragraph 6 of this Agreement, and shall remain fixed until the date of cure of said breach. FORECLOSURE The APCHA, the Board and the City Council may, pursuant to that certain Option to Buy executed and recorded of even date herewith, the terms of which are incorporated in this Agree- ment by this reference as if fully set forth herein, agree to release and waive their ability to enforce the resale deed restrictions contained herein, in the event of foreclosure, provided that said Option to Buy grants to the APCHA and either the Board or the City Council, as the designee of the APCHA, exercisable singly or jointly, the option to acquire the Property within thirty (30) days after the issuance of a public trustee's deed to the holder (including assigns of the holder) of the promissory note secured by a first deed of trust for an option price not to exceed the redemption price on the last day of all statutory redemption period(s) and any additional reasonable costs incurred by the holder during the option period which are directly related to the foreclosure. In the event that the APCHA and either the Board or the City Council, as the designee of the APCHA, exercise the option pursuant to the terms of that certain Option to Buy, described above, the APCHA, and/or its designee, may sell the Property to Qualified Buyers as that term is defined herein, or rent the Property to qualified tenants who meet the income, occupancy and all other qualifications, established by the APCHA in its Affordable Housing Guidelines until sale to a Qualified Buyer is effected. -10- • 0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 24. Notices. Any notice, consent or approval which is required to be given hereunder shall be given by mailing the same, certified mail, return receipt requested, properly addressed and with postage fully prepaid, to any address provided herein or to any subsequent mailing address of the party as long as prior written notice of the change of address has been given to the other parties to this Agreement. 25. Said notices, consents and approvals shall be sent to the parties hereto at the following addresses unless other- wise notified in writing: To Owner: To APCHA: Director Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, Colorado 81611 26. Exhibits. All exhibits attached hereto, (Exhibits A & B) are incorporated herein and by this reference made a part hereof. 27. Severability. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement and any other related document shall be interpreted in such manner as to be valid under applica- ble law; but, if any provision of any of the foregoing shall be invalid or prohibited under said applicable law, such provisions shall be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or prohibition without invalidating the remaining provisions of such document. 28. Choice of Law. This Agreement and each and every related document is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. 29. Successors. Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions and covenants contained herein shall inure to and be binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties. 30. Section Headings. Paragraph or section headings within this Agreement are inserted solely for convenience of reference, and are not intended to, and shall not, govern, limit or aid in the construction of any terms or provisions contained herein. -11- 31. Waiver. No claim of waiver, consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this Agreement shall be valid against any party hereto except on the basis of a written instrument executed by the parties to this Agreement. However, the party for whose benefit a condition is inserted herein shall have the unilateral right to waive such condition. 32. Gender and Number. Whenever the context so requires herein, the neuter gender shall include any or all genders and vice versa and the use of the singular shall include the plural and vice versa. 33. Personal Liability. Owner agrees that he or she shall be personally liable for any of the transactions contemplat- ed herein. 34. Further Actions. The parties to this Agreement agree to execute such further documents and take such further actions as may be reasonably required to carry out the provisions and intent of this Agreement or any agreement or document relating hereto or entered into in connection herewith. 35. Modifications. The parties to this Agreement agree that any modifications of this Agreement shall be effective only when made by writings signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. Notwithstanding the foregoing, APCHA reserves the right to amend this Agreement unilaterally where deemed necessary to effectuate the purpose and intent of this Agreement, and where such unilateral action does not materially impair the Owner's rights under this Agree- ment. 36. Owner and Successors. The term "Owner" shall mean the person or persons identified at the beginning of this Agreement and any other person or persons who shall acquire an ownership interest in the Property in compli- ance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement; it being understood that such person or persons shall be deemed an "Owner" hereunder only during the period of his, her or their ownership interest in the Property and shall be obligated hereunder for the full and complete performance and observance of all covenants, conditions and restrictions contained herein during such period. -12- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the day and year above first written. OWNER: By: Name: Mailing Address: OWNER: By: Name: Mailing Address: STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19_, by and Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: -13- Notary Public 0 ACCEPTANCE BY THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY The foregoing Agreement and its terms are accepted by The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY By: Title: 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 occup.agt -14- OPTION TO PURCHASE In the event of here and hereinafter note secured by a described as a foreclosure by the holder (including assigns of the holder) of the promissory first deed of trust on the property (hereinafter the "Property"), and subject to the issuance of a public trustee's deed to the holder following the expiration of all statutory redemption rights, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (the "APCHA"), and either the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado (the "City Council") or the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Pitkin, Colorado (the "Board"), as the designee of the APCHA, shall have the option to purchase the Property which shall be exercised in the following manner: a. Notice. The holder shall give such notice to the APCHA as is required under Colorado law in the foreclosure proceeding. Said notice shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed as follows: Director, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Truscott Place 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 b. Option to Purchase. The APCHA, and either the Board or the City Council, as the designee of the APCHA, shall have 30 days after issuance of the public trustee's deed in which to exercise this option to purchase by tendering to the holder, in cash or certified funds, an amount equal to the redemption price which would have been required of the borrower or any person who might be liable upon a deficiency on the last day of the statutory redemption period(s) and any additional reasonable costs incurred by the holder during the option period which are directly related to the foreclosure. C. Title. Upon receipt of the option price, the holder shall deliver to either the APCHA or the Board or City Council, as designated by the APCHA, a special warranty deed, conveying the Property to either the APCHA, the Board or City Council, as designated. The holder shall convey only such title as it received through the public trustee's deed and will not create or participate in the creation of any additional liens or encumbrances against the Property following issuance of the public trustee's deed to the holder. The holder shall not be liable for any of the costs of conveyance to the APCHA or its designee. d. Release. In the event that the holder is issued a public trustee's deed and neither the APCHA, the Board or the City Council exercise the option to purchase, as provided herein, the APCHA shall cause to be recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County a full and complete release of the affecting the Property which appear in said records in Book at Page Such release shall be placed of record within 14 days after demand therefor by the holder following expiration of the option and a certified copy of the release shall be mailed to the holder upon its recordation. e. Perpetuities savings clause. If any of the terms, covenants, conditions, restrictions, uses, limitations, obligations or options created by this option to purchase shall be unlawful or void for violation of: (a) the rule against perpetuities or some analogous statutory provision, (b) the rule restricting restraints on alienation, or (c) any other statutory or common law rules imposing like or similar time limits, then such provision shall continue only for the period of the lives of the current duly elected and seated Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado, their now living descendants, if any, and the survivor of them, plus twenty-one (21) years. f. Successors and Assigns. Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions and covenants contained herein shall inure to and be binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. g. Modifications. The parties hereto agree that any modification to this option to purchase shall be effective only when made by writings signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the day and year written below. HOLDER OF FIRST DEED OF TRUST: BY: authorized officer TITLE: MAILING ADDRESS: STATE OF COUNTY OF (date) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 199 , by Witness my hand and official seal, My commission expires: Notary Public THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY: By: authorized officer (date) TITLE: STATE OF ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 199_, by Witness my hand and official seal, My commission expires: Notary Public BORROWER: (date) (date) STATE OF ) SS. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 199, by Witness my hand and official seal, My commission expires: Notary Public ob • March 20, 1992 West Hopkins Townhomes Landscape Cost Estimate F laostone Sod Topsoil & spreading Fine Grading 3" Cottonwoods 2" Aspen 3" Shubert Choke Cherry 12' Colorado Spruce Sprinkler System Submersible Pump Pesper_.tfully submitted, j Mar, Bedell, President Landforms, Inc. MB/mck P;C. MARK BEDELL 536 SF @ $9.00/51' 7,200 SF @ $.30/5F 140 CuYds C $20.00/CuYd 8 @ $185.00/ea 6 @ $125.00/ea 8 @ $225.00/ea 4 @ $550.00/ea Total Cost Estimate LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ff SITE CONSTRUCTION Post Office Box 1381 Aspen, Colorado 81612 303/920-3939 $ 4,824.00 2 ,160.00 2,800.00 865.00 1,480.00 750.00 1,800.00 2,200.00 6,000.00 1,600.00 $ 24,479.00 February 19, 1992 G O. Box 2155 MEYER INC. spen, Colorado 81612 k303) 925.6727 Fax (303) 925-4157 CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS Mr. David Tolen ASPEN/PITKIN HOUSING AUTHORITY 39551 Highway 82 Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: West Hopkins Townhomes Proiect Dear Dave: Enclosed for your use are copies of my calculation sheets regarding storm drainage, schedules of both general public improvements and on -site drainage improvements and a cost estimate for both public and on -site construction of these facilities. These items are provided in follow-up to my letter proposal to you dated February 11, 1992. Drainage calculations yield an on -site storage requirement of 197 cubic feet which is accomplished on our site drainage plan with two (2) drywell structures which are five (5) feet in diameter and approximately twelve (12) feet deep. These drywells are relatively large due to the relatively high percentage of impervious surface created by the project design when compared to the existing site which is a grassy area without structures of any kind. The City of Aspen requires that the net difference in flow between the undeveloped and developed conditions be retained on -site. The drywells are interconnected to allow flow between them if one should fill up first. The design also allows surface overflow from the eastern drywell via an off -site graded swale. Roof drains within the courtyard area are piped directly to the drywells. The schedule of improvements is an item I have given to Heidi Hoffman already for use by the cost estimators and includes quantities only. The cost estimate sheet is for use as a cross- reference for the estimator's work as well as for Sunny Vann's use in negotiating the financial assurances requirements with the City for the public improvements. Please feel free to call me if I may discuss these figures further or provide further information. Very Truly Yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC. 7 Jay W. Hammond, P.E. Principal, Aspen Office JH/jh91133CE cc: Sunny Vann Heidi Hoffman 1001 Grand Avenue, Suite 2-E • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 9 (303) 945-1004 February 18, 1992 West Hopkins Townhomes Drainage Calculations Peak Run-off Q = CIA in cfs C = Runoff Rainfall Existing Total site = 0.283 acres + = 12,327.48 ft. Proposed SF G %A Wtd Gravel Parking 500 .50 4.06 .0203 Grass 11,827.48 .20 95.94 .1919 .2122 QME _ (.2122) (.365 ft/hr) (12,327.48 ft2 = 954.8003 ft3/hr = .2652 cfs SF C %A Wtd Building Coverage 6,230 .98 50.54 .4953 Paving/Walkways 1,990 .98 16.14 .1582 Landscape 4,107.48 .25 33.32 .0833 Qt00D = (.7368) (.365ft/hr) (12,327.48 ft2) = 3315.2539 ft3/hr = .9209 cfs :.Difference of existing to developed =.6557 cfs. For 10 minute design storm, storage volume = 393.47ft3 With 2 drywell structures = 197 ft3/drywell Use 6011 ID structures .7368 • West Hopkins Townhomes Public Improvements Schedule Curb & Gutter 245 L.F. Excavation (245' x 10' x 1211) 75 Cll. Yd. Class 6 Base Course 60 Cu. Yd. HBP Patch (3" x 1470 ft2) 30 Tons Sidewalk (not to be constructed at this time) (240 L.F. x 5' x 411) 1,200 S.F. (15 Cu-Yd) Relocate irrigation ditch - 130 L.F. Extend existing 12" CMP Irrigation Culvert - 5 L.F. Install 18" CMP riser w/grate On -site Drainage Schedule Roof drain connections to drywells - 150 L.F. 4" PVC Drywell to Drywell overflow 31 L.F. 611 PVC Drywell structures (2 total) 4 ea. 60" ID Perforated concrete pipe sections 2 ea. 60" ID Solid wall concrete pipe sections 2 ea. Cast -in -place pads @ 1.1 cu.yd. ea. 2 ea. Precast 6011 reinforced concrete lids w/24".access hole 2 ea. Neenah #R-2112 Manhole frames w/type "A" grate 4 tons Cl 6 Roadbase 20 tons 1 1/2" washed rock West Hopkins Townhomes Public Improvements Cost Estimate Curb & Gutter 245 L.F. @ $15/L.F. $3,675.00 Unclassified Exc. 75 C.Y. @ $ 9/C.Y. 675.00 Cl. 6 Base Course 120 Tons @ $14/Ton 1,680.00 HBP Patching 30 Tons @ $50/Ton 1,500.00 Sidewalk 135 S.Y. @ $30/SY 4,050.00 Relocated Irrigation Ditch (Bentonite-Lined) 130 L.F. @ $12/L.F. 1,560.00 Extend Existing 12" CMP 5 L.F. @ $25IL.F. 125.00 Install 18" CMP Riser & Grate Lump Sum 250.00 Total $13,515.00 (W/O Sidewalk) $ 9,465.00 On -Site Drainage Improvements Cost Estimate Roof Drains 150 L.F. 4" PVC @ $20/F.F. $ 3,000.00 Drywell interconnect 31 L.F. 6" PVC @ $28/L.F. 868.00 Drywell structures 2 each @ $3,000 ea. $ 6,000.00 Total, on -site items $ 9,868.00