Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.201906111 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION June 11, 2019 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I.WORK SESSION I.A.Housing Development Update I.B.Council Round table Discussion Regarding Housing 1 Page 1 of 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Everson, Affordable Housing Development Project Manager THRU: Sara Ott & Scott Miller, City Manager’s Office DATE OF MEMO: June 7, 2019 MEETING DATE: June 11, 2019 RE: 150 Fund (APCHA) Affordable Housing Development Work Plan REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting approval of staff work plan for 150 Fund (APCHA) affordable housing development or alternative direction from Council. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: At the January 29, 2019 work session, Aspen City Council provided staff with the direction items listed below. DISCUSSION: Staff cannot accurately predict the quantity of units which may result from the work described below because the lumber yard will require a public land use hearing process to determine density. An estimated range might be around 160 to 220 units of new affordable housing combined between the Burlingame Phase 3 and lumber yard projects. 1) Do not prepare for the 2020 budget cycle to update the demand information for the next 10- year period and potentially beyond Staff was instead directed to utilize data from the 2019 Greater Roaring Fork Regional Housing Study along with prior information from past City & APCHA studies for planning purposes. 2) Go forward with the Burlingame 3 outreach to neighborhood and larger community. Prepare for design and construction per staff’s proposed development plan. Perform a review of existing entitlements and advise Council of the possibility of further increasing the density at Burlingame Ranch. The City of Aspen does not have the unilateral right to increase the density at Burlingame Ranch. The existing development approvals for the remaining phase of Burlingame Ranch were executed by Aspen City Council on July 25, 2011 in Ordinance 22 of 2011 (the Ordinance) and includes 10- year vested rights. The existing approvals allow for construction of 79 additional condominiums and 2 additional single family homes. The Ordinance caps the total number of units at Burlingame Ranch at 258 units based on reference to the 2009 "Density Agreement" with the Burlingame HOA which was approved by a 2/3 vote of Burlingame owners at the time and by City Council via Resolution 82 of 2009 which also requires that any subsequent density increases at Burlingame Ranch shall require unanimous approval by all owners at Burlingame Ranch (currently 177 units). The 2009 Density Agreement was negotiated over the course of 2009 between staff and the Burlingame homeowners. The agreement added 22 units to the prior maximum allowable density at Burlingame Ranch, eliminated the monthly mobility fee for homeowners, increased the parking ratio from 1.67 spaces per unit up to 2.0 spaces per unit, and added numerous additional commitments upon the City. The parking increase for Phase I was retro-active, therefore the City 2 Page 2 of 5 funded and executed a project in 2014 through 2015 to engineer and construct 31 additional parking spaces in the Phase I area of the neighborhood. Attempting to further increase density at Burlingame Ranch would require the City of Aspen to break its commitment to the homeowners in the 2009 Density Agreement and would also require unanimous approval by all homeowners of the existing 177 units at Burlingame Ranch – which is likely impossible or otherwise prohibitively costly. For these reasons, pursuing a lengthy process to add density at Burlingame Ranch, above what is already approved, is not recommended by staff. Significant changes to the Ordinance or to the recorded Planned Development (PD) would require yet another land use public hearing process for Burlingame Ranch. Staff is recommending that the 2019 community outreach should focus less on modifying significant details of the PD and instead should focus on reminding the community of the facts around what is already approved and also making incremental design improvements based on lessons learned from the prior phases, but without significant changes to the PD and without further land use process. Under the current approvals, the City has the right to go directly to the building permit application process, but staff proposes to perform this round of community outreach in a voluntary manner even though this is not a step required by regulation. Just as the City did for the prior phase of Burlingame Ranch, staff proposes to focus the community outreach toward the residents of Burlingame Ranch for their convenience. In addition, and as was also previously done, staff proposes to also focus part of the 2019 community outreach to the larger Aspen community. Input received from the community will be vetted and verified with City Council prior to staff creating a package of construction documents and submitting any building permit applications. Staff will provide updated cost estimates when construction documents are produced. 3 Page 3 of 5 To facilitate the proposed process, staff released an RFP earlier this spring and is in the process of selecting a design team to perform the community outreach and related design and engineering services. Staff is working toward placing a proposed contract, which will contain more details on this effort, on the Council consent agenda on June 24, 2019. If we collect community feedback and work with Council on any proposed incremental design improvements which are not considered by the Community Development Director to be significant modifications to the PD, Council could then direct staff to create construction documents and apply for building permits without the need for any further land use action or public hearings. If the community outreach process and any associated incremental design improvements can be completed by end of 2019, then construction documents could be created and submitted for building permits in 2020 and Council could be presented with an opportunity to appropriate funds for construction to begin in 2021. 3) Create a plan to move forward with community outreach related to planning housing development at the lumber yard This effort will mark the first time that the City has in any way solicited community feedback related to the development of affordable housing at the lumber yard property. As such, it is a fundamental opportunity to begin an earnest process of community involvement in the future development of the affordable housing facilities at the lumber yard site. This first round of lumber yard community outreach should focus mainly on the community’s needs and desires related to this development opportunity. The fundamental and philosophical topics of engagement should include the following and more: • Affordable housing needs which should be fulfilled by this development • User demographics and stakeholder identification • Community needs in the surrounding neighborhood • Residential and commercial use needs analysis • Harmonizing and integrating with the nearby community • Land utilization exercises and project phasing • Transportation, mobility, parking and traffic impacts • Environmental priorities and sustainability • Parks and open space • Public health and safety / highway concerns Staff plans to integrate the lumber yard community outreach with the Burlingame community outreach described above, and to the extent possible, with outreach for other concurrent, related city projects in process. To facilitate the proposed process, staff released an RFP earlier this spring and is in the process of selecting a design team to perform the community outreach and conceptual design services. Staff is working toward placing a proposed contract, which will contain more details on this effort, on the Council consent agenda on June 24, 2019. Also, because the lumber yard outreach and 4 Page 4 of 5 conceptual design process does not have an approved budget for 2019, Council will need to approve the 2019 supplemental budget as part of the contract approval on June 24. The current lease at the lumber yard runs through July 31, 2025, but can be terminated with 30 months’ notice. The process as envisioned by staff may be ready for construction ahead of the expiration of the lease, and below is a very rough outline of the overall proposed lumber yard planning process: • 2019 Community outreach and creation of conceptual design alternatives • 2020 Community outreach to select and further hone the chosen conceptual design • 2021 Design and engineering to 50% complete and draft land use development application • 2022 Land use process plus design and engineering to complete recording of PD • 2023-2024 Design and engineering to 99% complete, building permit application process • 2025-2026 Construction, may include a construction phasing plan 4) Prepare budgets and perform due diligence related to the needed repairs at Truscott. To best develop scopes of work for the needed repairs at Truscott 200-300, staff recommends that we commission a comprehensive architectural/engineering study of both the building envelope water infiltration damage as well as the stormwater infiltration issues. A similar report was commissioned years ago related to the condition of the ownership facilities at Centennial. The report should describe the details and the extent of the damage conditions and should also prescribe the steps and details necessary for appropriate remediation based on remaining years of service expected of the 46-unit facility which was built in 1985. The prescribed steps and details for remediation in the report could then serve as a scope of work for the needed repairs. Observation work may require partial deconstruction in some areas, and the overall effort will likely require numerous months for procurement, coordination, building permits (if needed), on-site observation and documentation. Once a comprehensive report has been commissioned, received and studied, then staff could create an RFP to solicit builders for pricing and proposals for the necessary repairs based on the scope of work contained in the report. Staff recommends commissioning the report be tabled until 2020. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: An LRP which includes the lumber yard effort as well as the others described above might look like the attached Exhibit A – Fund 150 LRP, which appears that it could be supported by 150 Fund cash flows and with additional funds available along the way in case Council has an opportunity to purchase additional land. ALTERNATIVES: At Council’s direction and given sufficient discussion of the risks involved, staff could curtail the Burlingame or lumber yard outreach efforts and move forward more quickly. Also at Council’s direction, staff could accelerate commissioning of a comprehensive architectural/engineering study of the Truscott 200/300 facilities. Council could additionally direct staff to seek additional land purchases, and depending upon the magnitude of cost involved, could also direct staff to pursue debt financing as needed for additional projects. Other alternatives may also exist. 5 Page 5 of 5 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends moving forward with the suggested approach. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Proposed Fund 150 LRP. Includes Burlingame 3 Outreach, Design, Construction; Truscott Repairs; Lumber Yard Outreach, Design, Construction 6 150 Housing Development Fund ‐ Staff Proposed Capital Projects 2018 ‐ 2026 Project 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Total AHP Partnership Rental Housing +45 New Units $25,650,000 ($9,420,000)$16,230,000 Burlingame Ph3 Community Outreach and Design $350,000 $1,150,000 $1,500,000 Burlingame Ph3, Buildings 8-11, 36 new condos $20,000,000 $20,000,000 Burlingame Ph3, Buildings 12-15, 43 new condos $24,000,000 $24,000,000 Burlingame Ph3, Single Family Residences, 2 units $2,500,000 $2,500,000 Lumber Yard Outreach and Conceptual Design $175,000 $175,000 Lumber Yard Outreach and Design $300,000 $300,000 Lumber Yard Design, Engineering, LU Application $300,000 $300,000 Lumber Yard Land Use Process and PD Recording $500,000 $500,000 Lumber Yard Design, Engineering, BP Application $300,000 $300,000 $600,000 Lumber Yard Construction $30,000,000 $30,000,000 $60,000,000 Truscott II CHFA Loan Payoff $4,930,000 $4,930,000 Truscott Bldgs 200-300 Engineering Study $50,000 $50,000 Truscott Bldgs 200-300 Repairs to 46 Units $10,000,000 $10,000,000 Truscott Bldgs 10-70 Repairs to 41 Units $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Truscott Bldg 100 (51 Units)$500,000 $500,000 Total Expenditures $25,650,000 $5,455,000 $1,500,000 $30,300,000 $25,500,000 $3,300,000 $300,000 $30,000,000 $30,000,000 $152,005,000 Ending Fund Balance $23,680,646 $25,977,856 $43,499,826 $30,837,426 $25,058,676 $32,817,396 $44,390,726 $26,994,736 $9,779,196 7 MEMORANDUM 1 TO:Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Michelle Bonfils Thibeault, Project Manager Asset Management THRU: Sara Ott & Scott Miller, City Manager’s Office DATE OF MEMO: June 7, 2019 MEETING DATE: June 11, 2019 RE:Water Place Phase II Housing –Information on status of project REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting direction on preferred financing option(s) for Phase II of the Water Place 505 Fund housing development. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:In 2018 Council directed Staff to conduct a feasibility analysis of the site for employee housing development with the intent of contracting an architecture team in 2019 to begin the two-year design and entitlement process. BACKGROUND: The need for additional housing for City of Aspen employees to best serve emergency services and retain employees was identified as an important goal for the City as an organization. A 4.75-acre site on the Water Plant property (+/-49 acres) has been identified as a location for more City employee housing. The site neighbors the existing Twin Ridge neighborhood and Water Place affordable housing on Doolittle Drive. The architecture firm Roland + Broughton was hired in the spring of 2018 to conduct a site feasibility analysis including studying density options. The Roland + Broughton study was reviewed at a 2018 City Council work session where the “Gather Option” that included approximately 48 units in duplex buildings was the preferred site plan and density of the initial study results. Specifics such as unit-mix and unit sizes were not created in significant detail. DISCUSSION:In March 2019, the City solicited proposals from Architectural Teams for neighborhood outreach, design development, construction documents and permitting. The City specifically asked proposing teams to consider systems-built construction as an opportunity for cost savings. Five proposals were submitted ranging from small to large firms, with budgets ranging from $600k to over $1M. The 359 Design, LLC team submitted a proposal that is both reasonable in budget and comprehensive in utilizing systems-built construction. Systems-built construction can be 15%+ more cost effective than traditional construction methods. The 359 Design Team proposal also includes significant neighborhood outreach utilizing BendonAdams. The general schedule for Water Place Phase II is estimated to be 1.Conceptual Design –14 weeks 2.Schematic Design –12 weeks 3.Design Development --12 weeks (Public process and Approval Time 6 months) 4.Construction Documents –2 –3 months 5.Construction In summary, this project could be ready for construction June 2021. 8 MEMORANDUM 2 FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: A budget of $3,350,000 is allocated for the design development of Water Place Phase II. After the Roland + Broughton feasibility study, $3,215,000 is available to fund architectural services to create a final design for the Water Place II Housing development. Approval of both the architectural team ($741,885) and Construction Manager as Advisor ($349,720) contracts will total $1,091,605. Construction costs based on a preliminary site analysis estimate $30-40M for complete development of the project. A more accurate construction budget will be produced after a formal design is created and approved. The Council will need to determine if it is interested in cash, debt, or a combination of to finance the construction of the project. Financing options include: Public Private Partnerships (i.e. Aspen Valley Hospital, Aspen School District, etc.) Wheeler Loan Certificates of Participation ALTERNATIVES: Contracting 359 Design Team now will allow construction to start in 2021. Postponing architectural work and land use entitlements to the future will result in increased construction costs. Construction costs in the Roaring Fork valley have been increasing 5-8+% annually. RECOMMENDED ACTION:Staff recommends approving the 359 Design Team contract for $741,885 to create a site plan, architectural designs, and construction drawings for Water Place Housing Phase II when the contract is formally presented to City Council. A completed design will allow the City to better understand the construction costs for the project. 9