Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20150526 AGENDA Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission SPECIAL MEETING May 26, 2015 4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISIT II. ROLL CALL III. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public IV. MINUTES A. May 19, 2015 Minutes V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 100 S. Spring St - Growth Management and Commercial Design Review B. Resolution 54 - 601 Rio Grande Pl - Obermeyer Place Rezoning and PD Amendment VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. BOARD REPORTS IX. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legaJ notice (affi d avit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clari fications of ap plicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met. Revised April 2, 2014 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Page 1 Ryan Walterscheid, Chair, called the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members, Stan Gibbs, Jasmine Tygre, Keith Goode, Brian McNellis, and Skippy Mesirow. Also present from City staff; Debbie Quinn, Chris Bendon, Jessica Garrow, and Becky Levy. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Ms. Tygre referred to a recent article in the paper which reported high occupancy rates for the winter season. She asked Staff if it would be possible to obtain the details of the report. Ms. Garrow thought Mr. Bill Tomcich may be able to provide the report. She stated she will look into it. STAFF COMMENTS: There were no comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments. MINUTES March 17, 2015 Minutes – Ms. Tygre moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Mr. Mesirow. All in favor, motion carried. April 7, 2015 Minutes – Mr. Goode moved to approve the minutes with the modification requested. The motion was seconded. All in favor, motion carried. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Mr. McNellis stated he would need to recuse himself from the 200 S. Aspen St public hearing. Mr. Walterscheid stated he would have to recuse himself from the 200 S. Aspen St public hearing. 200 S Aspen St, Hotel Lenado, Planned Development – Continued from 4/7/2015 Mr. Goode opened the hearing for the 200 S Aspen St public hearing. The applicant is working on revisions to the proposal and was not ready to present to P&Z. Staff recommended tabling the application until the applicant is ready to present. Ms. Tygre motioned to table the application, seconded by Mr. Gibbs. All in favor, motion carried. Mr. Goode closed the hearing. Other Business – Code Amendment Discussion Ms. Garrow informed P&Z there is no set timeframe yet for the potential code amendments to be in front of City Council. In preparation, Staff is gathering feedback regarding the items being discussed at tonight’s meeting. P1 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Page 2 Elevators in Commercial / Mixed-Use Buildings Ms. Garrow stated there are two possible additions regarding elevators in commercial buildings. a) Add a requirement for elevators to provide access to all floors in a commercial or mixed-use building. Currently, there are no requirements. b) Add a requirement for separate elevators for residential and commercial uses. Mr. Bendon noted the Gap building as an example of item a). The elevator does not serve all units on all floors. Mr. Walterscheid commented the elevator in the Gap building does reach the basement, but the tenant modified the basement space which eliminated access to the elevator for the ground floor commercial tenants using the basement for storage. Mr. Walterscheid agrees there should be access provided to the trash, recycle and utility areas for commercial tenants. Mr. Bendon stated Staff would prefer to avoid situations requiring retrofits to address ADA requirements or changes in use for a building. Ms. Tygre noted there are existing buildings without elevators. Mr. Walterscheid agrees with the intent of the change requested. Mr. Goode feels requiring multiple elevators may require significant space and cost. The commission generally agrees with the requirement of elevators to ensure access, but questioned the requirement of physically separate elevators for residential and commercial uses. Certificates of Affordable Housing Ms. Garrow reviewed the six proposed modifications as listed below. 1) Public Sector Limits Staff is proposing to codify Council’s previously provided direction that no public sector or non-profit entity may use the program. Mr. Walterscheid asked about the exclusion of non-profits. Mr. Bendon stated the idea was to not allow entities who utilize public dollars, especially local public dollars, to utilize the program. P&Z felt the change sounded reasonable. 2) Dormitory Units Staff is recommending dormitory units not be eligible for credits. They want to avoid people creating dormitory units for credits. Ms. Tygre and Mr. McNellis felt this was acceptable because dormitory units do not satisfy the long term needs of the housing program. Mr. Mesirow would like to see if the units could somehow be included. P2 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Page 3 3) Fractional Credits Staff is recommending codifying the ability to provide credit for any overage created as units are built to satisfy a requirement. Staff believes this may encourage owners to build more units onsite. Mr. Goode asked how the City deals with past situations when owners had an overage they were not compensated for at the time. Mr. Bendon replied the change would only impact applications moving forward from the date approved. P&Z supports the proposed change. 4) Sales Limitations Staff is proposing only for sale units be allowed for housing credits. Mr. Goode would like further investigation to determine if rentals could possibly be included. 5) Category Limitations Ms. Garrow stated the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) identified the need for lower category units at this time. Staff recommends limiting the credit program to units defined as category 4 or lower. Ms. Tygre agrees with the recommendation. Mr. Walterscheid feels there may be unintended consequences. Mr. Mesirow stated a recent study conducted by the Next Generation Advisory Commission found there was a shortage of higher category units. Mr. Morris stated he understands Mr. Mesirow’s concerns but wants additional information to confirm the need. P&Z supports the proposed change but feels additional information may be helpful to confirm the exact need. 6) Location Limitations P&Z feels it is best to limit the locations to the City of Aspen only at this time to limit sprawl. At some point in the future, it may be necessary to consider the Urban Growth Boundary. Mr. Walterscheid asked staff if any discussions with the county has occurred. Mr. Bendon replied at this time no, but they would welcome a discussion. Timeshare Code Amendment Ms. Garrow reviewed the proposed code changes. Mr. Gibbs added that allowing houses to timeshare may encourage higher occupancy which he supports. Mr. Mesirow added he would support changes to allow higher occupancy as well. P3 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Page 4 CC / C-1 Clarifications Ms. Levy provided the background regarding the impacts to free market residential units located in CC and C-1 zone districts with the enactment of Ordinance 25, series 2012. Permitted uses on the fourth floor are not addressed in the code, despite the existence of several buildings with four floors above ground level in both districts. The City has received requests from owners of the fourth floor units who wish to upgrade or expand their units. The current code allows the units to continue to exist, but consider them units of non-conforming use and therefore subject to the non-conforming portion of the code. The owners of the units experience difficulties obtaining financing and building permits based on the non-conforming status. Staff is proposing to amend the code to clarify the free market residential units established prior to Ordinance 25, series 2012 continue in CC and C-1 as conforming as long as they do not expand. Currently there is a 10% cap for a 12 month period to improve or maintain a non-conforming unit. One of the properties impacted is the Concept 600 building located at 600 E Main St. Mr. Bendon explained the non-conforming portion of the code needs a complete review and upgrades. He also explained at the time Ordinance 25, series 2015 was approved, emphasis was placed on reducing height to 28 ft and eliminating new penthouses and not necessarily realizing the impacts to existing units. He is aware there is a substantial number of units impacted by this ordinance. He also feels the 10% cap does not make sense for the residential units. Mr. Bendon then stated this was not technically a public hearing but was aware of members of the public at the meeting who may want to provide comment if allowed. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for members of the public to provide comment if they wished. Mr. Jim Smith lives at the Concept 600 building is also president of the homeowners association. He stated he became aware of the issues when he attempted to obtain a building permit six months ago to expand their porch. He stated they would like to see the long existing free market resident units recognized as conforming. He reviewed old meetings in an effort to determine the focus of the efforts to approve Ordinance 25, series 2012 which he feels focused on future development instead of the existing units. He also feels it was an unintended consequence. He would like the code to be clarified to allow units to be maintained, upgraded and improved as needed as well as allow other provisions available prior to the ordinance. Ms. Lindsey Smith also lives at the Concept 600 building. She described the type of tenants in the building including long term renters, short term renters, and locals. The free market units are not separated from the renters. She feels the building represents a cross section of the visitors and residents of Aspen. Many improvements have been completed to the building to meet safety and ADA requirements. She reiterated the same requests as Mr. Smith. Mr. Bill Sterling is a commercial user of the building as of 1978. He is troubled by the non-conforming status and feels it may negatively impact the real estate market values and impede financing. He would like the ordinance to be amended to allow flexibility to maintain and upgrade the units. He feels the ordinance had unintended consequences. Mr. Jody Edwards represents the unit owners and feels Staff’s proposal is a good first step. He is concerned the owners will not be able to expand their units. As examples, he stated owners may want to expand their deck to the near wall, combine w adjacent units or extend the top roof to cover their deck. He noted some owners had completed similar projects in the past. P4 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Page 5 Mr. Walterscheid then closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Walterscheid asked Staff for rebuttal. Mr. Bendon stated Staff wants to focus on making the units conforming to stay with the intent of the ordinance. The owners have other mechanisms to utilize to pursue expansions or changes in use for the units. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for comments from the commissioners. Ms. Tygre does not like to change code that only affects one property but feels the ordinance was over- reaching. She feels it is best to keep the scope narrow at this point in time. Mr. Gibbs agreed. Mr. Mesirow asked if the intent of City Council was to cease development of larger penthouses. Mr. Bendon stated he doesn’t expect the units to amortize away and feels at the time the ordinance was approved, the focus was on the impact the penthouses had on the commercial use of the buildings along with height, mass and scale. Mr. McNellis asked how the 10% cap was determined. Mr. Bendon stated it is an outdated percentage and Ms. Levy added that she found other cities are eliminating the cap altogether. Mr. Bendon stated Staff will present options to City Council to consider to move forward. Land Use Code Applicability Ms. Garrow described the proposed code amendments to address minor amendments, major amendments and multi-step processes. P&Z supports staff’s recommendations. Mr. Walterscheid then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager P5 IV.A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Justin Barker, Planner RE: 100 South Spring Street – Growth Management Review and Consolidated Commercial Design Review Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 & Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 Public Hearing MEETING DATE: May 26, 2015 APPLICANT /OWNER: 100 South Spring Street LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Davis Horn, Inc. LOCATION: 100 South Spring Street CURRENT ZONING Mixed Use (MU) SUMMARY: The Applicant requests of the Planning and Zoning Commission approvals for Growth Management Review to relocate an existing affordable housing unit on site and consolidated Commercial Design Review to remodel the existing structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Growth Management Review to relocate the existing affordable housing unit on site and approval of Commercial Design Review to remodel the existing structure. Photo of 100 South Spring Street LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission are being requested: • Growth Management Review – for relocation of an existing affordable housing unit, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470 (P&Z is the final review authority). • Commercial Design Review – for remodel of the existing structure, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.412 (P&Z is the final review authority). P6 VI.A. 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 2 of 6 BACKGROUND: The subject site is located at the intersection of Spring Street and Main Street on the southeast corner. The property is zoned Mixed Use (MU) and is approximately 3,000 square feet (one Townsite Lot). There is an existing three-story structure on the site that has a floor area of approximately 3,131 square feet (2,439 sf net leasable), which includes a rental affordable housing unit of approximately 438 square feet floor area (400 sf net livable). The Mixed Use zone district allows 0.75:1 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for commercial uses (2,250 sf), which may be increased to 1:1 through special review. Overall allowable FAR is 2:1. The existing development was granted a floor area bonus to develop additional commercial space above the allowable in exchange for development a moderate income employee housing unit. The existing building is nonconforming in regards to commercial floor area, and the north and west setbacks. The property also does not contain any parking spaces that conform to the Code, although three were required for the commercial component. The parking requirement for the existing employee unit was waived by City Council. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing building and relocate the affordable housing unit from the south side of the property to the north side in the small cabin addition. The proposed commercial space will be converted from three stories to two with larger floor to ceiling heights. This reduces the commercial floor area to about 2,389 square feet (2,057 sf net leasable) and the overall structure floor area to about 2,843 square feet. The net livable of the relocated affordable housing unit is proposed to remain at 400 square feet. The applicant is also proposing the affordable housing unit remain as a rental. The applicant is proposing to convert the south side of the building into a two-car garage to satisfy two (2) of the 2.057 parking spaces required by the commercial space. The remaining 0.057 spaces are proposed to be mitigated with cash-in-lieu. The applicant is also proposing new exterior materials for the building. The affordable housing unit will be clad in cedar siding and roofing, and the commercial space will be zinc metal siding and roofing. The public amenity space is proposed along Spring Street, which will include paved area, a sculpture garden area, and bicycle parking. P7 VI.A. The applicant is requesting consolidated Commercial Design review and Growth Management review approvals. According to the Code, a proposed development may only be consolidated if it does not require growth management review and is of limited scope. The growth management review is proposed as a separate resolution for P&Z to review and decide upon prior to the commercial design review. STAFF EVALUATION: Growth Management Review (Exhibit A): Relocation of the affordable housing unit from the south side of the structure to the north side of the structure is considered demolition of affordable housing under Growth Management. The demolition of affordable housing as well as development of new affordable housing shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, per certain review criteria. These include compliance with APCHA guidelines, fifty percent or more of the unit above grade, and deed-restriction as “for sale” units (although rental units may sometimes be accepted). Staff Response: The proposed relocation of the affordable housing unit meets the criteria located in Exhibit A. The proposed new unit will be the same size as the existing and designated as a Category 2, comparable to the “moderate income category” that the existing unit is designated. APCHA was referred on this application and has recommended approval of the proposed relocation and affordable housing unit as a rental, with conditions (See Exhibit C). If the proposed unit is found out of compliance for one year, the unit shall be required to become an ownership unit in accordance with APCHA procedures. Commercial Design Review (Exhibits B): The property is located on the edge of the Central Mixed Use Character Area. The primary design objectives of this character area are: • Reflect a transition in character between the Commercial Core and the outlying residential neighborhoods. • Maintain a sense of front yards with landscaping. • Provide a sense of human scale. • Maintain a visually interesting street edge. • Encourage outdoor use areas. • Minimize visual impacts of parking. Staff Response: Staff finds that the proposed project generally meets the design objectives and guidelines of the Central Mixed Use Character Area. The project is mostly using the existing building form, which presents a transition between commercial and residential, and contains a mix of these uses. The existing yard between the structure and Spring Street is being enhanced to provide a more interesting street edge and create an area for outdoor use. Parking impacts are being reduced by moving parking to within the structure and off the alley/right-of-way. The massing of the building is generally remaining the same since the existing structure is being used. There are a few minor changes, which can be seen between the existing and proposed picture, shown in Figures 1 & 2. A small portion of the structure in the middle is being lowered to a one-story mass and the rest of the middle segment is raised to align with the rest of the 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 3 of 6 P8 VI.A. building to the south. This allows the structure to read more as two distinct masses with a connecting element between them. Additionally a portion of the second story facing the alley is being cut out to allow for a terrace. Figure 1 - Existing Building Figure 2 - Proposed Building The proposed materials are appropriate, however staff has recommended that they be similar in color to relate to each other better, and that the zinc is patinated to reduce the reflection/glare effects of a metallic siding. The proposed design includes sliding zinc doors that can be used to cover the glass openings on Spring Street. These glass openings are critical to the street level interest and interaction between the pedestrian and the building. They also reflect the 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 4 of 6 P9 VI.A. 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 5 of 6 Figure 3 – Proposed Site Plan 1. Paved area 2. Sculpture area 3. Bike parking area commercial character that is common of a public usable space instead of a private one. Staff recommends that they are removed from the design. The proposed public amenity space, shown in Figure 3 greatly improves on the existing conditions. Currently the area facing Spring Street is just grass and does not engage or invite pedestrians. The proposed space will be paved and include an area for sculpture. The upper portion of the space incorporates bicycle parking into the plan. Nonconformities: The existing structure was granted a commercial floor area bonus in exchange for developing an employee housing unit on site. The existing floor area ratio may be maintained as long as it is not increased or demolition is not triggered on the project. The proposal actually reduces the commercial floor area and overall floor area. Existing setback nonconformities may also be maintained as long as they are not expanded or increased. The proposal does not do either of these. Parking: The proposed development requires 2.057 parking spaces for the commercial component. The applicant is proposing 2 parking spaces and a cash-in-lieu payment for the remaining 0.057 spaces. A cash-in-lieu payment is permitted by right for commercial uses within the Aspen Infill Area. The existing affordable housing unit was waived the required one parking space by City Council. This parking waiver may be maintained for the relocated unit, as demolition on the entire structure is not triggered. Therefore the relocated affordable housing unit is not required to provide a parking space. REFERRAL DEPARTMENTS: APCHA, Utilities Department, and Environmental Health were referred on this application. APCHA has recommended approval of the proposed rental affordable housing unit with conditions (Exhibit C). The original utilities/trash/recycle plan was not acceptable to the Utilities and Environmental Health departments. A revised plan was submitted and has been preliminarily approved by these departments. 1 2 3 P10 VI.A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of consolidated Commercial Design Review and Growth Management with conditions. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, approving Growth Management Review with conditions, and approve Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, approving consolidated Commercial Design Review with conditions, for 100 South Spring Street.” EXHIBITS: A. Review Criteria – Growth Management B. Review Criteria – Commercial Design Review C. APCHA Referral D. Application E. First Supplemental to Application F. Second Supplemental to Application 100 S. Spring Street - Staff Memo Page 6 of 6 P11 VI.A. RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 100 S. SPRING STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT A, BLOCK 28 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITION, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-073-33-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 100 South Spring Street LLC, represented by Davis Horn, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve Growth Management Review for the property commonly known as 100 S. Spring Street, legally described as Lot A, Block 28 of the East Aspen Addition; and, WHEREAS, the property is zoned (MU) Mixed Use; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 26, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, by a ____ to ____ (_ – _) vote, approving Growth Management Review; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: General Approval The Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the demolition and relocation of the employee housing unit as a rental unit at Category 2 income level and a reduction of net leasable for the commercial space. Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 1 of 3 P12 VI.A. Section 2: Affordable Housing The project shall contain one studio unit that meets the following criteria: 1. The unit shall meet the conditions for development of affordable housing stated in the APCHA Guidelines. 2. The unit shall be classified at the Category 2 income level. 3. The unit shall contain a minimum of 400 square feet of net livable area. The Owner shall also record a new deed restriction for the unit. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted for the commercial space until the deed restriction is reviewed and approved by APCHA, and a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the affordable housing unit. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that, in accordance with CRS 38-12-301(1)(a) and (b), the Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that the Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. If the owner requests the unit to become an ownership unit, or it is found that the unit has been out of compliance for one year after notification to the owner, the unit shall become a “for-sale” unit and sold through Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system that meets the same conditions of approval as listed above. Section 3: Commercial Space A reconstruction credit of 2,439 square feet of commercial net leasable is credited toward the Project’s proposed 2,057 square feet of commercial net leasable. Existing and proposed net leasable calculations shall be verified with the Zoning Officer at time of building permit. Section 4: Parking The commercial net leasable generates 2.057 parking spaces. Two (2) off-street parking spaces shall be provided on-site. The remaining 0.057 parking spaces shall be mitigated through a cash-in-lieu payment. The cash-in-lieu payment shall be calculated at the time of building permit submission. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 2 of 3 P13 VI.A. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 26th day of May, 2015. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ______________________________ ______________________________ Debbie Quinn, Asst. City Attorney Ryan Walterscheid, Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 3 of 3 P14 VI.A. RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 100 S. SPRING STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT A, BLOCK 28 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITION, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-073-33-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 100 South Spring Street LLC, represented by Davis Horn, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission approve consolidated Commercial Design Review for the property commonly known as 100 S. Spring Street, legally described as Lot A, Block 28 of the East Aspen Addition; and, WHEREAS, the property is zoned (MU) Mixed Use and located within the Central Mixed Use Character Area; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 26, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. __, Series of 2015, by a ____ to ____ (_ – _) vote, approving consolidated Commercial Design Review; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 1 of 4 P15 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves consolidated Commercial Design Review with the following conditions: 1. The sliding zinc doors shall be removed. 2. The zinc siding shall be patinated. 3. Applicant shall obtain special review approval from the Environmental Health Department for the reduced trash/recycle area size, prior to building permit issuance. 4. The trash/recycle area fence shall be 6’ in height. 5. Mechanical exhaust, ventilation and ductwork shall be vented through the roof and screened, or along the eastern wall. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 26th day of May, 2015. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ______________________________ ______________________________ Debbie Quinn, Asst. City Attorney Ryan Walterscheid, Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Exhibits: A. Approved Site Plan B. Approved Elevations Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 2 of 4 P16 VI.A. Exhibit A Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 3 of 4 P17 VI.A. Exhibit B West Elevation South Elevation North Elevation East Elevation Resolution No. __, Series of 2015 100 S. Spring Street Page 4 of 4 P18 VI.A. EXHIBIT A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW 26.470.050.B General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staff Findings: There is no additional commercial development on the site. Affordable housing does not require allotments. No additional allotments are required for the development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, as well as with any applicable adopted regulatory master plan. Staff Findings: The existing use on the property is commercial with an affordable housing unit. The proposed uses are the same. The proposed development is appropriate as it is located near the downtown core where commercial and affordable housing uses are encouraged. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Staff Findings: The existing structure is non-conforming in regards to setbacks and floor area. The application proposes to reuse the existing structure and does not trigger demolition, and therefore the non-conformities may be maintained. The proposal is reducing the overall floor area, therefore reducing the non-conformity. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable. Staff Findings: The applicant requested consolidated Commercial Design Review for this proposal, given the existing structure is being used and project aspects typically reviewed during Conceptual Review are remaining mostly unchanged. The Community Development Department granted consolidated review. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 1 of 7 P19 VI.A. Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate. Staff Findings: There is no additional commercial development in this proposal. The commercial net leasable area is actually being reduced. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee/Square Footage Conversion. Staff Findings: There is no free-market residential component to this project. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. Staff Findings: There is no additional demand on the public infrastructure with this project. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.470.70.4 Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 2 of 7 P20 VI.A. Staff Findings: The proposed unit complies with the APCHA Guidelines. A recommendation of approval from APCHA is included in Exhibit C. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Affordable housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy-down units. Off-site units shall be provided within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.2. If the mitigation requirement is less than one (1) full unit, a cash-in-lieu payment may be accepted by the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. If the mitigation requirement is one (1) or more units, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3. A Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit may be used to satisfy mitigation requirements by approval of the Community Development Department Director, pursuant to Section 26.540.080 Extinguishment of the Certificate. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. Staff Findings: The proposed unit is a relocated rebuild of the existing affordable housing unit on site, which is considered the mitigation for the existing commercial space. No additional commercial space is proposed, and therefore no additional mitigation is required. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430. Staff Findings: The proposed unit is located entirely above grade. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units required for lodge development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for sale" provision. Staff Findings: The existing affordable housing unit on site is a rental unit. The applicant is proposing to maintain the replacement unit as a rental. APCHA has recommended approval of the unit as a rental, unless the unit is found to be out of compliance for one Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 3 of 7 P21 VI.A. year, upon which time the unit shall become an ownership unit (See Exhibit C). Staff finds this criterion to be met. e. Non-Mitigation Affordable Housing. Affordable housing units that are not required for mitigation, but meet the requirements of Section 26.470.070.4(a-d). The owner of such non-mitigation affordable housing is eligible to receive a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540. Staff Findings: The affordable housing unit is considered the mitigation for the commercial space. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 26.470.070.5 Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing. The combining, demolition, conversion or redevelopment of multi-family housing shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on compliance with the following requirements (see definition of demolition.): 1. Requirements for combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping free-market multi- family housing units: Only one (1) of the following two (2) options is required to be met when combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping a free-market multi-family residential property. To ensure the continued vitality of the community and a critical mass of local working residents, no net loss of density (total number of units) between the existing development and proposed development shall be allowed. a. One-hundred-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-family housing, the applicant shall have the option to construct replacement housing consisting of no less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of units, bedrooms and net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-restricted as resident occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Subsection 4, Affordable housing, of this Section. When this one-hundred-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-market residential development with no additional affordable housing mitigation required as long as there is no increase in the number of free- market residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.3, Expansion of free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use development. b. Fifty-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-family housing and replacement of less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of previous units, bedrooms or net livable area as described above, the applicant shall be required to construct affordable housing consisting of no less than fifty percent (50%) of the number of units, bedrooms and the net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-restricted as Category 4 housing, pursuant to the guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing. Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 4 of 7 P22 VI.A. When this fifty-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may be free-market residential development as long as additional affordable housing mitigation is provided pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.3, Expansion of free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project, and there is no increase in the number of free-market residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.080.2, New free-market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project. 2. One-hundred percent affordable housing replacement. When one-hundred-percent of the free-market multi-family housing units are demolished and are solely replaced with deed- restricted affordable housing units on a site that are not required for mitigation purposes, including any net additional dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.470.070.4, Affordable Housing; all of the units in the redevelopment are eligible for a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Section 26.540 Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit. Any remaining unused free market residential development rights shall be vacated. Staff Findings: Not applicable. 3. Requirements for demolishing affordable multi-family housing units: In the event a project proposes to demolish or replace existing deed-restricted affordable housing units, the redevelopment may increase or decrease the number of units, bedrooms or net livable area such that there is no decrease in the total number of employees housed by the existing units. The overall number of replacement units, unit sizes, bedrooms and category of the units shall be reviewed by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and a recommendation forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff Findings: The existing affordable housing unit on-site is a “moderate income” 400 square foot studio unit. The applicant proposes a 400 square foot studio unit at Category 2. APCHA has been referred on this application and recommends approval with conditions (See Exhibit C). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. Fractional unit requirement. When the affordable housing replacement requirement of this Section involves a fraction of a unit, cash-in-lieu may be provided only upon the review and approval of the City Council, to meet the fractional requirement only, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3, Provision of required affordable housing via a cash- in-lieu payment. Staff Findings: Not applicable. 5. Location requirement. Multi-family replacement units, both free-market and affordable, shall be developed on the same site on which demolition has occurred, unless the owner shall demonstrate and the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that replacement of the units on site would be in conflict with the parcel's zoning or would be an inappropriate solution due to the site's physical constraints. When either of the above circumstances result, the owner shall replace the maximum number of units on site which the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the site can accommodate and may replace the remaining units off site, at a location Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 5 of 7 P23 VI.A. determined acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. Staff Findings: The proposed location of the replacement unit is on the same property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Timing requirement. Any replacement units required to be deed-restricted as affordable housing shall be issued a certificate of occupancy, according to the Building Department, and be available for occupancy at the same time as, or prior to, any redeveloped free- market units, regardless of whether the replacement units are built on site or off site. Staff Findings: This is required in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. Redevelopment agreement. The applicant and the City shall enter into a redevelopment agreement that specifies the manner in which the applicant shall adhere to the approvals granted pursuant to this Section and penalties for noncompliance. The agreement shall be recorded before an application for a demolition permit may be accepted by the City. Staff Findings: The requirements of redevelopment are included in the proposed resolution. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. Growth management allotments. The existing number of free-market residential units, prior to demolition, may be replaced exempt from growth management, provided that the units conform to the provisions of this Section. The redevelopment credits shall not be transferable separate from the property unless permitted as described above in Subparagraph d, Location requirement. Staff Findings: Not applicable. 9. Exemptions. The Community Development Director shall exempt from the procedures and requirements of this Section the following types of development involving Multi- Family Housing Units. An exemption from these replacement requirements shall not exempt a development from compliance with any other provisions of this Title: a. The replacement of Multi-Family Housing Units after non-willful demolition such as a flood, fire, or other natural catastrophe, civil commotion, or similar event not purposefully caused by the land owner. The Community Development Director may require documentation be provided by the landowner to confirm the damage to the building was in-fact non-willful. To be exempted, the replacement development shall be an exact replacement of the previous number of units, bedrooms, and square footage and in the same configuration. The Community Development Director may approve exceptions to this exact replacement requirement to accommodate changes necessary to meet current building codes; improve accessibility; to conform to zoning, design standards, or other regulatory requirements of the City; or, to provide other architectural or site planning improvements that have no substantial effect on the use or program of the development. (Also see Chapter 26.312 – Nonconformities.) Substantive changes to Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 6 of 7 P24 VI.A. the development shall not be exempted from this Section and shall be reviewed as a willful change pursuant to the procedures and requirements of this Section. b. The demolition of Multi-Family Housing Units by order of a public agency including, but not limited to, the City of Aspen for reasons of preserving the life, health, safety, or general welfare of the public. c. The demolition, combining, conversion, replacement, or redevelopment of Multi- Family Housing Units which have been used exclusively as tourist accommodations or by non-working residents. The Community Development Director may require occupancy records, leases, affidavits, or other documentation to the satisfaction of the Director to demonstrate that the unit(s) has never housed a working resident. All other requirements of this Title shall still apply including zoning, growth management, and building codes.) d. The demolition, combining, conversion, replacement, or redevelopment of Multi- Family Housing Units which were illegally created (also known as “Bandit Units”). Any improvements associated with Bandit Units shall be required to conform to current requirements of this Title including zoning, growth management, and building codes. Replaced or redeveloped Bandit Units shall be deed restricted as Resident Occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority e. Any development action involving demising walls or floors/ceilings necessary for the normal upkeep, maintenance, or remodeling of adjacent Multi-Family Housing Units. f. A change order to an issued and active building permit that proposes to exceed the limitations of remodeling/demolition to rebuild portions of a structure which, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, should be rebuilt for structural, safety, accessibility, or significant energy efficiency reasons first realized during construction, which were not known and could not have been reasonably predicted prior to construction, and which cause no or minimal changes to the exterior dimensions and character of the building. Staff Findings: Not applicable. Exhibit A – Growth Management Page 7 of 7 P25 VI.A. EXHIBIT B COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 26.412.050. Review Criteria. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. Staff Findings: Responses to Sections 26.412.060-070 are outlined below. Staff finds this criterion is met. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the façade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. Staff Findings: The existing structure is already commercial. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. Staff Findings: Responses to the Design Guidelines are outlined below. This property is located in the Central Mixed Use Area. Overall, Staff finds this criterion is met. 26.412.060. Commercial Design Standards. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public Amenity Space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 1 of 12 P26 VI.A. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. Staff Findings: The proposed amenity space allows for a variety of activities to occur, including relaxing, viewing artwork, parking bicycles and small gatherings. It is designed in such a way that the activities may change depending upon the tenants or uses of the structure. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. Staff Findings: The proposed amenity space includes existing aspen trees, great views toward Aspen Mountain and two simple at-grade relationships that accommodate to the natural slope of the site. No seating is proposed at this time, but it includes dedicated area for public artwork. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. Staff Findings: The combination of large glass sliding windows fronting the commercial space and space for public artwork allow for a free-flow environment that will invite pedestrians from the street. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. Staff Findings: The proposed amenity space does not duplicate any existing space nearby. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. Staff Findings: No variation from the standards is requested. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 2 of 12 P27 VI.A. 1. A trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. Staff Findings: The applicant is proposing a trash and recycle area that is approximately 11’ x 4’4”. This is smaller than the minimum size standards of 20 linear feet. The applicant has met with the Environmental Health Department and has tentatively received Special Review approval for the reduced size. Final Special Review approval shall be obtained prior to building permit issuance. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. Staff Findings: There is an existing transformer on site that the applicant intends to abandon. Service will be accessed from a transformer across the alley. The existing meters will stay in place on the east wall of the building. The Utilities Department has reviewed this proposal and tentatively approved it as long as the building does not generate more service than can be provided by the transformer across the alley. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. Staff Findings: The trash, recycle and utility services will all be located on the southeast corner of the property. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Staff Findings: Trash and recycle will be accessed along the alley, either through the exterior fence door or through the garage, as needed by the applicant. Utility will be accessed through the existing transformer located across the alley and the meters accessed as they are currently. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. Staff Findings: The trash and recycle service area has proposed screening of a 5’ cedar fence that is entirely opaque. The fence must be raised to 6’ to comply with this standard. The existing meters will not be screened, but are entirely hidden from street view as they are located along the southern portion of the east wall, interior to the lot. Staff finds this criterion to not be met. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 3 of 12 P28 VI.A. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. Staff Findings: Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. Staff Findings: The existing transformer and pedestal are proposed to be abandoned. Service shall be obtained from the transformer located across the alley and already allows for service provider access. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. Staff Findings: The delivery area shall be along the alley as it is currently. The second floor commercial space is part of the first floor and does not need separate delivery. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. Staff Findings: A vestibule that meets the requirements of the IECC is provided in the design. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 10. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. Staff Findings: Exhaust systems and venting have not been identified in the proposal. All exhaust shall be either through the roof (preferably the flat roof portion) or along the eastern wall. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 11. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 4 of 12 P29 VI.A. public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. Staff Findings: See response to criteria 10 above. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions). Staff Findings: The applicant is requesting Special Review approval for reduced trash and recycle service area dimensions. Environmental Health has tentatively approved the proposed plan. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 26.412.070. Suggested design elements. The following guidelines are building practices suggested by the City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances, compliance with these practices may not produce the most desired development, and project designers should use their best judgment. A. Signage. Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated signage areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc., may minimize new tenant signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a public way- finding function, especially for office uses. Signs should not block design details of the building on which they are placed. Compliance with the City's sign code is mandatory. Staff Findings: The project will comply with all signage requirements. Staff finds this criterion is met. B. Display windows. Display windows provide pedestrian interest and can contribute to the success of the retail space. Providing windows that reveal inside activity of the store can provide this pedestrian interest. Staff Findings: The main entrance will be large sliding glass doors and an additional large glass entrance will be further south on the same façade. These activate pedestrians from the street and reveal activity within the commercial space. Staff finds this criterion is met. C. Lighting. Well-lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create pedestrian interest after business hours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating certain important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light trespass should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided. Compliance with the City's Outdoor lighting code, Section 26.575.150 of this Title, is mandatory. Staff Findings: The project will comply with all lighting requirements. Staff finds this criterion is met. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 5 of 12 P30 VI.A. Commercial Design Guidelines – Central Mixed Used Area, Conceptual & Final Review Design Guidelines This parcel is designated as the Central Mixed Use Area in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines. The Central Mixed Use area primarily consists of multi-family residential buildings of two and three stories, although future development as commercial and lodge is likely as a Mixed Use zone district. Building height is residential in scale. Shallow front and side yard setbacks are typical and buildings tend to be freestanding. Buildings are articulated with varied massing and architectural details to convey a human scale. Roof forms vary while building materials are relatively urban with a predominance of brick. The design objectives for this character area are: 1. Reflect a transition in character between the Commercial Core and the outlying residential neighborhoods. 2. Maintain a sense of front yards with landscaping. 3. Provide a sense of human scale. 4. Maintain a visually interesting street edge. 5. Encourage outdoor use areas. 6. Minimize visual impacts of parking. Conceptual Review includes the following guidelines: Street & Alley System Staff Findings: The applicant has proposed upgrades to the public walkway along Spring Street to enhance the pedestrian experience. It is located at sidewalk level. The second story terrace on the alley provides a connection between the architecture and the pedestrians who use the alley as a walkway into downtown from Neale Ave. Staff finds these Guidelines are met. Staff finds the following Guideline is met: 2.2 Public walkways and through courts shall be designed to facilitate access to uses within the link and/or to the rear of the site. • Locate walkways at the sidewalk level. • Locate retail frontage along walkways. • Use architectural detailing to enhance the pedestrian experience. • Design lighting, signage and landscapes to create human scale and to enhance the pedestrian experience. Staff finds the following Guideline is not applicable: 2.1 Development on a site of two or more traditional lot widths may accommodate additional public walkways and through courts. These should: • Respect the setting of and avoid conflict with an adjacent historic building • Design the frontage of any walkways or through court with similar attention to articulation, detail and materials accorded the primary street façade(s). Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 6 of 12 P31 VI.A. Parking Staff Findings: The proposed parking is within the building in a garage that faces the alley. This is a vast improvement upon the non-conforming parking that currently is used on the site and adjacent right-of-way. The garage is built into the mass of the structure and located along the alley. The proposed materials are the same as the commercial portion of the structure. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.3 Parking shall not be positioned between the building and the street and visual impacts shall be minimized in one or more of the following ways: • Parking shall be placed underground wherever possible • Where surface parking must be provided, it shall be located to the rear of the interior of the property. • Surface parking shall be externally buffered with landscaping, and internally planted and landscaped. 2.4 Structured parking access shall not have a negative impact on the character of the street. The access shall be: • Located on a secondary street where feasible • Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building façade • Integrated into the building design Public Amenity Space Staff Findings: The proposed design enhances the public space along Spring Street, increasing the usable area and making it more inviting to pedestrians. The amenity space abuts and is level with the sidewalk, open to the sky, paved and directly accessible to the public. The applicant proposes to include public art in the amenity space, as the proposed use for the structure is an art gallery. The upper portion of the amenity space includes proposed bicycle parking. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.5 Public Amenity Space should take the form of: • Public space adjacent to the street edge • Public links through the site 2.7 A street facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: • Abut the public sidewalk • Be level with the sidewalk • Be open to the sky • Be directly accessible to the public • Be paved or otherwise landscaped Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 7 of 12 P32 VI.A. 2.8 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: • Street furniture • Public art • Historical / interpretive marker The detailed design of Public Amenity Space, with regard to guideline 2.8, will be a matter for approval at the Final Review Stage, although it may be discussed at the Conceptual Stage. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 2.6 A street facing amenity space located on a corner or within the street block may be considered. 2.9 New buildings on a site occupying more than two traditional lot widths may provide a walkway or through court within a single development or between two developments. This may also extend only part way through the parcel. 2.10 Mid-block walkways shall remain subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths. • Mid-block public walkways shall be between 8 ft. and 10 ft. in width. Building Placement Staff Findings: The existing structure is non-conforming in regards to front and side yard setbacks. The applicant proposes to reuse the existing structure and therefore may maintain the setbacks. Additionally, this property is located adjacent to the Commercial Core, where zero setbacks are common and encouraged. Existing yard around the smaller mass along Main Street will be maintained. There is little open space surrounding the existing structure, which is proposed for reuse in this application. The existing building is mostly perpendicular to the street frontages and occupies most of the lot, which is a traditional lot. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.11 The existing setback pattern within this area should be maintained. • A front yard should be provided. • Position a new building to be within the established range of front yard setbacks. • Side yard setbacks should frame the perimeter of a development 2.12 Maintain a sense of open space around a building. 2.13 A building should be oriented perpendicular to the street frontage within the traditional lot arrangement. Building Height, Mass & Scale Staff Findings: The proposed project converts the existing three story structure into two stories. The proposed building conforms to the maximum height of the zone district. The proposal does not step back the upper story, as the existing structure does not do this, and is proposed for Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 8 of 12 P33 VI.A. reuse. No additional height is proposed. This property is not adjacent to any historic buildings. The building occupies most of the lot, which is only one traditional lot width (30 ft.). The existing structures include a step down massing from 2 stories above grade along the alley to 1 ½ stories above grade in the middle to a one story mass attached to the front along Main Street. The proposed design cleans up the massing by creating two distinct masses, one story and two stories, with a connecting element between. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guideline is met: 2.16 Subdivide the mass into smaller “modules” that convey a human scale. Multiple modules can be connected to create a larger building. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 2.14 A new building or addition should reflect the existing range of two or three stories. • Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height on the subject property. • Step back upper levels to reduce the perceived scale at the street edge. • Additional height, as permitted in the zone district, may be added for one or more of the following reasons: o In order to achieve at least a two foot variation in height with an adjacent building. o The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) o Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another area may be appropriate. o To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing Units. o To make a demonstrable contribution to the building’s overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved daylighting. 2.15 The width of a building should convey a human scale. • A new building should step down in height next to a single story historic buildings • Maximum building width should be limited to three traditional lot widths (90ft.) Final Review includes the following guidelines: Building Design & Articulation Staff Findings: The perceived mass of the building respects the design character of the area. The combination of varied roof forms on the structure breaks up the massing and creates interest. The first story includes large sliding glass doors that front the street to enhance the interaction between pedestrians and the interior space of the building. Staff has suggested the applicant add additional windows to the first story to further enhance the human scale. The conversion from a Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 9 of 12 P34 VI.A. three story to two story structure within the same volume allows for larger floor to ceiling heights that are well above 9 feet. The proposal includes large sliding glass doors that front the street to enhance the interaction between the interior and exterior of the structure. Staff has suggested the applicant add additional windows to the first story to further enhance interest at the street level. The proposed design also includes sliding zinc doors that can be used to cover the glass openings on Spring Street. These glass openings are critical to the street level interest and interaction between the pedestrian and the building. They also reflect the commercial character that is common of a public usable space instead of a private one. Staff recommends that they are removed from the design. The entrance to the gallery is located at sidewalk level and is ADA compliant. An airlock entry is provided, although additional entry points are also located along the street when weather allows for a more free-flow of pedestrians between the interior to exterior. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.17 To reduce the perceived mass of a building the design should respect the design character of the area and reflect the human scale and character of the city. This shall be achieved through all of the following: • The massing of building forms • The articulation of the façade(s) through a varied roof profile • The use of a variation in architectural materials, and detailing 2.19 The first floor façade should be designed to concentrate interest at the street level, using the highest quality of design, detailing and materials 2.22 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. • All entrances shall be ADA compliant. • On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible. 2.23 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. • An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary façade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. • Adding temporary entries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district. • Using a temporary vinyl or fabric “airlock” to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 10 of 12 P35 VI.A. 2.24 The roofscape should be designed with the same design attention as the secondary elevations of the building. • Group and screen mechanical units from view. • Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area. • Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosures or structures to reflect the modulation and character of the building. • Use materials which complement the design of the building facades. • Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive from the street. • Use ‘green roof’ design best practice, where feasible. Staff finds the following Guidelines are not applicable: 2.18 Any new buildings shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to ceiling on all floors. 2.20 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level retail frontage. • This should be a minimum of 11 ft. in floor to floor height on the first floor. 2.21 Minimize the appearance of a third floor. • Where a third floor’s floor to ceiling height is in excess of 10 ft., it should be set back a minimum of 15 ft. from the street façade to reduce the apparent height. • Increase the parapet height to screen the visual impact of a tall top floor. • The design of a set back third floor shall be simpler in form, more subdued in modeling, detail and color than the primary façade. Architectural Materials Staff Findings: The proposed materials are zinc for the commercial portion and cedar for the affordable housing unit. These are high quality materials. Cedar is seen historically around Aspen, and although zinc is not as common, it presents a more contemporary contrasting material that complements the cedar. Both materials are durable and weather appropriately. The initial application represented these materials as contrasting to differentiate. Staff suggested trying to relate the materials more to make this appear as a more cohesive design, and not a faux historic project. Staff suggests that the final materials be similar in color and that the zinc be patinated to reduce the reflectiveness of the material. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.25 High quality, durable materials should be employed. • The palette of materials proposed for all development should be specified and approved as part of the general and detailed development approvals process, including samples of materials as required. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 11 of 12 P36 VI.A. 2.26 Building materials should have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials seen historically. • Reduce the perceived scale of the building. • Convey a human scale. • Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within this climate. Paving & Landscape Staff Findings: The enhanced public space along Spring Street will be paved and landscaped. The proposed materials are flamed granite entry pavers and grass pave blocks for the sculpture court. This is a large improvement over the currently underutilized space and creates an interaction between the proposed building and Spring Street. Staff finds this portion of the Guidelines met. Staff finds the following Guidelines are met: 2.27 Landscaping and paving should have the following characteristics: • Enhance the street scene. • Integrate the development with its setting. • Reflect the quality of the architectural materials. 2.28 Landscaping should be provided in all projects. Exhibit B – Commercial Design Review Page 12 of 12 P37 VI.A. EXHIBIT C MEMORANDUM TO: Justin Barker, Community Development Department FROM: APCHA Board of Directors THRU: Mike Kosdrosky, Executive Director Cindy Christensen, Operations Manager DATE: April 1, 2015 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ISSUE: The applicant is proposing to renovate the existing building into an art gallery, and replace the existing “moderate income” (using under the Category 3 designation) studio affordable housing rental unit in a different location. BACKGROUND: In 1979, Neil Ross and Brian Goodheim owned by property; it was known as the Aspen Valley Visiting Nurses Association Building (AVVNA). Ross and Goodheim received approval to develop additional commercial space by developing a “moderate” income employee housing unit. City Council approved the floor area bonus and waived the required parking space for the employee unit. The unit was restricted to “moderate income category” on July 18, 1980, at Reception No. 225474. The Guidelines today reflect that a “moderate income category” is defined as either Category 2 or Category 3. The building is proposed to look like two buildings – an art gallery on the south side linked to a small affordable housing unit on the north side. The 35-year old affordable housing unit will be relocated from the alley to the Main Street side of the property. The studio unit will be completely remodeled. The net livable area of 400 square feet shall remain the same. The current minimum square footage for Category 1 or 2 studio unit is 400 square feet; the proposed Guidelines increase the minimum square footage to 500 square feet for all studio-type units. DISCUSSION: The current building was developed with one moderate income employee unit. The unit was the product of the City’s commercial space special review for a floor area bonus. The applicant is proposing to renovate the affordable housing unit and will record a new deed restriction in the currently used form at the Category 2 price, income and occupancy guidelines. Section 26.470.070.4d, of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, states that the “proposed units shall be deed-restricted as ‘for sale’ units and transferred to qualified purchasers;” however, the Code does Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 1 P38 VI.A. allow for rental units. The applicant is seeking to maintain the unit as a rental unit. If the approval requires the unit to be a “for sale” unit, the applicant will withdraw this application. The unit is currently a Category 3; the monthly rent for a studio Category 3 is $1,307 per month. The Category 2 monthly rent for a studio unit is $875 per month. The unit meets the current minimum square footage for a Category 1 or 2 studio. The applicant plans on moving forward with the initial parking agreement – there will be no off-street parking for the employee unit. Staff would recommend that a washer/dryer be provided in the unit along with the other appliances due to the request to waive the off-street parking for the employee. Due to the plans to relocate the employee unit, staff would recommend that the conditions stated in Part VII, Information for Development of Affordable Housing, Section 14, Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units, of the APCHA Guidelines, are required. They are: a. The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. b. The interior Appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good and working condition. c. Carpet must be less than five year old and be in good condition and repair, or be replaced. d. The exterior walls shall be freshly painted within one year of dedication. e. A general level of upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. f. Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures and equipment shall be in good and working order, and brought up to today’s standards. g. The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten (10) years. h. All units shall meet the International Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequate code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. RECOMMENDATION: The APCHA Board reviewed the application at their regular meeting held April 1, 2015 and recommend approval of the relocation of the employee housing unit as a rental unit at Category 2; however, at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the unit shall become an ownership unit and listed and sold through the APCHA lottery system. The following conditions shall also apply: Rental Unit: 1. Recordation of a new deed restriction for the unit, provided by APCHA, at Category 2. 2. The unit shall be remodeled to meet the conditions a-h stated above. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 2 P39 VI.A. 3. The appliances shall include: refrigerator/freezer, stove/oven, dishwasher, washer and dryer. 4. The deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA every two years. 5. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that, in accordance with CRS 38-12-301(1)(a) and (b), this Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that the Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. 6. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Units shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for employees and their families who are employed in Pitkin County and who meet the definition of "qualified Category 2 employee for the studio unit as that term is defined by the qualification guidelines established and indexed by the Authority on an annual basis. The Owner shall have the right to lease the Employee Dwelling Unit to a "qualified employee" of their own selection. b. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall not be occupied by the Owner or members of the immediate family ("Immediate Family" shall mean a person related by blood or marriage who is a first cousin [or closer relative] and his or her children), unless the family member is a qualified employee and obtains approval by APCHA prior to occupancy. The unit shall at no time be used as a lodge unit. c. Written verification of employment of employee(s) proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the APCHA by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Units prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the APCHA. d. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 2, studio rental rates as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the APCHA and may be adjusted annually as set forth by the Guidelines. Rent shall be verified and approved by the APCHA upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the APCHA as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations every two years. A copy of the signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine if there is full compliance with this Agreement. g. In the event that APCHA has reasonable cause to believe the Owner and/or tenant is violating the provisions of this Agreement, the APCHA, by its authorized representative, may inspect the Property or Affordable Housing Unit 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. h. The APCHA, in the event a violation of this Agreement is discovered, shall send a notice of violation to the Owner and/or tenant, as may be applicable, detailing the nature of the violation and allowing the Owner or tenant fifteen (15) days to cure. Said notice shall state that the Owner or tenant may request a quasi-judicial hearing before the APCHA Board pursuant to the Grievance Procedures of the APCHA Guidelines within fifteen (15) days to determine the merits of the allegations. If no hearing is requested and the violation is not cured within the fifteen (15) day period, the Owner or tenant shall be considered in violation of this Agreement. If a hearing is held before the APCHA Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 3 P40 VI.A. Board, the decision of the APCHA Board based on the record of such hearing shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred and for the purpose of judicial review. i. 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 recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees. j. In the event the Employee Housing Unit is leased without compliance herewith, such lease shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the purported tenant. Each and every lease, for all purposes, shall be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, the covenants herein contained, even without reference therein to this Agreement. k. In the event that the Owner or tenant 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 compliance by Owner and/or tenant. l. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement and any other related document shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be valid under applicable law; but if any such provision shall be invalid or prohibited under applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or prohibition without invalidating the remaining provisions of this Agreement or other document. m. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. n. No claim of waiver, consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this Agreement shall be valid against any part 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. o. The parties to this Agreement agree that any modifications of this Agreement shall be effective only when made in writing signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. p. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Employee Housing Unit as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the APCHA, the City of Aspen, Colorado, and by their respective successors and assigns, by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction, abatement, or eviction of non-qualified tenants. q. Lease agreements executed for occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit shall provide for a rental term of not less than six (6) consecutive months. A signed and executed copy of the lease shall be provided to the APCHA by the Owner within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. Upon vacancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit, the Owner is granted forty- five (45) days in which to locate a qualified employee. If an employee is not placed by the Owner, the APCHA may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. r. When the option to convert any unit to a sale unit is exercised, the owner must adopt a new deed restriction in the form adopted by APCHA that is applicable to sale units. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 4 P41 VI.A. If the owner requests the unit to become an ownership unit, or it is found that the unit has been out of compliance for one year after notification to the owner, the unit shall become a “for-sale” unit and the following shall apply: Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 2 for the studio unit. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be paid by the Art Gallery (commercial space) owners. If any work is associated with the deed-restricted unit, the cost will be assessed based on the actual values of the commercial space versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial space shall not be charged to the deed- restricted owner. The condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy to include language in the event the deed-restricted unit reverts to ownership. The goal is to protect the affordable housing units from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications associated with the commercial space. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 5 P42 VI.A. EXHIBIT D P43 VI.A. P44 VI.A. P45 VI.A. P46 VI.A. P47 VI.A. P48 VI.A. P49 VI.A. P50 VI.A. P51 VI.A. P52 VI.A. P53 VI.A. P54 VI.A. P55 VI.A. P56 VI.A. P57 VI.A. P58 VI.A. P59 VI.A. P60 VI.A. P61 VI.A. P62 VI.A. P63 VI.A. P64 VI.A. P65 VI.A. P66 VI.A. P67 VI.A. P68 VI.A. P69 VI.A. P70 VI.A. P71 VI.A. P72 VI.A. P73 VI.A. P74 VI.A. P75 VI.A. P76 VI.A. P77 VI.A. P78 VI.A. P 7 9 V I . A . P80 VI.A. P81 VI.A. P82 VI.A. P 8 3 V I . A . P84 VI.A. P85 VI.A. P86 VI.A. P 8 7 V I . A . P88 VI.A. P89 VI.A. P90 VI.A. P91 VI.A. P92 VI.A. P93 VI.A. P94 VI.A. P95 VI.A. P96 VI.A. P97 VI.A. P98 VI.A. P99 VI.A. P 1 0 0 V I . A . P 1 0 1 V I . A . P 1 0 2 V I . A . P 1 0 3 V I . A . P 1 0 4 V I . A . P 1 0 5 V I . A . P 1 0 6 V I . A . P 1 0 7 V I . A . P 1 0 8 V I . A . P 1 0 9 V I . A . P 1 1 0 V I . A . P 1 1 1 V I . A . P 1 1 2 V I . A . P 1 1 3 V I . A . P 1 1 4 V I . A . P 1 1 5 V I . A . P 1 1 6 V I . A . P 1 1 7 V I . A . P 1 1 8 V I . A . P 1 1 9 V I . A . P 1 2 0 V I . A . P 1 2 1 V I . A . P122 VI.A. P123 VI.A. P124 VI.A. P125 VI.A. P126 VI.A. P127 VI.A. P128 VI.A. P129 VI.A. P130 VI.A. P131 VI.A. P132 VI.A. P133 VI.A. P134 VI.A. P135 VI.A. P136 VI.A. P137 VI.A. P138 VI.A. E X H I B I T E P 1 3 9 V I . A . P 1 4 0 V I . A . P141 VI.A. P142 VI.A. P143 VI.A. P144 VI.A. P145 VI.A. P146 VI.A. P147 VI.A. P148 VI.A. P149 VI.A. P150 VI.A. E X H I B I T F P 1 5 1 V I . A . P152 VI.A. P153 VI.A. P154 VI.A. �utM EXHIBIT =' AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE COD ADDRESS OF PROgERTY: too 5• S • ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Twe aaam cc.H 2-4. -P 4:30 9 201�r STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section.of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of"notice: By posting",of'notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials; which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high,: and which.was composed of letters not less than one,inch in height. Said notice was posted'at least fifteen (15) days prior to the publichhearing on-the._-•.day.of - , 20 , to and including the date and time of the piiblic,l"baring. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Maa�lzngof'notace.f Bye the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community . gf Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304;060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (306) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall:be,those'on the"current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAs or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and. new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to`this notice requireineht., ;' Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate`survey map or-otFier sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this day of Mew z , 20 r' ,by •�v��-�� t�--�-�--, PUBLIC NOTICE ��.. RE:100 S.SPRING STREET.COMMERCIAL DESIGN AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT WITNESS HANTLTA RA REVIEWS VV 11 1 V L:JI� 4M&L SE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that public hearing STATE OF COLORADO will be held°n Tuesday,May 26,2015,at a meet- NOTARY ID 20014030017 ing to begin al 4:30 p.m.before the Aspen Plan- My cO iss � ning and Zoning Commission,Sister Cities Meet- , pfifwsm Ing ROOM,Cily Hall,130 S.Galena SL,Aspen,to outh consider antLLC,application0Nlestitt2e�thbYS�reetSNew �V Spring Street LLC, York,NY 10011,represented by Davis Horn,Inc., for the property located at 100 S.Spring Street. The applicant is requesting consolidated Commer- cial Design Review and Growth Management Re- Notary Public view approvals to remodel the existing structure 1V and relocate an affordable housingunit on site.The property is legally described as Block 28,Lot A of the East Aspen Addition,otherwise known as the Goodheim and Ross Building Condominiums, Par- cel ID 273707333001. For further information, contact Justin Barker at the City of Aspen Commu- nity Development Department,130 S.Galena St., Aspen,CO,(970)429.2797,;ustin.barker@°ity°" TACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE• _ faspen.com. �' sl R an Walterscheid Chair ! ILATION Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission I L Published in the Aspen Times on May 7th,2015 THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) (,,,-5,05L1J1 ur•1HE 0WNERSAND GO VERNMENTAL A GENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT.OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060-.(E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE M ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: S �?f ' Aspen,CO..- SCHEDULED.PUBLIC HEARING DATE: S Z� 1 S 20d J STATE OF COLORADO ) SS. County.of-Pitkin ). I; G Ie.n- Cl (name,please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City.of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally: certify that I have complied with.the public notice.requirements of Section 26:304,060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following.ma'imer: Publication of notice: By.the publication:in the.legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City,of Aspen at_least fifteen (15).. days prior to the.public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached Hereto.: Posting of notice.- By.posting of notice,which form was obtained from the. Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials,which was not less than.twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six(26).inches high, and which was,composed of letters not . less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at,least fifteen(1 5) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously,visible,from the4�0day of 200'1 to and including the date.and time of the public hearing.0A photograph.of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ✓Mailing of notice: _By the mailing of a notice obtained.from 4he`Community Development Department,,which contains the.information described n`Section 26:304.060(E)(2)of the Aspen Land Use Code: At least fifteen-(15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was.hand delivered'.or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet.of.the property subject to the developmentapplication. Thepames and addresses of, property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty(60)days priorto the date of,the public hearing.. A copy of o the owners and:governmental agencies so'noticed is attached hereto. . (continued on next page) i Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map_is in anyway to.be changed or amended incidental Wor.as part of a general.revision. of this Title;or`whenever.the textof this Title is to'be amended, whether such reyision.be madeby repeal of this`Title and enactment of anew land'use regulation, or otherwise,the requirement of an.Accurate survey map or other• sufficient,legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names"and Addresses of owners ofreal property_ nahe area of the.proposed change shall be waived: However,the proposedzoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency.d. in all.business hours for.fifteen (15).days. prior to the public hearing on such a ents. Signa .. e The f going"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this day of , 200 by �fe/J/1 �Idrn WITNESS MY.HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 1. , � b, My c mini on expires. o.. otary P b ' sy ATTACHMENTS 'COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE'(SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 100 S. SPRING STRET—COMMERCIAL DESIGN AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 26, 2015, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 100 South Spring Street LLC, 509 West 24`h Street,.New York, NY 10011, represented by Davis Horn; Inc., for the property located at 100 S. Spring Street. The applicant is requesting consolidated Commercial Design Review and Growth Management Review approvals to remodel the existing structure and relocate an affordable housing unit on site. The property is legally described as Block 28, Lot A of the East Aspen Addition, otherwise known as the Goodheim and.Ross Building Condominiums, Parcel ID 273707333001. For further information, contact Justin Barker at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2797,justin.barker@cityofaspen.com. s/Ryan Walterscheid, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 7, 2015 City of Aspen Account i G fi t ` `` 9 `Masa.,° N71�1 " �' �a ° TUE aC�ray--, a � r • � � '`. ® � z •k�, "r� as � ..4 Sister CEties m �� '� �Ctt HaJl3Q�SGalenaSt rp OS Appl�cat{r1Cl�(} SSpr�n� treet LLG i .:. & nth S NewyorkNY a 5Q9 " 1 Q011� e oasts consilidafe Cpm ercialk esicgn 4Rev�ev�an i /��'"�'��y� �/ { �j�.y y [�1 y gyt ty q ""i�VV tI 9't [ nQg�✓1peopl, ..Vgt approva[sIfor this site proposal u �� �s to remodel the e �st�n structure and relcact an affordat )e iou�ssn MV Wk rn�atr#n ,� ` anta�ct do-Plan mat A ?! f, ri I � E yU, M may' � y r � c � . Mailed on 5-( - '2-0/,D 100 NORTH SPRING STREET LLC 11.0 N SPRING ST LLC 117 SOUTH SPRING STREET HOLDINGS LLC 250 STEELE ST#375 3336 E 32ND ST#217 PO BOX 11600 "DENVER,CO 80206 TULSA,OK 74135 ASPEN,CO 81612 214 WEST COOPER LLC 311 ASPEN LLC 625 MAIN ASPEN LLC 6 NE 63RD ST#220 2317 PENNSYLVANIA AVE - 465 N MILL ST STE 12-113 OKLAHOMA CITY,OK 73105 WILMINGTON,DE 19806 ASPEN,CO 81611 625 MAIN INVESTMENTS LLC AARON ROGER S&VIRGINIA A ALLEN CARROL A REV TRUST 1482 E VALLEY RD#463 1010 5TH AVE#12C 15495 SW ALDERBROOK CIR SANTA BARBARA,CA 93108 NEW YORK,NY 10028 TIGARD, OR 97224 ALLEN RONALD W REV TRUST ALPINE BANK ASPEN ANDERTON JAMES L 50 SW 137TH AV PO BOX 10000 100 OBERMEYER PL#4101 BEAVERTON,OR 97006 GLENWOOD SPRINGS,CO 81602 ASPEN,CO 81611 ARENELLA BETH&FRANK III ARTIM LLC ASHTON JONATHAN G 101 N SPRING ST#107 PO BOX 30106 PO BOX 26 ASPEN,CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10011 JAMESTOWN,CO 804550026 ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN BLEEKER STREET LP ASPEN BLOCK 99 LLC PO BOX 81016 520 S MAIN ST#178 532 E HOPKINS AVE SAN MARINO,CA 91118 GROVE,OK 74344 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN LEGACY LLC ASPEN RIVER PARK LLC ATWOODSTANFORD H JR&PAMELA S 17740 E HINSDALE AVE 8200 DOUGLAS AVE#300 LIVING TRUST FOXFIELD,CO 80016 DALLAS,TX 75225 16125 GREENWOOD LN MONTE SERENO, CA 95030 BALLINGER ELIZABETH F BASSI PETER A AND BARBARA J 1996 FAMILY BERG KRISTOFOR PO BOX 10205 TRUST 102 FOUNDERS PL#202 ASPEN,CO 81612 18 CHANNEL VISTA ASPEN,CO 81611 NEWPORT COAST,CA 92657 BERLIN JAMES TRUST BIG BOY LLC BIG HOPKINS LLC 1795 BROOKWOOD DR 1.06 S MILL ST#202 421 N BEVERLY DR#300 AKRON,OH 44313-5070 ASPEN,CO 81611 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90210 BILCO PROPERTIES LLC BOMBA LAURIE A REV TRUST BOOHER ANDREA LYNN PO BOX 14 5601 HIGH DR 709 E MAIN STREET#303 SADDLE RIVER, NJ 07458 MISSION HILLS, KS 66208 ASPEN,CO 81611 BORCHERTS ROBERT H REV TRUST -. BOSELY MARY ANNE REVOCABLE TRUST BROUGH STEVE B&DEBORAH A ,1555 WAS HTENAW PO BOX 26 599 TROUT LK DR ANN ARBOR,MI 48104 WOODY CREEK,CO 81656 SANGER,CA 93657 BRYANT CAROLINA H BULKELEY RICHARD C&JULIE J CALHOON THOMAS C PO BOX 5217 600 E MAIN ST#401 315 LAVACA ST SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 ASPEN,CO 81611 AUSTIN,TX 787013036 CAREM LLC CF HOPKINS LLC CIPOLLINO NICHOLAS 655 MADISON AVE 11TH FL 700 NW 107 AVE 4TH FL 300 QUAIL RD NEW YORK, NY 10065 MIAMI,FL 33172 MERRITT,NC 28556-9641 CITY OF ASPEN COHEN NANCY C REV TRUST COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA 130 S GALENA ST 2026 N MOHAWK PO BOX 1927 ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO, IL 60614 CARSON CITY, NV 89702 CONCEPT 600 LLC COPPOCK RICHARD P CROSS JUDITH PO BOX 2914 PO BOX 44 PO BOX 3388 BASALT,CO 81621 DEXTER, MI 48130 ASPEN,CO 81612 CRUMMER KLEIN TITLE TRUST 2008 CWAREI LLC DIXIE DOG VENTURES LLC 1305 N BEVERLY DR 3030 HARTLEY RD#350 1690 HOMESTAKE DR, BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90210 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32257 ASPEN,CO 81611 DML REALTY LLC DOCKEN ANDREW DONAHUE ELIZABETH PO BOX 305 101 N SPRING ST#106 102 FOUNDERS PLACE #2302 CHAVIES, KY 41727 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 DORAN RALPH J DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST 2600 WOODWARD WAY 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY 8051 LOCKLIN LN ATLANTA,GA 30305 SOUTHFIELD,MI 48034 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP,MI 48382 EDWARDS CHARLES N EISENSTAT MELISSA B EMCAR LLC 189 BENVENUE ST 1125 PARK AVE#61) 655 MADISON AVE 11TH FL WELLSLEY,MA 024827104 NEW YORK, NY 10128 NEW YORK, NY 10065 EMPHASYS SERVICE COMPANY FADELL MICHAEL F FARRELL SCOTT W 1925 BRICKELL AVE BLDG D 1922 W 36TH AVE PO BOX 9656 PENTHOUSE 11 D DENVER,CO 80211 ASPEN,CO 81612 MIAMI,FL 33129 7 FEDER ERIC REV TRUST FELDMAN JONATHAN FESUS GEORGE J&SUSAN C 43042 ISLAND ESTATES DR 100 OBERMEYER PLACE DR#102 PO BOX 9197 NORTH MIAMI BEACH,FL 33160-5505 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612-9197 FICKE FAMILY REV TRUST FORTIER TIMOTHY FRIEDSTEIN SHELDON TRUST 15 W ARRELLAGA ST#3 601 RIO GRANDE PL#102 PO BOX 7917 SANTA BARBARA,CA 93101 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 FURTHUR CANCUN LLC G&G CORPORATE OFFICES LLC GADA 777 REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST PO BOX 2199 2520 S GRAND AV#114 PO BOX 2061 ASPEN,CO 81.612 GLENWOOD SPGS,CO 81601 ASPEN,CO 81612 GALANTER YALE&ELYSE GERSHMAN ELAINE LEVITT GILKERSON LINDA REV TRUST 525 S ANDREWS AVE 1027 PHEASANT RD 1449 E 56TH ST FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 333012831 JENKINTOWN,PA 19046 CHICAGO, IL 60637 GLATHAR KIMBERLY J GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY&BARBARA GOLDFEIN MICHAEL PO BOX 12197 460 ST PAUL ST 1724 BRAESIDE LN ASPEN,CO 81612 DENVER,CO 80206 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062 GRAHAM NARELDA GREENBERG DEAN L 2012 FAMILY IRR TRUST GRIMES DAVID L 101 N SPRING ST#203 112 N SPRING ST 3510 BROMLEY WOODS LN ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 GREENSBORO, NC 27410 GRW RIO GRANDE PROPERTY LLC GURHOLT CHARLES J&VERNE GWM PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 4491 N5999 GURHOLT RD PO BOX 4146 ASPEN,CO 81612 SCANDINAVIA,WI 54977 ASPEN,CO 81612 HALTON SARAH JANE HANEY PERRY L&SHEA NOREEN M HAUSER MARY JANE 18 DAMPIER CRESCENT FORREST 5455 LANDMARK PL#408 1540 BOHNS POINT RD ACT 2603 AUSTRALIA, GREENWOOD VILLAGE,CO 80111 WAYZATA,MN 55391 HICKS GILBERT W&PATSY K HOLLAND AND HART HONEA KATHARINE M 3674 WOODLAWN TERRACE PL PO BOX 8749 PO BOX 288 HONOLULU, HI 96822 DENVER,CO 80201 BASALT, CO 81621 HOPKINS DEV LLC HOPKINS TOWNHOME LLC HOVERSTEN PHILIP E&LOUISE B 345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 12 S EATON PL 2990 BOOTH CREEK DR NEW YORK,NY 10154 LONDON SW1W9JA VAIL,CO 81657 UNITED KINGDOM, HUGHES GREGORY HUNDERT DANIEL G HUNTER ALEXANDER x208 S SPRING ST#1 417-A MAIN ST PO BOX 1638 ASPEN,CO 81611 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 ASPEN,CO 81612 HUNTER SQUARE LLC 90% HUTCHESON LAURA TRUST INDY HOUSE LLC PO BOX 2 54 RAINEY ST PH02 12555 BISCAYNE#711 SONOMA,CA 95476 AUSTIN,TX 78701 MIAMI, FL 33181 IRVINE DOUGLAS FORBES JENKINS ASIA JENSEN CARLY J 101 S MILL ST#200 734 E HOPKINS AVE 15 S WILLOW CT ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 JOSA LLC JURINE LLC 10% K&J ENTERPRISES LLC PO BOX 10147 PO BOX 2 601 RIO GRANDE PL#119A ASPEN,CO 81612 SONOMA,CA 95476 ASPEN,CO 81611 KIMPLE 2004 TRUST KLEIN JAMES J&SALLIE R LAMB DON REV TRUST 3505 TURTLE CREEK BLVD#PH20A PO BOX 12022 1449 E 56TH ST DALLAS,TX 75219 ASPEN,CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60637 LANE TAMMIE LARSON MARIA M LAWROM LLC BRUNSWOLD KIRK PO BOX 8207 533 E HOPKINS AVE 601 RIO GRANDE PL#118 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 LAZAR FAMILY TRUST LCC ASPEN HOLDINGS LLC LEBARRE FAM LLC 5342 ALDEA AVE 601 RIO GRANDE PL 7518 MIDDLEWOOD ST ENCINO,CA 91316 ASPEN,CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77063 LEE GREGORY K&DEBBIE L LEITCH B BRYAN III LEONARD FAMILY TRUST 9777 W CORNELL PL 2606 STATE ST PO BOX 710 LAKEWOOD,CO 80227 DALLAS,TX 75204 RANCHO SANTA FE,CA 92067 LIEBOWITZ BRYNA S REV TRUST LINDENAU SCOTT A REV TRUST LINK LYNN B 3 SUNSET SUMMIT 501 RIO GRANDE PL#104 PO BOX 7942 ASHVILLE, NC 28804 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 MACKLOWE WILLIAM S&JULIE L MAESTRANZI ALEXA LEE TRUST MANN KATHLEEN A REV TRUST 99% 126 E 56TH ST FL 28 1736 PARK RIDGE PT PO BOX 1455 NEW YORK, NY 10022 PARK RIDGE, IL 60068 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 MANNING FREDERICK J&GAIL P MARASCO BERNARD R 11.0446% MARASCO EMILY A AK MEYER EMILYA ;x'22 W ADAMS ST#2290 320 DAKOTA DR 11.0446% CHICAGO, IL 60606 GRAND JUNCTION,CO 81506 21701 FLAMENCO MISSION VIEJO,CA 92692 MARASCO FAMILY TRUST 33.4331% MARCHETTI FAMILY LLC MARRIOTT FAMILY TRUST 653 26 1/2 RD 1526 FOREST DR 2428 THE STRAND GRAND JUNCTION,CO 81506 GLENVIEW, IL 60025 HERMOSA BEACH,CA 90254 MARSH HUGH MARTINEZ RITA MCCUTCHIN GENE P 631 E MAIN ST PO BOX 380 14833 MIDWAY RD ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ADDISON,TX 75001 MCDONALD FRANCIS B MCGAFFEY FAMILY&CO NO C LLC MCPHETRES RICHARD M f PO BOX 4671 2465 NOB HILL AVE NORTH 7 YOUNG ST ASPEN,CO 81612 SEATTLE,WA 98109 BARTON ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA, MHT LLC MILNE SHEILA MOSCOE THOMAS D PO BOX 25318 PO BOX 8286 14700 ROCKSBOROUGH RD ST CROIX VIRGIN ISLANDS 00824, ASPEN,CO 81612 MINNETONKA,MN 553453718 MURPHY GEORGE VV MYSKO ASPEN HOLDINGS NGS LLC PO BOX 4146 615 E HOPKINS AVE 101 FOUNDERS PL#109 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 NGUYEN MICHAEL TAM NIBLACK SCOTT OBERMEYER 204 LLC DAO OANH KIM 101 N SPRING ST#3109 2727 ALLEN PKWY STE1400 430 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 816111560 HOUSTON,TX 77019 ASPEN,CO 81611 OBERMEYER PLACE RENTAL GRP LLC OBP LLC OLITSKY TAMAR&STEPHEN OBERMEYER PLACE SALES GRP LLC 101 FOUNDERS PL#104 PO BOX 514 115 AABC ASPEN,CO 81611 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 ASPEN,CO 81611 OP LLC ORIGINAL CURVE CONDO#310 LLC ORR KEITH 424 PARK CIR#6 1796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD 4545 N STATE LINE ASPEN,CO 81611 BASALT,CO 81621 TEXARKANA,TX 75503 PAM LLC PARDEE JAMES LEE III REV LIV TRST PATTERSON VICKI PO BOX 4446 PO BOX 4153 620 E PLUM ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 816124153 FORT COLLINS,CO 80524 PEARSON DOUG PITKIN COUNTY PR ASPEN HOLDINGS LLC "101 N SPRING ST#3105 530 E MAIN ST#302 PO BOX 1006 ASPEN,CO 816111518 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 QTIP MARITAL TRUST 1/2 QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAINER EWALD 40 E 80TH ST#PH 26A 9932 LAKEWAY CT 409 E COOPER AVE#4 NEW YORK,NY 10075 DALLAS,TX 75230 ASPEN,CO 81611 RAMOS WALTHER JR&MARJORIE R REDSTONE SUSAN B REINGOLD ROBERT B INC 133 TALL TREES DR PO BOX 159 1482 E VALLEY RD#601 BALA CYNWYD, PA 19004 ASPEN,CO 81612 MONTECITO,CA 93108 RIO GRANDE PARTNERS 88 LLC RIVER HOUSE LLC RIVER PARK IN ASPEN CONDO ASSOC 1008 E HOPKINS AVE 729 E BLEEKER ST 730 E DURANT ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 RIVER ROAD LLC RKJR PROPERTIES LTD ROSENFIELD LYNNE CARYN 12481 HIGH BLUFF DR#150 5934 ROYAL LN#250 709 E MAIN ST#203 SAN DIEGO,CA 92130 DALLAS,TX 75230 ASPEN,CO 81611-2059 ROTHBERG MARJORIE ROTHBLUM PHILIP 1/2 ROY ADAM C&SARAH G 2006 N BANCROFT PKWY 40 E 80TH ST#PH 26A 625 E MAIN ST#203 WILMINGTON,DE 19806 NEW YORK, NY 10075 ASPEN,CO 81611 RUDIN MICHAEL&SABRINA SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SATTLER SANDRA A 345 PARK AVE PO BOX 4897 101 NORTH SPRING ST#3204 NEW YORK, NY 10154 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 SCHENKELBERG LLC SEGREST DAVID H SELBY TROY E&MAY EYNON 140 VISTA GRANDE 2606 STATE ST PO BOX 8234 GRAND JUNCTION,CO 81507 DALLAS,TX 75204 ASPEN,CO 81612 SELDIN CHRISTOPHER G SEYFFERT STEVEN J SHAPIRO FREDERIC M&SUSAN 22 MOUNTAIN CT 102 FOUNDERS PL#201 101 N SPRING ST#3108 BASALT,CO 81621 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 SHERMAN CAPITAL COMPANY SHOAF JEFFREY S SIMCHIK MCGOVERN LLC 5840 E JOSHUA TREE LN PO BOX 3123 260 PIONEER RD#1 PARADISE VALLEY,AZ 85253 ASPEN,CO 81612 RYE,NH 03870 SINTA SCOTT SLS LLC - SMITH GAILEN B FAMILY TRUST +!PO BOX 2872 101 FOUNDERS PL#104 520 S MAIN ST#178 `ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 GROVE,OK 743443439 SMITH H W III SMITH JAMES F&N LINDSAY STARMER MARY JOSEPHINE 11.0446% PO BOX 10914 600 E MAIN ST#302 12738 W 84TH DR ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ARVADA,CO 80001 STEWART TITLE CO SUTTON TREVOR MICHAEL THOMAS KATHRYN PO BOX 669 18 DAMPIER CRESCENT FORREST 631 E MAIN ST HOUSTON,TX 77001 ACT 2603 AUSTRALIA, ASPEN,CO 81611 TIOS RENTALS LLC TRACY KATHLEEN TRAVIS SHELBY J 50 MILBURN CT 625 E MAIN ST#202 208 E 28TH ST-APT 2G CARBONDALE,CO 81623 ASPEN,CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10016 TREDER CAROLE A TSE HOLDINGS LLC TUSCANA LLC 101 N SPRING ST BOX 3205 601 RIO GRANDE PL#120 501 RIO GRANDE PL STE 105 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 UNIT 106 OP LLC UNIT 109 OP LLC 90% UNIT 5E OP LLC DBA BIG BOY LLC 106 S MILL ST#203 501 RIO GRANDE PL#107 106 MILL ST#202 ASPEN,CO 816112497 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 VAN WALRAVEN EDWARD C REV TRUST 1% VANWOERKOM LAURIE VECTOR ENTERPRISES LLC PO BOX 1455 PO BOX 341 0490 ASPEN OAK DR CARBONDALE,CO 81623 WOODY CREEK,CO 81656 ASPEN,CO 81611 VRANA MALEKA WAGAR RICHARD H WASKOW SUSAN A TRUST PO BOX 4535 PO BOX 9063 5710 CRESCENT PARK E#132 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 PLAYA VISTA,CA 90094 WEEKS ROBIN WELSCH SUSAN FLEET REVOCABLE TRUST WHITEHILL STEPHEN LANE 526 RIDGEWAY DR 11/30/1983 5320 W HARBOR VILLAGE DR#201 METAIRIE, LA 70001 101 N SPRING ST#201 VERO BEACH,FL 32967 ASPEN,CO 81611 WILSON FAMILY TRUST WILSON STACE S 101 FOUNDERS PL UNIT 201 PO BOX 5217 ASPEN,CO 81611 SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 EXHIBIT Davits H®r inc- , PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING May 21,2015 Debbie Quinn City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado Re: 100 South Spring Street Affordable Housing Unit Deed Restriction Dear Debbie: 100 South Spring Street LLC (Applicant) is represented by Davis Horn Incorporated in the land use application which seeks approval to renovate the existing building located at 100 South Spring Street and convert the building from office/affordable housing to the Boesky Art Gallery. The Gallery will include a completely renovated and updated rental affordable housing unit. The ; Housing Authority and Community Development Department are proposing a modification of existing rental deed restriction which is unacceptable to the Applicant. I have discussed this issue with Jim and he suggested that we propose alternative language. This letter summarizes the background associated with the deed restriction and proposes a modification of the new deed restriction which is proposed by the Housing Authority. Background 1. In 1979,Neil Ross and Brian Goodheim owned the subject property which was known as the Aspen Valley Visiting Nurses Association Building(AVVNA). Ross and Goodheim applied for and received approval of a floor area bonus to develop additional commercial space in excess of the quantity permitted in the Office zone in return for developing a "moderate income employee housing unit." 2. Attachment 1 is the July 11, 1979 Planning Office Memorandum to the Aspen City Council addressing the AVVNA Special Review. 3. Attachment 2 is a copy of the July 23, 1979 City Council minutes. The City Council approved the floor area bonus special review and waived the required parking for the employee unit. 4. On July 18, 1980 Ross and Goodheim recorded covenants restricting the employee unit to the"moderate income category"City of Aspen housing guidelines (see Attachment 3). ALICE DAVIS AICP S GLENN HORN AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH ST. • SUITE 104 • ASPEN,COLORADO 81611 • 970/925-6587 • FAX:970/925-5180 adavis@rof.net ghorn@rof.net Moderate income housing guidelines'have been replaced by the Aspen Pitkin Housing Authority category 2 and 3 price, income and occupancy guidelines. Current Proposal 1. The Applicant is proposing to renovate the existing building and relocate the existing affordable housing unit from the south end of the building to the north end of the building. 2. The relocation of the unit triggers residential GMQS review pursuant to Sections 26.470.070.4 and 26.470.070.5(2)of the Land Use Code. 3. The Applicant is seeking to maintain the unit as a rental unit and voluntarily change the deed restriction to a Category 2 rental unit, a more restrictive category. 4.' The maximum monthly rental rates for the unit will decrease by approximately 33 percent from $ 1,307 per month(Category 3)to $ 875 (Category 2). The maximum annual family income of an individual renting the unit will be reduced from $ 88,000 to $ 56,000(approximately 36%). The maximum annual family income of a couple renting the unit will be reduced from $ 133,000 to $ 81,000(approximately 39 \ Housing Authority Recommendation 1. The Housing Authority accepted the Applicant's voluntary offer to change the deed restriction to a Category 2 rental deed restriction with an added provision that"at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year,the unit become an ownership unit and listed and sold through the APCHA lottery system"(see Attachment 4). 2. The Applicant objects to the added provision and has indicated she will withdraw the land use application if the added provision is included in the deed restriction. Applicant's Proposed Deed Restriction 1. .The Applicant proposes an alternative added provision: if the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year the Owner of the building will pay a fine of$ 100 per day until the unit is rented in compliance with the deed restriction. 2. Attachment 5,is a redlined copy of the proposed deed restriction. Summary The Applicant will relocate the moderate income rental affordable housing unit within the building,renovate the unit and agree to a current Category 2 rental deed restriction which makes the unit more affordable to a lower income employee. This is a benefit to the community. i The Applicant will not voluntarily agree to the added provision requiring the forced.sale of the unit if it is in non-compliance for one year: However, the Applicant,will agree to pay a fine of S 100 per day if the unit is in non-compliance for one year. S ncetely; i D HORN CORPORATED GL HO AICP cc: Justin Barker ' I C etA MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Jim Rednts, Planning Office RE: AVVNA Building Special Review, DATE: July 11, 1979 This is a special review application requesting the following: 1. The approval of the FAR bonus to provide additional commercial space and employee housing. 2. The reduction of required parking. The applicant proposes to remodel the existing structure. at the corner of Main and Hunter and construct a 'total of 2,330 square':feet of commercial space: and a 450 square-foot studio for employee, housing. With the employee housing bonus, the FAR breaks down as follows: , 75 to 1 permitted by right 2,250 square feet .15 to 1 employee housing bonus 450 square feet .10 to l commercial bonus 80 square feet 1 to i FAR with bonus 2,780.square feet i The proposed employee dwelling unit meets: the guidelines adopted by the City Council. (Stu,dio unit: 400 to 600 square feet): The applicant states that this unit is proposed to, house a secretary employed on site. Although no specific information was-provided by the applicant as to" an income level of this employee, he stated he would.live with the income (low,"moderate or middle) level for rentals recommended by this office. It.is our belief, judging by the income levels of secretaries within Aspen that the low income designation is most appropriate. The Planning and.Zoning Commission; in their special review for FAR bonus has found that this project'does, in'fact, meet the intent, of the'FAR bonus, for employee housing: In addition, they recommend to Council that the rental or sale price guidelines should fall into the low income category. The second special review deals with parking reduction. For employee.housing, the Code requires one off-street parking space per bedroom with a deviation from that requirement.by review of City Council upon recommendation of the P and Z.. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends elimination of the off-street parking requirement for the employee unit, 'primarily because of'the constraints of the small lot. "It is felt n this, instance that 'in the trade off between a'parking space"and_an employee unit, helping the applicant facilitate providing deed restricted employee- housing is of greater benefit-to'the City. �o i (Y , GOODHEIM AND-ROSS REAL ESTATE SERVICES 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN,COLORADO 81611 BRIAN L.GOODHEIM;M.BA.,R.M. NEIL ROSS REALTOR,APPRAISER REALTOR,INSURANCE BROKER (303)925.1568 (303)925-2800 July 5, 1979 Mr. Jim Reents Planning Office City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Jim: In your absence Richard Grice of the Planning Office has been most helpful in further clarifying the guidelines for our' application for special review before the Planning and Zoning Commission. We would like to amend our initial. application as follows: We proposea single structure to encompass 2330 square feet of commercial. office space and.450 square feet of employee housing. According to tZicht* at our�peei:ing" on Monday. July .2nd, this size structure will enable us to use the original parking reduction request of three (3) spaces. Brian shall be representing the partnership at the Planning and Zoning meeting on Tuesday -July 10th. Again, thanks to the Planning Office for their help. Cordiall , Neil Ross Brian L. Goodheim NR:sw .cc: Richard Grice Karen Smith MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jim Reents, Planning Office RE: AVVNA Building DATE: June 26, 1919 This is a special review application requesting the following: 1. The approval of the FAR bonus to provide additional commercial space and employee housing. 2. The reduction of required parking.. The applicant proposes to remodel the existing structure at,the corner of Main and Hunter and construct a total of.2550 square feet.of commercial space and a 450 square foot studio for employee housing. With the employee housing bonus, the FAR breaks down as.fol.lows: .75 to 1 permitted by right 2,250 square feet .15 to 1 employee housing bonus 450 square feet . .10 to 1 commercial bonus 300�square efeet to 1 FAR with onus 3,000 square are feet The proposed employee dwelling-.Unit meets the guidelines adopted by the City Council (Studio unit: 400 to 600.s4uare feet). The applicant states that this unit is proposed to house a secretary.empl oyed on site. Although no specific information was provided by the applicant as to an income level of this employee, he stated he would live with the income (low, moderate or middle) level for rentals recommended by this office. It is our belief, judging by the income levels of secretaries within Aspen that the low income designation . is most appropriate. Your finding under the special review for FAR bonus is that this project does, in fact, meet the intent of the FAR bonus for employee housing. In addition, a recommendation should be made to Council as to the rental or sale price guidelines that should be established with regard to this unit. The second special review deals with parking reduction: this in turn is divided into two areas of review, commercial space and employee housing. The current Code requires three off-street.parking spaces per 1000 square feet-of commercial space with a reduction to 1.5 per 100D square feet by, review of the Planning and:.Zoning Commission. This would reduce the required parking from eight to four for commercial space. For employee housing, Code requires one.off-street parking space per bedroom with a deviation from that requirement by review of City Council upon recommendation of the P and Z. The applicant is requesting a reduction in parking from nine spaces required by Code to three spaces. You have the authority-to reduce parking on.the commercial space to four spaces and to.recommend to Council a reduction of required parking for employee housing. The applicant has stated that the restrictions of the non-conforming lot (3,000 square feet where-6,000 squart feet minimum is required in the "0" Office zone) allow only three spaces provided on site. The Planning Office recommends the reduction of parking for commercial space from eight spaces to four with the understanding that any further reduction in required parking for commercial space can only be granted by the Board of Adjustment. In addition, because of the restrictions of a small site, the Planning Office recommends.reduction (elimination) of the off-street parking requirement for the employee unit. It is felt in this instance that in the trade off between a parking space and. an employee unit, helping the applicant facilitate providing deed restricted employee housing is of greater benefit to the City. GOODHEIM AND ROSS REAL ESTATE SERVICES 100 SOUTH SPRINGSTRE£T ASPEN,COLORADO 81811 BRIAN L.GOODHEIM,M.B.A.,R.M. {VEIL ROSS REALTOR,APPRAISER REALTOR,INSURANCE BROKER (303)926-1558 1303)925.2800 May 30, 1979 Mr. Jim Reents Planning Office City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 100 South Spring Street, Aspen, Colorado--Special Review Dear Jim: Both Brian and I appreciate you and Ron taking your.time.yesterday to offer us the gui-delines -necessary. for filing for special review on- the -above mentioned property. Please.accept this written correspondence as a formal application from Brian and myself for special review on 100 South Spring Street as follows: 1) Approval of the.FAR bonus for employee housing in the."O Office .District. We propose a.. project(a single structure) to include 2550 square feet of-cammercial office space and 450 square feet of employee housing(Which is within the'FAR guidelines per our discussion--Tuesday). The:empl.oyee housing unit shall be designated whatever category(low, moderate or middle) the Planning Office reccommends. 2) Approval of parking reduction for the above office space and re- stricted unit- to ,a total of three (3) spaces. We would hope to. have you submit this for hearing before the-Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on the.Agenda of Tuesday, June 5, 1979. Please contact Brian or me. with any..questions you have or with a request for additional information, if needed. I want to thank you, Ron and the Planning office for your continued assistance. Cordially yours, Neil Ross Brian L. Goodhefm NR:lb cc: Ron Stock Karen Smith OAW GOODHEIM AND ROSS REAL ESTATE SERVICES 100 SOUTH SPRING.STREET ASPEN,COLORADO 81611 BRIAN L.OOODHEIM,M.B.A.,R.M. NEIL ROSS REALTOR,APPRAISER REALTOR,INSURANCE BROKER (303)925.1558 (303)925-2800 MEMORANDUM April 30, 1979 City of Aspen From:Brian Goodheim Planning Office Neil Ross Attn: Carla 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Carla: As requested, we have' researched .the adjoining property ownership for our pending application for a PMH unit on Lot A Block 28 East Aspen Addition. . The.adjoining property owners are located on. Exhibit A (attached) and are as follows: ProperU 1: Concept 600 Condominium Association c/o IIILCOR . 555 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Property 2: Estate of Arthur Mikkelsen c/o Box 3132 Aspe6, Colorado. 81611 Property 3: Spring Street Associates, A General Partnership 117 South Spring Street (c/o Scott) Aspen., Colorado 81611 .:-Pioperty 4: Spring Street Commercial Associates, A General Partnership 117 South Spring Street- (c/o Scott and c/o Mel Seid) Aspen:, Colorado 81611 Property 5: Aspen: Main Condominium Association c/o Ms. Mary Bosley . 709 East Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Property. 6: . Mr. Theodore.L. and Ruth L. Mularz Box 166 Aspen; Colorado 81611 Property 7: Michael Otte and Richard Sherrif Box 11299 Aspen .Colorado 81611 If we may be of further:assistance, or provide additional information, please con- tact us at 925-1558 or 925-2800. ! j • i 1 : _:. r I , , I t t `�!!'.'11f- ' ; .-_r" "t._ i' ■rte '�. 4 j i • , as a► J , : IALA I VI Ito iS -4711 44 cq I "to ` : oworoao►vouoawo Co..Do wo, RECORD O P P R O C E E DI N G S .Aspen Planning and Zoining Commission, July 10, 1979; 5:00 PM, City Couneil'Chambers, page 1 The Aspen Planning.and Zoning Commission held a continued meeting from July 2; 1979 on*July 10, ' 1979, in the.City coilncil Chambers, at 5:00,PM. The members present were.Olaf Hedstrom, Welton '. Anderson, 'Perry Harvey, Roger. Hunt,,and Lee Pardee. .Staff representatives.were Karen smith and Richard .Grice: AVVNA: Richaid..'Grice�was present to discuss the AVVNA, in which he.explaine3' it stood for Aspen.Valley Visiting Nurses Association. Anderson stepped out from the discussion. Grice stated that the.applUation came from Brian Goodheim and'Neil Ross: They are requesting special review approval for the FAR.bonus to provide additional commercial space, employee housing, and a reduction of require4 -parking. Grice stated that the application has changed slightly by reducing the total commercial space that,they are requesting and the Iota: 'strucutre space they are requesting to 2330 square feet. Grice stated that the-code allows .75 to 1:commerciall.space be right.in the zone.' A bonus of .10 commercial spaceprovided that they construct :15 iii-employee housing. He stated that^the'.75 to 1 permitted by right stays at 2250. The -1S-to l stays.at 4$O. However, the bonus and commercial space they are how.requestirng is.only 80.square feet instead of 300 square feet. The reasoning for this is that their lot is 3000 square feet, and they could not get'more than 3 spaces in the'back of the property: The.an unit.is intended .to house their secretary. 'Grice stated that-they recommend that the cosimittee's.finding should be 2 things.t '1. the-intent.of the FAR•.bonus has been met and, 2. that they need'to••make a recommendation to.City Council d.9 to what price.guidelinea should.be.fixed.to the low-income guidelines. Harvey asked what the.total square footage was. Grice.ieplied that it-.' was 2780, .and before that it was 3000, Dunniway asked if it was aubject,to the GMP Grice replied that it was not.considering that:it was in-tho;O=Zone District. Grice stated that they are,a imply asking for. less' ihah their ,:10 . aommercia.I.bbonus in return for allowing :the employee housing unit. in this way, they.will only.need. three•parking^•spaces instead'of four. Grice stated that there.were two elements in parkiag. The first one is that there is parking requirements for three spaces per 1000 square feet of,commeicia7 space. T,he request. is to reduce that number:-to 1.5 parking 'spaces per 1000;square•.feet:<'- The second element 1.8"that they would like to'eliminate.the'parking space for the employee housing all' together. Grice stated that:it .is, the'Planning.Office''s recommendation that they,. approve:the reduction-in parking,for the•commercial -sgace-to 1.5 spaces: per:1000 square feet and'that they snake a'recommendation•to.City,council that the parking:space for the employee hoilsing.unit not-.be-required. Harvey asked Grice what the original application was. Grice stated that they asked for 300'square feet..of commercial bonus. Hunt felt that most employees have vehicles.and. considering that there will'not be.g.parking.L space for the employee housing unit; there will- be one less:commerCial parking space for.the secretaries' vehicle. . Hunt stated that they should�Aot say that the employee.housing unit does-not need'a parking:space in which in practicality it does: Goodheim stated that.it really enhances the ability of the employe= to attract_and.keepthe:employsea. 'Hedstrom asked.if.it was possible to have four'parking'spaces...•.'Goodheim.;': stated''that:it was not.because htey only have'-30-.feet'Aldo 'the'alley. way. Goodheim noted`.thit.they mould.:not. encoura9e any employee parking: there at allcronsidering-that they would be near everything.in town., . Goodheim.stated.that it was.a PMH 'unit:and that they do:not.have to: 'Provide-parking. Their alternative is that:they could make :that area into 2250 square feet of.•office.: •Goodheim noted that'-this, would.be'easier to finance.- .Harvey Harvey made a motion.that:they find 'that the'-application for the Aspen. Valiey Visiting Nurses Associgtion Building ekpanblon meets the intent. of the FAR bonus, and further recommend to.City Council;fhat the rental•` . -and;sale;:price:;-guidelines established-for the-employee,housing•unit should 1e low-income'PMH, and further that the off-street parking " requirement;be reduced.for-the commercial from the:3 spaces-- paces per_1000 ` square.feet of commercial space to 1.5 spaces.per.'1Q00 square feet of commercial space, and further,recommending.the.required parking spaixi'_ for the employee housing unit.be waived.: Pardee seconded.: All in.favor. the motion carried.. KSPN: KSPN has withdrawn their application. . SHOAF'S RIVER VIEW SUBDIVISION: Anderson stepped back in'for this discussion. Grice stated that this was a preliminary plat stage for the Shoaf River:View Subdivision. 'This Application.,involves the:.splitting of a 30;010 square foot parcel in halve-in.order..to create a-second single,family residence{ There,•is• already.one .single family residence in..existence, so it is in accordance with an exemption listed in the GMP; whenever •there is.enough.land area for density for-double density, and an existing dwelling q. be. a . single,dwel'ling duplex, one can cut off one. additional piece 9f.ground. : which would be fes tiicted•to' single family use. Even :though the R-15 Zone al°lows duplexes, this-.parcel'.will not be able'to have tha:Auplex ' for two reasons.:. 1. It would have to go to GMP competition to be.other than a'single•family. and.2. it would never-happen Anyway because parcels ckeated.after a number of years ago, you have to.have 20,000 square feet;.: in the. R-15 Zone. : So, considering that this parcel of land`woul.d only .: be.15000 square feet,:.it would permanently be a single family'site. Grice stated'thai the'location will-be on Mill Street, just.up,the hill' . from Herron Park. 'This applicatio4 has been referred to the City.-Water . Department; Sanitation'District, Mountain.Hell, Holy Cross Electric,: Cany.90-Cable, Rocky Mountain Natural.Gas, and the Fire Narshall.in which.. : all..of these have no problems with this:application at a11. 'They recam<aend the•coinittW s approval: One comment from the Engineering.Department.in which they recommend:that •they.approve the subdivision-subject•to the corrections. that was present in the packet. Harvey asked about the flood line. Grice stated that the:surveyor became confused and that no flood•lineexists. .So the Engineeiing;Department would. like thefloodline corrected on future plats.. Grice $fated that-the building.:site-is poor and that it goes'4own-the hill_ So between the cottonwoods and the streaml margin review, the Engineering .. Department would like them'to rotate the building.' 'Pardee•.stated that .. the Y,ngineering:Departmant should not tell people where to build or to rotate their building. Hedstrom opened the meeting to the public: No.comments from..the public. Sestrom close3.the"meeting to the public, a . ! Regular•Meetih4 Aspen City Council July".23, 1979; r Councilman Van Ness moved to endorse the expedition;, seconded by Councilwoman Michael. W All in favor; motion carried. A+iOL dN M Councilman Parry moved to fund $1,000; seconded by Councilman Behrendt.. !� pointedCounci out•there would'be television coverage,and some exposure and it ' will Aspenbe fovo obmlle'id 'Aspen. Mayor Edel said if they would-be willing.,to get.the,word . p nal campaign, he would be more favorable Mayor Edel said.he did not Z P� i, see any tie to Aspen. Joan Klai said the ekped tion would like to get"a small version of the Aspen flag to put,on top of the•mouniainj there will be rio+doubt where this expedition is from. Councilman Isaac said the,City'does not have. the $1,000: ; Councilmembers Behrendt. and Parry in favor; Councilmembers Isaac, Collins, Van Ness, Michael, and Mayor Edel opposed. Motion NOT,.:"carried: PAVING SIDEWALK ON.E. HOPKINS Franz Berko told Council he is concerned as the people who own the lot to,the' east of.him, I put,snow on.the non_existent sidewalk and it is- People.have 'to go in the middle of the.street. Berko said they cannot plow it.because there is no•sidewalk. City' Sidewalk giving ' Manager ,Stalf, told. Council,he had;spoken,to: representatives of the owner of this property,. E. Hopkins and it is for sale: The attorneys'are cooperative on working on putting inthe -sidewalk; they,are'negotiating to sell the'bank and this, property'. i Councilman' Van.'Ness asked, if the•'city'could force;the,property owner to pave the sidewalk; or can the city plow it despite the: fact itis,not paved. City Attorney Stock'said the city could plow it, noaetheless. it would riot get to solid surface. The. City'can. legally °. force putting; in a sidewalk,, but only,. through's specil, improvement district and; this, is costly: Stock said the best• approach is to deal with-thc owners and'ask them to do, so ' voluntarily. if the owners want•to build something on the property, the citycan force them to put in a sidewalk: 'Sta11'said he. 'would' bring"this back on the next 'agenda. c APPEAL TO ALL- TWINNED-TOWNS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, IN FAVOR OF THE REFUGEES+FROM SOUTHEAST i ASIA Mayor•Edel told_Council thi's program wants:the' city to accept,families and.',bring them in Refugeesas wards with the,,city sponsoring them and seeing that they are,, financially secureuntiL they get on, their'•own: Mayor, Edel said''there is no.dollar figure included but it is i probably pret£y'heavy': Stalf". said he would give this,to the social services at.the county so that'the Council, could get more information and costs, etc. :and place on the next: ; joint agenda., Councilman Collins said he felt this should be a private sponsor," someone Ij outside the city. Councilman Van Ness said he would like more information. OPENING OF THE GOLF COURSE �. Ms. Butterbaugh showed Council what was budgeted for operation and capital expenditure; Golf Course- the debt service.is.$72,000 and,$0 000.was, provided out of the bond issue. There would opening date be a shortfall of- $40;000. regardless of the decision; ;there will be another $40,000 short. fall if. the course is not opened. Holland.told.•Council the grass on 'thecourse.can cake the play for 2 months; however, it. is not in.top, condition and is not a competitive course. Holland said, this is riot just a matter of money, but is a matter of pride: It will not be presenting Aspen image.as a top,notch course. Holland told Council the course'will ! sustain some damage if it is•played upon. Bruce Roberts pointed out if the course is opened, they will"not be able to continue working on it:, i �. Mick Mahoney told Council.ihe city,had made a pledge to the community that they would have an 18-hole golf.course to-aid summer activity and that, it would open this,summer. Mahoney i said the promise was that the city would-not come back to,the.public:sector for .tax funds.; i Mahoney .s aid' this course could,be an element in some, of thepackages for the summer. Councilman :van Ness said,it;was the intent'.this; pay for. itself and.he would like to get it open. Bill Wax _:told 'Council he felt the golf course has a.fine, layout. Waxman said:he felt that:anyone.who playe& the course would admire it. Waxman suggested Charging-lower green 'fees .far the.rest of"this year. Mayor said he had,been contacted by local golfers'.who think it would make more sense 'to; delag the opening until.'next year. - 'Mayor Edel'said .the City.has spent over $1,500,000 and it seems absurd to jeopardize ! $30,,000 to :open it now. _ Ms. Butterbaugh told Council the projected revenues will have to be covered because the course-did not, open. The geheral fund does not have the money; the ,only unrestricted funds . that are available are in the water fund. The Council'could say this money has to be ! !.` paid back to.the:water fund from operating revenues;,however', the first 5:'years of the golf course project. a break even ! Councilman Parry moved that the City does.not open the,golf course' this'year; ,seconded by Councilman Behrendt. Councilriiember's"Parry, Michael, Behrendt, and Mayor Edel in favor;' 1 Councilmembers 'Collins Van Ness and Isaac opposed. Motion carried. The supplemental appropriation,will be; brought back to Council. AVVNA BUILDING SPECIAL REVIEW I Jim Reents,. planning office, told,Council this is a,special, review, of an FAR bonus to aVVNA'building provide employee housing and a'reduction of reaqui •ed.parking for employee housing. In ;pedal review a the O, office"district a :25:1 FAR bonus may be'approved and.of that .15:1,.is allowed, .^c�glaw housing', for employee housing,:and '.l:l for commercial space. The proposal to modify an exist, i bonus, ing structure:and•expand it to.incl. . l empl"oyee housing unit and ;to maximize the comm- ercial space'. ,The,applicant.is maximizing with the :employde�thousing.unit and is minimiz ; ing commercial bonus because of the,restrictions of a small site. P & Z, has reviewed ±" C this and has, recommended approval in a reduction of required parking for the employee ll IF . ' housing unit. Because of the small size of the site, 3,000 square feet, it was .the i i r .oy.... o...uy � noyoia t•-y wut,t:aa .,Uly dJ, 17/7 opinion of P & Z that no off street parking space for the employee unit should be requiredi ! becuase of the greater benefit of the unit. P & Z recommended that Council support the ' approval of the FAR bonus and the parking requirement. i Councilman Isaac moved to approve the FAR bonus and the reduction of the parking; seconded by Councilman Parry. 4 Reents told Council this proposal is for one structure of 2780 square feet for office ! space and one employee unit. There will be 3 parking spaces on the alley. The Code does j not address non-conforming uses where structures are already in place. All in favor, motion carried. PROGRAM FOR GOALS TASK FORCE s Council had stated they would like to see a goals task force established. Ms. Smith, plan'- ning director agreed this is appropriate in terms of reviewing past directions, public l` programs, and future direction for growth and development. Ms. .Smith presented a memo ;Goal Tpby� for establishing the task force, a tentative agenda for the next 3 months to get this going, and budgetting. Ms. Smith requested that if Council.agrees with this program, she will budget for 1980. Councilman Isaac moved to direct Ms. Smith to proceed; seconded by Councilwoman Michael. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #43, SERIES OF 1979 - Water Plant Annexation #1 Mayor Edel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Edel closed the public hearing. Ord. 43,1979 Water Plant ' Councilman Parry moved to read Ordinance #43, Series of 1979; seconded by CouncilmanAnnexation #1 Collins. .All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #43 (Series of 1979) AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING CERTAIN UNINCORPORATED TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO was read by the city clerk i Councilman Isaac moved to adopt Ordinance #43, Series of 1979, on second reading; seconded:. by Councilman Collins. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Michael, aye;-Isaac, aye; Behrendt,.: aye; Collins, aye; Parry, aye; Mayor Edel, aye. Motion carried. CITY MANAGER 1. Fountain in Mall at Galena an. Stalf reported to Council that there is no clear cut ac Mon as to w ether nd t e H ountain should be functional or not. Stale said ,.there is a contest for a sculpture and fountain in the mall, and the decision is whether rai i Fountain it should be a functional fountain. The city has problems keeping the fountain clean as Galena & Hyman , it is; maintenance costs of a functional fountain are far greater. Councilman Parry said when Council made the award $15,000 it was for a fountain to have a purpose to block out traffic noise and make a pleasant area. Lou Wille said a fountain that doesn't function is emasculated,. and it will not bee too difficult to maintain. The fountain could be operated with a direct flow of city water. The people in this contest should be given i very definite set of rules. The fountain should function in the summer and be a screen and a good sculpture in the winter. Bill Jamison agreed the fountain could be made for $15,000 if the artist is left to do what he wants, whether it functions or not should be left up to the artist. 1 'Stalf told Council he hears from the fire department and fire marshal that the fountain in very dangerous. It might be appropriate to do some design work for the entrance to j the mall, and also some work on maintenance costs on a functioning fountain versus a non- functioning one. Stalf told Council it is publicly known that the City is having a com- petition for this fountain/sculpture and the money is committed. Councilman Behrendt suggested having Stalf come up with specifications for the artists to use and bring back at the next meeting. 2. Parkin Curt Stewart, transportation director,, told Council he had talked with the traffic control officers and downtown businesses; they have noticed an increase of people . turning over the parking spaces. One of the weaknesses of the program is a lack of infor- Parking plan & mation program. The handbill idea took away from the TCO's patrolling and regulating the regulations parking. Stewart told Council that once the theory was explained, people are very recap- i tive to it. Stewart said he felt there is a need to provide more parking supply. Stewart recdmmended two one-way loops in town, Galena to Hyman and Mill to Hyman. .The second loop would conflict with the Silverking route, and would require signal modification at Mill and Main. Stewart's alternative is to one-way Galena south of Hopkins around to the first block of Cooper; this would provide additional 22 spaces or 484 cars in 11 hours. This is a low cost way of providing more parking, and it-works from a circulation stand- point. Another alternative is the redesigning of Rubey Park to improve the transit station and to provide 45 additional parking spaces: Stewart said he is trying to determine how much work can be done in-house. Stewart told Council he feels there is a need to expand the i Rio Grande area; it is at capacity 80 per cent of the time. Stewart said it would be nicd to have a trolley in Aspen if it served a well-defined role and could be used as a shuttle to perimeter parking. Stewart told Council the City had a commitment to the Ski Corp to provide a good loading area at Rubey Park, and the City cannot take up too many spaces for parking. Stewart said for winter parking spaces, he would not want it to be at the detriment of staging buses. I i '' %�-r�-�hme✓1T 3 I:;i�1. �^:.::i•'•%:''�r�•Ll::,''•ir?%%'. cf:' Recorded 2:56 P,4 July 18 1980 ReceptlonD Loretta Banner Recorder 5C 2254'74 COVENANTS SUOS3 2(} t7J _ 3cy3� J 10`; GOODHEIM AND ROSS (covenantorl, for themselves, 7.their heirs, executors, Administrabors," and assigns hereby ;.r 3� covenant with the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, that; 1. They are the owners of the following described i% i� •• Li prope:tty together with the improvements thereon: 1; ?t Unit f4, Lot Al Block 28, East Aspen Addition Townsite, k 100 South Spring $treetr Aspen, Pitkin, Colorado 81611 �# b �.a s 2. The above-described property shall be restricted to six (6) month minimum leacea with no morb than two (2) shorter ,, tenandies in any cAlendar year. i. 3: The aboVe-descsi'bed preperty'shall be restricted to ^:.'• rental and sale price terms within" housing priceguidelines for l the moder^tc income category as the game may be amended from a time to time by. the'City. Council Of the City Of Aspen, CoiozAdo Yeti % i within-the 'provisions of Secti6n 24=10.4(bl G31 of the Municipal Code',of the City of ASpen, Colqzadq, yc 1`ho above-d99cra.bed property shAll ba regtFicteII to occupancy -limitatiolis within Hqusing Zncoma EligSbility Guidelinns . aa'.the sa=6.may be amended from time to time by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colo;ado within the provisions of Section L`r 24-10:4(b) (3l of the Municipal Code of the City Of Aspen, Colorado. ( , T� S. The covenants contained herein may be' changed, modified or aaended'by the zecordj.ng of a.tr;itten instrument signed by 1 the record owners of the property and the Mayor of the City of y?� Aspen pursuant to a vote taken by the City Council, li 6. The coveftants contained herein Are to run a$th the. t'<; land and shall be binding on all parties and all perSon$,claiminq under them for a period,of fifty (50) years from the dote, these covenants are recordedi after which time, the covenant contained in ''4 paragraph two (2) shall be automatically extended for succdVaive ' periods'of ton (10) years, unless an instrument signed by the record ownets of the property and the Mayor of the City of Aspen pursuant < : to' a vote' taken by the City Council has been recorded which changes I: ? jG y�```t`ttt• t i f 3 Q'YCFFLi.C{RfIY••�v/C�29•...4P[n:bi..i'M 7iit..S.ri.�::J;.}':=�'ta-..'^7Tj�•rrrw t:n-..M ..r_,,.r..,_ ....._ .. t.•}�i.;b". ..i < .r h- i.. .rte - ire St�: '-'.�.• .t dYS1. :a'w'�:a/t6.3i:! a.+. r.x�4 a.. .-•1;:.!a `'% .�.t.� _>� .`.i 6•. BOOM said•covenant, in whole or in part, or which releases-thesamo,-: S ; and.-the covenants contained in paragraphs three't3) and four (d). r shall be released. IN WITNESS//WHEREOF, this'`Declaration has been duly pp . executed this (S day of 19 Gy' STATE OF 660AAOb )• is.••< County of Atkin )'- .,5+ Tho�foregoi7ig instrument was acknowledged b"afore me this • d L`• i day-Oi . 1$ d Q., by �4 : e66 tiy'hand •atiA official seal, t'f;%F'• :,•:{, 'SAIL iy..r�¢��ission expi=aae +p j: •': .Si ?•222 �t •j. Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ' County of. Yitkin Tt�e foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ,...;,}. day,of - _�� 19 by Witness my hand and official seal. . t 7. my commission expires:, ' ctr r sv� X. ',3o U "fit•<%�� Ltd s Notary'Public y i YYi i - .j e` MEMORANDUM TO: APCHA Board of Directors FROM: Cindy Christensen,Operations Manager THRU: Mike Kosdrosky,Executive Director DATE: April 1,2015 RE: REDEVELOPMENT OF 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET ISSUE: The applicant is proposing to renovate the existing building into an art gallery,and replace the existing"moderate income"(using under the Category 3 designation)studio affordable housing rental unit in a different location. BACKGROUND: In 1979, Neil Ross and Brian Goodheim owned by property; it was known as the Aspen Valley Visiting Nurses Association Building (AVVNA). Ross and Goodheim received approval to develop additional commercial space by developing a."moderate" income employee housing unit. City Council approved the floor area bonus and waived the required parking space for the employee unit. The unit was restricted to"moderate income category"on July 18, 1980,at Reception No. 225474. The Guidelines today reflect that a"moderate income category' is defined as either Category 2 or Category 3. The building is proposed to look like two buildings— an art gallery on the south side linked to a small affordable housing unit on the north side. The 35-year old affordable housing unit will be relocated from the alley to the Main Street side of the property. The studio unit will be completely remodeled. The net livable area of 400 square feet shall remain the same. The current minimum square footage for Category 1 or 2 studio unit is 400 square feet; the proposed Guidelines increase the minimum square footage to 500 square feet for all studio-type units. DISCUSSION: The current building was developed with one moderate income employee unit. The unit was the product of the City's commercial space special review for a floor area bonus. The applicant is proposing to renovate the affordable housing unit and will record a new deed restriction in the currently used form at the Category 2 price,income and occupancy guidelines. Section 26.470.070.4d,of the City of Aspen Land Use Code,states that the"proposed units shall be deed-restricted as `for sale' units and transferred to qualified purchasers;"however, the Code does allow for rental units. The applicant is seeking to maintain the unit as a rental unit. If the approval requires the unit to be a"for sale"unit,the applicant will withdraw this application. . Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 1 The unit is currently a Category 3; the monthly rent for a studio Category 3 is $1,307 per month. The Category 2 monthly rent for a studio unit is $875 per month. The unit meets the current minimum square footage for a Category 1 or 2 studio. The applicant plans on moving forward with the initial parking agreement - there will be no off-street parking for the employee unit. Staff would recommend that a washer/dryer be provided in the unit along with the other appliances due to the request to waive the off-street parking for the employee.. Due to the plans to relocate the employee unit, staff would recommend that the conditions stated in Part VII, Information for Development of Affordable Housing, Section 14, Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units,of the APCHA Guidelines,are required. They are: a. The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. b. The interior Appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good and working condition. c. Carpet must be less than five year old and be in good condition and repair,or be replaced. d. The exterior walls shall be freshly painted within one year of dedication. e. A general level of upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. f. Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures and equipment shall be in good and working order,and brought up to today's standards. g. The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten(10)years. h. All units shall meet the International Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequate code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend the APCHA Board approve the relocation of the employee housing unit as a rental,unit at Category 2; however,at such time the unit is found to be out of compliance for one year, the unit shall become an ownership unit and listed and sold through the APCHA lottery system. The following conditions shall also apply: Rental Unit: 1. Recordation of a new deed restriction for the unit,provided by APCHA,at Category 2. 2. The unit shall be remodeled to meet the conditions a-h stated above. 3. The appliances shall include: refrigerator/freezer,stove/oven,dishwasher,washer and dryer. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 2 v . 4. The deed restriction shall require that all tenants are approved PRIOR to tenancy through APCHA every two years. 5. Owner and APCHA stipulate and agree that, in accordance with CRS 38-12-301(1)(a) and (b), this Deed Restriction constitutes a voluntary agreement and deed restriction to limit rent on the property subject hereto and to otherwise provide affordable housing stock. Owner waives any right it may have to claim that the Deed Restriction violates CRS 38-12-301. 6. The rental deed restriction will be recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Units shall henceforth be limited exclusively to housing for employees and their families who are employed in Pitkin County and who meet the definition of "qualified Category 2 employee for the studio unit as that term is defined by the qualification guidelines established and indexed by the Authority on an annual basis. The Owner shall have the right to lease the Employee Dwelling Unit to a "qualified employee" of their own selection. b. The Employee Dwelling Unit shall not be occupied by the Owner or members of the immediate family("Immediate Family"shall mean a person related by blood or marriage who is a first cousin[or closer relative]and his or her children),unless the family member is a qualified employee and obtains approval by APCHA prior to occupancy. The unit shall at no time be used as a lodge unit. C. Written verification of employment of employee(s)proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the APCHA by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Units prior to occupancy thereof,and such verification must be acceptable to the APCHA. d. The maximum rental rate shall not exceed the Category 2,studio rental rates as set forth in the Rental Guidelines established by the APCHA and may be adjusted annually asset forth by the Guidelines. Rent shall be verified and approved by the APCHA upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the APCHA as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations every two years. A copy of the signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request all information reasonably necessary to determine if there is full compliance with this Agreement. g. In the event that APCHA has reasonable cause to believe the Owner and/or tenant is violating the provisions of this Agreement,the APCHA,by its authorized representative,may inspect the Property or Affordable Housing Unit between the hours of 8:00 a.n-L and 5:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner with no less than 24 hours'written notice. h. The APCHA,in the event a violation of this Agreement is discovered,shall send a notice of violation to the Owner and/or tenant,as may be applicable,detailing the nature of the violation and allowing the Owner or tenant fifteen(15)days to cure. Said notice shall state that the Owner or tenant may request a quasi-judicial hearing before the APCHA Board pursuant to the Grievance Procedures of the APCHA Guidelines within fifteen (15) days to determine the merits of the allegations. If no hearing is requested and the violation is not cured within the fifteen(15) day period,the Owner or tenant shall be considered in violation of this Agreement. If a hearing is held before the APCHA Board,the decision of the APCHA Board based on the record of such hearing shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred and for the purpose of judicial review. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 3 i. 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 recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. j. In the event the Employee Housing Unit is leased without compliance herewith,such lease shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the purported tenant. Each and every lease, for all purposes, shall be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, the covenants herein contained,even without reference therein to this Agreement. k. In the event that the Owner or tenant 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 compliance by Owner and/or tenant. 1. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement and any other related document shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be valid under applicable law;but if any such provision shall be invalid or prohibited under applicable law,such provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or prohibition without invalidating the remaining provisions of this Agreement or other document. M. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. n. No claim of waiver,consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this Agreement shall be valid against any part 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. o. The parties to this Agreement agree that any modifications of this Agreement shall be effective only when made in writing signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County,Colorado. P. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Employee Housing Unit as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent, the Association and/or Owner, by the APCHA, the City of Aspen, Colorado, and by their respective successors and assigns, by any appropriate legal action including,but not limited to,injunction,abatement,or eviction of non-qualified tenants. q. Lease agreements executed for occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit shall provide for a rental term of not less than six(6)consecutive months. A signed and executed copy of the lease shall be provided to the APCHA by the Owncr within ten (10) days of approval of employee(s) for the Employee Dwelling Unit. Upon vacancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit,the Owner is granted forty- five(45)days in which to locate a qualified employee. If an employee is not placed by the Owner,the APCHA may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. c When the option to convert any unit to a sale unit is exercised,the owner must adopt a new deed restriction in the form adopted by APCHA that is applicable to sale units. If the owner requests the unit to become an ownership unit,or it is found that the unit has been out of compliance for one year after notification to the owner, the unit shall become a "for-sale"unit and the following shall apply: Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 4 Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 2 for the studio unit. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be paid by the Art Gallery(commercial space)owners. If any work is associated with the deed-restricted unit,the cost will be assessed based on the actual values of the commercial space versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial space shall not be charged to the deed- restricted owner. The condominium documents shall be reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy to include language in the event the deed-restricted unit reverts to ownership. The goal is to protect the affordable housing units from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications associated with the commercial space. Redevelopment of 100 South Spring Street Page 5 4. The rental deed restriction will be,recorded with the following conditions: a. The use and occupancy of the.Employee Dwelling Units shall henceforth,be limited exclusively to housing for employees and their families,who are employed in Pitkin County and who meet the definition of"qualified Category 2 ernployee.for the studio unit as that term is defined by the qualification guidelines established and indexed,by the Authority on all annual basis. The Owner shall have the right to.lease the Employee Dwelling_Unit to a "qualified employee" of their own selection. b, The Employee Dwelling Unit shall not be occupied by the Owner or members of the immediate family("ImmediateFamily" shall mean a person related by blood or marriage who is a first cousin [or closer relative] and his or her children), unless the family member,is a qualified employee and obtains approval by APCHA prior to occupancy. The unit shall at no time be used as a lodge unit. C. Written verification of employment of einployee(s)proposed to reside in the Employee Dwelling Unit shall be completed and filed with the APCHA by the Owner of the Employee Dwelling Units prior to occupancy thereof, and such verification must be acceptable to the APCHA. d. The maximum refital.rate shall not exceed the Category 2, studio rental rates as set forth in the.Rental Guidelines established by the APCHAand may be adjusted annually as set forth.by the Guidelines. Rent shall be verified and approved by the-APCHA upon submission and approval of the lease. Employees shall be qualified by the APCHA as to employment, maximum income and asset limitations,every two years. A copy of the signed lease must be provided to APCHA. f. Owner agrees to provide to APCHA upon request,all information reasonably necessary to determine'if'there is full compliance with,this Agreement. & In the event that APCHA has reasonable cause to believe the Owner and/or tenant is violating the provisions of this Agreement; the APCHA,by its authorized representative, may inspect the Property or Affordable Housing Unit 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. h. The APCHA, in the event a violation of this Agreement is discovered;shall send a notice of violation to the Owner and/or tenant, as may be applicable, detailing the nature of the violation and allowing the Owner or tenant fifteen (15) days to cure. Said notice shall state that.the Owner or tenant may request a quasi-judicial hearing before the APCHA Board pursuant,to the Grievance Procedures of the APCHA Guidelines within fifteen.(15) days to determine the merits of the allegations. If,no hearing is requested and the violation is not, cured within the fifteen (15) day period,the Owner or tenant shall be considered in violation of this Agreement. If a hearing s held before the APCHA Board, the decision of the APCHA Board based on the.record of such Bearing shall be f nal for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred and for the purpose of judicial review. In the event the APCHA Board determines the Owner is in violation of this At-n-cernem and the violation is not cured within one year of such determination. the Owner shall Pav a fine iii the am.owit of$ 100 per day to the APCHA until the violation is cured to the satisfaction of the APCHA. i. The Owner is not liable for tenant non-compliance unless such non-compliance is patent or made known to owner and not cured within ninety(90)days. t:. ii. 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 recover damages and costs, including reasonable attorney's fees. In the event the Employee Housing Unit is leased without compliance herewith, such lease shall be wholly null and void and shall confer no title whatsoever upon the purported tenant. Each and every lease, for all purposes,shall be deemed to include and incorporate by this reference, the covenants herein contained, even without reference therein to this Agreement. 1k. In the event that the Owner or tenant 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 compliance by Owner and/or tenant. m4, Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement and any other related doeument shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be valid under applicable law; but if any such provision shall be invalid or prohibited under applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or prohibition without invalidating the remaining provisions of this Agreement or other document. nm. This Agreement is to be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. oto. No claim of waiver,consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this , Agreement shall be valid against any part 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. ..e. The parties to this Agreement agree that any modifications of this Agreement shall be effective only when made in writing signed by both parties and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. qp. The terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction shall constitute covenants running with the title to the Employee Housing Unit as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the Managing Agent,the Association and/or Owner,by the APCHA, the City of Aspen, Colorado, and by their respective successors and assigns, by any appropriate legal action including;but not limited to,injunction, abatement, or eviction of non-qualified tenants. Eq. Lease agreements executed for occupancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit shall provide for a rental term of not less than six(6) consecutive months.A signed and executed copy of the lease shall be provided to the APCHA by the Owner within ten(10)days of approval of employee(s)for the Employee Dwelling Unit Upon vacancy of the Employee Dwelling Unit,the Owner is granted forty-five (45) days in which to locate a qualified employee. If an employee is not placed by the Owner, the APCHA may rent the Employee Dwelling Unit to a qualified employee. sf:. When the option to convert any unit to a sale unit is exercised, the owner must adopt a new deed restriction in the form adopted by APCHA that is applicable to sale units. If the owner requests the unit to become an ownership unit,or it is found that the unit has been out of compliance for one year after notification to the owner, the unit shall become a"for-sale" unit and the following shall apply: ' Sales Unit: 1. The unit shall be an ownership unit and sold through Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority lottery system. 2. The unit shall be classified as Category 2 for the studio unit. 3. The condominium documents shall reflect that any common area maintenance shall be paid by the Art Gallery(commercial space) owners. If any work is associated with the deed-restricted unit,the cost will be assessed based on the actual values of the commercial space versus the deed-restricted unit. Any property management fees or other fees associated with the commercial space shall not be charged to the deed-restricted owner. The condominium documents shall be .reviewed and approved by APCHA prior to Certificate of Occupancy to include language in the event the deed-restricted unit reverts to ownership. The goal is to protect the affordable housing units from excessive monthly and/or special assessments having to do with luxury items and/or expensive modifications associated with the commercial space. Page 1 of 5 MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Sara Nadolny, Planner Technician THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Obermeyer Place PD – Rezoning and PD Amendment MEETING DATE: May 26, 2015 APPLICANT/OWNERS: Obermeyer Place Condominium Assoc. REPRESENTATIVE: Jerome Simecek, Director of Operations LOCATION: Obermeyer Place, 601 Rio Grande Place (management office), Aspen, CO 81611 CURRENT ZONING & USE: The zoning for this property is SCI, with a few units that are permitted either SCI or NC uses. This is a mixed-use property that contains residential, commercial, service, industrial, and recreation uses. PROPOSED LAND USE: The property will continue the same mix of uses. The applicant is requesting a zoning change from SCI to NC, and a PD amendment to continue SCI uses. SUMMARY: Obermeyer Pl. was approved in 2003 and zoned SCI with a series of office uses and some limited NC uses. The SCI zone district is very specific in its allowed use, while the NC zone district allows for more general categories of uses. Since its creation, owners of units within Obermeyer Place have struggled to find tenants that fit within the list of specific uses of the SCI zone district. The result is empty units, contributing to the lack of vitality throughout the area. Rezoning the parcels to NC will increase the likelihood that vacant units will be filled, increasing business to the area the vibrancy of Obermeyer Place. Amending the PD to permit SCI uses will ensure no existing use becomes non-conforming, and will still allow those industrial uses to locate here. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning provide a referral to the City Council to approve the request to rezone the SCI units within the Obermeyer Place PD to Neighborhood Commercial, and to amend the PD to permit SCI uses. Figure A: Obermeyer Place P155 VI.B. Page 2 of 5 LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval: • Rezoning – pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310.060. The Planning and Zoning Commission is tasked with determining if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, and to provide a recommendation to City Council. City Council is the final review authority in this matter.  Minor Amendment to a Project Review approval – pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.110. City Council is the final review authority in this matter. Staff requests a recommendation from P&Z as part of this application. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND: Obermeyer Place is located just north of the commercial core between Main St. and Rio Grande Pl. The parcel measures approximately 2.6 acres in size, and contains five separate buildings with a mix of commercial, service, industrial, recreational and residential uses. The current zoning for the property is Service, Commercial, Industrial (SCI) with a Planned Development (PD) overlay. The planned development approval allows for an 850 sq. ft. space and the outdoor seating area outside of building #5 for either SCI or Neighborhood Commercial (NC) uses. Additionally, the approval lists eight spaces that are considered to be legally established non-conformities for the SCI zone district. These spaces are all office uses, with the exception of the fitness club. These uses existed prior to the redevelopment of Obermeyer Place and were allowed to be maintained within the redeveloped PD. The Obermeyer Place PD was granted final approval in 2003 via Ordinance No. 18. The final plat was recorded in June, 2004. The project was developed as a COWOP (Convenience and Welfare of the Public – a designation no longer used by the City) with combined Specially Planned Area (SPA) and Planned Development (PD) overlays. The SPA designation has since been absorbed by the PD designation as an update to the Land Use Code. The vision for Obermeyer Place was a vibrant area adjacent to the downtown core that provided a place for service-oriented and commercial businesses, surface and underground parking for public and private needs, free-market and deed-restricted housing, and that served as a link between the river and the city’s core area. Figure B: Location of subject property P156 VI.B. Page 3 of 5 RECENT HISTORY: In 2013 the City Council directed Staff to identify the SCI zoned areas within the City and examine whether these area are functioning successfully. In response, Staff performed public outreach and held community meetings to gauge owners’ experience in these locations, and their potential interest in rezoning. NC was found to be the most logical zone district that would reflect the current needs and uses of the tenants, while allowing for more variety of uses. A high level of interest in change was found at Obermeyer Pl. where owners expressed difficulty in bringing viable businesses to the area. As a planned development, Obermeyer Pl. serves as an excellent example of where this may work. The dimensions of structures are set by the PD, and there is no threat at this point of redevelopment. Respondents overwhelmingly expressed that an expansion of allowed uses may be the factor to revitalizing the area. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is interested in changing the underlying zoning of Obermeyer Place from SCI to NC. The applicant is further proposing an amendment to the PD approvals to allow the uses associated with the SCI zone district within any unit in Obermeyer Pl. The rezoning will expand the allowed uses, while the PD amendment will prevent the creation of non-conforming uses for existing businesses that are current tenants of Obermeyer Place, for example, the wood shop. It will also still allow for industrial uses to locate in this area. STAFF COMMENTS: The SCI zone district is very narrow in terms of allowed uses (see Exhibit A). For instance, typesetting and coffee roasting are two of the permitted uses, while a business with a propensity of office use is not. This specificity of uses creates a burden on unit owners of Obermeyer Pl. to find tenants with businesses that fit within the limited list of uses allowed within the SCI zone district. Staff regularly receives requests from business owners who are interested in locating within the SCI zoned areas, but often these requests are denied as the business does not fit within the allowed uses. Exhibit B to this memo outlines the common requests that have been denied in recent years. This has had the unintended consequence of many units remaining vacant for long periods of time. Through the years a number of businesses have moved into spaces within Obermeyer Pl. that operate more like office uses. These do not include the units that were indicated earlier, which allow for either SCI or NC uses, and are generally used as offices. The Aspen Police Dept. has located in one of the Obermeyer buildings, which required a temporary use approval. The nature of Obermeyer Pl. is changing Figure C: Image of vacant unit at Obermeyer Place P157 VI.B. Page 4 of 5 and more office-type businesses are locating and finding success in this area. Rather than recognize these as non-conformities, the answer may be to bring them into compliance by changing the zoning to allow such uses, as well as to recognize the progression of industries. For instance, the current evolution of typesetting, an allowed use in SCI, may now appear more as an office, with a desk and computer as its primary tools. In response to the review criteria for rezoning, Staff does not anticipate any changes to demands on public facilities that was not originally planned for with the development of Obermeyer Pl, nor will the rezoning exceed the availability of current public facilities. Staff does not anticipate any significant adverse impacts to the natural environment as a result of this proposal; the zoning change would merely allow an expansion of uses in an area that was constructed to handle such usage. Rezoning the property to NC increases the likelihood of bringing more businesses to the area. The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character and in harmony with the public interest and intent of the Land Use Code. The surrounding zone districts include C-1 and CC, which are both commercial zone districts, R/MF/PD which is a residential parcel, R-6/PD which contains the Fraternal Order of the Eagles, and PUB/PD which is the Rio Grande Park area. Commercial and residential uses are permitted within the NC zone district. The Fraternal Order of the Eagles is located on a site that would typically be used residentially; however, this fraternal club is also compatible with the commercial uses found in the NC zone district. The Rio Grande Park to the north provides an excellent buffer from the mix of uses associated with the NC zone district, and the level of vitality that was initially anticipated for Obermeyer Pl. Staff finds that the rezoning will maintain compatibility between Obermeyer Pl. and the surrounding parcels. The majority of the criteria related to the Minor PD Amendment do not apply to this application. The Obermeyer Pl. Planned Development Guide sets the dimensions of the structures on the site which is not proposed to be changed with this application. Staff finds that the proposal to maintain SCI uses in conjunction with the proposed rezoning will aid in a significant community goal, which is to enhance the vitality of this region and allow for uses that are difficult to locate within the city. When it was first created, Obermeyer Pl., with its underlying SCI zoning, was expected to function as a vibrant, essential part of the city that allowed for uses that would otherwise be difficult to locate elsewhere, potentially forcing them out of the Aspen community. However, the demand for these types of businesses has not been strong. The exclusionary zoning of the SCI zone district’s uses has provided too narrow an industry selection, and has not brought in the businesses once imaged. Staff believes that by opening up the allowed uses in the way that the NC zone district does Obermeyer Pl. has a better chance at becoming that successful, vibrant community space that was originally planned. Staff finds all relevant criteria regarding rezoning and an amendment to the Planned Development approvals to be met, and recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission provide a recommendation of approval to City Council. P158 VI.B. Page 5 of 5 RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): “I move to make a recommendation of approval to City Council for the rezoning of Obermeyer Place from Service Commercial Industrial to Neighborhood Commercial, and to amend the Planned Development to permit SCI uses, as noted in Resolution 54, Series of 2015.” ATTACHMENTS:  EXHIBIT A – Land Use Code Sections SCI and NC  EXHIBIT B – Denied requests for locating in the SCI zone district  EXHIBIT C – Results of Neighborhood Meeting in Obermeyer Pl  EXHIBIT D – Review Criteria  EXHIBIT E – Application P159 VI.B. Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 54 (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PROVIDING A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR REZONING AND MINOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR OBERMEYER PLACE, COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 601 E. MAIN ST., CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Obermeyer Place Condominium Associates (Applicant), represented by Jerome Simecek, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission provide a recommendation of approval to City Council of a Rezoning and Minor PD Amendment at Obermeyer Place; and, WHEREAS, the Obermeyer Place COWOP PD was granted final approval via Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2003 by the Aspen City Council; and WHEREAS, the Project includes all land between East Bleeker Street and Rio Grande Place, all land bordering East Bleeker Street between Spring Street and Rio Grande Place, and portions of Rio Grande Park, more precisely described as: a tract of land in the East Aspen Townsite Addition, according to the plat thereof recorded as Document No. 108453 of the records of Pitkin County, identified as Parcel No. 273707324003, according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 540 East Main Street, Gignoux-Lynch Subdivision Lots 1 and 2, Lots 6 through 9, Block 20. East Aspen Addition, Lots 9 through 9 Rio Grande Subdivision, a tract of land identified as Parcel No. 273707300040 according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 600 East Bleeker Street, a tract of land identified as Parcel No. 273707300041, according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 530 East Bleeker Street right-of-way between Spring St and Rio Grande Pl, that portion of Rio Grande Park owned by the City of Aspen accommodating and affected by the Pitkin County recycling operation and snow melting facility, that portion of Rio Grande Pl right-of-way between and including its two intersections with East Bleeker Street, and a parcel of land owned by Pitkin County known as Rio Grande Subdivision Lot #5, all located within the City of Aspen. WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.310.060 of the Land Use Code, Rezoning may be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and granted a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the application at a duly notices public hearing; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.445.110 of the Land Use Code, a Minor PD Amendment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council. However, Staff is requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission as part of this application; and WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on May 26, 2015, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and provided a recommendation of approval of the Rezoning and PD Amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. P160 VI.B. Page 2 of 2 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a recommendation to the Aspen City Council to approve the Rezoning and Minor PD Amendment requests, pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, for Obermeyer Place, as listed below. Section 1: The following shall be provided a recommendation of approval to City Council, per this resolution: a. Obermeyer Place Planned Development shall be rezoned from Service Commercial Industrial to Neighborhood Commercial, for the entirety of the parcel; and b. The Planned Development approval for Obermeyer Place shall be updated to include the allowance of Service Commercial Industrial uses within any non-residential unit on the parcel. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 26th day of May, 2015. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______________________ R y a n W a l t e r s c h e i d , C h a i r m a n APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: _______________________________ _______________________________ Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Cindy Klob, Records Manager P161 VI.B. 1 Exhibit A Land Use Code Sections SCI and NC 26.710.160 Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone district is to preserve and enhance locally-serving, primarily non-retail small business areas to ensure a more balanced permanent community; to protect the few remaining such small business parks historically used primarily for light industrial uses, manufacturing, repair, storage and servicing of consumer goods, with limited retail, showroom, or customer reception areas. The SCI zone district contains uses that may not be appropriate in other zone districts or do not require or generate high customer traffic volumes, and permits customary accessory uses. B. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI) zone district. Each of the permitted uses may have, in combination, a limited percent of the floor area, as noted below, devoted to retail sales, showroom, or customer reception, and such uses shall be ancillary to the primary commercial use. This floor area percentage may be increased through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and according to the standards of Section 26.710.160(E)1. 1. SCI Uses which may use up to 100% of the floor area for retail sales, showroom, or customer reception include the manufacturing, repair, customizing, servicing, detailing, sales, and rental of consumer goods such as: a. Building materials, components, hardware, fixtures, interior finishes and equipment. b. Household appliances such as ranges, refrigerators, dishwashers, etc. c. Automobiles and motorcycles, Motor-driven cycles, and Motorized bicycles, including parts. d. Non-motorized vehicles such as bicycles and river-related recreational items, for rental or in combination with a service use related to guiding or touring. e. Fabric and sewing supply. 2. SCI Uses which may use, in combination, up to 25% of the floor area for accessory retail sales, showroom, or customer reception including the manufacturing, repair, alteration, tailoring, and servicing of consumer goods such as, electronic equipment; floral arrangements; furniture; clothing; or sporting goods: a. Typesetting and printing, including copy center. b. Photo processing laboratory. c. Locksmith. d. Post Office branch. e. Shipping and receiving services. P162 VI.B. 2 f. Internet auction consignment outlet g. Laundromat. h. Commercial dry cleaning. i. Recycling center. j. Artist studio. k. Veterinary clinic. l. Animal boarding facility. m. Animal grooming establishment. n. Brewery and brewing supply, with on-site alcoholic beverage consumption limited to the hours of noon to 9 pm Mondays through Saturdays and noon through 6 pm on Sundays and limited to six samples of six ounces, or four samples of six ounces and one sample of 16 ounces, per person, per day; this consumption limitation to be suspended for wholesale buyers. o. Coffee roasting and supply p. Commercial Kitchen or Bakery. q. Design Studio, limited to the Andrews-McFarlin Subdivision. r. Marijuana Cultivation Facility, which may include up to 25% of the floor space used for a medical marijuana establishment or a retail marijuana establishment (i.e. sales). s. Marijuana Product Manufacturing Facility, which may include up to 25% of the floor space used for a medical marijuana establishment or a retail marijuana establishment (i.e. sales). t. Marijuana Testing Facility, which may include up to 25% of the floor space used for a medical marijuana establishment or a retail marijuana establishment (i.e. sales). 3. SCI Uses which may use, in combination, up to 10% of the floor area for accessory retail sales, showroom, or customer reception: a. Building/landscape maintenance facility. b. Automobile washing facility. c. Warehousing and storage. 4. Primary Care Physician’s Office Uses permitted: a. On Upper Floors, pursuant to Section 26.710.160 (D)11(b). b. Limited to a cap of 3,500 square feet at the Obermeyer Place PD, upon execution of an Insubstantial PD Amendment. 5. Permitted Accessory Uses: a. Service yard accessory to a permitted use. b. Sales and rental accessory and incidental to a permitted use. P163 VI.B. 3 c. Accessory buildings and uses. d. Home occupations. e. Offices, accessory to a permitted or conditional use, not to exceed 10% of a commercial unit. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (SCI) zone district, subject to the procedures established in Chapter 26.425.050 Procedures for Review, and the standards established in Section 26.710.160(F). Under Section 26.710.160(C)1-3, the Commission shall establish the appropriate amount of floor area to be devoted to retail sales, showroom, or customer reception for each conditional use during the review, pursuant to the review standards of Section 26.710.160 (F)1. Under Section 26.710.160(C)4-5, the Commission shall review the site plan to determine compliance pursuant to the review standards of Section 26.710.160(F)2-3, and establish conditions of approval as needed. 1. Consignment retail establishment. 2. Commercial Parking Facility, pursuant to Section 26.515. 3. Gasoline service station. 4. Affordable Multi-Family Housing on Upper Floors. 5. Free Market Multi-Family Housing on Upper Floors D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (SCI) zone district: 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): 3,000 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): No requirement. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): No requirement. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): No requirement. 7. Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle area: Pursuant to Section 26.575.060. 8. Maximum height: 35 feet. 9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No Requirement. 10. Pedestrian Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030. P164 VI.B. 4 11. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 2.25:1. Achieving the maximum floor area ratio is subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements, public amenity requirements and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the maximum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations. a. Commercial Uses: 1.5:1. b. Primary Care Physician’s Office uses: .25:1 FAR, only if a minimum of .75:1 FAR of Commercial uses, listed in Section 26.710.160(B)1-3, exist on the same parcel. c. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .5:1. d. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, only if a minimum of .75:1 FAR of Commercial Uses listed in Section 26.710.160(B)1-3 exist on the same parcel. e. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .5:1, only if a minimum of .75:1 FAR of Commercial Uses listed in Section 26.710.160(B)1-3 exist on the same parcel, and a minimum of .25:1 FAR of Primary Care Physician’s Office Uses exist on the same parcel. 12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling unit size (square feet): 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area. a. The property owner may increase individual multi-family unit size by extinguishing Historic Transferable Development Right Certificates (“certificate” or “certificates”), subject to the following: 1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is extinguished. 2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,500 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot. Commentary: Refer to Chapter 26.535 for the procedures for extinguishing certificates. E. Special Review Standards. Whenever the dimensional standards of a proposed development within the SCI Zone District are subject to Special Review, the development application shall be processed as a Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: 1. To increase the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom, or customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and appropriateness for such additional space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCI Zone District. The additional approved percentage for a specific use shall be limited to that use and not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space. P165 VI.B. 5 F. Conditional Use Review Standards. 1. To establish the allowable percentage of interior space assigned to retail, showroom, or customer reception area, the applicant shall demonstrate the need and appropriateness for the space and shall demonstrate consistency with the purpose of the SCI Zone District. The approved percentage for a specific use shall be limited to that use and not applicable to subsequent uses in the same space. 2. Applicant must demonstrate that the affordable housing and/or free market housing is substantially removed and physically separated from Commercial Uses on the same parcel, to the extent practicable, so as to isolate residential uses from commercial impacts and to adequately provide for on-loading, off-loading, circulation and parking for commercial uses. 3. Applicant must implement a prohibition on the cross-ownership of free market residential units and commercial space, to be reviewed and accepted by the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 2-1999, §1; Ord. No. 22-2005, §1; Ord. No. 4-2008; Ord. No. 27-2010, §4; Ord. No. 39-2013, §3) P166 VI.B. 6 26.710.170 Neighborhood Commercial (NC). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District is to provide for the establishment of mixed-use buildings with commercial uses serving the daily or frequent needs of the surrounding neighborhood, thereby reducing traffic circulation and parking problems, to provide opportunities for affordable and free-market residential density, to support vacation rentals of residential dwelling units, and to provide a transition between the commercial core and surrounding residential neighborhoods. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District: 1. Uses allowed on upper floors: lodging, affordable multi-family housing, free-market multi-family housing, home occupations and vacation rentals. 2. Uses allowed on all building levels: retail and restaurant uses, neighborhood commercial uses, service uses, office uses, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center, bed and breakfast, accessory uses and structures, uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors, including parking accessory to a permitted use, storage accessory to a permitted use, farmers' market, provided that a vending agreement is obtained pursuant to Subsection 15.04.350(b). C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Lodging, affordable multi-family housing, free-market multi-family housing or home occupations on the ground floor. 2. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District: 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): No requirement. 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): five (5). 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): five (5). 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): five (5). 7. Minimum utility/trash/recycle area: Pursuant to Section 26.575.060. 8. Maximum height: twenty-eight (28) feet, which may be increased to thirty-two (32) feet through commercial design review. See Chapter 26.412. 9. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): No requirement. P167 VI.B. 7 10. Public amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030. 11. Floor area ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 1.5:1. Achieving the maximum floor area ratio is subject to compliance with applicable design standards, view plane requirements, public amenity requirements and other dimensional standards. Accordingly, the maximum FAR is not an entitlement and is not achievable in all situations. a. Commercial uses: 1:1. b. Lodging, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, child care center and similar uses: 1:1. c. Affordable multi-family housing: .5:1. d. Free-market multi-family housing: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 if affordable housing floor area equal to 100% of the free-market residential floor area is developed on the same parcel. 12. Maximum multi-family residential dwelling size (square feet): one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of net livable area. a. The property owner may increase individual multi-family unit size by extinguishing historic transferable development right certificates ("certificate" or "certificates"), subject to the following: 1) The transfer ratio is 500 sq. ft. of net livable area for each certificate that is purchased. 2) The additional square footage accrued may be applied to multiple units. However, the maximum individual unit size attainable by transferring development rights is 2,000 sq. ft. of net livable area (i.e., no more than 500 additional square feet may be applied per unit). 3) This incentive applies only to individual unit size. Transferring development rights does not allow an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the lot. Commentary: Refer to Chapter 26.535 for the procedures for extinguishing certificates. 13. Commercial/residential ratio: The total free-market residential net livable area shall be no greater than the total floor area associated with the uses described in Subparagraphs 26.710.170.D.11.a and b combined on the same parcel. (Ord. No. 38-2000, §2; Ord. No. 12-2005, §1; Ord. No. 12-2006, §14, 15; Ord. No. 11, 2007; Ord. No. 27-2010, §4; Ord. NO. 34-2011, §15) P168 VI.B. Exhibit B Recent Denied Request for Locating in the SCI Zone District   The planning department initiated a service position to provide assistance to those who need answers  on planning‐related issues in the City between the hours of 9am‐12pm and 1pm – 3:30 pm, every week  day.  This is a rotating position that is filled by a different member of the planning staff daily.  In 2008  the department began tracking the questions received during these hours.  Below is a breakdown by  category of the requests that are commonly asked regarding the Service Commercial Industrial (SCI)  zone district.  These are requests that have been denied by the planning department due to their  incompatibility with Section 26.710.160 of the Land Use Code.  1. Marijuana‐related requests.  A common request is for medical marijuana dispensaries that are  looking to locate in this zone district.  One such request involved becoming a joint tenant within  the Aspen Laundry.  Another request was for the cultivating of hydroponic “plants” and  “flowers” in this zone district.      2. Office‐related requests.  Another very common request is to allow offices in the SCI zone  district.  These requests have ranged from a law office, property management/rental, insurance,  and event production company offices.  More general commercial office type requests are  found throughout the request tracker spreadsheet.    3. Medical‐related.  Requests within this category have included psychotherapist and dental  offices.  Medical offices are allowed in Obermeyer Place, however these are limited to Primary  Care Physician’s offices only, are limited to upper floors, and capped at 3,500 sq. ft.    4. Interior Design & Architecture.  These requests can be difficult to permit or deny without a  great deal of staff discussion.  The Andrews‐McFarlin Subdivision is the one space within the SCI  zone district that allows design studios.  Therefore staff cannot approve the majority of these  requests.    5. General Retail & Related Services.  Common requests are for those looking to locate their  commercial retail businesses in the SCI zone district.  Permitted uses within this zone district can  be extremely specific and limiting.  Due to the extent of retail activity, staff could not approve  requests for a frame/framing shop, office supplies store, home consignment, and solar voltaic  sales.    6. Other.  Lastly, there are always a number of requests that staff receives which are found to be  inconsistent with the SCI zone district.  These include security systems, web design/IT, taxi  business, child learning center, yoga studio and a distillery with a restaurant component.  Also, a  P169 VI.B. significant number of individuals have requested to use SCI spaces for personal storage of items,  files, and vehicles.  While storage is an allowed use, this is intended to allow for storage  businesses, and not simply for personal storage.    P170 VI.B. Exhibit C Results of Neighborhood Meeting for Obermeyer Place     SCI Zone Meeting 3  Obermeyer Place   501 Rio Grande Pl #7  April 23, 2013 @ 2 pm    Participants: 7   Expanding uses:  o Free‐marked residential tends to create conflicts with commercial    Businesses are often the losers in this scenario  o Free‐market residential has a tendency to suppress what uses are allowed in area  o Redevelopment could push out existing businesses     Current Zoning:  o Use limits do not make sense, outdated & strange  o Owners of spaces cannot sell or rent due to use restrictions  o Case‐by‐case zoning is too discretionary   E.g. – primary care physician allowed but no dentist   Dog washer allowed but no hair stylist  o Too many Code changes too often!  o Difficult to decipher allowed uses in Code     Zoning Changes:  o NC makes sense for Obermeyer  o Obermeyer is different than other SCI properties and should be zoned differently      P171 VI.B. 1    Exhibit D Review Criteria 26.310.090. Rezoning - Standards of review. In reviewing an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Response: The applicant is proposing to change the underlying zoning of Obermeyer Place from Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC), and amend the PD to allow the continuation of SCI uses. NC allows for a wider, more general variety of uses, and maintaining the SCI uses an allowed per the PD approval will prevent the creation of any nonconformity in regards to the existing uses. The surrounding zone districts include C-1 and CC, which are both commercial zone districts, R/MF/PD which is a residential parcel, R-6/PD which contains the Fraternal Order of the Eagles, and PUB/PD which is the Rio Grande Park area. Commercial and residential uses are permitted within the NC zone district. The Fraternal Order of the Eagles is located on a site that would typically be used residentially; however, this fraternal club is also compatible with the commercial uses found in the NC zone district. Lastly, Rio Grande Park to the north provides an excellent buffer from the mix of uses associated with the NC zone district, and the level of vitality that was initially anticipated for Obermeyer Place. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities. Staff Response: Staff does not anticipate any changes to demands on public facilities or that the proposed amendment would exceed the availability of the current public facilities. Obermeyer Place was created with the intent of these facilities being utilized at a higher degree than are being currently utilized, due to many vacant units. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Response: Staff does not anticipate any significant adverse impacts to the natural environment as a result of this proposal. The proposed zoning change would merely allow an expansion of allowed uses in an area that is already built to handle such usage. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City and in harmony with the public interest and the intent of this Title. P172 VI.B. 2    Staff Response: Obermeyer Place was intended to be an area of vitality adjacent to the City’s downtown core that would to serve, in part, as a desirable location for businesses that could not locate elsewhere due to zoning restrictions. This vision was supported by the City as well as private parties. Obermeyer Place was created as a COWOP (Convenience and Welfare of the Public) project. By rezoning the property to NC, while still allowing the uses found in SCI, the applicant, with Staff’s support, hopes to bring additional businesses to the area, such as was originally intended for Obermeyer Place. The proposed amendment is consistent with and compatible with the community character and in harmony with the public interest and intent of the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met. P173 VI.B. 3    26.445.050. Project Review Standards. The Project Review shall focus on the general concept for the development and shall outline any dimensional requirements that vary from those allowed in the underlying zone district. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. The underlying zone district designation shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the dimensions which may be considered during the development review process. Any dimensional variations allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following: A. Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. Staff Response: There is no proposed development or redevelopment associated with this request. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. B. Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snowslide areas, slopes in excess of 30%, and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: The Obermeyer PD has already been developed, with final approval granted via Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2003. No new development is proposed as part of this current application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. C. Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The site plan responds to the site’s natural characteristics and physical constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or enhance said features. Staff Response: There are no changes to the approved site plan as a result of this current application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. P174 VI.B. 4    2. The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. Staff Response: There are no changes to the built environment as a result of this current application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 3. Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Staff Response: The Obermeyer PD has already been developed, and was approved via Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2003. There are no new buildings or redevelopment of existing buildings proposed as part of this current application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. D. Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following criteria: 1. There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations. Staff Response: Obermeyer Place was approved and developed as a COWOP (a development for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public), with the vision that this would be a vibrant area that contributed to the city’s residential and business opportunities. It was imagined to be an area just north of the commercial core where hard to locate service and industrial businesses could thrive. However, through the years it is found that less and less of these types of businesses are locating here, leaving vacant units and creating dead space. The proposed Minor PD Amendment will work in conjunction with the proposed rezoning of the property to continue to allow service and industrial businesses to locate in Obermeyer Pl. This amendment further ensures that existing service and industrial uses do not become non- conforming. Finding a way to increase vitality in an area that was designed and built for this purpose is surely a significant community goal that may be achieved through the requested rezoning and PD amendment. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary uses of the project. Staff Response: The current application does not proposed any dimensional changes to the approved Obermeyer Place PD. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable 3. The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or cultural resources. P175 VI.B. 5    Staff Response: There are no changes to the approved dimensions requested as part of this application. Obermeyer Pl. currently is zoned SCI. This portion of the application deals with a PD amendment to continue the allowance of SCI uses. These uses are existing, and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development, and the potential for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement. Staff Response: There are no changes to the approved parking at Obermeyer Place requested as part of this PD amendment. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 5. The Project Review approval, at City Council’s discretion, may include specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110 – Amendments. Staff Response: The applicant is requesting no dimensional flexibility, or changes to the approved PD dimensions as part of this PD Amendment application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. E. Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. Staff Response: There are no changes to the built environment associated with this application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 2. The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review. Staff Response: There are no changes to the existing materials found within the Obermeyer Pl. PD associated with this application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. F. Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. P176 VI.B. 6    Staff Response: There are no changes proposed to the pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities already approved and in place for Obermeyer Place. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. G. Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29 – Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: There is no new development or redevelopment associated with this Minor PD Amendment request. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. H. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: Staff believes adequate infrastructure is already in place at the Obermeyer Pl. This proposed Minor PD Amendment, in conjunction with the requested rezoning, will not cause any stress to the system that was not already planned for with the initial development of the PD. The spaces reserved for commercial, service and industrial businesses are underutilized in Obermeyer Pl. with many vacancies. The intent of the rezoning, in combination with this PD amendment, is to open up the allowed uses to fill these vacant spaces and bring vitality to this area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. I. Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned Development retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. Staff Response: The current development has perpetual unobstructed vehicular access to a public way through the Obermeyer Pl. There are no changes proposed to the development as part of this current application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. P177 VI.B. P178 VI.B. P179 VI.B. P180 VI.B. P181 VI.B. P182 VI.B. P183 VI.B. P184 VI.B. P185 VI.B. P186 VI.B. P187 VI.B. P188 VI.B. P189 VI.B. P190 VI.B. P191 VI.B. P192 VI.B. P193 VI.B. P194 VI.B. P195 VI.B. P196 VI.B. P197 VI.B. P198 VI.B. P199 VI.B. P200 VI.B. P201 VI.B. P202 VI.B. P203 VI.B. P204 VI.B. P205 VI.B. P206 VI.B. P207 VI.B. P208 VI.B. P209 VI.B. P210 VI.B. P211 VI.B. P212 VI.B. P213 VI.B. P214 VI.B. P215 VI.B. P216 VI.B. P217 VI.B. P218 VI.B. P219 VI.B. P220 VI.B. P221 VI.B. P222 VI.B. P223 VI.B. N , EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ( Of rR40rt ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Mop6m 2=4 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, A%&,J'1 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant t3 the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: V"' Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting'of notice: By posting•of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials-, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which.was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least'fifteen (15 'days prior to the public hearing on the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. _ Ma_iling of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community ',Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26'304.`:060(E).(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to llft ;. e s,thet.public:;hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage tmaili:to"all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addressee of4hineral esiate owi-ier"s shall 156 4 6' se on t ... current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot,- new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice tegi ir(2m0nt. ; Rezoning or tett amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate•survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available.for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. _.r Signature The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this g day Of 20L'S_,byv�-P�o. PUBLIC NOTICE RE:OBERMEYER PLACE-REZONING AND MAJOR PAMENDMENTLOPMENT WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday,May 26,2015 at a meet- ing to begin at 4:30 p.m.before the Aspen Plan- ning ex and Zoning Commission,Sister Cities Room, City Hall,130.S.Galena St.,Aspen. P&Z will con- /� ,� p A sider an application submitted by Obermeyer Place �/V -r'" ^n Condominium HOA,601 Rio Grande PI,Aspen CO UBLIC 81611,affecting the property legally described as a C LO�DO tract of land in the East Aspen Townsite Addition, according to the plat thereof recorded as Docu- Notary Public NOTARY ID 200140 ment No.108453 of the records of Pitkin County, identified as Parcel No.273707324003,according MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 0912612017 to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 540 -East Main Street,Gignoux-Lynch Subdivision Lots 1 and 2,Lots 6'through 9,Block 20.East Aspen Addition,Lots 9 through 9 Rio Grande Subdivision, a tract of land identified as Parcel No. 273707300040 according to the Pitkin County As- sessor and known as 600 East Bleaker Street,a tract of land identified- Pi Parcel No, TACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: 273707300041,according to the Pitkin County As- sessor and known as 530East Bleaker Street right-of-way between Spring St and Rio Grande PI, BLICATION that portion of Rio Grande Park owned by the City - of Aspen accommodating and affected by the Pit- kin County recycling operation and snow melting F THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) facility,that portion of Rio Grande PI right-of-way between and including its two intersections with East Bleeker Street,and a parcel of land owned by VERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED Pitkin County known as Rio Grande Subdivision Lot#5,all located within the City of Aspen. The Obermayer Place PD is cul) zoned Sir- TIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE vice Commercial Industrial(SCI),,with with some units allowing for Neighborhood Commercial INC)zoned 1 uses. The applicant is interested in pursuing a re- I C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 zoning of the entire property to NC,to open up the allowable uses,and to update the PD approval document to also allow for SCI uses,thereby pre- venting any existing uses from becoming non-con- forming. For further information,contact Sara Nadolny at the City of Aspen Community Development Depart- ment, 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970)' 429-2739,sara.nadolny@gmail.com s/Rvan Walterscheid Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 7th,2015 (111651 28) - AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 00 t 9- ; b &y-c, I e, o-C 2. ,Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: STATE OF COLORADO } ss. County of Pitkin ) J I, J� a t Jit (name,please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. X Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials,,which was not Iess than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15)days prior to the public hearing on the to day of MQ� _, 2015, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A phot4raph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. X Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested,to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text atnendrnent. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title,or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended,whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the"public hearing on such amendments. Signa re The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this day 20 j S1,by �P i-c Vyl e. S.yyl (dam: of—�[L.� ' WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL KELLY ELIZABETH BROCKETT NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID#20084035560 - My Commission Expires October 2s,2016 Notar ublic ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: OBERMEYER PLACE — REZONING AND MINOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen. P&Z will consider an application submitted by Obermeyer Place Condominium HOA, 601 Rio Grande PI,Aspen CO 81611,affecting the property legally described as a tract of land in the East Aspen Townsite Addition, according to the plat thereof recorded as Document No. 108453 of the records of Pitkin County, identified as Parcel No. 273707324003, according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 540 East Main Street, Gignoux-Lynch Subdivision Lots 1 and 2, Lots 6 through 9, Block 20. East Aspen Addition, Lots 9 through 9 Rio Grande Subdivision,a tract of land identified as Parcel No. 273707300040 according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 600 East Bleeker Street, a tract of land identified as Parcel No. 273707300041, according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 530 East Bleeker Street right-of-way between Spring St and Rio Grande PI, that portion of Rio Grande Park owned by the City of Aspen accommodating and affected by the Pitkin County recycling operation and snow melting facility, that portion of Rio Grande PI right-of-way between and including its two intersections with East Bleeker Street, and a parcel of land owned by Pitkin County known as Rio Grande Subdivision Lot#5, all located within the City of Aspen. The Obermeyer Place PD is currently zoned Service Commercial Industrial (SCI), with some units allowing for Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoned uses. The applicant is interested in pursuing a rezoning of the entire property to NC,to open up the allowable uses, and to update the PD approval document to also allow for SCI uses, thereby preventing any existing uses from becoming non- conforming. For further information, contact Sara Nadolny at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970)429-2739,sara.nadolny@gnnail.com s/Ryan Walterscheid Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 7,2015 City of Aspen Account © 3 o=nom®�Yomcllro�� !�I� — frm�;nc �r�`@. 1+ or: radio. ©arni�c' - - s 100 NORTH SPRING STREET LLC 100 SOUTH SPRING STREET LLC 110 N SPRING ST LLC 250 STEELE ST#375 509 W 24TH ST 3336 E 32ND ST#217 DENVER,CO 80206 NEW YORK,NY 10011 TULSA,OK 74135 117 SOUTH SPRING STREET HOLDINGS LLC 625 MAIN ASPEN LLC 625 MAIN INVESTMENTS LLC PO BOX 11600 465 N MILL ST STE 12-113 1482 E VALLEY RD#463 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO�81611 SANTA BARBARA,CA 93108 AARON ROGER S&VIRGINIA A ALLEN CARROL A REV TRUST ALLEN RONALD W REV TRUST 1010 5TH AVE#12C 15495 SW ALDERBROOK CIR 50 SW 137TH AV NEW YORK,NY 10028 TIGARD,OR 97224 BEAVERTON,OR 97006 ARCHDIOCESE OF DENVER ASHTON JONATHAN G ASPEN LEGACY LLC 1300 S STEELE ST PO BOX 26 17740 E HINSDALE AVE DENVER,CO 80210 JAMESTOWN,CO 804550026 FOXFIELD,CO 80016 ASPEN RIVER PARK LLC BECKWITH DAVID E APRT BECKWITH NATALIE B OPRT 8200 DOUGLAS AVE#300 1800 N PROSPECT AVE APT 16E 777 E WISCONSIN AVE DALLAS,TX 75225 MILWAUKEE,WI 532023073 MILWAUKEE,WI 53202 BERLIN JAMES TRUST BOOHER ANDREA LYNN BORCHERTS ROBERT H REV TRUST 1795 BROOKWOOD DR 709 E MAIN STREET#303 1555 WASHTENAW AKRON,OH 44313-5070 ASPEN,CO 81611 ANN ARBOR,MI 48104 BROUGH STEVE B&DEBORAH A BRYANT CAROLINA H BULKELEY RICHARD C&JULIE J 599 TROUT LK DR PO BOX 5217 600 E MAIN ST#401 SANGER,CA 93657 SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 ASPEN,CO 81611 CAREM LLC CIPOLLINO NICHOLAS CITY OF ASPEN 655 MADISON AVE 11TH FL 300 QUAIL RD 130 S GALENA ST NEW YORK,NY 10065 MERRITT,NC 28556-9641 ASPEN,CO 81611 COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA CONCEPT 600 LLC COPPOCK RICHARD P PO BOX 1927 PO BOX 2914 PO BOX 44 CARSON CITY,NV 89702 BASALT,CO 81621 DEXTER,MI 48130 CROSS JUDITH CWAREI LLC DORAN RALPH PO BOX 3388 3030 HARTLEY RD#350 2600 WOODWARD WAY ASPEN,CO 81612 JACKSONVILLE,FL 32257 ATLANTA,GA 30305 EDWARDS CHARLES N EISENSTAT MELISSA B ELDEN RICHARD&GAIL M 189 BENVENUE ST 1125 PARK AVE#61) 2430 N LAKEVIEW AVE-#115 WELLSLEY,MA 024827104 NEW YORK,NY 10128 CHICAGO,IL 60614 EMCAR LLC EMPHASYS SERVICE COMPANY FARRELL SCOTT W 655 MADISON AVE 11TH FL 1925 BRICKELL AVE BLDG D PO BOX 9656 NEW YORK,NY 10065 PENTHOUSE 11D ASPEN,CO 81612 MIAMI,FL 33129 FEDER ERIC REV TRUST FICKE FAMILY REV TRUST FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES 4042 ISLAND ESTATES DR 15 W ARRELLAGA ST#3 700 E BLEEKER AVE NORTH MIAMI BEACH,FL 33160-5505 SANTA BARBARA,CA 93101 ASPEN,CO 81611 FRIEDSTEIN SHELDON TRUST GADA 777 REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST GERSHMAN ELAINE LEVITT PO BOX 7917 PO BOX 2061 1027 PHEASANT RD ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO B1612 JENKINTOWN,PA 19046 GILKERSON LINDA REV TRUST• GREENBERG DEAN L 2012 FAMILY IRR TRUST GRIMES DAVID L 1449 E 56TH ST 112 N SPRING ST 3510 BROMLEY WOODS LN CHICAGO,IL 60637 ASPEN,CO 81611 GREENSBORO,NC 27410 GURHOLT CHARLES J&VERNE HALTON SARAH JANE HICKS GILBERT W&PATSY K N5999 GURHOLT RD 18 DAMPIER CRESCENT FORREST 3674 WOODLAWN TERRACE PL SCANDINAVIA,WI 54977 ACT 2603 AUSTRALIA, HONOLULU,Hf 96822 HOLLAND AND HART HONEA KATHARINE M HOVERSTEN PHILIP E&LOUISE B PO BOX 8749 PO BOX 288 2990 BOOTH CREEK DR DENVER,CO 80201 BASALT,CO 81621 VAIL,CO 81657 HUNDERT DANIEL G HUNTER SQUARE LLC 90% JACKDOG LTD 417-A MAIN ST PO BOX 2 3900 ESSEX#101 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 SONOMA,CA 95476 HOUSTON,TX 77027 J£NSEN CARLY J JURINE LLC 10% KALLENBERG JEFFREY D J&SANDRA L 15 S WILLOW CT PO BOX 2 401 MARKET ST#500 ASPEN,CO 81611 SONOMA,CA 95476 SHREVEPORT,LA 71101 LAMB DON REV TRUST LARSON MARIA M LBILLIK LLC 1449 E 56TH ST PO BOX 8207 1922 W 36TH AVE CHICAGO,IL 60637 ASPEN,CO 81612 DENVER,CO 80211 LEBARRE FAM LLC LEE GREGORY K&DEBBIE L LEITCH B BRYAN Ill 7518 MIDDLEWOOD ST 9777 W CORNELL PL 2606 STATE ST HOUSTON,TX 77063 LAKEWOOD,CO 80227 DALLAS,TX 75204 LINK LYNN B LITTLE RIVER HOUSE LLLP MAESTRANZI ALEXA LEE TRUST PO BOX 7942 1873 S BELLAIRE ST#700 1736 PARK RIDGE PT ASPEN,CO 81612 DENVER,CO 80222 PARK RIDGE,IL 60068 MANN KATHLEEN A REV TRUST 99% MARASCO BERNARD R 11.0446% MARASCO EMILY A AK MEYER EMILYA PO BOX 1455 320 DAKOTA DR 11.0446% CARBONDALE,CO 81623 GRAND JUNCTION,CO 81506 21701 FLAMENCO MISSION VIEJO,CA 92692 MARASCO FAMILY TRUST 33.4331% MARCHETTI FAMILY LLC MARRIOTT FAMILY TRUST 653 26 112 RD 1526 FOREST DR 2428 THE STRAND GRAND JUNCTION,CO 81506 GLENVIEW,IL 60025 HERMOSA BEACH,CA 90254 MARSH HUGH MCCUTCHIN GENE P MCDONALD FRANCIS B 631 E MAIN ST 14833 MIDWAY RD PO BOX 4671 ASPEN,CO 81611 ADDISON,TX 75001 ASPEN,CO 81612 MCGAFFEY FAMILY&CO NO C LLC MCPHETRES RICHARD M MHT LLC 2465 NOB HILL AVE NORTH 7 YOUNG ST PO BOX 25318 SEATTLE,WA 98109 BARTON ST CROIX VIRGIN ISLANDS 00824, ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA, ORIGINAL CURVE CONDO#310 LLC PATTERSON VICKI PFEIFER ASPEN HOUSE TRUST 1796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD 620 E PLUM 16300 CANTRELL RD BASALT,CO 81621 FORT COLLINS,CO 80524 LITTLE ROCK,AR 72223 PITKIN COUNTY RAINER EWALD REDSTONE SUSAN B 530 E MAIN ST#302 409 E COOPER AVE#4 PO BOX 159 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 RIVER HOUSE LLC RIVER PARK IN ASPEN CONDO ASSOC RIVER PARK LLC 729 E.BLEEKER ST 730 E DURANT 0133 PROSPECTOR RD#41026 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 RKJR PROPERTIES LTD ROSENFIELD LYNNE CARYN ROTHBERG MARJORIE 5934 ROYAL LN#250 709 E MAIN ST#203 2006 N BANCROFT PKWY DALLAS,TX 75230 ASPEN,CO 81611-2059 WILMINGTON,DE 19806 ROY ADAM C 8,SARAH G SEGREST DAVID H SELDIN CHRISTOPHER G 625 E MAIN ST#203 2606 STATE ST 22 MOUNTAIN CT ASPEN,CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75204 BASALT,CO 81.621 SHERMAN CAPITAL COMPANY SHOAF JEFFREY S SLS LLC 5840 E JOSHUA TREE LN PO BOX 3123 101 FOUNDERS PL#104 PARADISE VALLEY,AZ 85253 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 SMITH JAMES F&N LINDSAY SPRING STREET CONDO ASSOC STARMER MARY JOSEPHINE 11.0446% 600 E MAIN ST#302 12738 W 84TH DR ASPEN,CO 81611 ARVADA,CO 80001 STUDIO SIX LLC SUTTON TREVOR MICHAEL TASTERS RESTAURANT INC PO BOX DD 18 DAMPIER CRESCENT FORREST PO BOX 6211 ASPEN,CO 81612 ACT 2603 AUSTRALIA, SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 THOMAS KATHRYN TIOS RENTALS LLC TRACY KATHLEEN 631 E MAIN ST 50 MILBURN CT 625 E MAIN ST#202 ASPEN,CO 81611 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 ASPEN,CO 81611 TRAVIS SHELBY J VAN DEUSEN LLC VAN WALRAVEN EDWARD C REV TRUST 1% 208 E 28TH ST-APT 2G 233 N SPRING ST PO BOX 1455 NEW YORK,NY 10016 ASPEN,CO 81611 CARBONDALE.CO 81623 VANWOERKOM LAURIE VRANA MALEKA WAGAR RICHARD H PO BOX 341 PO BOX 4535 PO BOX 9063 WOODY CREEK,CO 81656 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 WASKOW SUSAN A TRUST WEEKS ROBIN WHITEHILL STEPHEN LANE 5710 CRESCENT PARK E APT 241 526 RIDGEWAY DR 5320 W HARBOR VILLAGE DR#201 PLAYA VISTA,CA 900942074 METAIRIE,LA 70001 VERO BEACH,FL 32967 WILSON STACE S PO BOX 5217 SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615