Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.council.regular.20230926
AGENDA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING September 26, 2023 5:00 PM, City Council Chambers 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen I.Call to Order II.Roll Call III.Scheduled Public Appearances IV.Citizens Comments & Petitions V.Special Orders of the Day Zoom Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device: Please click this URL to join. https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85814186347? pwd=WQQBPF5Wbel3aKwsBHuxCRY68WoNTe.1 Passcode: 81611 Or join by phone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 719 359 4580 Webinar ID: 858 1418 6347 Passcode: 81611 International numbers available: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kdsGNn2M2P (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT scheduled for a public hearing. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) 1 1 VI.Consent Calendar VIA.Resolution #135, Series of 2023 - APCHA Essential Home Repairs Pilot Grant Program VIB. Resolution #136, Series of 2023 - Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen Resolution #137, Series of 2023 - Power Purchase Agreement between City of Aspen and Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (Ridgway Project) VIC.Resolution #138, Series of 2023 - Extending Hosting and Licensing Services for City's ERP System VID.Resolution #139, Series of 2023 - Contract for Milling and Paving on Chatfield Trail VIE.Resolution #140, Series of 2023 - Council consent and support - Application for Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) - Strong Communities Planning Grant Program VIF.Resolution 142, Series 2023 - Proposition 123 Local Government Commitment a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Amendments c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) Staff Memo - Resolution135_2023.docx Resolution_135_APCHA_Essential_Repair_Pilot_Grant_Program.docx MEAN - Fourth Revised PPA Rough Draft Memo - Final .docx Exhibit A - Resolution 136 Series of 2023.docx Exhibit B - Resolution 137 Series of 2023.docx Exhibit C - Fourth Revised SupplementalAgreement between MEAN and City of Aspen.pdf Exhibit D - Purchase Power Agreement between City of Aspen and MEAN.pdf Exhibit E - July 31st, 2023, Council Memo - TCWCD agreement.pdf Reso 138-2023 - 2 Year Extension for Oracle Licensing.docx Memo for Reso 138-2023 Oracle Licensing Renewal.docx Exh. A - Hosting and 2 Year Renewal Agreement - Nov 2023 - NEW.pdf Council Memo for Resolution #139, series 2023 - Contract for Milling and Paving on Chatfield Trail.docx Resolution__139__series_2023_- _Contract_for_Milling_and_Paving_on_Chatfield_Trail.doc 2023-308 - CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION (short) - 9.14.23.doc.pdf Staff Memo - Resolution140_2023.pdf Reso 140_Strong Communities Grant Application Support.docx Exhibit A_Planning Grant Program Guidelines.pdf Exhibit B_Project Scoping Questions.pdf Council Memo - Proposition 123 - Final.docx Resolution__142__Series_2023__Proposition_123_Affordable_Housing_commitment.doc 2 2 VIG.Draft Minutes of August 8th VII.Notice of Call-Up VIIA.333 E Durant Ave. - Mountain Chalet Lodge - Commercial Design Review VIIB.420 W. Francis St. – Minor Development, Demolition VIII.First Reading of Ordinances VIIIA.Ordinance #16, Series of 2023 - Building IQ Ordinance Amendments IX.Public Hearings IXA.Ordinance #14, Series of 2023 - De Facto City Wide 15 MPH Speed Limit X.Action Items XA.Resolution #141, Series of 2023 - 540 W. Smuggler - Consideration of Demolition Allotment Request Funding Forecast.pdf P123 - Affordable Housing Overview Flyer cc.min.080823.docx Memo_Notice of Call-Up_Council_Mountain Chalet.pdf Exhibit A_PandZ Memo_8_15_23.pdf Exhibit B_PandZ Draft Minutes.pdf Exhibit C_Review Criteria_Commercial Design.pdf Exhibit D_Narrative from the Application.pdf 420 W Francis_Notice of Call Up Memo.pdf Exhibit A_HPC Memo with Demolition Criteria.pdf Exhibit B_HPC Approved Plans.pdf Exhibit C_HPC Meeting Minutes.20230726.pdf Exhibit D_Resolution #10, Series 2023.pdf Building IQ Ordinance Amendments First Reading 9.26.23.pdf Appendix A Comparison Matrix of U.S. Building Performance Standards.pdf Appendix B National Building Performance Standards Coalition Member Map.pdf Appendix C BPS Stakeholder Committee Roster.pdf Appendix D BPS Stakeholder Committee Charter.pdf Ordinance__16__2023_.docx 15 mph De Facto Speed Limit Reduction Second Reading Memo.docx Attachment A Ordinance 14 - Defacto 15 mph.docx Attachment B First Reading Memo of Ordinance 14.pdf Reso 141_540 Smuggler_Demo Allotment.docx Exhibit A_540 w. Smuggler Demo Application 3-24-23.pdf Exhibit B_540 w. Smuggler demolition application.pdf Exhibit C_540 w. Smuggler Supplement 7-13-23.pdf Exhibit D_Correspondence to Council_6_9_23.pdf Staff Memo - Resolution141_2023.pdf 3 3 XB.Elected Official Transportation Committee (EOTC) Meeting Preparation XI.Executive Session XII.Action Items (Continued) XIII.Adjournment 1 - October 5, 2023 EOTC Agenda.pdf 2 - EOTC Decisions Reached June 29, 2023.pdf 3 - AIS - 2023 Work Plan Updates.pdf 4 - AIS - 2024 EOTC Budget and Work Plan.pdf 5 - 2024 EOTC Budget.pdf 6 - Town of Snowmass Village Funding Request.pdf 7 - Aspen Reso 2024 EOTC Work Plan_Budget.pdf Pursuant to C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions. The specific item of discussion involves the following: Discussion of work product privilege with Counsel regarding Lumber Yard financial modeling and proformas. Discussion and review of work product privilege regarding Lumber Yard financial modeling and proformas 4 4 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council FROM:Liz Axberg, Housing Policy Analyst Matthew Gillen, APCHA Executive Director THROUGH:Diane Foster, Assistant City Manager MEMO DATE:September 20, 2023 MEETING DATE:September 26, 2023 RE:Resolution #135, Series of 2023 APCHA Essential Home Repairs Pilot Grant Program Funding REQUEST OF COUNCIL:Resolution #135, Series of 2023 would approve $200,000 from the City of Aspen’s Housing Development Fund (Fund 150) to support 50% of the APCHA Essential Home Repairs Pilot Grant Program. BACKGROUND: At the June 12 th, 2023 work session, staff presented the APCHA Essential Home Repairs pilot grant program to Council. This program would provide Category 1-3 APCHA owners with grants of up to $10,000 to make essential repairs to their home. Staff proposed that the program be jointly funded by both the City and County with a $200,000 contribution from both entities-- $400,000 of grant dollars in total. This funding request in not an appropriation already made in the 2023 budget but is a new ask of $200,000 from CoA and $400,000 overall authority in the APCHA 620 Fund budget; the other half funded by Pitkin County. Below is a full overview of the program that was presented to Council at the June 12th work session. STAFF DISCUSSION: APCHA Pilot Home Repairs Grant Program Overview Program Goals: 1. Test Internal Processes of a Home Improvement Program a. Pilot a program to test how an internal APCHA capital improvement program would internally function. In later phases, APCHA could potentially expand the program to offer larger assistance options (I.e., loan programs). By piloting a smaller grant program now, APCHA staff 5 2 can collect data and improve internal processes to allow potential to build out a well-informed capital improvement program in the future. 2.Measure the Need a. A pilot program would allow APCHA to collect data on which properties need more support and the types of repairs most needed. This information provides insight into the needs of APCHA owners and current unit conditions. b. The pilot program would also allow APCHA staff to track the cost of common repairs. This will provide a clear benchmark of the average cost of repairs and understand repair costs in the valley. 3.Support Aging Properties in the APCHA Inventory a. This program will support APCHA owners in making needed, essential repairs to their home while alleviating some of the cost-burden associated with repairs in this valley. Homes in the APCHA inventory are aging and APCHA needs to start testing programs that support the longevity and sustainability of affordable housing. b. With financial aid, owners may have the means to undertake more expensive, but more environmentally sustainable repair options. Program Description: This Home Repairs Pilot Grant Program is designed to assist qualified APCHA homeowners with housing issues and repairs that pose a threat to the household's health and safety. A maximum of $10,000 may be granted to assist in correcting conditions. The grant serves as assistance and a starting point for the pilot. Assistance amount offered and match required is determined by the re-qualification category at the time of application. Assistance is in the form of a grant (not required to be repaid). If more applications are received than available funding, APCHA staff will implement a prioritization process based on the most critically needed repairs. Minimum qualifications for the Housing Repairs Grant Program include: Applicants must be an APCHA deed-restricted Category 1-3 (category based on income requalification) homeowner. Homeowner must be current on their HOA dues, taxes, and in good standing with APCHA (no outstanding Notice of Violations, bi-annual affidavit must be completed). Each qualified owner is only eligible for $10,000 of assistance during the pilot run. If the Owner property’s Deed Restriction is not the current APCHA deed restriction, the owner must sign a new deed restriction. Assistance Eligibility: When owners apply for a home repair grant, they will be required to complete a partial requalification through HomeTrek. This will include submitting a W-2 or 1099 and their 6 3 most recent pay stub. Match level will be determined based on the category of requalification. The percentage indicated is the percentage of the total repair cost the applicant is required to pay. Requalifying solely based on income does not consider assets but will expedite the process for applicants and reduce time barriers. Listed are the category and subsequent assistance levels: Category 1 10% Category 2 20% Category 3 30% Examples: 1. The owner requalifies at Category 1: The total repair cost is $15,000. The owner must pay for at least 10% of the final repair cost ($1,500) but would be eligible for the full $5,000 of grant assistance. 2. The owner requalifies at Category 2: The total repair cost is $4,000. The owner must pay at least 20% of the final repair cost ($800) but would be eligible for $3,200 of grant assistance. 19% (or 486 properties) are Category 1-3 ownership units. This provides an idea of the number of properties that are potentially eligible. Refer to the APCHA Housing and Inventory Totals for more information. Eligible Repairs: Essential Repairs are defined as repairs that are necessary to improve the health and safety of living conditions for residents. Repairs are accepted based on this definition. Depending on the amount of grant applications APCHA receives, a prioritization process may be necessary to allocate funding and select grantees. Repairs must occur after the time of application submission. Retroactive funding is not available. Essential Repairs Categories: o Inoperable Furnace or Water Heaters o Hazardous Plumbing or Electrical Conditions o Roof Hazards o Heating Issues o Flooring Hazards o Accessibility modifications (ramps, grab bars, or shower replacements) o Septic System Issues o Window Repairs o Ceiling Repairs Repairs not included in these categories will be accepted on a case-by-case basis, determined by APCHA staff and the outlined definition of an essential repair. After this 7 4 pilot run, staff will have a better idea of the most common repairs APCHA owners and the affordability of these repairs. Sustainability and climate action are top priorities for both the County and City. In this pilot program, APCHA will encourage and support owners in making the most environmentally conscious and sustainable repairs. This will be achieved through working with the CoA Environmental Health & Sustainability Office and CORE during the application review process. This component of the program will be finalized after approval. Application Prioritization: If APCHA receives more eligible grant applications than available funding, staff will implement a pre-determined prioritization process to select grantees. This process prioritizes repairs most critical in improving the health and safety of the property. Applications will be categorized into different repair priority levels. Priority Level Description 1 The item in need of repair is immediately needed for the health and safety of the household and is further damaging the property right now. The repair is an emergency. 2 The item in need of repair is needed for the health and safety of the household but is not an emergency. If the issue is not repaired soon, the house will become unsafe to live in and/or cause further property damage. The repair needs to be completed as soon as possible. 3 The item needing repair is not immediately needed for the household's health and safety of the household. The issue is stagnant, and it will not worsen anytime soon, but it is still an essential repair. The repair needs to be completed as soon as practical. The most critical repairs (Level 1) will be prioritized first. If further prioritization is necessary, lower category individuals will be selected. If funds are not fully utilized in the first application window, the application window will re-open. Next Steps: If Council agrees to approve funding for this program, staff would be able to launch the grant program this fall. The APCHA board will receive program updates along the way. 8 5 FINANCIAL IMPACT: This funding request in not an appropriation already made in the 2023 budget but is a new ask of $200,000 from City of Aspen’s Housing Development Fund (Fund 150) and $400,000 new in overall authority in the APCHA Operational Fund (Fund 620). The other $200,000 in support would be received from Pitkin County. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution #135, Series 2023 appropriating $200,000 from the City of Aspen’s Housing Development Fund to fund 50% of the APCHA Essential Repairs Grant Program. 9 RESOLUTION # 135 (Series of 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING FUNDING FOR THE APCHA ESSENTIAL HOME REPAIRS PILOT GRANT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENT NECESSARY TO ISSUE SAID FUNDING ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, On June 12 th, 2023, City Council held a work session on the need for essential home repairs for APCHA housing stock and a proposed pilot grant program for owners. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an outlined pilot grant program, a true and accurate copy of which is attached in the staff memo. WHEREAS, the amount of funding requested from the City of Aspen for the pilot grant program is $200,000, one-half of the requested funding needed for the total program, with the other half pledged by Pitkin County. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves funding in the amount of $200,000 for the APCHA Essential Home Repairs Pilot Grant Program and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute all documents necessary to issue said program funds on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of September 2023. Torre,Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the 26th day of September 2023. Nicole Henning, City Clerk 10 11 1 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM: Phil Overeynder, Special Projects Engineer Steve Hunter, Utilities Resource Manager THROUGH:Justin Forman, Utilities Director Tyler Christoff, Deputy Public Works Director MEMO DATE:September 18, 2023 MEETING DATE:September 26, 2023 RE:Resolution # 136, Series of 2023—Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen Resolution # 137, Series of 2023—Power Purchase Agreement between City of Aspen and Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (Ridgway Project) REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests approval of Resolution # 136 and #137 Series of 2023, authorizing a revised supplemental agreement and a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) for power generated at the Ridgway hydroelectric facility located in Ouray County, Colorado. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:On August 13, 2012, Aspen entered into a 20-year power purchase agreement with Tri County Water Conservancy District (TCWCD) for the winter output from the Ridgway facility. The plant was constructed and began producing energy in 2014. That existing agreement provides an option for Aspen to purchase the summer output for the remaining 10-year period beginning in 2024. In 2012, City Council approved modifications to Aspen’s “All Requirements” energy purchase agreements with the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) which allowed Aspen to purchase the winter output from the Ridgway facility. In a June 13th, 2022, Council work session City staff presented a list of potential projects intended to enhance Aspen’s existing renewable energy portfolio. Council expressed unanimous support for further exploration of the options presented by staff. Based on this direction staff continued a review of options including increasing capacity of existing hydroelectric facilities, additional hydroelectric purchased power agreements, and local utility scale solar. From this meeting Staff committed to returning to Council with any contract obligations, procurement decisions, or general guidance or direction on these projects. 12 2 On August 8, 2023, Council approved Resolution # 114. This agreement allowed Aspen to exercise its right of first refusal to purchase year-round energy from the Ridgway Hydroplant. This 10-year agreement anticipated that approximately half of that energy would be sold to MEAN as part of its green energy pool and half would be retained by Aspen. The half retained by Aspen is designed to provide the best match with the seasonal demand of Aspen’s municipal electric customers. BACKGROUND: 2002:In 2002, as the bonds for the Ruedi plant were being retired, Aspen began participating in development of a hydroelectric plant at the existing Ridgway Dam and Reservoir. Together with TCWCD, Aspen funded a feasibility study to develop a project that would be similar in scale and output with the Ruedi project. Aspen’s goals were to increase energy production from a new renewable energy source as well as to benefit financially through long term participation in a low-cost renewable energy source. 2012:The Ridgway project received regulatory approvals and began construction a decade after the initial study. At that time, Aspen determined that it would only be able to balance energy deliveries to its customers with the new plant during the period from October through May. The MEAN board was consulted, but ultimately declined financial participation in the project. Aspen and TCWCD agreed to include a right for Aspen to purchase the summer output beginning in 2024. 2022-2023:Based on City Council direction, Aspen and TCWCD renewed discussions around additional purchased power at the Ridgway facility. Staff reviewed Aspen demand profiles and discussed potential partnership with MEAN to resell generation in excess of Aspen’s needs. Finding the project and associated terms mutually beneficial, Aspen, TCWCD, and MEAN worked to develop a series of agreements to memorialize this relationship. DISCUSSION:At the time that it entered the PPA with TCWCD, Aspen set goals to achieve delivery of 100% renewable energy to its electric customers. Hydroelectric energy, including production from the Ridgway agreement, played a major role in reaching this objective in 2015. The preferred energy mix was adopted to achieve a balance from energy purchases compared with energy demand as well as to maintain rates that were competitive. Aspen purposefully chose an energy mix that included 46% from hydroelectric sources, with most of the balance derived from wind energy delivered by MEAN. Balancing the energy mix in this manner has played an important role in providing system reliability, has kept Aspen’s energy rates competitive and allowed Aspen to consistently meet its renewable energy goals each year since 2015. However, load growth on the Aspen system, together with changes in water release patterns at existing dams, has reduced the percentage of hydroelectric energy received by Aspen over the last decade. Since the original power purchase at Ridgway, MEAN has created new contractual methods for other members to participate in renewable energy projects and is now able to participate in the purchase of energy from the Ridgway Project. Beginning in 2023, a “Green Energy” option allows MEAN members to subscribe to purchase a blend of renewable energy sources. The MEAN Board of Directors has approved purchasing approximately 50% of the annual 13 3 energy output generated at Ridgway above Aspen’s needs. This arrangement allows Aspen to utilize this cost effective, in-state energy source while allowing other communities that are part of the MEAN’s joint action agency to enjoy the benefits of this renewable generation. Two agreements with MEAN are necessary to realize these benefits: 1) the 4 th Revised Supplemental Agreement lists the Ridgway energy to be retained as an exception Aspen’s “All Requirements” commitment for energy purchases through MEAN; and 2) a power purchase agreement that enables MEAN to buy approximately one-half of the Ridgway energy and place that share into the “Green Energy” pool to benefit other MEAN members. Details of these two agreements are highlighted in resolutions #136 and #137 (Exhibit A&B, attached) for council’s consideration and approval. FINANCIAL BUDGET IMPACTS:On an annual basis, Aspen will sell approximately half of the Ridgway energy to MEAN at the same price paid in its agreement with TCWCD. There will be no net cost to Aspen as a result of the sale of energy to MEAN. The financial impacts associated with Aspen’s agreement with TCWCD were described in the July 31, 2023, Council Memorandum, attached as Exhibit E ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The energy produced at Ridgway results from water releases at an existing dam that primarily serves agricultural uses downstream. The same release volumes would occur without the Ridgway project. Aspen’s participation in this project does not create any changes to the existing operations or release regimes. There is a well-established fishery downstream of the dam that will continue to be maintained. ALTERNATIVES:The previously approved agreement with TCWCD anticipates this action. In the event the two MEAN agreements are not approved, Aspen would need to revise or terminate the previously approved agreement with TCWCD. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council move to approveResolutions#136 and #137, Series of 2023. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Resolution # 136, Series 2023 Exhibit B: Resolution # 137, Series 2023 Exhibit C: Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement between MEAN and The City of Aspen Exhibit D: Purchase Power Agreement between City of Aspen and MEAN Exhibit E:July 31st, 2023, Council Memo – TCWCD agreement 14 RESOLUTION #136 (Series of 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A FOURTH REVISED SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY OF NEBRASKA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a fourth revised supplemental agreement, between The Aspen Utilities Department, an enterprise owned and operated by the City of Aspen and Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (“MEAN”) a substantially complete copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “C”; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves a fourth revised supplemental agreement, between The Aspen Utilities Department, an enterprise owned and operated by the City of Aspen and MEAN, a substantially complete copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the Utilities Department of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of September 2023. Torre,Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the 26th day of September 2023. Nicole Henning, City Clerk 15 RESOLUTION #137 (Series of 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY OF NEBRASKA (RIDGWAY PROJECT), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE UTILITIES DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a power purchase agreement for the purchase and sale of hydroelectric power, between The Aspen Utilities Department, an enterprise owned and operated by the City of Aspen and Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN), a substantially complete copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “D”; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves a power purchase agreement for the purchase and sale of hydroelectric power, between The Aspen Utilities Department, an enterprise owned and operated by the City of Aspen and MEAN, a substantially complete copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the Utilities Department of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of September 2023. Torre,Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the 26th day of September 2023. Nicole Henning, City Clerk 16 1 Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado This Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement, dated the __________ day of ______________________, 2023, between the City of Aspen, Colorado, a home rule city of the State of Colorado (Aspen), and the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska, an agency and political subdivision of the State of Nebraska (MEAN), supersedes and replaces effective October 1, 2023, the Third Revised Supplemental Agreement between Aspen and MEAN executed as of August 25, 2015, and Amendment No. 1 to Third Revised Supplemental Agreement executed as of May 9, 2019. WHEREAS, due to unique circumstances affecting the sale of electric capacity and energy by MEAN to Aspen, the parties desire to agree on certain contractual terms in addition to those that would normally attend the sale of the electric capacity and energy by MEAN to a municipal customer; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1.The parties have executed standardized contracts governing the sale of electric capacity and energy by MEAN to Aspen. These Agreements are the Service Schedule M Total Power Requirements Power Purchase Agreement (Schedule M Agreement), dated June 25, 1984, and the Green Energy Program Subscription Confirmation executed March 17, 2023 (collectively referred to as the Preexisting Power Agreements), which are incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of any conflict or contradiction between the provisions of one or more of the Preexisting Power Agreements, and the provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall govern and control. 2.The City of Aspen, Colorado owns and operates the Ruedi hydroelectric plant under a permit issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) with a rated capacity of five megawatts and a hydroelectric project known as Maroon Creek with a rated capacity of .5 megawatts; and Aspen has acquired an interest in the output of the Ridgway Hydropower Project (Ridgway); which projects are used to supply capacity and energy to Aspen for resale to its customers, or in the case of Ridgway, the output is managed and used by MEAN as described herein. The parties acknowledge that a portion of the Ridgway output procured by Aspen will be resold to MEAN under a separate written agreement between Aspen and MEAN. For purposes of this Agreement, only the share of the Ridgway output associated with the capacity amount for Ridgway on Exhibit B shall 26th September 17 2 be considered Aspen’s share of Ridgway (Aspen’s Ridgway Share), and MEAN’s share of Ridgway output shall not be considered Aspen’s Ridgway Share. MEAN is fully aware that Aspen is planning and may construct itself, or jointly with third parties one or more of the additional proposed hydroelectric projects listed in Exhibit B to this Agreement that may also be used to supply capacity and energy to Aspen. Aspen has received a Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) demand allocation under the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects of 988 kW in the summer season and 1,560 kW in the winter season. The parties acknowledge that Aspen’s purchases under the Schedule M Agreement have been modified by the Green Energy Program Subscription Confirmation. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, the parties expressly agree that the amount of hydropower output used to reduce Aspen’s total load under this Agreement for each unit shall be limited and is deemed not to exceed generation associated with the capacity amount listed for each respective unit on Exhibit B to this Agreement. 3. Calculation of Fixed Cost Recovery Charge and Energy Charge A.Fixed Cost Recovery Charge for Aspen will be billed as set forth in the then-current Exhibit B, Schedule of Rates and Charges, to the Schedule M Agreement, which Schedule of Rates and Charges is subject to change from time to time upon action of the MEAN Board of Directors. B. Energy Charge. Monthly Billing Energy is determined as follows and will be billed at the applicable rate set forth in the then-current Exhibit B, Schedule of Rates and Charges, to the Schedule M Agreement: On an hourly basis, MEAN will reconcile the load and generation for Aspen. For each hour, the amount of supplemental energy supplied by MEAN under the Schedule M Agreement shall be actual metered energy minus the sum of energy supplied from WAPA and the energy generated from the hydropower projects listed on Exhibit B. Monthly Billing Energy equals the net of the amounts determined on an hourly basis for the current month, less applicable transmission losses as specified in the Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) network integration transmission service agreement (PSCo Contract), the Holy Cross Contract (as defined in Section 6) and the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.’s network transmission service agreement for MEAN’s delivery of Aspen’s Ridgway Share, for the current month (“net MEAN supplemental energy”). In any calendar month that Aspen’s resources from the hydropower generation from the facilities listed on Exhibit B exceed the City’s total electric power and energy requirements net of WAPA energy allocations, MEAN will carry over the excess hydro energy (kWh) to the immediately succeeding calendar month(s) billing and shall reduce the amount of net MEAN supplemental energy billed in the succeeding month(s) by an amount equal to the excess hydro energy (kWh) that is subject to carryover until fully exhausted. 4. Aspen shall be treated, for purposes of the Schedule M Agreement, as if those 18 3 hydroelectric generating facilities listed in Exhibit B which actually supply capacity and energy to Aspen, were WAPA Allocations (as defined in the Schedule M Agreement), and the following provisions of the Schedule M Agreement shall not be applicable to Aspen with regard to the facilities listed on Exhibit B: Schedule M Agreement Article XII and Article XIV 5. Division of responsibility for transmission losses: A.MEAN shall bear all transmission losses associated with delivery of MEAN power and energy to Aspen at the Delivery Point. The Delivery Point is set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement. B. Aspen shall bear all transmission losses associated with the delivery of WAPA power and energy as well as power and energy from the facilities listed on Exhibit B. 6. Division of responsibility for transmission charges: A. MEAN has entered into the PSCo Contract for delivery by PSCo of power and energy from MEAN resources, Ruedi and WAPA. Aspen has entered into the Holy Cross contract for use of Holy Cross transmission and distribution facilities for delivery of power and energy from Ruedi to the transmission system of PSCo and from the transmission system of PSCo to Aspen and for the delivery of all power and energy from the Delivery Point to Aspen (Holy Cross Contract). All Holy Cross charges shall be paid by Aspen. All transmission charges for MEAN’s delivery of Aspen’s Ridgway Share shall be the responsibility of Aspen as provided in subsection B below. B.Responsibility for the costs of transmission service for MEAN to serve the City of Aspen with MEAN resources shall be as set forth in the Schedule M Agreement and the then-current Exhibit B, Schedule of Rates and Charges, thereto. The City of Aspen is responsible for the portion of the transmission cost for delivery of power and energy from Ruedi, Aspen’s Ridgway Share, WAPA and any other constructed hydropower projects currently listed as proposed on Exhibit B. All transmission costs, including losses, associated with Aspen’s Ridgway Share shall be the sole responsibility of Aspen. Accordingly, Aspen shall be responsible for the lesser of the following costs: (i) costs of delivering Aspen’s Ridgway Share from the Ridgway project to Aspen, or (ii) costs for delivering Aspen’s Ridgway Share from the Ridgway project to MEAN’s network load on Tri-State’s system or other transmission provider’s system (which load shall be that determined by MEAN in its sole discretion), including without limitation point-to-point transmission charges incurred to deliver to such network. 19 4 C.All arrangements for and charges for transmission, distribution, losses and other charges on and for all power and energy after it is delivered by MEAN to the Delivery Point shall be the sole responsibility of Aspen. Except as provided below for Aspen’s Ridgway Share and for Green Energy, the Delivery Point shall be as set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement. This Delivery Point shall also serve as the delivery point for Service Schedule M. The Delivery Point for Aspen’s Ridgway Share shall be deemed to be the Tri-State meter, or such point as agreed hereafter by Aspen and Tri-State. The delivery point with regard to Green Energy shall be as set forth in Aspen’s Green Energy Program Subscription Confirmation. 7. In the event Aspen shall become a Contract Purchaser (as defined in the Schedule M Agreement), Aspen’s obligation to purchase and MEAN's obligation to supply electric power and energy shall thereafter be at a Contract Demand equal to the maximum clock hour integrated system demand of Aspen, less its WAPA allocation, occurring during each Billing Period for the 12 preceding monthly Billing Periods, adjusted to take into account any Aspen hydroelectric projects listed on Exhibit B operating during the 12 preceding monthly Billing Periods. The adjustment for hydroelectric projects shall be based upon the operating experience of each hydroelectric generation unit during the maximum clock hour of Aspen integrated system demand during the 12 preceding monthly Billing Periods. Contract Demand, as used herein, shall constitute the Firm Power Requirement for the City for purposes of 3.01 of the Schedule M Agreement. 8.Management of Aspen’s Ridgway Share. Aspen hereby designates MEAN as the party exclusively responsible for scheduling and managing Aspen’s Ridgway Share. MEAN shall manage Aspen’s Ridgway Share and accept delivery of Aspen’s Ridgway Share from Tri-County pursuant to the terms and conditions of the agreement between Aspen and Tri-County for Ridgway output. After receipt of Aspen’s Ridgway Share by MEAN from Tri-County, MEAN shall manage Aspen’s Ridgway Share in the manner determined by MEAN in its sole discretion (as further described in Section 6). The City agrees not to take any action or support any effort by Tri-County or any other third party that would restrict, affect or eliminate MEAN’s right to use Aspen’s Ridgway Share in the manner described in this Agreement. 9. Effective Date. This Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement shall be effective as of October 1, 2023. 10. The parties mutually agree that the provisions of Section 4.02 of the Schedule M Agreement shall not apply in the case of events resulting from or caused by the negligent or intentional actions of MEAN. 11. It is mutually agreed and understood that the obligations imposed by the provisions of the Schedule M Agreement and this Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement are only 20 5 such as are consistent with applicable state and federal law. The parties further agree that if any provision of the Schedule M Agreement or this Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement becomes in its performance inconsistent with state or federal law or is declared invalid, they will in good faith negotiate to modify the agreement accordingly. 12. In no event shall the obligations imposed be diminished or agreements be modified so as to jeopardize the effectiveness of the Schedule M Agreement as security for the payment of notes, bonds, or other evidences of indebtedness issued by MEAN. 13. This Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Nebraska. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWING.] 21 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned parties have duly executed this Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement as of the date below. MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY OF CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO NEBRASKA By: ____________________________ By: _____________________________ Title: __________________________ Title: ___________________________ Date: __________________________ Date: ___________________________ Attest: _______________________________ City Clerk (SEAL) K:\Legal\K\MEAN\ERPA\Aspen, CO\AspenFourthRevisedSupplementalAgmtFinal20230915.docx Executive Director/CEO 22 Exhibit A to the Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado Delivery Point The Point of Delivery shall be the point(s) at the outlet of the interconnected transmission system where electric power and energy are delivered by or on the account of MEAN to the City of Aspen, Colorado (Participant), or to an intervening carrier agency for delivery to the Participant, which point(s) are as determined by the applicable Transmission Provider. Unless otherwise specified, the Point of Delivery refers to the point(s) at which the applicable Transmission Provider’s transmission facilities interconnect with the Participant’s distribution or transmission facilities or intervening carrier agency, if any. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent the energy generated by behind the meter generation interconnected with a Participant’s distribution system and leased to or purchased by MEAN is used by MEAN to serve such Participant, the energy may be delivered at the generator’s point of interconnection with the Participant or alternate point at which MEAN acquires the energy as agreed in writing between MEAN and the Participant or Participant’s customer. 23 Exhibit B to the Fourth Revised Supplemental Agreement between Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska and The City of Aspen, Colorado Existing and Proposed Hydropower Projects of the City of Aspen, Colorado [See attached.] 24 EXHIBIT B EXISTING HYDROPOWER PROJECTS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN Project Location Year of Start-up Installed Capacity (KW) Estimated May- September Energy Production (GWH) Estimated October- April Energy Production (GWH) Ruedi Reservoir 1986 5,000 9.8 10.5 Maroon Creek Pipeline 1989 360 1.1 0.3 Ridgway Hydro 2014 4,500 6.4 3.4 Total of Installed Hydro 9,860 17.3 14.2 PROPOSED HYDROPOWER PROJECTS TO BE BUILT OR PARTICIPATED IN BY THE CITY OF ASPEN Project Location Year of Start-up Installed Capacity (KW) Estimated May- September Energy Production (GWH) Estimated October- April Energy Production (GWH) Other Hydropower Projects1 1,780 5.2 1.5 Total of Proposed Projects 1,780 5.2 1.5 1Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Agreement, all proposed hydropower projects listed above are subject to approval by the MEAN Board of Directors. Accordingly, output from Other Hydropower Projects listed above may only be used to supply capacity and energy to Aspen or MEAN if approved by the MEAN Board of Directors. 25 1 POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF ASPEN AND MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY OF NEBRASKA This Power Purchase Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this day of __________________, (“Effective Date”) by and between the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska, hereinafter referred to as “Buyer”, and on behalf of its successors and assigns, and the Aspen Electric Department of the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereinafter referred to as “Seller”, and on behalf of its successors and assigns. Buyer and Seller may be hereinafter referred to collectively as the “Parties” and individually as a “Party”. 1.RECITALS: 1.1 The Aspen Electric Department, established by the City of Aspen Municipal Code Section 25.04.010, is an enterprise under Article X §20(2)(d) of the Colorado Constitution and is owned and operated by the City of Aspen. 1.2 Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska is a political subdivision and public corporation of the State of Nebraska. 1.3 The City of Aspen has developed a renewable resource program designed to promote the development of electric energy resources and has charged the Aspen Electric Department to implement the program. 1.4 Tri-County Water Conservancy District, a public and quasi municipal corporation (“Tri-County”), owns and operates the Tri-County Hydropower Generating Facility located in Ouray County, Colorado approximately six miles north of the Town of Ridgway at the Ridgway Reservoir Dam, hereinafter referred to as the “Site” and defined below. 1.5 Tri-County produces electric energy through the utilization and operation of one or more hydropower generators at the Site (“Facility”). 1.6 Pursuant to the Amended and Restated Power Purchase Agreement executed by and between Seller and Tri-County (“Tri-County Agreement”), Seller purchases from Tri-County capacity and energy generated during each year subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Tri-County Agreement, with the intent to resell a portion of the capacity and energy to Buyer under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein, and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: September 26, 2023 26 2 2.DEFINITIONS: For purposes of this Agreement, all terms used herein with initial capital letters, and not otherwise textually defined, shall have the definitions ascribed to them in this Section 2; terms used herein with initial capital letters not textually defined and not set forth in Section 2 shall have the meaning generally ascribed to them and consistent with the context in which used: 2.1 "Billing Period" is a period of time, normally coinciding with a calendar month, during which energy generation is aggregated for the purpose of sale by Seller and purchase by Buyer. 2.2 "Buyer’s Share of Output" means the portion of electric energy produced by the Unit and delivered by Seller to Buyer at the Point of Delivery, measured in megawatt-hours and calculated as shown in Exhibit 4, attached hereto, and made a part of this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Output shall include the Environmental Attributes associated with the electric energy delivered by Seller to Buyer at the Point of Delivery. Any reference to a proportional amount of Output refers to the portion of the total electric energy produced by the Unit which is purchased by Buyer under this Agreement. 2.3 "Effective Date" is the date stated on page one of this Agreement. 2.4 “Energy Rate(s)” is as shown in Exhibit 3, attached hereto, and made a part of this Agreement. 2.5 “Environmental Attributes” shall mean with respect to a specified quantity of the electric energy generated by the Unit the right of a purchaser of such Environmental Attributes to claim under applicable energy generation disclosure and tracking laws and regulations, any and all of the value associated with the generation of such electric energy, including: any green tags, tradable renewable certificates or similar renewable energy certificates, credits, values or premiums associated with such renewable energy generation; any output-based incentive, allocation, credit, value, set-aside allowance or non-energy attribute relating to or arising out of the production of renewable energy generation on a capacity and/or energy basis, and the resulting emission and greenhouse gas reductions; whether any of the foregoing arises pursuant to existing or future energy generation disclosure and tracking laws and regulations, or existing or future certification, certification program, trading market or exchange; provided, however, that for purposes of this Agreement, Environmental Attributes shall specifically exclude any and all state and federal production tax credits, investment tax credits and any other tax credits of any nature which are or will be available to Seller in connection with the electric energy generated by the Unit. 2.6 "Interconnection Facilities" means all of the necessary electrical connection facilities which have been or must be installed or modified for the purpose of interconnecting the Unit to Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. at the Site. Interconnection Facilities include, but are not limited to, metering equipment, transformers and associated equipment, distribution lines and 27 3 equipment, communications and telemetering equipment, protective devices and safety equipment. 2.7 “Interconnection Point” means the point of interconnection of the Facility from the interconnection provider’s electric system to the Point of Delivery as defined below 2.8 “Metered Energy” is the monthly electric energy output from the Unit, measured at the Point of Delivery. 2.9 “Output” means the electric energy produced by the Unit. 2.10 “Point of Delivery” shall mean the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. meter located in the Cow Creek substation as depicted on Exhibit 5, attached hereto, and made a part of this Agreement, unless mutually agreed to hereinafter by Seller and Buyer, also known as “Point of Change of Ownership.” 2.11 “Site” means all components of Tri-County Hydropower Generating Facility located in Ouray County, Colorado approximately six miles north of the Town of Ridgway at the Ridgway Reservoir Dam, as described in Exhibit 2, attached hereto, and made part of this Agreement, and Tri-County’s interconnection facilities needed to produce electricity and deliver such electricity to the Interconnection Point, as described in Exhibit 5. 2.12 “Term” means the total length of time during which the obligation of the Seller to deliver electric energy to the Buyer pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 2.13 “Unit” means two (2) Francis turbine generators and associated equipment having a maximum collective net rated output of 8 MW, as described in Exhibit 1, attached hereto, and made a part of this Agreement. 2.SALE: 3.1 Upon execution of this Agreement, Seller shall sell and deliver to Buyer and Buyer shall purchase and receive from Seller at the Point of Delivery the portion of capacity and Output as calculated in accordance with Exhibit 4 from the Unit generated year-round for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the summer and winter rates set forth in Exhibit 3. 3.2 Buyer’s Share of the Output has been designated by Buyer as a network resource on the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. system. 3.3 It shall be Buyer's sole responsibility to make all the necessary arrangements for the transmission of energy associated with Buyer’s Share of the Output from the Point of Delivery, including scheduling, accounting, and billing, with the appropriate control area operators and/or transmission providers. Any wheeling charges or other costs associated with transmission beyond the Point of Delivery shall be the sole responsibility of Buyer. This includes any costs associated with 28 4 transmission system curtailments and costs for additional points of delivery required by Buyer beyond the Point of Delivery. 3.4 Seller shall communicate to Buyer and/or its designated Agent the amount of energy expected to be delivered on an hourly basis under this Agreement by such means as the Parties shall mutually agree upon. 4.TERM AND TERMINATION; AND OPTION TO EXTEND: 4.1 This Agreement shall be in force and effect for a term of October 1, 2023 through April 30, 2034, unless otherwise extended by the Parties. 4.2 The breach of any material representation, warranty or obligation included in this Agreement, shall be deemed a default under this Agreement. Upon such default, the non-defaulting party shall provide the defaulting Party with written notice of default pursuant to Section 23 of this Agreement. Such written notice shall set forth, in reasonable detail, the nature of the default. The defaulting Party shall have sixty (60) days from such written notice to cure the default. In the event the default is not cured the non-defaulting Party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement. 4.3 Option to Extend Term. Buyer acknowledges that the Tri-County Agreement term ends on April 30, 2034, and Seller has an option to extend the Tri-County Agreement for the purchase of Output if the terms of extension are agreeable to Tri-County and Seller. Buyer may request this Agreement be extended for an additional period, which extension shall be subject to renegotiation of the terms of this Agreement (the "New Terms") including, without limitation, the rate, escalation factor and term of years, and shall be subject to Seller extending the Tri-County Agreement through the term of the extension of this Agreement. If Buyer desires to extend the Term of this Agreement, Buyer shall deliver written notice to Seller requesting an extension on or before the date that is two (2) years prior to the end of the Term. If Seller approves Buyer’s request (which may be approved or denied in Seller’s discretion) then Seller and Buyer shall begin discussions regarding the New Terms. If Buyer fails to give timely notice of its request for an extension, if Seller denies Buyer's request, if Seller does not respond prior to the end of the Term or if Seller and Buyer fail to agree in writing on the New Terms of the Agreement before three hundred and sixty-five (365) days prior to the end of the Term, then this Agreement shall terminate at the end of the Term. 5.DETERMINATION OF ENERGY DELIVERED: 5.1 The cost of Buyer’s Share of Output shall be calculated using the applicable rate set forth in Exhibit 3. 5.2 The Buyer’s Share of Output shall be delivered to Buyer at the Point of Delivery, which shall be deemed the point of sale, and purchased by Buyer. 29 5 6.BILLING AND PAYMENT: 6.1 Billing and payment arrangements shall be as set forth on Exhibit 6, attached hereto and made part of this Agreement. 7.METERING: 7.1 It is the Parties’ intent that Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. shall own, operate and maintain all necessary meters, dedicated potential and current transformers, and associated equipment to be utilized for the measurement of energy for determining Seller’s payments to Tri-County under the Tri-County Agreement. Buyer and Seller agree to utilize such measurement data to determine Buyer's payments to Seller pursuant to this Agreement. Metering equipment is installed at the Point of Delivery and shall be used to measure the Metered Energy. The Metered Energy shall be used to calculate the Buyer’s Share of Output by means of the formula defined in Exhibit 4. In the event the foregoing metering arrangement is not in place at any time during the term of this Agreement, then the following metering arrangements will apply: Under the Tri-County Agreement, Tri-County shall install, own, operate and maintain, at its own expense, all necessary meters, dedicated potential and current transformers, and associated equipment to be utilized for the measurement of energy for determining Seller’s payments to Tri-County under the Tri-County Agreement. Buyer and Seller agree to utilize such measurement data to determine Buyer's payments to Seller pursuant to this Agreement. Metering equipment will be installed at the Point of Delivery and shall be used to measure the Metered Energy. The Metered Energy shall be used to calculate the Buyer’s Share of Output by means of the formula defined in Exhibit 4. 7.2 A one line drawing depicting the interconnection of the Unit to the Point of Delivery and the placement of Tri-County’s metering installation is set forth in Exhibit 5. 7.3 Seller will request Tri-County to test the meters as requested by Buyer upon ten (10) days notice by Buyer, at Buyer’s expense. Buyer shall be allowed to have a representative present to witness any test requested by it and shall be entitled to receive all test reports of any tests undertaken by Tri-County. Under the Tri- County Agreement, metering equipment found to be inaccurate by more than 2% shall be repaired, adjusted, or replaced by Tri-County, at Tri-County’s expense. Any correction in the billing resulting from such repairs, adjustments or replacements shall be made in the accounting rendered for the next Billing Period pursuant to Section 6 herein; and such correction, when made, shall constitute full resolution of any claim between the Parties arising out of such inaccuracy of metering equipment. The period for which any such correction will be applied shall be limited to one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the date on which the Parties agree, in writing, to the resolution of any required correction. 7.4 The Parties shall cooperate in providing such information and reports to each other and to and from Tri-County relating to this Agreement, including but not limited 30 6 to, metering, testing, the Unit, and the Point of Delivery, as may be reasonably required from time to time. 8.OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE: 8.1 Seller shall be responsible for any and all costs or charges assessed by Tri-County under the Tri-County Agreement, including without limitation costs and charges related to the operation and maintenance of the Unit, if any. 8.2 Employees of Buyer and agents of Buyer shall have the right to visit the Site and inspect the Unit with reasonable prior notice given to Seller. 9.INTERCONNECTION: 9.1 Except as otherwise specifically provided for herein, Tri-County shall design, operate, and maintain, at its own expense, all Interconnection Facilities associated with the Unit. 9.2 Seller shall provide Buyer with electrical plans and specifications for Interconnection Facilities upon furnishment of such plans and specifications to Seller by Tri-County or Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. 10.RECITALS AND EXHIBITS MADE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT: All Recitals and all Exhibits which are referred to herein and attached hereto, and as such made a part hereof are specifically incorporated into this Agreement as material terms thereof and, where applicable, not merely for the purpose of example. 11.LIABILITY: To the extent allowed by law, Seller shall save, defend, and hold harmless, Buyer, its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims arising from or related to the Unit or the Site, including without limitation claims for injury to person or persons or damage to property occurring at the Unit or the Site prior to or, at or after the Point of Delivery; provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall be construed as relieving or releasing any Party from liability for injury or damage, wherever occurring, resulting from its own negligence or the negligence of any of its officers, servants, employees, or agents; and in the event of concurrent negligence by the Parties, there shall be contribution; and provided further, that each of the Parties hereto shall be solely responsible for injury or damage, wherever occurring, due solely to any defect in equipment installed, furnished, or maintained by such Party. Each Party is solely responsible for the risk of loss, or damage to, its equipment, unless the loss or damage results from the negligence or fault of the other Party. Nothing herein shall be construed or interpreted as denying either party any remedy or defense available to such party under the laws of the State of Colorado. This clause will survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 31 7 12.INSURANCE: Seller will require Tri-County to obtain and maintain, and cause any contractor or subcontractor engaged by Tri-County to obtain and maintain, adequate and extended insurance coverage for (a) all risks of liability to persons or property, (b) interrupted business operations and (c) in connection with the construction of the facility or any later occurring improvements thereto, an all-risk builder’s policy of insurance. The amounts of coverage and terms of liability shall be determined by Tri-County and shall be compliant with the typical amounts and terms associated with the development, construction and operation of a hydroelectric plant similar in capacity, output and size to the Site. 13.TITLE: Delivery of energy from Seller to Buyer shall be deemed completed at the Point of Delivery, and title to such energy shall pass to Buyer upon delivery. 14.WAIVER: Failure to enforce or insist upon compliance with any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment of any such terms or conditions, but the terms or conditions of this Agreement shall be and remain at all times in full force and effect. 15.CHOICE OF LAW: This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of Colorado applicable to agreements made and to be performed entirely within Colorado other than such laws, rules, regulations and case law that would result in the application of the laws of a jurisdiction other than the state of Colorado. Any action or other proceeding arising from this Agreement must be initiated and conducted in an appropriate federal or state court in the State of Colorado with the exception that both Parties shall agree to the venue of the proceedings. 16.FORCE MAJEURE: Subject to the terms and conditions in this Paragraph, no Party to this Agreement shall be liable for any delay or failure to perform under this Agreement due solely to conditions or events of force majeure, as that term is specifically defined herein; provided that: (i) the non performing Party gives the other Party prompt written notice describing the particulars of the occurrence of the force majeure; (ii) the suspension of performance is of no greater scope and of no longer duration than is required by the force majeure event or condition; and (iii) the non-performing Party proceeds with reasonable diligence to remedy its inability to perform and provides weekly progress reports to the other Party describing the actions taken to remedy the consequences of the force majeure event or condition. As used herein force majeure shall mean any delay or failure of a Party to perform its obligations under this Agreement caused by events beyond the Party’s reasonable control, and without the fault or negligence of the Party, including, without limitation (a) changes in state or federal law or administrative practice concerning, water rights administration, water quality or stream flow requirements, (b) any obligation 32 8 imposed upon Tri-County pertaining to the delivery and/or use of its water and all its associated rights existing thereunder as required by the Bureau of Reclamation, any other federal or state governmental, (c) acts of God, (d) sudden actions of the elements such as floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, or tornadoes, (e) sabotage, (f) vandalism beyond that which can be reasonably prevented by the Party, (g) terrorism, (h) war, (i) riots, (j) fire, (k) explosion, (l) severe cold or hot weather, (m) snow, (n) drought, (o) other extreme weather conditions, (p) blockades, (q) insurrection, (r) strike, slow down or labor disruptions (even if such difficulties could be resolved by conceding to the demands of a labor group), (s) actions by federal, state, municipal, or any other government or agency (including but not limited to, the adoption or change in any rule or regulation or environmental constraint imposed by federal, state or local government bodies) but only if such requirements, actions, or failures to act prevent or delay performance, (t) inability, despite due diligence, to obtain required licenses, permits or approvals, and, (u) changes of law relating to financial obligations, revenues and budgetary matters concerning Colorado water conservancy enterprises. In the event a force majeure event or condition prevents Seller from delivering all or part of the agreed upon amounts of electric energy to Buyer, Seller shall refund all advance payments made, if any, for that energy not delivered within sixty (60) days of the conclusion of the force majeure event or the cancellation of the Agreement pursuant to the remaining provisions of this Paragraph. In no event will any delay or failure of performance caused by any conditions or events of force majeure extend this Agreement beyond its stated term. In the event any delay or failure of performance on the part of the Party claiming force majeure continues for an uninterrupted period of more than one hundred and twenty (120) days from its occurrence or inception as noticed pursuant to this Paragraph, the Party not claiming force majeure may, at any time following the end of such one hundred and twenty (120) day period, terminate this Agreement upon written notice to the Party claiming force majeure, without further obligation except as to costs and balances incurred prior to the effective date of such termination. 17.PRIORITY OF DELIVERY: Seller and Buyer acknowledge that the Tri-County Agreement was made expressly subordinate to any present or future use of water for any purpose or any other use Tri- County has incurred or will incur as a result of the present or future terms and conditions set forth and existing in and through any obligation imposed upon Tri-County pertaining to the delivery and/or use of its water and all its associated rights existing thereunder as required by the Bureau of Reclamation, any other federal or state governmental entity and/or any contract, agreement, treaty, accord or other arrangement into which Tri- County may enter for the benefit of all persons and/or entities to which it is bound to deliver its water. 18.ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES: Buyer’s Share of Output shall include all associated Environmental Attributes. Seller, or Tri-County at request of Seller and MEAN, shall present to Buyer an attestation form or such other form acceptable to Buyer as proper and appropriate for the particular Environmental Attributes, with each invoice designating the quantity of Environmental Attributes associated with the relevant invoice period. In the event that Buyer determines that it requires amendment or modification to the form of attestation to be received from 33 9 Seller with future invoices, Seller agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to amend or modify the form of attestation it provides to Buyer, in order to accommodate Buyer's needs. Seller agrees to provide certification for one hundred percent (100%) of the Environmental Attributes associated with Buyer’s Share of Output and such other documentation as may be reasonably requested by Buyer from time to time in order to realize the benefits of the Environmental Attributes. Seller represents and warrants it has and at all times will have exclusive right to sell the Environmental Attributes that exist under current laws, rules and regulations called for in this Agreement, limited to the Buyer’s Share of Output, and if there are changes in laws, rules or regulations after the Effective Date, Seller shall take all actions reasonably necessary to establish and maintain its exclusive rights to sell and transfer such Environmental Attributes to Buyer, and Seller further declares that the Environmental Attributes have not been sold or otherwise transferred to a third party. Seller shall not sell, market, or otherwise transfer Environmental Attributes arising from Buyer’s Share of Output to a third party. Seller’s full and exclusive ownership rights to the Environmental Attributes arising from Output described herein are not being disputed; and the energy that was generated with the Environmental Attributes arising from Buyer’s Share of Output was not and will not be separately sold, used, marketed or otherwise represented as renewable energy by Seller and was not used to meet any federal, state or local renewable energy requirement, renewable energy procurement, renewable portfolio standard, or other renewable energy mandate by Seller, or any other party purchasing from the Unit. 19.SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the Parties hereto. Each Party shall have the right to assign all or part of its rights and interests herein, without prior written consent of the other Party, to any entity at least a majority of which is owned by such transferring Party. Neither Party, shall be entitled to assign this Agreement or enter any sublease without the prior written consent of the other Party, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld (it being understood that it would be reasonable to withhold consent to any assignment which would adversely affect the non-assigning Party or the delivery of electric energy under this Agreement). Any approved assignee or sublessee must first deliver to the non-transferring Party an agreement binding such assignee or sublessee to this Agreement and containing (a) a covenant by such assignee or sublessee to perform all of the obligations of the transferring Party to be performed under this Agreement; and (b) a provision subjecting any further assignment or sublease to the restrictions contained in this Section 19. Under no circumstances will any assignment or sublease be allowed if it shall violate the terms of any license or permit required for performance under this Agreement. 20.APPROVALS: This Agreement is and shall be subject to the regulatory powers of a state or federal agency having jurisdiction. Each Party hereto shall use its best efforts and shall cooperate with the other Party to obtain from all such state and federal authorities as may have jurisdiction, all authorizations, approvals, and orders to the extent required by law in order to enable it to validly enter into this Agreement and to perform all its obligations herein. 34 10 21.SEVERABILITY: If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Agreement and the application thereof shall not be affected and shall be enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing sentence, to the extent that any provision of this Agreement is prohibited or ineffective under the applicable law, this Agreement shall be considered amended to the smallest degree possible in order to make the Agreement effective under applicable law. 22.INTEGRATION: The terms and provisions contained in this Agreement between Buyer and Seller constitute the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller, and supersede all previous communications and representations, either oral or written, between Buyer and Seller with respect to the subject matter and the intended terms of this Agreement. 23.NOTICES: All notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be sent only by the following methods: personal delivery; United States Mail (first-class, certified, return- receipt requested, postage prepaid); or delivery by a national, overnight courier service that keeps records of deliveries (including Federal Express, United Parcel Service and DHL). For purposes of giving notice hereunder, the respective addresses of the Parties are, until changed as hereinafter provided, the following: To Seller: Attn: Director of Utilities Aspen Electric Department of the City of Aspen 500 Doolittle Drive Aspen, CO 81611 justin.forman@aspen.gov Phone 970 429-1992 Fax 970 920-5117 To Buyer: Attn: Executive Director Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) 8377 Glynoaks Drive Lincoln, NE 68516 bpoehling@nmppenergy.org, with a copy to legal@nmppenergy.org Phone 402 474-4759 Any Party may change its address or the designation of the person to be notified at any time by giving written notice of such change to the other Party in the manner provided herein. All notices shall be deemed given on the date of personal delivery or, if mailed by certified mail, on the delivery date or attempted delivery date shown on the return-receipt or, if sent by courier service, the next business day. 35 11 24.LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED HEREIN, NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE TO THE OTHER PARTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE TRANSACTION(S) CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT FOR ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, REMOTE, PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY, LOSS OF PROFITS OR REVENUE, OR SIMILAR DAMAGES, REGARDLESS OF HOW CHARACTERIZED AND REGARDLESS OF A PARTY HAVING BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OR POTENTIAL OF SUCH DAMAGES. 25.INDEMNIFICATION: Each of the Parties shall, to the extent allowed by law, with respect to any third-party claims, indemnify, defend, protect and hold the other, its assignees, invitees, employees, agents and contractors harmless from and against losses, costs, damages, liability or expenses for physical damage to property and for physical injuries to any person, to the extent caused by the operations or activities of such Party or those acting by, for or under such Party. Nothing herein shall be construed or interpreted as denying either party any remedy or defense available to such party under the laws of the State of Colorado. This clause will survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 26.NO PARTNERSHIP: Nothing contained in this Agreement or any acts of either Party, prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement shall be deemed or construed by the Parties or by any third person to create the relationship of principal and agent, partnership, joint venture or any other association between the Parties, other than the relationship of Seller and Buyer of electric energy. 27.RELIANCE AND SURVIVAL OF REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES: Each of the Parties acknowledges that the other Party has relied and will rely upon the accuracy of its respective representations and warranties contained herein, which representations and warranties constitute fundamental terms of this Agreement. All representations, warranties and covenants granted or assented to in this Agreement, shall survive the completion of the transactions contemplated herein and each such representation, warranty, and covenant is a condition of this Agreement, any or all of which conditions may be waived in whole or in part by the party for whose benefit the representation is made. The representations and warranties of the parties contained in this Agreement shall not be discharged, dissolved or terminated by the exercise of any option or right under Section 4 of this Agreement. 28.DISPUTE RESOLUTION: The Parties agree that it is in the best interest of both Parties to attempt to resolve disputes that arise under this Agreement in a prompt and inexpensive manner. To that end, the Parties commit to use their reasonable efforts to resolve disputes informally. For all disputes that arise pursuant to this Agreement, the Parties immediately, through their designated representatives shall negotiate with one another in good faith in order to reach 36 12 resolution of the dispute. In the event that the Parties, through their respective governing bodies cannot agree to a resolution of any dispute within thirty (30) days after the commencement of negotiations, either Party may seek available legal remedies. 29.AMENDMENT: This Agreement may be amended, changed, modified or altered, provided that such amendment, change, modification or alteration shall be in writing and signed by both Parties hereto. Any oral representations or modifications concerning this Agreement shall be of no force or effect unless contained in a subsequent written modification signed by the Party to be charged. 30.FURTHER ASSURANCES: Each Party shall execute such additional documents, instruments and assurances as may be reasonably required from time to time to carry out the terms and intention of this Agreement or to facilitate any financing of the Facilities, and it shall not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay its compliance with any reasonable request made by the other Party. In addition, the Parties agree to work together in good faith to make necessary or desired changes to the terms and conditions of this Agreement to honor the intent of this Agreement in the event the applicable balancing authority or transmission service provider joins a regional transmission organization or independent system operator or otherwise transfers functional control to another entity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no such changes shall affect or modify the rate for energy, capacity and Environmental Attributes unless such change is set forth in an amendment to this Agreement and signed by authorized representatives of both Parties. 31.TIME: Time is of the essence hereof. 32.CONSTRUCTION: Unless the context otherwise requires: (a) words of any gender shall be deemed to include each other gender and the neutral; (b) words using the singular or plural number shall also include the plural or singular number, respectively; (c) the words “hereof,” “herein” and “hereunder” and words of similar import when used in this Agreement shall refer to this Agreement as a whole and not to any particular provision of this Agreement, and section or paragraph references are to the sections or paragraphs of this Agreement unless otherwise specified; (d) the word “including” and words of similar import when used in this Agreement shall mean “including, without limitation,” unless otherwise specified; (e) “or” is not exclusive; (f) all terms in this Agreement shall have the defined meanings when used in any certificate or other document made or delivered pursuant hereto unless otherwise defined therein; (g) any agreement, instrument, statute or regulation defined or referred to herein or in any instrument or certificate delivered in connection herewith means such agreement, instrument, statute or regulation as from time to time amended, modified or supplemented and includes (in the case of agreements or instruments) references to all attachments thereto and instruments incorporated therein; (h) any references to a person are also to its legal representatives, successors, and 37 13 permitted assigns and (i) any reference to a monetary amount shall be a reference to lawful money of the United States. Any reference herein to a “day” or number of “days” (without the explicit qualification of “business”) shall be deemed to refer to a calendar day or number of calendar days. If any action or notice is to be taken or given on or by a particular calendar day, and such calendar day is not a business day, then such action or notice may be taken or given on the next succeeding business day. A “business day” means any day other than a Saturday, a Sunday or a day on which banks in Denver, Colorado are required or permitted by applicable law to close. This Agreement shall be deemed the collaborative effort of the Parties and shall not be interpreted more stringently against either Party. 33.COUNTERPARTS AND ELECTRONIC DELIVERY This Agreement may be executed in one or more separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Each counterpart may consist of a number of copies hereof, each signed by less than all, but together signed by all, of the parties hereto. Copies of documents or signature pages bearing original signatures, and executed documents or signature pages delivered by a party by facsimile, or e-mail transmission of an Adobe® file format document (also known as a PDF file), shall, in each such instance, be deemed to be, and shall constitute and be treated as, an original signed document or counterpart, as applicable. Any party delivering an executed counterpart of this Agreement by facsimile, or e-mail transmission of an Adobe® file format document, also shall deliver an original executed counterpart of this Agreement, but the failure to deliver an original executed counterpart shall not affect the validity, enforceability, and binding effect of this Agreement. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWING.] 38 14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Power Purchase Agreement to be executed in their respective names as of the date and year first above written. SELLER: ASPEN ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By: __________________________________________ Sara Ott, City Manager Date Attest: ________________________________________ Date BUYER: MUNICIPAL ENERGY AGENCY OF NEBRASKA By:____________________________________________ Robert L. Poehling, Executive Director/CEO Date 39 15 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIT Exhibit 2 VICINITY MAP SHOWING THE SITE AND THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE UNIT Exhibit 3 ENERGY RATES Exhibit 4 CALCULATION OF OUTPUT AND COST Exhibit 5 INTERCONNECTION AND METERING DESCRIPTION Exhibit 6 BILLING AND PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS 40 16 EXHIBIT 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE UNIT The Unit associated with this Agreement shall be two (2) Francis turbine generators, with maximum collective net rated output of -8- MW, and all related equipment, to be manufactured and installed along with associated Interconnection Facilities, installed at the Tri-County Water Hydropower Facility which is located in Ouray County, Colorado approximately six miles north of the Town of Ridgway at the Ridgway Reservoir Dam. 41 17 EXHIBIT 2 VICINITY MAP SHOWING THE SITE AND THE GENERAL LOCATION OF THE UNIT 42 18 43 19 EXHIBIT 3 Table of Rates (Capacity & Energy) Period (Months) Winter Rate Oct 1-April 30 ($/MWh) Summer Rate May 1-Sept 30 ($/MWh) Oct 1, 2023-Sep 30, 2024 70.55 49.00 Oct 1, 2024-Sep 30, 2025 71.97 49.98 Oct 1, 2025-Sep 30, 2026 73.41 50.98 Oct 1, 2026-Sep 30- 2027 74.88 52.00 Oct 1, 2027-Sep 30,2028 76.38 53.04 Oct 1, 2028-Sep 30,2029 77.91 54.10 Oct 1, 2029-Sep 30,2030 77.91 55.18 Oct 1, 2030-Sep 30, 2031 77.91 56.29 Oct 1, 2031-Sep 30, 2032 77.91 57.41 Oct 1, 2032-Sep 30, 2033 77.91 58.56 Oct 1, 2033-April 30, 2034 77.91 N/A 44 20 EXHIBIT 4 CALCULATION OF OUTPUT AND COST For this Agreement, the Buyer’s Share of Output to be purchased by Buyer and delivered by Seller at the Point of Delivery shall be measured in megawatt-hours as calculated on a monthly basis using the following formula: Buyer’s Share of Output = (Metered Energy) x (Buyer’s Share, as that term is defined below) Cost to Buyer = (Buyer’s Share of Output) x (Rate from Exhibit 3) Buyer’s Share of Output means the following portion of the total electric energy produced by the Unit and delivered by Tri-County at the Point of Delivery. The remainder of the total electric energy produced by the Unit and delivered by Tri-County at the Point of Delivery shall be considered Seller’s share of Output, not Buyer’s Share, and shall be excluded from the purchase and sale obligation under the Agreement: Summer (May through September) Winter (October through April) Buyer’s Share 67% 20% Seller’s Share 33% 80% Parties will annually review the five year rolling average of Seller’s Share of Output to compare to the estimates of hydropower production set forth in Seller’s Exhibit B to its Supplemental Agreement with MEAN, or any successor agreement thereto, and the Parties agree to update the split if the 5 year rolling average is materially greater than such estimates. 45 21 EXHIBIT 5 INTERCONNECTION AND METERING DESCRIPTION 46 22 EXHIBIT 6 BILLING AND PAYMENT ARRANGEMENTS 1. The Cost to Buyer for each Billing Period shall be the product of the Buyer’s Share of Output (in megawatt-hours) delivered to Buyer, pursuant to Section 5 of the Agreement, during such Billing Period, times the applicable Energy Rate as set forth in Exhibit 3 of the Agreement. 2. Buyer will create a report each month with the Metered Energy and send it to Tri- County and Seller. This report will be generated on or about the 1st business day of the following month and will be in MST, unless otherwise specified. In accordance with Section 7.1 of the Agreement, the Metered Energy shown on the report shall be used to calculate the Buyer’s Share of Output by means of the formula defined in Exhibit 4 of the Agreement. 3. If there are any questions about the data, these need to be submitted to Buyer in writing within three (3) business days for prompt resolution. 4. Seller shall submit to Buyer by the 10th day of the month an invoice, for the preceding Billing Period, for the Buyer’s Share of Output from the Unit delivered to Buyer at the Point of Delivery. Such invoices shall include the beginning and end dates of the Billing Period, the amount of energy delivered to Buyer as determined from the metering equipment described in Section 7 of the Agreement using the calculation defined in Exhibit 4, and the total amount due to Seller. 5. Buyer shall make payment to Seller, by electronic transfer of such payment, within seven (7) business days following receipt of the invoice from Seller. Payments are deemed paid on the date they are postmarked or electronically transferred. Absent proof of postmark, payments shall be deemed paid as of the date the electronic transfer is received by Seller. Interest on any unpaid amount shall accrue at the rate of one percent per month or fraction thereof from the date due until the date upon which payment is made. 6. Information necessary to accomplish electronic transfer of payments due shall be provided in writing. 7. In the event that any portion of an invoice is in dispute, the amount invoiced shall be paid in accordance with the terms of #5 of this Exhibit. The Parties shall use their best efforts to amicably and promptly resolve the dispute. Upon determination of the correct billing amount, and agreed to by both Parties, the proper adjustment will be included on the next month’s invoice unless other arrangements are agreed to by both Parties, including a credit for interest on any refunds at the rate of one percent per month or fraction thereof accruing from the due date of the original invoice to the date upon which payment is refunded. 47 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Phil Overeynder, Special Projects Engineer Steve Hunter, Utilities Resource Manager THROUGH: Justin Forman, Utilities Director Tyler Christoff, Deputy Public Works Director MEMO DATE: July 31, 2023 MEETING DATE: August 8, 2023 RE: Resolution # 114, Series of 2023—Amended and Restated Power Purchase Agreement between City of Aspen and Tri-County Water Conservancy District (Ridgway Project) REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests approval of Resolution # 114, Series of 2023, authorizing an amendment to the 20-year Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Tri-County Water Conservancy District (TCWCD) for power generated at the Ridgway hydroelectric facility located in Ouray County, Colorado. The amendment pertains to exercising Aspen’s right of first refusal to purchase energy during the summer months for the remaining ten-year term of the existing agreement beginning in October 2024. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On August 13, 2012, Aspen entered into a 20-year power purchase agreement with TCWCD for the winter output from the Ridgway facility. The plant was constructed and began producing energy in 2014. That existing agreement provides an option for Aspen to purchase the summer output for the remaining 10-year period beginning in 2024. In 2012, City Council approved certain modifications to Aspen’s “All Requirements” energy purchase agreements with the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN) which allowed Aspen to purchase the winter output from the Ridgway facility. In a June 13th, 2022 Council work session City staff presented a list of potential projects intended to enhance Aspen’s existing renewable energy portfolio. Council expressed unanimous support for further exploration of the options presented by staff. Based on this direction staff continued a review of options including increasing capacity of existing hydroelectric facilities, additional hydroelectric purchased power agreements, and local utility scale solar. From this meeting Staff committed to returning to Council with any contract obligations, procurement decisions, or general guidance or direction on these projects. 48 2 BACKGROUND: In 2002, as the bonds for the Ruedi plant were being retired , Aspen began participating in development of a hydroelectric plant at the existing Ridgway Dam and Reservoir. Together with TCWCD, Aspen funded a feasibility study to develop a project that would be similar in scale and output with the Ruedi project. Aspen’s goals were to increase energy production from a new renewable energy source as well as to benefit financially through long term participation in a low-cost renewable energy source. The Ridgway project received regulatory approvals and began construction a decade after the initial study. At that time, Aspen determined that it would only be able to balance energy deliveries to its customers with the new plant during the period from October through May. The MEAN board was consulted regarding potential participation in the project by purchasing the summer energy, MEAN declined to participate financially in 2012 when construction was initiated. The parties agreed to include a right for Aspen to purchase the summer output beginning in 2024. It was anticipated that future conditions would allow for other MEAN members to participate in the project. Aspen believed that growth in energy sales would allow for an increase in the amount of energy purchased during the second half of the contract period . DISCUSSION: At the time that it entered the 20-year PPA with TCWCD, Aspen set goals to achieve delivery of 100% renewable energy to its electric customers. Hydroelectric energy, including production from the Ridgway agreement, played a major role in reaching this objective in 2015. The preferred energy mix was adopted to achieve a balance from energy purchases compared with energy demand as well as to maintain rates that were competitive. Aspen purposefully chose an energy mix that included 46% from hydroelectric sources, with the majority of the balance derived from wind energy delivered by MEAN. Balancing the energy mix in this manner has played an important role in providing system reliability, has kept Aspen’s energy rates low and allowed Aspen to consistently meet its renewable energy goals each year since 2015. However, load growth on the Aspen system, together with changes in water release patterns at existing dams, has reduced the percentage of hydroelectric energy received by Aspen over the last decade. Since the original power purchase at Ridgway, MEAN has created new contractual methods for other members to participate in renewable energy projects and is now able to participate in the purchase of energy from the Ridgway Project. Beginning in 2023, a “Green Energy” option allows MEAN members to subscribe to purchase a blend of energy including hydroelectric, wind, landfill gas and solar energy sources. The MEAN Board of Directors has approved purchasing approximately 50% of the annual energy output generated at Ridgway above Aspen’s needs. This arrangement allows Aspen to utilize this cost effective, in -state energy source while allowing other communities that are part of the MEAN’s joint action agency to enjoy the benefits of this renewable generation . FINANCIAL BUDGET IMPACTS: The increase to the City’s expenditure appropriation necessary to implement this agreement is $227,000; however, this does not reflect the true bottom-line impact to the City. Ultimately, this agreement will help the City cost avoid roughly $112,000 by not purchasing as much power under the current MEAN agreements, and it will also help the City avoid expense wheeling charges and other fixed costs under MEAN power purchase. 49 3 $963,000 City's Current Cost for Agreement at Ridgway $227,000 Cost Increase Included in this Agreement $1,190,000 Total Proposed Cost of New Agreement ($630,000) Aspen's Cost for Kept Share of Energy Production* $560,000 Remaining Cost of Energy Available to Sell ($536,000) MEAN's Power Purchase from Aspen $24,000 Net Additional Cost to City * * It’s important to note that potential savings associated with Aspen’s wholesale energy were omitted due to annual demand variability. If energy was bought under current MEAN agreements, the City would pay ~$742,000, so this agreement would help the City cost avoid ~$112,000. Additionally, the City will save in wheeling charges and other fixed costs tied to MEAN purchased power as a result. Staff’s financial modeling indicate an immediate and long-term cost savings from this proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The energy produced at Ridgway results from water releases at an existing dam that primarily serves agricultural uses downstream. The same release volumes would occur without the Ridgway project. Aspen’s participation in this project does not create any changes to the existing operations or release regimes. There is a well-established fishery downstream of the dam that will continue to be maintained. ALTERNATIVES: City Council could decide not to exercise the right of first refusal for the summer Ridgway energy and continue existing purchase arrangements with only the winter energy at Ridgway and filling in the balance of its energy needs through MEAN. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council move to approve Resolution #114, Series of 2023. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to adopt Resolution No.114, Series of 2023. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Resolution # 114, Series 2023 Exhibit B: Amended and Restated Power Purchase Agreement between City of Aspen and Tri County Water Conservancy District Exhibit C: MEAN PPA Intent to Purchase Letter and January 19, 2023, Minutes Board of Directors Approval 50 RESOLUTION #138 (Series of 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND ORACLE AMERICA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for hosting, licensing and priority support services for the City’s enterprise resource planning (ERP) solution, between the City of Aspen and Oracle America, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for services between the City of Aspen and Oracle America, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of September 2023. Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting on the 26th day of September 2023. Nicole Henning, City Clerk 51 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council FROM:Pete Strecker, Finance Director THROUGH:Sara Ott, City Manager MEETING DATE:September 26, 2023 RE:Resolution 138 (Series 2023) Oracle Hosting and Licensing Renewal _______ REQUEST OF COUNCIL:Staff is requesting approval of an extension to the hosting and licensing of the City’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. This agreement will lock in a two-year agreement for the continued use of this software solution at $187,535 per year. This is an annual reduction in cost of $10,921 from the current contract. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:The City utilizes Oracle Fusion as its financial and human capital management platform. This system is responsible for all payroll, purchasing, accounting, budgeting, and benefits management for the entire organization and replaced our previous financial system, a Tyler product, when it was no longer being supported. This transition occurred roughly seven years ago and was a significant investment by the organization, both financially and through staff time and change management efforts to bring about a successful implementation. The most recent hosting and licensing agreement includes a fixed rate pricing arrangement, which began November 17, 2019 and included optional renewals through November 16, 2023 (four year duration in total). The per year cost of this agreement has been $191,568 and has covered the majority of our current functionality - the City did add an additional module for electronic timesheets in the system recently which brought our current annual cost up to $198,456 (but also eliminated another $40K expense for a legacy timesheet system). DISCUSSION: The City’s ERP solution is robust and is rooted in our daily operations and financial and human resource-related efforts. As a cloud-based solution, the system is continually evolving to match the business needs of the organization through monthly and quarterly improvement patches and is designed then to serve the organization for at least another decade or more (of note, our last financial solution was 19 years old before it was retired). At this time, the City needs to renew its subscription agreement for the hosting and licensing use of the solution and followed a sole source procurement effort to facilitate discussions with the vendor for pricing. After receiving a renewal quote, staff negotiated the proposed annual fee of $210,364 down to the current revised price of $187,535 by 52 assessing proposed modules and opting to carve out select items from the agreement. With the remaining services, the City will be well served and will not lose any desired functionality. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Over the full two-year term of this agreement, the aggregate cost is $375,069.93. This amount can be fully covered via the existing General Fund budget within the operational spending authority for Finance (75%) and Human Resources (25%) departments, where this expense has historically been booked. RECOMMENDATIONS:Staff recommend approval of Resolution 138 for extending the existing hosting and licensing contract with Oracle for another two-year period. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 53 ORDERING DOCUMENT Oracle America, Inc. 500 Oracle Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Name CITY OF ASPEN Contact Pete Strecker Address 427 Rio Grande Place ASPEN CO 81611 Phone Number Email Address 1-970-920-5007 pete.strecker@apen.gov Renew Subscription Term: 17-Nov-2023 to 16-Nov-2025 Service Period: 24 months Cloud Services Data Center Region Quantity Term Unit Net Price Net Fee B73946 - Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud Service - Hosted Named User NORTH AMERICA 25 24 mo 26.09 15,656.76 B86669 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS: Base Fee NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 1,250.00 30,000.00 B86668 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 65.24 1,565.68 B86836 - Oracle Fusion Financials Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 3.04 73,064.88 B86668 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 585.44 14,050.61 B86847 - Oracle Fusion Procurement Contracts Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.54 13,063.68 B84490 - Oracle Additional Test Environment for Oracle Fusion Cloud Service - Each NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 2,835.00 68,040.00 B86838 - Oracle Fusion Expenses Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.30 7,239.46 B86840 - Oracle Fusion Automated Invoice Processing Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.30 7,239.46 B86841 - Oracle Fusion Document Recognition Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.30 7,239.46 B86843 - Oracle Fusion Purchasing Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.54 13,063.68 CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 1 of 4 54346 Service Period: 24 months Cloud Services Data Center Region Quantity Term Unit Net Price Net Fee B84260 - Oracle Talent Acquisition for Midsize Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.41 9,797.76 B84261 - Oracle Talent Management for Midsize Cloud Service - Hosted Named User NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.20 4,898.88 B77399 - Oracle Test Environment for Oracle TBE Cloud Service - Test Environment NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 316.01 7,584.19 B85800 - Oracle Fusion Human Capital Management Base Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 1.62 38,918.88 B86668 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 314.28 7,542.72 B86334 - Oracle Fusion Payroll Cloud Service for United States - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.87 20,956.32 B75365 - Oracle Fusion Time and Labor Cloud Service - Hosted Named User NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.65 15,552.00 B86848 - Oracle Fusion Self Service Procurement Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.14 3,265.92 B86850 - Oracle Fusion Project Financials Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.68 16,329.60 Subtotal 375,069.93 Fee Description Net Fee Cloud Services Fees 375,069.93 Net Fees 375,069.93 Total Fees 375,069.93 CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 2 of 4 55347 A. Terms of Your Order 1. Applicable Agreement: a. Public Sector Agreement for Cloud Services US-CSA-CPQ-1352418 effective 05-NOV-2019 2. Cloud Payment Terms: a. Net 30 days from invoice date 3. Cloud Payment Frequency: a. Quarterly in Arrears 4. Currency: a. US Dollars 5. Offer Valid through: a. 30-NOV-2023 6. Service Specifications a. The Service Specifications applicable to the Cloud Services and the Consulting/Professional Services ordered may be accessed at http:// www.oracle.com/contracts. 7. Services Period a. The Services Period for the Services commences on the date stated in this order. If no date is specified, then the "Cloud Services Start Date" for each Service will be the date that you are issued access that enables you to activate your Services, and the "Consulting/Professional Services Start Date" is the date that Oracle begins performing such services. B. Additional Order Terms 1. No Auto-Renewal Notwithstanding any statement to the contrary in the Service Specifications, the parties expressly agree that the Services acquired under this order will not Auto-Renew. 2. Non-Appropriation In the event funds are not appropriated for a new fiscal year period, You may terminate this order immediately without penalty or expense; provided, however, that: (a) for each of the 12-month terms of the order, You must provide a purchase order, and (b) Your issuance of each 12-month purchase order shall signify to Oracle that all funds for the given 12-month term have been fully appropriated and encumbered. Notwithstanding the foregoing, You agree to pay for all services performed by Oracle prior to Oracle's receipt of Your notice of non-appropriation. CITY OF ASPEN {{!doctype_es_:signer1:default("CPQ Print"):font(name=Times, color=#ffffff, size=8)}} Oracle America, Inc. Signature Signature Name Name Title Title Signature Date Signature Date CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 3 of 4 56348 SPACE SPACE BILL TO / SHIP TO INFORMATION SPACE SPACE Bill To Ship To Customer Name CITY OF ASPEN Customer Name CITY OF ASPEN Customer Address 427 Rio Grande Place ASPEN CO 81611 Customer Address 427 Rio Grande Place ASPEN CO 81611 Contact Name Pete Strecker Contact Name Pete Strecker Contact Phone 1-970-920-5007 Contact Phone 1-970-920-5007 Contact Email pete.strecker@apen.gov Contact Email pete.strecker@apen.gov CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 4 of 4 57349 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Brian Long, Trail System Manager THROUGH:Matt Kuhn, Parks and Open Space Director MEETING DATE:September 26, 2023 RE:Resolution #139 Series 2023 - Contract for Milling and Paving on Chatfield Trail REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Parks and Open Space Department is seeking Council approval of a contract with Frontier Paving, Inc. for $169,658.00 for milling and paving services on Chatfield Trail. SUMMARY / BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen relies on a system of paved trails to foster recreation and alternative commuting around town. The majority of these trails are paved in asphalt and require capital maintenance to fix damage from tree roots, from subsurface failures and from general wear and tear. The Parks Department long term budget has planned for these system upkeep needs by assigning Trail Surface Improvements every other year. This budget item allows the most needy sections of trail to be scheduled for necessary maintenance in a cycle that insures that Aspen’s trail users have a product that is safe and enjoyable to travel upon. DISCUSSION: For 2023 Chatfield Trail near the Aspen Golf Club has been identified as the section of trail most in need of capital maintenance. Chatfield Trail ranges from 9 to 12 feet in width and runs 1650 feet in length. The trail’s asphalt is some of the oldest in the system and no longer presents a smooth uniform surface for the user. Some damage to the trail has also occurred because of roots growing underneath and heaving the trail into “volcanoes”. The prescribed treatment for this need is to mill the trail to an even surface, apply a repair fabric where volcanoes and cracks have been noted, and to overlay the trail with new asphalt. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The budget for these services is included in the 2023 Parks Fund (100) Capital Maintenance Budget, as project 40031 Trail Surface Improvements. The contract amount of $169,658.00 for the milling, repair and overlay services is within the appropriated project budget for 2023, which is $175,000. 58 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Chatfield Trail is used for commuting and recreation by bike and on foot. Trips on this trail often replace vehicle trips, easing traffic and emissions. Keeping the paved trail system in good shape affirms Aspen’s commitment to alternative transportation and a healthy populace. The mill, repair and overlay process is the best practice for maintaining this asset. ALTERNATIVES Council may request an alternative search for other constructors in this field. A new formal bid process and completion of work would carry to the 2024 season and conditions on this trail would worsen. The system-wide needs for trail surface upkeep demand a regular maintenance schedule. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Parks and Open Space Staff recommends approval of the contract with Frontier Paving, Inc. for milling, repair and overlay of the Chatfield Trail. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 59 RESOLUTION #139 (Series of 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND FRONTIER PAVING, INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for milling and paving on the Chatfield Trail, between the City of Aspen and Frontier Paving, Inc., a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for milling and paving services, between the City of Aspen and Frontier Paving, Inc., a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of September 2023. Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held September 26, 2023. Nicole Henning, City Clerk 60 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 1 Updated: 6/5/2023 CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION (Short Form) Project #2023-308 THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into on September26, 2023, by and between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, hereinafter called the “City”, and Frontier Paving, Inc., hereinafter called the “Contractor”. THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and Contracts herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 1. Construction of Project. Contractor agrees to furnish all labor, materials, tools, machinery, equipment, temporary utilities, transportation and any other facilities needed therefor, and to complete in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner the Project as described in the Scope of Work and/or Proposal appended hereto as Exhibit “A” which is incorporated herein as if fully set forth (the “Project”). 2. Plans and Specifications; Compliance with Laws. The Project is to be constructed and completed in strict conformance with the Scope of Work and/or Proposal appended hereto for the same approved in writing by the parties hereto. The Project shall also be constructed and completed in strict compliance with all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations of all applicable governmental authorities, and the City of Aspen Procurement Code, Title 4 of the Municipal Code, including the approval requirements of Section 4- 08-040. Contractor shall apply for and obtain all required permits and licenses and shall pay all fees therefor and all other fees required by such governmental authorities. 3. Payments to Contractor. In consideration of the covenants and Contracts herein contained being performed and kept by Contractor, including the supplying of all labor, materials and services required by this Contract, and the construction and completion of the Project, City agrees to pay Contractor a sum not to exceed _one hundred sixty-nine thousand, six hundred fifty-eight ($169,658.00) DOLLARS or as shown on Exhibit “A”. 4. Commencement and Completion. Contractor agrees to commence work hereunder immediately upon execution hereof, to prosecute said work thereafter diligently and continuously to completion, and in any and all events to substantially complete the same not later than October 31, 2023, subject to such delays as are permissible under the “Extension of Time for Completion” section of this Contract. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 61330 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 2 Updated: 6/5/2023 5. Payment of Bills and Charges. Contractor shall pay promptly all valid bills and charges for material, labor, machinery, equipment or any other service or facility used in connection with or arising out of the Project, and shall obtain periodic releases from all subcontractors and material suppliers supplying labor or materials to the Project concurrently with Contractor's delivering any payment to such subcontractors and material suppliers. Contractor shall indemnify and hold City and City's officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns free and harmless against all expenses and liability suffered or incurred in connection with the claims of any such subcontractors or material suppliers, including but not limited to court costs and attorney's fees resulting or arising therefrom; provided that Contractor shall be excused from this obligation to the extent that City is in arrears in making the payments to Contractor. Should any liens or claims of lien be filed of record against the Property, or should Contractor receive notice of any unpaid bill or charge in connection with construction of the Project, Contractor shall immediately either pay and discharge the same and cause the same to be released of record, or shall furnish City with the proper indemnity either by title policy or by corporate surety bond in the amount of 150% of the amount claimed pursuant to such lien. 6. Releases. Contractor shall, if requested by City, before being entitled to receive any payment due, furnish to City all releases obtained from subcontractors and material suppliers and copies of all bills paid to such date, properly receipted and identified, covering work done and the materials furnished to the Project and showing an expenditure of an amount not less than the total of all previous payments made hereunder by City to Contractor. 7. Hierarchy of Project Documents. This Contract and the Proposal or Scope of Work appended hereto as Exhibit “A” are intended to supplement one another. In case of conflict, however, this Contract shall control both. 8. Changes in the Work. Should the City at any time during the progress of the work request any modifications, alterations or deviations in, additions to, or omissions from this Contract or the Proposal/Scope of Work, it shall be at liberty to do so, and the same shall in no way affect or make void this Contract; but the amount thereof shall be amortized over the remaining term of this Contract and added to or deducted, as the case may be, from the payments set forth in Paragraph 3 above by a fair and reasonable valuation, based upon the actual cost of labor and materials. This Contract shall be deemed to be completed when the work is finished in accordance with the original Proposal or Scope of Work as amended or modified by such changes, whatever may be the nature or the extent thereof. The rule of practice to be observed in fulfillment of this paragraph shall be that, upon the demand of either City or Contractor, the character and valuation of any or all changes, omissions or extra work shall be agreed upon and fixed in writing, signed by City and Contractor, prior to performance. 9. Contractor's Failure to Perform. Should Contractor, at any time during the progress of the work, refuse or fail to supply sufficient material or workmen for the expeditious progress of said work or fail to perform any other provisions of this Contract, City may, upon giving notice in writing to Contractor as provided herein and upon DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 62331 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 3 Updated: 6/5/2023 Contractor's failure to remedy any such failure within 3 days from receipt of such notice, terminate this Contract and provide the necessary material and workmen to finish the work and may enter upon the Property for such purpose and complete said work. The expense thereof shall be deducted from the payments remaining under Paragraph 3 above, or if the total cost of the work to City exceeds the amount of such remaining payments, Contractor shall pay to City upon demand the amount of such excess in addition to any and all other damages to which City may be entitled. In the event of such termination, City may take possession of all materials, equipment and appliances belonging to Contractor upon or adjacent to the Property upon which said work is being performed and may use the same in the completion of said work. Such termination shall not prejudice or be exclusive of any other legal rights which City may have against Contractor. 10. Extension of Time for Completion. Time is of the essence of this Contract and Contractor shall substantially complete the work during the time provided for herein. However, the time during which Contractor is delayed in said work by (a) the acts of City or its agents or employees or those claiming under Contract with or permission from City, or (b) the acts of God which Contractor could not have reasonably foreseen and provided against, or (c) unanticipated stormy or inclement weather which necessarily delays the work, or (d) any strikes, boycotts or obstructive actions by employees or labor organizations and which are beyond the control of Contractor and which it cannot reasonably overcome, or (e) the failure of City to make progress payments promptly, shall be added to the time for completion of the work by a fair and reasonable allowance. Contractor recognizes, however, that the site of the work is in the Rocky Mountains at a high elevation where inclement whether conditions are common. This fact has been considered by Contractor in preparing its Proposal and or agreeing to the Scope of Work. Furthermore, Contractor shall have the right to stop work if any payment, including payment for extra work, is not made to Contractor as provided in this Contract. In the event of such nonpayment, Contractor may keep the job idle until all payments then due are received. 11. Unforeseen Conditions. It is understood and agreed that Contractor, before incurring any other expenses or purchasing any other materials for the Project, shall proceed to inspect the work site and all visible conditions and that if, at the time of inspection therefor, the Contractor finds that the proposed work is at variance with the conditions indicated by the Proposal, Scope of Work, or information supplied by City, or should Contractor encounter physical conditions below the surface of the ground of an unusual nature, differing materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract or inherent in a work site located in the Rocky Mountains, Contractor shall so notify City, and City shall at that time have the right and option to immediately cancel and terminate this Contract or to instruct Contractor to continue the work and add the additional amount attributable to such unforeseen conditions to the payments due Contractor as set forth above. It is agreed that in the event of any cancellation by City in accordance with this section, Contractor shall be paid the actual costs of the work done prior to the time of cancellation. In computing such costs, building permit fees, insurance and such financing DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 63332 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 4 Updated: 6/5/2023 and title charges as are not refundable shall be included; provided that supervision time, office overhead and profit shall not be included in such costs to be refunded to Contractor by reason of such cancellation. 12. Acceptance by City. No payment hereunder nor occupancy of said improvements or any part thereof shall be construed as an acceptance of any work done up to the time of such payment or occupancy, but the entire work is to be subject to the inspection and approval of City at the time when Contractor notifies City that the Project has been completed. 13. Notice of Completion; Contractor's Release. City agrees to sign and file of record within five (5) days after the substantial completion and acceptance of the Project a Notice of Completion. If City fails to so record the Notice of Completion within said five (5) day period, City hereby appoints Contractor as City's agent to sign and record such Notice of Completion on City's behalf. This agency is irrevocable and is an agency coupled with an interest. Contractor agrees upon receipt of final payment to release the Project and property from any and all claims that may have accrued against the same by reason of said construction. If Contractor faithfully performs the obligations of this Contract on its part to be performed, it shall have the right to refuse to permit occupancy of any structures by City or City's assignees or agents until the Notice of Complet ion has been recorded and Contractor has received the payment, if any, due hereunder at completion of construction, less such amounts as may be retained pursuant to mutual Contract of City and Contractor under the provisions of Paragraph 3 above. 14. Indemnification. Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this contract, to the extent and for an amount represented by the degree or percentage such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the wrongful act, omission, error, contractor error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Contractor, any subcontractor of the Contractor, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Contractor or of any subcontractor of the Contractor, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Contractor or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Contractor. The Contractor agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Contractor, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Contractor for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 64333 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 5 Updated: 6/5/2023 15. Insurance. a. The Contractor agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Contractor shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to the terms of this Contract by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. b. Contractor shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Contractor to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed in the Supplemental Conditions. If the Supplemental Conditions do not set forth minimum insurance coverage, then the minimum coverage shall be as set forth below. Such coverage shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to City. All coverage shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. 1. Worker's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) for each accident, ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) disease - policy limit, and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) disease - each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Worker's Compensation requirements of this paragraph. 2. Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) each occurrence and THREE MILLION DOLLARS ($3,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall include coverage for explosion, collapse, and underground hazards. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. 3. Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate with respect to each Contractor's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the services. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Contractor has no DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 65334 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 6 Updated: 6/5/2023 owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Contractor providing services to the City under this contract. c. Except for any Contractor Liability insurance that may be required, the policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City of Aspen and the City of Aspen's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City of Aspen, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City of Aspen, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Contractor. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. d. The certificate of insurance provided to the City of Aspen shall be completed by the Contractor's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverage, conditions, and minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Aspen prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverage afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City of Aspen. e. In addition, these Certificates of Insurance shall contain the following clauses: Underwriters and issuers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the City of Aspen, it being the intention of the parties that the insurance policies so effected shall protect all parties and be primary coverage for any and all losses covered by the above-described insurance. To the extent that the City's insurer(s) may become liable for secondary or excess coverage, the City's underwriters and insurers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the Contractor. The insurance companies issuing the policy or policies shall have no recourse against the City of Aspen for payment of any premiums or for assessments under any form of policy. Any and all deductibles in the above-described insurance policies shall be assumed by and be for the amount of, and at the sole risk of the Proposer. Location of operations shall be: "All operations and locations at which work in connection with the referenced project is done." DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 66335 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 7 Updated: 6/5/2023 Certificates of Insurance for all renewal policies shall be delivered to the Architect at least fifteen (15) days prior to a policy's expiration date except for any policy expiring on the expiration date of this Contract or thereafter. e. Failure on the part of the Contractor to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverage, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith. All moneys so paid by City shall be repaid by Contractor to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against moneys due to Contractor from City. f. City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. 16. Damage or Destruction. If the Project is destroyed or damaged by any accident or disaster, such as fire, storm, flood, landslide, earthquake, subsidence, theft or vandalism, any work done by Contractor in rebuilding or restoring the work shall be paid for by City as extra work under Paragraph 8 above. If, however, the estimated cost of replacement of the work already completed by Contractor exceeds twenty (20%) percent of the insured sum set forth in Paragraph 14 above, City shall have the option to cancel this Contract and, in such event, Contractor shall be paid the reasonable cost, including net profit to Contractor in the amount of ten (10%) percent, of all work performed by Contractor before such cancellation. 17. Notices. Any notice which any party is required or may desire to give to any other party shall be in writing and may be personally delivered or given or made by United States mail addressed as follows: To City: City of Aspen Parks Department 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 To Contractor: Frontier Paving, Inc. 854 Bedrock Lane Rifle, CO 81650 DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 67336 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 8 Updated: 6/5/2023 subject to the right of either party to designate a different address for itself by notice similarly given. Any notice so given, delivered or made by United States mail, shall be deemed to have been given the same day as transmitted by telecopier or delivered personally, one day after consignment to overnight courier service such as Federal Express, or two days after the deposit in the United States mail as registered or certified matter, addressed as above provided, with postage thereon fully prepaid. 18. Inspections; Warranties. (a) Contractor shall conduct an inspection of the Project prior to final acceptance of the work with City. (b) Contractor shall schedule and cause to be performed all corrective activities necessitated as a result of any deficiencies noted on the final inspection prior to acceptance. The costs of material and/or labor incurred in connection with such corrective activities shall not be reimbursed or otherwise paid to Contractor. (c) Contractor shall obtain, at City's expense, third party warranty contracts (to be entered into by City). 19. Licensure of Contractor. Contractor hereby represents and warrants to City that Contractor is duly licensed as a general contractor in the State of Colorado, and if applicable, in the County of Pitkin. 20. Independent Contractor. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing in this Contract shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. The Contractor shall be, and shall perform as, an independent the Contractor who agrees to use his best efforts to provide the Work on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of the Contractor shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. The City is interested only in the results obtained under the Contract Documents. The manner and means of conducting the Work are under the sole control of the Contractor. None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees including, but not limited to, worker's compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from the City to the employees, agents or servants of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of the Contractor's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of the Contract. THE CONTRACTOR, AS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR, SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO PAY FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON ANY MONEYS EARNED PURSUANT TO THE CONTRACT. 21. Assignment. This Contract is for the personal services of Contractor. Contractor shall not transfer or assign this Contract or its rights and responsibilities under this Contract nor subcontract to others its rights and responsibilities under this Contract, and any attempt to do so shall be void and constitute a material breach of this Contract. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 68337 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 9 Updated: 6/5/2023 22. Successors and Assigns. Subject to paragraph 22, above, this Contract shall be binding on, and shall inure to the benefit of, City and Contractor and their respective successors and assigns. 23. Entire Contract. This Contract contains the entire Contract between City and Contractor respecting the matters set forth herein and supersedes all prior Contracts between City and Contractor respecting such matters. 24. Waivers. No waiver by City or Contractor of any default by the other or of any event, circumstance or condition permitting either to terminate this Contract shall constitute a waiver of any other default or other such event, circumstance or condition, whether of the same or of any other nature or type and whether preceding, concurrent or succeeding; and no failure or delay by either City or Contractor to exercise any right arising by reason of any default by the other shall prevent the exercise of such right while the defaulting party continues in default, and no waiver of any default shall operate as a waiver of any other default or as a modification of this Contract. 25. Remedies Non-Exclusive. No remedy conferred on either party to this Contract shall be exclusive of any other remedy herein or by law provided or permitted, but each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. 26. Governing Law. This Contract shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any action at law or equity shall be Pitkin County. 27. Attorneys' Fees. If either party to this Contract shall institute any action or proceeding to enforce any right, remedy or provision contained in this Contract, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to receive its attorneys' fees in connection with such action from the non-prevailing party. 28. Severability. Any provision in this Contract which is held to be inoperative, unenforceable or invalid shall be inoperative, unenforceable or invalid without affecting the remaining provisions, and to this end the provisions of this Contract are declared to be severable. 29. Nondiscrimination. During the performance of this Contract, the Contractor agrees as follows: The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, marital status, sexual orientation, being handicapped, a disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Vietnam era veteran. The Contractor will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, handicapped, a disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Vietnam era veteran. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 69338 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 10 Updated: 6/5/2023 to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. Any business that enters into a contract for goods or services with the City of Aspen or any of its boards, agencies, or departments shall: (a) Implement an employment nondiscrimination policy prohibiting discrimination in hiring, discharging, promoting or demoting, matters of compensation, or any other employment-related decision or benefit on account of actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, physical or mental disability, age, military status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or marital or familial status. (b) Not discriminate in the performance of the contract on account of actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, physical or mental disability, age, military status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or marital or familial status. (c) Incorporate the foregoing provisions in all subcontracts hereunder. 30. Prohibited Interest. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or the Town of Snowmass Village shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract or the proceeds thereof. 31. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflict of Interest: a. The Contractor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon a Contract or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingency fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Contractor for the purpose of securing business. b. The Contractor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering of advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Contract or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. c. It shall be a material breach of the Contract for any payment, gratuity, or offer of employment to be made by or on behalf of a Subcontractor under a contract to the prime Contractor or higher tier Subcontractor or any person associated therewith, as an inducement for the award of a Subcontract or order. The Contractor is prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed under this Contract to give up any part of the DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 70339 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 11 Updated: 6/5/2023 compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled. The Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal "anti-kickback" statutes or regulations. 32. Payments Subject to Annual Appropriations. If the contract awarded extends beyond the calendar year, nothing herein shall be construed as an obligation by the City beyond any amounts that may be, from time to time, appropriated by the City on an annual basis. It is understood that payment under any contract is conditional upon annual appropriation of funds by said governing body and that before providing services, the Contractor, if it so requests, will be advised as to the status of funds appropriated for services or materials and shall not be obligated to provide services or materials for which funds have not been appropriate. 33. Worker Without Authorization – CRS §8-17.5-101 & §24-76.5-101. Purpose. During the 2021 Colorado legislative session, the legislature passed House Bill 21-1075 that amended current CRS §8-17.5-102 (1), (2)(a), (2)(b) introductory portion, and (2)(b)(III) as it relates to the employment of and contracting with a “worker without authorization” which is defined as an individual who is unable to provide evidence that the individual is authorized by the federal government to work in the United States. As amended, the current law prohibits all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the Owner, from knowingly hiring a worker without authorization to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a Contractor who knowingly hires with a worker without authorization to perform work under the contract. The law also requires that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. Definitions. The following terms are defined by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the Owner. .1 "E-verify program" means the electronic employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is jointly administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the social security Administration, or its successor program. .2 "Department program" means the employment verification program established pursuant to Section 8-17.5-102(5)(c). .3 "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. .4 "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 71340 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 12 Updated: 6/5/2023 .5 “Worker without authorization” means an individual who is unable to provide evidence that the individual is authorized by the federal government to work in the United States By signing this document, Contractor certifies and represents that at this time: 1. Contractor shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment to perform work under the public contract for services; and 2. Contractor has participated or attempted to participate in either the e-verify program or the department program in order to verify that new employees are not workers without authorization. Contractor hereby confirms that: 1. Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with a worker without authorization to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 2. Contractor shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to certify to the Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with a worker without authorization to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 3. Contractor has confirmed the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment to perform work under the public contract for services through participation in either the e-verify program or the department program. 4. Contractor shall not use the either the e-verify program or the department program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. If Contractor obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a worker without authorization, Contractor shall: 1. Notify such subcontractor and the Owner within three days that Contractor has actual knowledge that the subcontractor is employing or subcontracting with a worker without authorization: and 2. Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not stop employing or contracting with the worker without authorization; except that Contractor shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 72341 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 13 Updated: 6/5/2023 establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with a worker without authorization. Contractor shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S. If Contractor violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the Owner may terminate this Agreement. If this Agreement is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual damages to the Owner arising out of Contractor’s violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. 34. Electronic Signatures and Electronic Records This Agreement and any amendments hereto may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one agreement binding on the Parties, notwithstanding the possible event that all Parties may not have signed the same counterpart. Furthermore, each Party consents to the use of electronic signatures by either Party. The Scope of Work, and any other documents requiring a signature hereunder, may be signed electronically in the manner agreed to by the Parties. The Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the Agreement solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. The Parties agree not to object to the admissibility of the Agreement in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic documents, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the ground that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 73342 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 14 Updated: 6/5/2023 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties agree hereto have executed this Contract for Construction on the date first above written. ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By: ____________ Title:_________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney ATTESTED BY: CONTRACTOR: __________________________ By: __________________________ Title:__________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 9/15/2023 | 4:30:47 PM MDT president Charles Ellsworth 74343 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 15 Updated: 6/5/2023 General Conditions for Construction Contracts and Special Conditions can be found on City of Aspen Website. Purchasing | Aspen, CO Note: Certification of Incorporation shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporation. If a partnership, the Contract shall be signed by a Principal and indicate title. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 75344 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 16 Updated: 6/5/2023 CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION (To be completed if Contractor is a Corporation) STATE OF ____________________) ) SS. COUNTY OF __________________) On this _______ day of ________________________________, 20____, before me appeared ___________________________________________________, to me personally known, who, being by me first duly sworn, did say that s/he is ___________________________________ of _______________________________________________________ and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors, and said deponent acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL the day and year in this certificate first above written. ______________________________________ Notary Public ______________________________________ Address My commission expires: _______________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 76345 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council FROM: Ben Anderson, Deputy Director, ComDev Liz Axberg, Housing Policy Analyst, CMO Chris Everson, Affordable Housing Project Manager, Asset Mgmt. Haley Hart, Long-Range Planner, ComDev Jenn Ooten, Sr. Project Manager, CMO THROUGH: Sara Ott, City Manager MEMO DATE: September 20, 2023 MEETING DATE: September 26, 2023 RE: Resolution #140, Series of 2023 Council Support for Grant Application Colorado Department of Local Affairs Strong Communities Planning Grant Program REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Resolution #140, Series of 2023 would provide Council support for staff to make application to State of Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) Strong Communities Planning Grant Program. This resolution is necessary as part of the grant application process and provides evidence of Council’s awareness and support of the work that would result from a successful grant application. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The Strong Communities Planning Grant Program is “intended to incentivize the adoption of transformational practices, programs and policies that support sustainable growth and development patterns and affordable housing into the future.” The program has identified a series of Land Use Best Practices in support of these outcomes and has encouraged communities to apply for planning grants up to $200K for work towards the implementation of these best practices. STAFF DISCUSSION: Aspen has long been a national leader in the development of policies, programs, and regulations in support of our affordable housing program. Over the years, we have implemented many of the Land Use Best Practices identified by DOLA. One tool that Aspen has not utilized is the community land trust (CLT). Briefly, a CLT is typically an independent non-profit that acquires land and then reserves land for a particular purpose – usually in support of affordable housing units or commercial spaces. There are numerous models and manifestations of community land trusts across the country. Looking at the City of Aspen’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan (2022-2026), 77 Page 2 of 2 Resolution #140, Series of 2023 Council Support for Grant Application the concept of a CLT appears to intersect with several of the identified Action items – and if implemented could be a powerful tool in building on Aspen’s legacy in developing creative solutions to the challenges of affordable housing. The purpose of the grant, ultimately, is to evaluate the potential of a CLT within Aspen’s context. Particularly, staff is looking for a better understanding of the opportunities and challenges that a CLT would bring to Aspen’s long-established housing program. CLTs are also frequently used to support interventions in commercial real estate markets, similar to those strategies used to support affordable housing. While DOLA is not focused on this use of the CLT, there are opportunities for our work under this grant to inform Council Goals work around public private partnerships for commercial vitality. Additionally, the proposed scope of work under the grant application would identify the steps and process involved in establishing a CLT and would define an appropriate role for the City as the concept of a CLT is developed. If the grant application were to be successful, the City would need to provide a minimum of 10% as a match to the grant award in carrying out the program. This match would not exceed $20K and would be equally provided from budgeted planning monies within the 150 Fund and Community Development Long-Range Planning fund. Staff is continuing to evaluate the final amount of a grant request but does not anticipate that the total project cost (grant award and COA match) would exceed $150K. Next Steps: If Council agrees to the grant application, and if the grant application were successful, an RFP would be generated to identify a qualified consultant in support of this work. Council would eventually review a proposed contract for the consultant. The receipt of the grant would require the scope identified by the grant to be completed by October 31, 2026. If the grant application was not successful, staff would not pursue any additional work on the concept of a CLT without further Council direction. RECOMMENDATION: The approval of Resolution #140 has no effect beyond granting Council acknowledgement and support for a grant application to the Strong Communities Planning Grant Program. Staff recommends approval of Resolution #140, Series of 2023 as part of the Consent Agenda on September 26, 2023. EXHIBITS: A. Strong Communities Planning Grant Program Guidelines B. Project Scoping Questions 78 Resolution No. 140, Series of 2023 Support for Grant Application Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION #140 SERIES OF 2023 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGING AND SUPPORTING THE APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF ASPEN FOR A STRONG COMMUNITIES PLANNING GRANT THROUGH THE STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS. WHEREAS,within the adopted City of Aspen’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan (2022-2026), several Action items are identified as priorities including: Land Banking, Regional Collaboration, Development Neutral outcomes, and Partnerships; and, WHEREAS,the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), with funding from HB22-1304 and in partnership with the Colorado Energy Office (CEO) and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has established a new grant program for municipalities and counties; and, WHEREAS,The Strong Communities Planning Grant Program is intended to support local governments in planning for sustainable growth and development patterns and affordable housing into the future; and, WHEREAS,a team of City of Aspen staff from the City Manager’s office, Asset Management - Housing, and Community Development have evaluated the grant application requirements and elements of Aspen’s current housing program through the lens of the 150 Fund, the Land Use Code, and APCHA regulations and development requirements; and, WHEREAS,the staff team has identified the concept of a community land trust as a tool in the development of affordable housing and in meeting other community desires – that has been used as a highly effective strategy elsewhere, but not in Aspen; and, WHEREAS, land trusts have been identified by the Strong Communities Planning Grant Program as one of the “Suggested Best Practices” in the area of Affordable Housing; and, WHEREAS,the development of a community land trust is a complex process with many stakeholders, in which the eventual role of the City of Aspen would need to be defined; and, WHEREAS,staff has determined that consultant support in evaluating the potential of a community land trust in building capacity in the development of affordable housing, and in providing support in the development of a plan for the establishment of a community land trust would be an appropriate request within the Strong Communities Planning Grant Program; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. 79 Resolution No. 140, Series of 2023 Support for Grant Application Page 2 of 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: A. Aspen City Council acknowledges and is supportive of an application to The State of Colorado Department of Local Affairs Strong Communities Planning Grant Program for the purposes of exploring the potential of a community land trust in building additional capacity in the development of affordable housing. B. A successful grant proposal will pursue funds for consultant support in evaluating the potential of a community land trust within the Aspen context and will help to develop a plan for the establishment of a community land trust – including identifying the appropriate role for the City in the process. C. If the grant proposal is successful, an RFP for consultant support would be the next step in the process. Staff is continuing to evaluate the final amount of the grant request but does not believe the cost of the identified scope of work will exceed $150K. The maximum grant request allowed by the program is $200K. Council would have a future role of reviewing and approving the contract for the selected consultant. D. Council is aware that the receipt of a grant would require the City of Aspen to provide a match of 10% of the project’s cost. Monies for this match would come from budgeted planning programs in the 150 Fund and Community Development. The total value of the match would not exceed $20K and would be equally divided between these two budget sources. E. It is intended that the results of the project’s work will be used to inform and inspire a community process to establish a community land trust. City Council acknowledges that the City would have an important role in the development of a community land trust, but that an eventual community land trust would be a non- profit organization, independent from the City of Aspen. FINALLY,adopted this 26th day of September, 2023. ______________________________________ Torre, Mayor ATTEST:APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________________________ Nicole Henning,City Clerk James R. True, City Attorney 80 HB22-1304 Infrastructure &Strong Communities: Planning Grant Program Guidelines Strong Communities Planning Grant Program The Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA),with funding from HB22-1304 and in partnership with the Colorado Energy Office (CEO)and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT),has established a new grant program for municipalities and counties. The Strong Communities Planning Grant Program is intended to support local governments in planning for sustainable growth and development patterns and affordable housing into the future. This program provides planning grants to help communities align policies and regulations to locate affordable housing in infill locations near jobs,transit,and everyday services;ensure new neighborhoods have housing of all types,sizes,and price points;and direct housing to areas with access to multimodal transportation options. The Community Development Office (CDO)within DOLA’s Division of Local Government will manage the Strong Communities Grant Program. Funding ●Available funding:Approximately $4 million in funding is available for planning grant awards. ●Funding source:Funding for Strong Communities is appropriated from the Affordable Housing and Home Ownership Cash Fund which originated from the Federal Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund (also referred to as State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds,or SLFRF).See more information about managing this federal stimulus grant on the Strong Communities web page. ●Grant maximum:Suggested maximum grant award amount for individual jurisdiction planning grants is $200,000,but larger grant requests to adopt more land use strategies,take a multi-jurisdictional approach,or cover staffing needs may be considered. ●Expiration of funds:All grant awards will be made before September 2024.To meet program close out deadlines,all grant and matching funds must be spent by October 31,2026.No extensions can be granted. ●First funding round:Applications will open August 1 and are due October 1,2023. ●Second funding round:More information about a second round of planning grants may be made available in early 2024,depending on available funding. ●Local match:A minimum of 10%local cash match of the total project cost is required.An applicant experiencing extreme financial hardship may request a reduced level of matching funds from DOLA staff before submitting their application.Local cash match does not include other grant funds. DOLA Local Government Infrastructure &Strong Communities Planning Grant Program (07.17.23)1 81 HB22-1304 Infrastructure &Strong Communities: Planning Grant Program Guidelines Eligibility ●Applicants ○Eligible entities include municipalities,counties,and city/counties.Awards cannot be made directly to housing authorities or regional governments,but partnerships are encouraged where appropriate. ●Planning Initiatives ○The intent of the program is to fund municipal or county planning work that supports adoption of one or more qualifying strategies from the land use best practices list or other innovative and impactful strategies that align with the goals of the program. ○Housing needs assessments or similar studies are encouraged where needed as an initial step to inform a qualifying planning project,but applications for the Planning Grant Program must also include plans to adopt a qualified implementation strategy (i.e.,any resulting grant agreement will require adoption of at least one qualifying strategy). ○“Affordable housing”for this program is defined in statute as up to 140%AMI for ownership in most areas and up to 160%AMI for homeownership in rural resort communities.The AMI for rental properties is 140%.Local government definitions of affordable housing may differ from this standard but should align (the local definition shouldn’t exceed these maximums). ●Expenses ○Awards may be used to cover administrative expenses,including staffing.Staffing funds may be used for grant administration (generally up to 20%of the total award),as well as for community engagement and championing this project (generally up to 30%of the total award).The overall amount that can be spent for staff capacity cannot exceed 50%of the total award.See the FAQ document for more details on what this program can fund and the rules around spending and documentation for grant management. Scoring Criteria ●Readiness &Capacity:The applicant clearly shows they are ready to begin work and has a reasonable timeline for completion to meet the October 31,2026 deadline.The applicant and its partners have the organizational experience with and capacity to manage grants and to manage the overall project.The applicant can demonstrate long-term capacity and has considered,or through this process will consider,utilization and enforcement of new or updated planning tools and regulations as part of their strategy evaluation. ●Impact on Housing and Development Patterns:The project will include developing and adopting one or more strategies from the list of land use best practices.The applicant will be scored on the general estimated impact the strategy(ies)will have to improve sustainable development patterns and meet the documented affordable housing need in that community. The most competitive applicants will demonstrate how this project is part of a larger strategy to promote the development of affordable housing in the community. DOLA Local Government Infrastructure &Strong Communities Planning Grant Program (07.17.23)2 82 HB22-1304 Infrastructure &Strong Communities: Planning Grant Program Guidelines ●Broad,Sustained Support:The applicant must show broad political and stakeholder support, via adopted plans,policies,and/or letters of support,to adopt the proposed strategy(ies)to support the development of affordable housing.If building support is part of the project,the applicant must demonstrate there is a thoughtful plan in place to build stakeholder support through an inclusive and equitable process.Applicants will be assessed on the extent and efficacy of their community and stakeholder engagement plan. ●Equity,Diversity,and Inclusion:Inclusive community and stakeholder engagement is a critical component of every planning effort;applications will be evaluated on the extent and efficacy of their community and stakeholder engagement plan.Any process to conduct a housing needs assessment or adopt a new strategy should ensure the project will promote equity in affordable housing.Applicants should assess the long-term impacts of the policy(ies)on marginalized and vulnerable populations throughout the process and impacts of the strategies on these populations.Competitive applicants will engage a wide array of stakeholders in designing housing solutions. ●The most competitive applications will be to adopt policies that: ○address community benefits such as early childhood education centers,broadband capacity, public health outcomes,economic diversification,transit oriented development,etc.; ○improve accessibility,such as age-friendly planning or ADA accessibility guidelines; ○include long-term impacts such as the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions,support for renewable energy and water conservation,green building guidelines,etc.;or ○reduce vehicle miles traveled,such as providing standards for transit-oriented development or prioritizing integrated multimodal transportation. ●DOLA may also consider geographic diversity,and to a lesser degree,financial need in making final award determinations. Application and Award Process Timeline ●Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult with their DOLA Regional Manager and to get input from CDO staff before submitting an application. ●Submit applications through the Division of Local Government Online Grants Portal per the Notice of Funding Available (NOFA).Visit the CDO website for more information on funding opportunities. ●Round 1 applications will be accepted August 1 –October 1.Applications will be reviewed and awarded by January 2024.Staff will then work to finalize grant agreements within two months. ●The DOLA Executive Director will make final award decisions. ●No work may begin on the project until the grantee receives a signed grant agreement from DOLA. ●Any contracts that local governments enter into in support of the program must include a competitive bidding process,as well as their own procurement rules. DOLA Local Government Infrastructure &Strong Communities Planning Grant Program (07.17.23)3 83 HB22-1304 Infrastructure &Strong Communities: Planning Grant Program Guidelines Note:If the grantee does not complete a good-faith effort to adopt planning strategy(ies),DOLA may request the awarded funds be returned to DOLA. Please refer to the Strong Communities page for additional information.Any questions or concerns may be directed to Lisa Loranger v ia email or by calling 303-565-6200. DOLA Local Government Infrastructure &Strong Communities Planning Grant Program (07.17.23)4 84 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AND COST FROM: City of Aspen Community Development Department RE: Development of Community Land Trust The City of Aspen is pursuing the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) Strong Communities Planning Grant Program for funding to provide services for a consultant team to examine the following questions in relation to the development of a Community Land Trust. The City of Aspen seeks an estimated cost in providing answers and resources to the following questions: Opportunities and Constraints 1. The Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) currently manages the sales, rental, management, and sustainability of 3,200 deed restricted affordable housing units. How could a land trust work with APCHA to bolster more affordable homes, create more homeownership opportunities, and create better access to affordable housing in the City of Aspen/Pitkin County? 2. Are there any concerns with brining a community land trust into a City/County with an existing and established program (APCHA)? Are there friction points with this? 3. What sorts of mechanisms could be employed to utilize a land trust to help maintain existing affordable housing in partnership with APCHA? 4. What is the appropriate relationship and role between the City and a potential community land trust in regards to development and implementation and also long- term sustainability? 5. What would be an appropriate mission for a Land Trust in our area and what would a roadmap toward implementing a land trust look like? Consultant Scope of Work Based on the guiding steps as outlined in the National League of Cities, Community Land Trusts: A Guide for Local Governments document 1. What would the City’s role be in building a community vision? (Page 26) • Proponents of a Land Trust should begin the organizing process by having a community conversation about housing needs and concerns, and the role a community land trust could play in the local housing and development landscape. Indeed, they should have many conversations, finding a variety 85 of ways to engage with stakeholders on these topics — including through one-on-one discussions, small and large group meetings, in-person and online events, focus groups, and more. An important goal of these conversations is to identify who is already working to address the needs and concerns raised by the community, and in what ways. Ultimately, the community should arrive at a shared vision of the need for a Land Trust and the role it could play in the local housing ecosystem. 2. What would the City’s role be in determining who the land trust will serve and how? (Page 27) • The next step of the process is to dive deeper into the details and define a vision for the Land Trust. The decisions made in this phase will be informed by the conversations had in the first phase. They will also likely be revisited in future phases as understandings and priorities shift over the course of the organizing process. Key decisions to make at this point concern the Land Trust’s mission, geography and functions. 3. How could the land trust be structured and governed? What would the City’s role in this be for the start-up and long-term? (Page 29) • The “classic” community land trust is an independent nonprofit organization governed by a tripartite board of directors. The “tripartite” board consists of equal numbers of land trust homeowners, members from the neighborhood or other geography served by the trust, and other “at large” members who are selected because they are well-positioned to guide the work the land trust does, potentially including bankers, lawyers, foundation leaders, and leaders of other community organizations. While this is the traditional governance structure for land trust’s, there is room for variation. It often, for example, makes sense to operate the trust as a program or subsidiary of an existing organization during the start-up phase. This can make it easier to support and sustain the trust’s operations by sharing staff, office space and financial resources. During this phase, there may be no board at all, or the board may be appointed by the parent organization. As the land trust becomes more established, it can be spun-off as its own free-standing organization, run by the traditional tripartite board. 86 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Jenn Ooton, Senior Project Manager THROUGH:Diane Foster, Assistant City Manager Sara Ott, City Manager MEMO DATE:Sept. 18, 2023 MEETING DATE:Sept. 26, 2023 RE:Resolution 142, Series 2023 - Proposition 123 – Affordable Housing Commitment REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Approval Resolution 142, Series of 2023, authorizing the filing of a commitment for the Proposition 123 Affordable Housing program, which unlocks Aspen’s ability to apply for related affordable housing funding from the state. In order to be eligible for state Proposition 123 grants or loans over the next three years, entities must opt into the commitment by Nov. 1, 2023. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: Colorado voters approved Proposition 123 in November 2022 dedicating a portion of annual state income tax revenue to be spent on affordable housing programs that support affordable home ownership, rent reduction, development of multi-family residential projects, local planning capacity, and other approaches to address the statewide housing crisis. The Division of Housing receives 40% of the funds and the Office of Economic Development and International Trade receives 60% of the funds. Earlier this year, state estimates for the DOH portion were $64 million from 2022-23 budget year and $127.2 million from 2023-24 budget year; while the portion transferred to the Affordable Housing Financing Fund for OEDIT was estimated at $96 million from 2022-23 budget year and $190.8 million from 2023-24 budget year. Opting into the Proposition 123 program means a local government commits to increase the number of affordable housing units over its base amount by 3 percent annually or a total of 9 percent for the first three-year cycle. The commitment is only for the first three- year cycle. Cities must establish their own affordable housing baselines based on set criteria (median income calculations and other nationally available data), and it does not factor in the community’s own deed restricted affordable housing stock. Using the American 87 Community Survey and Area Median Income for Pitkin County, DOLA shows the City of Aspen baseline at 512 units and the annual commitment at 16 units. Additionally, in the first three-year commitment cycle there is not a requirement for a 90-day fast-tracking for development approvals with where least 50 percent of the proposed units are affordable. Subsequent commitment cycles will include the fast-tracking provision. In order for units to fulfill Aspen’s three-year 48-unit commitment, new units must serve people with an income limit at 100% of Area Median Income (homebuyers) and an income of 60% of Area Median Income (renters). Rural resort communities, including Aspen, may petition the Division of Housing to use alternative percentages of area median income for eligibility for certain affordable housing programs for a given funding cycle. Conversions of market-rate units to a deed restriction can count toward the overall commitment. DISCUSSION: Staff recommends opting into this program because there are benefits to the greater community and the penalty for not meeting the commitment is sitting out for the next cycle of funding. Opting in also allows other agencies, businesses and residents in the community to access grants and loan funds within the program. If a community has not filed a commitment or is out of compliance, non-government entities within that community cannot receive Proposition 123 funding, even if they would otherwise be eligible. As of Sept. 15, 67 local governments had filed commitments across the state. According to the Proposition 123 Implementation website, “If a local government is unable to meet its 9% total commitment by December 31, 2026, then it and any development project in its jurisdiction are ineligible to receive any funding established by Proposition 123 for calendar year 2027.” In that case, the jurisdiction can file a new commitment again on Nov. 1, 2027 for a two-year commitment. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This commitment to the state does not include a financial commitment but opens up the possibility of applying for funding. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Increasing access to and creating additional affordable housing units has an environmental impact, as people living closer to their jobs do not have to travel long distances and makes choosing other modes of travel such as walking or biking easier. ALTERNATIVES: Local governments that miss the November deadline can file a commitment by November 1, 2024, for a 2-year commitment to increase its affordable housing stock by a total of 6% by December 31, 2026. RECOMMENDATIONS:Approval of Resolution 142, Series 2023, to file an affordable housing commitment for Proposition 123. 88 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Proposition 123 Funding Forecast Proposition 123 Overview 89 RESOLUTION #142 (Series of 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE FILING OF A PROPOSITION 123 AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITMENT WITH THE STATE OF COLORADO, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID COMMITMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO WHEREAS, Colorado voters approved Proposition 123 in November 2022 dedicating .1 percent of annual state income tax revenue to be spent on affordable housing; and WHEREAS, in order to be eligible for Proposition 123 grants or loans over the next three years, entities must file a commitment with the state of Colorado to increase the number of affordable housing units over its base amount by 3 percent annually or a total of 9 percent for the first three-year cycle by Nov. 1, 2023; and WHEREAS, filing a commitment for the Proposition 123 Affordable Housing program unlocks Aspen’s ability to apply for related affordable housing funding from the state; and WHEREAS, in order to file a commitment for the Proposition 123 Affordable Housing program, Aspen must establish an affordable housing baseline referencing the American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates for 2017-2021 or the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy Estimates for 2015-2019 in preparing the commitment; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Affordable Housing Baseline Reference Data Table using the American Community Survey from the Department of Local Affairs shows the annualized commitment estimate for Aspen using the Pitkin County Area Median Income at 16 units; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that filing a commitment for the Proposition 123 Affordable Housing program with the state of Colorado furthers Aspen’s affordable housing goals. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, 90 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the filing of a Proposition 123 affordable housing commitment with the state of Colorado for the City of Aspen using the Local Government Affordable Housing Baseline Reference Table for the next three-year funding cycle. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26 th day of September 2023. Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held, on September 26 th, 2023. Nicole Henning, City Clerk 91 92 93 proposition 123 Affordable Housing Support Fund In November 2022, Colorado voters passed Proposition 123, a ballot measure authorizing the state to retain money from existing state tax revenue to support affordable housing investment. These funds are split 60/40 between the Office of Economic Development and International Trade (OEDIT) and the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) through its Division of Housing (DOH), respectively. OEDIT manages the Affordable Housing Financing Fund, in partnership with Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHFA), which serves as Contract Administrator. DOH manages the Affordable Housing Support Fund, described below. 40% Forty percent of Proposition 123 funds are allocated to the Affordable Housing Support Fund, which is managed by the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) through its Division of Housing (DOH) and Division of Local Government (DLG). The Support Fund includes three programmatic areas: Affordable Homeownership, Serving Persons Experiencing Homelessness, and Local Planning Capacity Development. Affordable homeownership program DOH will provide grants to: • third-party agencies who will then make down-payment assistance (first-time homebuyers) and loans to individual homeowners at or below 120% AMI • third-party agencies who will then make owner-repair grants and loans to individual homeowners at or below 100% AMI • projects for the development or purchasing of affordable homeownership units at or below 100% AMI DOH will also provide grants or loans to groups or associations of mobile homeowners to assist them with the purchase of the mobile home park where they reside, or to the following entities if they have assigned their right to purchase their mobile home park to a: • local government • tribal government • housing authority • nonprofit with expertise related to housing, or • State or an agency of the State Program serving persons experiencing homelessness DOH will provide grants and loans to nonprofits, local governments, tribal governments, and private entities for: • development/preservation of supportive housing • outreach • rapid rehousing • supportive services • bridge housing • rental assistance • eviction defense assistance (including legal, financial, and case management) Proposition 123 homelessness programs not tied to an affordable housing project (i.e. creation of units) may be funded in jurisdictions regardless of local or tribal government commitment. This includes tenant based rental assistance, eviction defense assistance, outreach, supportive services, and rapid rehousing. Applications will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the DOH to verify eligibility. Local planning capacity development grant program and fast-tracking assistance DLG, in partnership with DOH, will work with developers, tribal and local governments to develop guidance materials on how an expedited review or “Fast Track” process could work to meet the requirements of Proposition 123. Additionally, up to 5% of the Affordable Housing Support Fund may be used each year to support local and tribal governments in adopting a Fast Track process and to support local capacity to review projects within the time constraints laid out in the statute. Grant funding could support local governments to hire consultants, supplement staff wages, implement new systems and technologies, revise land use codes, utilize regional partnerships, develop future commitments, or other efforts that achieve fast track goals. This summer, DOLA is offering virtual and on-site technical assistance to local and tribal governments to support commitment planning by November 1, 2023. 06/23.v2 Local and tribal government resources and requirements Commitment filing site bit.ly/co-123-commit bit.ly/co-123-baseline Baseline assistance tool 94 proposition 123 Affordable Housing Financing Fund In November 2022, Colorado voters passed Proposition 123, a ballot measure authorizing the state to retain money from existing state tax revenue to support affordable housing investment. These funds are split 60/40 between the Office of Economic Development and International Trade (OEDIT) and the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) through its Division of Housing (DOH), respectively. OEDIT manages the Affordable Housing Financing Fund, described below, in partnership with Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHFA), which serves as Contract Administrator. DOH manages the Affordable Housing Support Fund. 60% Sixty percent of Proposition 123 funds are allocated to the Affordable Housing Finance Fund, which is managed by OEDIT and administered by CHFA. This fund includes three programmatic areas: Land Banking, Equity, and Concessionary Debt. Local and tribal governments must complete a Local Government Affordable Housing Commitment as required by Proposition 123, unless otherwise noted, in order for projects within their jurisdiction to be eligible for funding. Land banking The goal of this program is to provide funding for acquisition and preservation of land for the development of affordable housing. To qualify, housing must serve residents at 60 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) or below for rental housing and 100 percent of AMI or below for homeownership*. Funding is provided in the form of grants to eligible local governments, including housing authorities, tribal governments, and forgivable loans to eligible nonprofits with a demonstrated history of providing affordable housing. Equity The Equity program provides below-market-rate equity investments in low and middle income multifamily rental developments or existing affordable housing. Developments that receive equity financing must have a Tenant Equity Vehicle (TEV). Supported developments must serve an average of 90% of Area Median Income*. Concessionary debt This program provides debt financing in four ways to support affordable housing investment, three of which are subject to a requirement to serve an average of 60 percent AMI or below*, unless a secondary source of financing is used: • Debt financing for low and middle income multifamily rental developments • Gap financing in the form of subordinate debt and predevelopment loans for LIHTC projects • Debt financing to preserve existing affordable multifamily rental housing units • Debt financing for modular and factory-built housing manufacturers (not subject to AMI or Local Government Affordable Housing Commitment requirement) 06/23.v2 Local and tribal government resources and requirements Commitment filing site bit.ly/co-123-commit bit.ly/co-123-baseline Baseline assistance tool *Higher AMI’s will be allowed for Rural Resort Local Governments who have been approved through a Petition Process. 95 1 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 8TH, 2023 At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Torre called the regular meeting to order with Councilors Doyle and Rose present and Councilor Hauenstein and Councilor Guth present via Zoom. SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCE – Swearing in of Police Officer, Josh Bennett. Police Chief, Kim Ferber, introduced Officer Bennett. She said he was raised in Las Vegas and moved here in 1999. He has more than 15 years of experience and was previously with the Sheriff’s department. He is here tonight with his wife Nikki, and she is also a new team member and part of their professional staff. She thanked him for his service and inspiring to see him stay in the field for so long. Mayor Torre swore in Officer Bennett in front of council. CITIZEN COMMENTS: David Scruggs – Mr. Scruggs said he has appeared before the city council several times requesting hybrid HPC meetings, so he is checking back on status for this. He said there was an application for affordable housing and there were five hearings for this. There is a lot of confusion for HPC members regarding their responsibilitiesunder the new ordinance, which is why it took five meetings. He is requesting that council consider calling this up on your next agenda. The reason is for the council to give HPC some directive concerning this new statute. This is the first application submitted under this new ordinance. Mayor Torre said they are not able to get hybrid done at this time and they have had plenty of glitches during normal council meetings. The HPC item will be called up at the next meeting pending minutes from the clerk’s office. Patty Kravitz – Ms. Kravits said she is a homeowner from Centennial with a lawsuit update. She is in the fact-finding phase. She advised people to please visit voiceofcentennial.com for an outline. Betty Hoops – Ms. Hoops said she has a local business and she’s lived here since ‘91. She’s trying to keep her rental at Truscott. She has received a lot of rude communication regarding this. She would love to get an answer from Matthew Gillen, as he has deemed her music job as a hobby. This is a job, and she would like to have these onsite hours added. She also does the marketing for all of these shows. For this type of contract work, it’s hard to prove without office hours, but a lot of people in the valley do this type of work. She feels belittled and attacked by Sandra in the office. Jason Tietz – Mr. Tietz said he is back again representing the bank to discuss the parking and transit situation on Main Street. He thanked council for their help so far and the memo. There is a west bound bus lane on Main Street, and for 16 years parking was allowed during down time. Parking has recently been taken away. They would still like to get some sort of parking back. The first option in the memo is the preferred outcome. Jeff Scroff – Mr. Scroff said he’s a longtime local and friendly face of the Centennial mess. He said he was thinking about the unresolved issues, and it reminds him of interactions with Aspen High School students when he used to run food service for them. The kids would always talk to him about things. He spoke about a kid who didn’t pass a class because he didn’t complete his homework successfully. He’s seen a lot of conversation and invitation to come to a resolution, but he hasn’t seen pertinent sustainable activity to form a resolution. Talk is cheap. He doesn’t want the city council to have an incomplete score for not having adequate effort. 96 2 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 8TH, 2023 Randy Eis – Mr. Eis said he is a Centennial homeowner and board member, and hewould love a solution and to rebuild the walls. He’s hoping to find time to work together and come up with some ideas to get some funding for this. We just don’t want people to be forced out. He’s been a board member since ’09. Mayor Torre said they will work on an invite to a meeting. Mr. Eis said there is no winner to the lawsuit. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS: Councilor Guth said he would like to give some clarifying comments about what he spoke on the other night regarding environment and climate goals. He said he’s not an anti-environmentalist, he just wants respect for private property rights. When he was talking about his concerns, he was talking about existing buildings, not new buildings. The environment is meaningful to him. He appreciates the natural environment that we live in. Councilor Hauenstein said being far away makes him realize how fortunate we are to live in Aspen. He’s thinking of the music festival and Theatre Aspen. He has seen two plays down there and they are outstanding. Second to none. He encourages everyone here to enjoy what is at your doorstep and he looks forward to the community picnic next week at the Red Brick. Councilor Rose said he is looking forward to the Armory remodel work session. He had a good time at the Back Country Marathon and Ducky Derby city events. The community picnicwill be here in the Galena Plaza, not the Red Brick. He said they will talk about the building performance standard guidelines on September 12th. He is disappointed this will be delayed for an entire year. He would also like a work session about the parking on Main and see what the options are for a compromise. Ms. Ott said she needs direction on the record. She encourages a work session so that RFTA can be in the room for the discussion, but you do already have a statement from them. Councilor Guth said he is not interested in this, and that Jason did receive some options in a memo from staff. Councilor Doyle said he read the memo and doesn’t feel the need for a work session. Councilor Hauenstein said he agrees with John. Mayor Torre said something should be changed, but he doesn’t need a work session. He’s for some changes here. Councilor Rose said he’s worried this will be lost. Mayor Torre said not if you don’t lose it. We can keep moving it forward without a work session. Councilor Doyle shared some environmental stats and read from an Associated Press article regarding the warmth of the earth. Mayor Torre thanked everyone for the supporters of the Mayors Cup benefitting mental health in our community. Aspen Strong has been rebranded to HeadQuarters. Keep remembering it is a priority and we need to stay vigilant. Headq.org is the new website for what was Aspen Strong. It’s ok to call for help when you need it. He thanked the sponsors of the event. He brought up APCHA and making a change to category sales units. We recently made a change for people to bid up. He is asking council members to allow category 1 people to bid up to category 2. Councilor Rose is not interested in this conversation. Councilor Hauenstein said he doesn’t want that either and wants to keep uniformity. Councilor Guth said no but thank you for bringing this up. 97 3 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 8TH, 2023 Councilor Doyle said he doesn’t want people getting in over their heads. Mayor Torre said it’s a delicate issue. There may be more insight needed here. He pointed out that he is the only one on this board currently living in employee housing and working with APCHA. AGENDA AMENDMENTS: City Attorney, James R. True, said they would need to pull Resolution #114 for discussion when they get to that point. BOARD REPORTS: Councilor Doyle said he and Sam had CORE. Councilor Rose said it was a great event with state-of-the- art architecture. It was cutting edge. Councilor Doyle agreed and said it was a great event. Mayor Torre said he and Sam have RFTA on Thursday. He said he also had the CAST housing task force, which mostly focused on vacancy and RETT taxes. CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Torre pulled Resolution #084. Councilor Guth pulled Resolution #120. Mayor Torre said they would start with Resolution #114, which Mr. True requested. Resolution #114, Series of 2023 – Amended and Restated Power Purchas Agreement between COA and Tri-County Water Conservancy District (Ridgeway Project) Mr. True said there are a couple of minor issues that need to be addressed. Justin Forman, Utilities Operations Manager, pointed out two small clerical issues. The first is the termination date, which should say April 30th, 2034, and in the table of rates, the summer rates should start in the summer of 2024. Assistant City Attorney, Kate Johnson, said it was bad math on her part. Councilor Doyle motioned to approve Resolution #114 as amended; Councilor Rose seconded. Roll call vote: Doyle, yes; Guth, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Rose, yes; Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. Resolution #084, Series of 2023 – Arts & Culture Fund Asset & Acquisition Assistance Grant Funding Recommendations – John Barker, Patrick Quick, and Ann Mullins Mayor Torre asked about funding grants this past year and a couple of recipients seeing sizable decreases. He saw some of these organizations are multimillionaire and it didn’t sit right with him. It’s a pilot program so he wants some feedback. Mr. Barker and Ms. Mullins addressed the concerns. Resolution #120, Series of 2023 – Contract with Integrity Plumbing & Heating for the Replacement of 22 Hot Water Storage Tanks located at Truscott Place Phase I and II – Cindy Christensen Councilor Guth asked why they aren’t approaching this building by building instead of all at once. Ms. Christensen said it made more economical sense to replace the tanks all at the same time and they are all the same age. They are located in storage space in each building. Ms. Ott said another key consideration is water service to the buildings at the same time. We kicked this down the road during COVID. 98 4 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 8TH, 2023 Councilor Rose motioned to approve the consent calendar; Councilor Guth seconded. Mayor Torre said thank you to staff. Roll call vote: Doyle, yes; Guth, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Rose, yes; Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Ordinance #10, Series of 2023 – Lumberyard Affordable Housing Project – Kevin Rayes, City Planner Mr. Rayes said he is asking council to continue this item and gave a recap from first reading. He is asking to continue to September 12 th. Councilor Rose motioned to continue Ordinance #10 to September12th at 5 p.m.; Councilor Doyle seconded. Roll call vote: Doyle, yes; Guth, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Rose, yes; Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. Mayor Torre said thank you to staff. No one likes delay, but he appreciates the extra work everyone is doing on this, and we will move forward with an excellent project. Councilor Hauenstein agreed and said it deserves our full attention. Roll call vote: Doyle, yes; Guth, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Rose, yes; Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. Councilor Rose motioned to adjourn; Councilor Doyle seconded. Roll call vote: Doyle, yes; Guth, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Rose, yes; Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. ___________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk 99 333 E Durant Ave.; Mountain Chalet Lodge Commercial Design Review – Notice of Call-up; City Council Page 1 of 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council FROM: Ben Anderson, Community Development, Deputy Director THROUGH: Phillip Supino, Community Development Director MEMO DATE: September 19, 2023 MEETING DATE: September 26, 2023 RE: Notice of Call-Up, P&Z approval for 333 E Durant, Mountain Chalet Lodge; Commercial Design Review Applicant: Zachary Kupperman, Authorized Representative of 2021 Aspen Mountain Chalet, LLC; a Delaware Limited Liability Company Representative: Chris Bendon of BendonAdams, LLC Location: 333 E. Durant Avenue; Mountain Chalet Lodge Current Zoning: Underlying Lodge (L) Zone District, with a Lodge Preservation and Planned Development overlays (LP-PD) (Mountain Chalet P.U.D., Ordinance 23, Series of 2001. Summary: The applicant proposes to complete an uncompleted phase of the approvals from the 2001 PD approval with modifications. The most important element is the demolition and reconstruction of the east wing of the lodge. Also proposed are the addition of two restaurant spaces, the addition of a reception area on Dean Street, and the reconfiguration and updates to the lodge rooms throughout. The exterior of the building will retain its “chalet” architectural character – but will be expressed in new materials and through minor changes to fenestration and balcony design. Process Summary: Certain land use approvals granted by HPC or P&Z, in this case P&Z’s approval of Commercial Design Review require that Council be notified of the decision through a brief staff summary. The notification is not a public hearing, and no applicant presentation or public comment has been accepted in the past. During the Notice of Call- Up, Council may uphold the P&Z decision. Alternatively, Council may request more detailed information be provided through a presentation by staff and the applicant at a future meeting. After hearing the additional project description, Council may uphold the commission’s decision or may remand it to require reconsideration of specific issues at a new public hearing. P&Z’s decision on remand shall be final. 100 333 E Durant Ave.; Mountain Chalet Lodge Commercial Design Review – Notice of Call-up; City Council Page 2 of 5 BACKGROUND: On August 15, 2023, Aspen’s Planning and Zoning Commission approved (in a 7-0 vote) a Planned Development Amendment for a significant renovation of the Mountain Chalet Lodge. This recent approval was heavily based on development rights established in a 2001 Planned Development for the property and includes additional reviews including Commercial Design Review – the subject of this Call-Up Notice. Included as Exhibit A is staff’s memo from the P&Z hearing describing the full scope of the project and staff’s findings on the relevant review criteria. The P&Z minutes from the August 15th are provided as Exhibit B. Commercial Design Review Criteria with staff findings are provided as Exhibit C. Council’s purview within the Call-Up process is limited to Commercial Design Review. Here is an excerpt from staff’s P&Z memo: Commercial Design Review – 26.412.060 Commercial Design Review applies to all commercial, lodging and mixed-use development within the City that requires a building permit. Like PD review, Commercial Design review is initially done in 2-steps (Conceptual and Final). As this is part of an amendment process, we are combining these two reviews (pursuant to 26.304.060.B). Commercial Design Review includes criteria that are specified in two places: 1) in the Land Use Code, and 2) In a separately adopted document: Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines. There are three, primary sets of criteria: General – these apply to all development and set basic design expectations for site planning and streetscape; parking; building mass, height and scale; street level design (that includes entry features); roofscapes; materials; lighting; service and mechanical areas. Mountain Base – The Mountain Chalet is located in the Mountain Base Character Area. The Character Areas were established to reinforce historic and existing development patterns and neighborhood design features. A focus in the Mountain Base area is on architectural features and materials that respond to mountain topography and the varied architectural styles located in the neighborhood. Pedestrian Amenity – This requirement encourages intentionally designed and meaningful open space that conveys human scale, provides relief from the built environment, and improves the pedestrian experience. This is a new requirement that did not exist when the 2001 PD was approved (although the PD did contemplate a % of “open space” on the property). Since the Mountain Chalet project as proposed is not crossing the important threshold of “demolition” as defined by the code, it is not required to meet the 25% of the Gross Lot Area as Pedestrian Amenity. However, because the new reception center is proposed for location in an area that is defined as Pedestrian Amenity, the proposed project is reducing existing Pedestrian Amenity area. As such, a condition of approval is included that will require the project to show during building permit that the property provides at least 25% of its Gross Lot Area as Pedestrian Amenity area that includes the reduction proposed 101 333 E Durant Ave.; Mountain Chalet Lodge Commercial Design Review – Notice of Call-up; City Council Page 3 of 5 by the addition of the reception building. If 25% is not reached, the project would be required to provide a Cash-in-Lieu payment to mitigate for the area lost by the inclusion of the reception building. The payment, if required, would equate to $100 per square foot of the floor area of the reception building. For P&Z’s information, monies collected for these requirements are utilized by the City to improve pedestrian-related facilities and beautification projects in the ROW. There is certainly a subjective nature to some of the Commercial Design Review criteria. Most of the really challenging aspects under these requirements (mass, scale, rooflines, etc.) were already established by the PD. In staff’s view however, the improvements to site planning, the updating of architectural features and materials, and a redesigned entry and site circulation, are positive aspects of the proposed project. Staff finds the review criteria to be met, with the one condition related to Pedestrian Amenity. Figures 1 and 2. Durant Avenue and Dean Street Renderings of the approved project. For Council’s Information, below is a summary of the project as proposed and approved by P&Z: • Reduction in lodge rooms – from 67 to 59 Average room size in 2001; 339 square feet. Proposed: 329 square feet. • Addition of roughly 2,325 square feet of commercial net leasable area This is primarily to accommodate two proposed restaurants. 102 333 E Durant Ave.; Mountain Chalet Lodge Commercial Design Review – Notice of Call-up; City Council Page 4 of 5 • A new, standalone reception area on Dean Street • Re-located transformers • Re-located street-level, trash service area • Reconfigured balconies and fenestration (doors and windows) • Reconfigured “lodge amenity” areas – lounges, bar, spa and lockers for lodge guests, workout room • Updated exterior materials, lighting, and landscaping • Reconfigured On-Site Affordable Housing units – in terms of layout and size (5 units) Figure 3 – comparison of proposed and existing – North Elevation, Durant Avenue Figure 4 – comparison of proposed and existing – South Elevation, Dean Street STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In the staff memo from the P&Z hearing, staff detailed the review process and the complexity of evaluating a new proposed project under development rights established in 2001 and the intersection with the current Land Use Code and other sections of the Municipal Code. There were several challenging topics that the Applicant team and City staff across several departments had to work through in getting to the P&Z approval. On Commercial Design Review, however, staff and P&Z’s evaluation was simpler. Many of the challenging topics in Commercial Design were already established by the 2001 approval (mass, scale, rooflines, etc. On aspects of the current proposal that were new – updated access and entry features, improvements to pedestrian features on property and in the right-of-way, a new reception center on Dean St., new materials, new balcony and fenestration design – staff found to be significant improvements over existing conditions. Staff recommends Council uphold P&Z’s decision. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council uphold P&Z’s decision. 103 333 E Durant Ave.; Mountain Chalet Lodge Commercial Design Review – Notice of Call-up; City Council Page 5 of 5 Recommended Motion for Call-up “I move to uphold P&Z’s approval for 333 E Durant, Mountain Chalet Lodge - Commercial Design Review.” EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – P&Z memo, August 15, 2023 Exhibit B – P&Z Minutes, meeting from August 15, 2023 Exhibit C – Commercial Design Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit D – Narrative of project from LU Application 104 MEMORANDUM TO: City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Ben Anderson, Deputy Director, Community Development MEMO DATE: August 9, 2023 MEETING DATE: August 15, 2023 RE: Mountain Chalet Lodge, 333 E. Durant Ave. Minor Amendment to a Planned Development and Related Reviews Applicant: Zachary Kupperman, Authorized Representative of 2021 Aspen Mountain Chalet, LLC; a Delaware Limited Liability Company Representative: Chris Bendon of BendonAdams, LLC Location: 333 E. Durant Avenue; Mountain Chalet Lodge Current Zoning: Underlying Lodge (L) Zone District, with a Lodge Preservation and Planned Development overlays (LP- PD) (Mountain Chalet P.U.D., Ordinance 23, Series of 2001. Summary: The applicant proposes to complete an uncompleted phase of the approvals from the 2001 PD approval with modifications. The most important element is the demolition and reconstruction of the east wing of the lodge. Also proposed are the addition of two restaurant spaces, the addition of a reception area on Dean Street, and the reconfiguration and updates to the lodge rooms throughout. The exterior of the building will retain its “chalet” architectural character – but will be expressed in new materials and through minor changes to fenestration and balcony design. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of a Minor Amendment of a Planned Development and related reviews, with conditions. Figure 1. Location of Mountain Chalet Lodge 105 Page 2 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting approval for the following Land Use Reviews: • Planned Development; Minor Amendment – 26.445.110.A Mountain Chalet Lodge is subject to a Planned Development Overlay, approved by Ordinance No. 23, Series of 2001. • Commercial Design Review (combined Conceptual and Final) – 26.412 Mountain Chalet Lodge has not previously received Commercial Design Review and as such, requires P&Z approval for any exterior changes of significance. • Growth Management Review – 26.470 This includes expansion of commercial development, the creation of affordable housing and an evaluation of the existing and proposed lodge rooms. • Transportation and Parking Management Review – 26.515 This will evaluate the proposed project under current code and the provisions of the 2001 PD approvals – particularly in the expansion of commercial net leasable area. • Special Review – 26.430 Two special reviews are required. The first is related to parking configuration and operation. The second is related to affordable housing unit standards. • Conditional Use – 26.425.040 While restaurant uses have previously occurred within Mountain Chalet, the underlying Zone District of Lodge (L) identifies restaurants as a conditional use. • Mountain View Plane Review – 26.435.050 The 2001 PD approval evaluated and provided approval for the height and building massing related to view plane review. The current proposal includes minimal changes to limited areas of the roof plan, that require review under these provisions. • Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit – 26.540 As proposed, the project would meet its affordable housing mitigation requirements on-site. This review would evaluate the issuance of AH Credits for any excess housing provided by the on-site units. Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority for these approvals. However, the approval is subject to call-up by City Council related solely to Commercial Design Review. If Council requests call-up, Council may remand the decision back to the P&Z Commission for reconsideration. 106 Page 3 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The Mountain Chalet Lodge, located at the northwest corner of Mill Street and Durant Avenue, was initally established in the 1950’s and was expanded and modified several times over the years by the Melville family who owned the property until 2021. In 2001, the property received approval for a Planned Development (at the time called a Planned Unit Development, PUD) that described a significant redevelopment of the property planned to be carried out across three phases. The 2001 Ordinance and approved plans are included as Exhibit C. Some of the approved work was completed, but the most significant element of the approved project left incomplete was the proposed demolition and reconstruction of the east wing of the building (increasing to four stories). Specific elements of the 2001 PD Approval will be discussed in more detail, later in the memo. In general terms, when a Planned Development is approved for a property, elements of that approval create a development right that runs with the property for an indefinite period of time unless a PD is removed by a future ordinance. In this case the “development right” primarily relates to: height, floor area, number of units (in this case lodge and affordable housing), and site planning. Other requirements found in the Land Use Code may or may not apply over the life of the project, depending on how the original PD and subsequent amendments were crafted. The Foundations of this Review In the case of the Mountain Chalet, as the new owners of the property proposed a significant renovation that would carry out the “second” phase of the approved project with new modifications, staff and the applicant team worked through the complexities of evaluating the existing and proposed conditions in consideration of the PD approvals and the current provisions of the Land Use Code. It was a complex process that did not always proceed with agreement. The project that is presented to the Commission is an outcome of many months of dialogue, information sharing, and negotiation between the applicant team and relevant City agencies. The beginning of this process began more than two years ago with discussion between the applicant team, ComDev Staff, and the City Attorney’s office. The important outcome of this initial effort was to arrive at common agreement on the aspects of the project that were “vested” by the PD approval, and those aspects of an eventual project that would be subject to the current provisions of the Land Use Code. Another important element in setting the foundation for this review was the completion of a “Lodge Audit”. This document is identified by the code and can be completed for a variety of reasons but in this case, the document was used to establish the baseline of existing conditions in the lodge, following a complex land use and building history. This document also provided guidance as to how proposed modifications may be treated by different sections of the current code. The Lodge Audit is included as Exhibit D. By the time that an application reaches a review board, it is unusual for staff to be recommending denial of an application. This is not the outcome of staff simply rubber- stamping projects that don’t comply with the code. Instead, it is often the product of much 107 Page 4 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission effort between the staff and the applicant team to shape and redesign a project into compliance – so that a positive recommendation can be made based on the review criteria findings. This is certainly true of this application. Following the initial application, a few aspects of the project surfaced, primarily impacting site planning, that would have in staff’s view made it difficult to support elements of the project as initially proposed. Months of conversation and restudy ensued that eventually resolved the issues. The memo will discuss this more below, but the location of the project’s upgraded electrical transformers, trash facilities, and other elements related to the right-of-way were resolved and contributed to staff’s positive recommendation. While everyone involved in this project to date would agree that this process from the beginning was time consumptive and at times frustrating, without the groundwork by the applicant team and City review staff, staff’s recommendation would likely look different and the nature of the review would have taken a very different shape. This process also helped to identify and resolve problems that would have likely emerged during building permit review. While not necessary for the land use review, many of these identified issues have been resolved and will hopefully improve the eventual permit review process. The Proposed Project Importantly, the proposed Mountain Chalet will from the outside look like an updated version of the project as approved by the 2001 PD, and many exterior elements will appear similar to or reference existing conditions. The following aspects of the proposed project are not amended from the 2001 approval: • Maximum Height • Allowed Floor Area • Building Massing – including roof lines (except for some technical modifications necessary to accommodate mechanical equipment and roof access) • Parking Spaces required per lodge and affordable housing bedrooms • Number of on-site affordable housing units and the relative location of these units • The replacement and redesign of the elevator tower (approved by a subsequent PD Amendment in 2019) It should be noted for the Commission, that if some of these elements above were to be proposed for change – that City Council would have likely been the review authority, rather than P&Z. Additionally, height, floor area, and parking are all governed by Referendum 1 – an aspect of the City’s Charter that requires conformance with code or triggers a public vote in order to gain approval. Specific changes in the proposed project from the Planned Development: • Reduction in lodge rooms – from 67 to 59 Average room size in 2001; 339 square feet. Proposed: 329 square feet. 108 Page 5 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission • Addition of roughly 2,325 square feet of commercial net leasable area This is primarily to accommodate two proposed restaurants. • A new, standalone reception area on Dean Street • Re-located transformers • Re-located street-level, trash service area • Reconfigured balconies and fenestration (doors and windows) • Reconfigured “lodge amenity” areas – lounges, bar, spa and lockers for lodge guests, workout room • Updated exterior materials, lighting, and landscaping • Reconfigured Affordable Housing units – in terms of layout and size STAFF EVALUATION: This project will create noticeable changes to the Mountain Chalet Lodge from its existing conditions. The redeveloped eastern wing will be the most visible to the community, but the entirety of the hotel will be updated and subject to significant reconfiguration. As described above, it has been a complex process to navigate in aligning the PD approvals with existing conditions and in evaluating the proposed changes. Ultimately though, it is essential to consider the original PD approval from 2001 and to understand that with the exception of the topics discussed in specificity below, the project as presented aligns with the existing development rights. Figures 1 and 2. Durant Avenue and Dean Street Renderings 109 Page 6 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission Height, Mass, Scale These elements were locked in by the 2001 PD Approval. As presented, the project appears to comply with height, allowable floor area, and other dimensional allowances of the approvals. Ultimately, these items are formally evaluated and confirmed during zoning review as part of the building permit process. Site Planning Like height, mass and scale, basic details on site planning (like building footprint) were established by the PD. However, the history of the Mountain Chalet has created site conditions that use practically every inch of the property. This is further illustrated by the Mountain Chalet property extending into the middle of Dean Street and the location of the ramp to the parking garage being completely located in the City of Aspen Right-of-Way (ROW). As the functional needs of the planned renovated building have changed and municipal code amendments have ushered in new requirements since the approval of the PD, issues with the proposed project arose that have been resolved through negotiation, restudy, and compromise between the applicant team and City Departments. A description of the proposed changes to the site plan: Electrical transformer location – Transformers are a regular constraint and topic of negotiation. City of Aspen Engineering standards require that transformers be located on private property, outside of the ROW. Additionally, City Parks preclude transformers from having impacts on existing trees. When combined with requirements of electrical and fire codes, it is often difficult to find a location. This was certainly an issue at Mountain Chalet. A new location accommodating expanded transformer capacity was identified on the north property line adjacent to the Durant Ave. sidewalk. A condition of approval is included to allow the transformer platform to extend into the ROW, as long as the transformers themselves are fully on the Mountain Chalet property. Trash Service location – As the project is expanding commercial net leasable area by a significant amount, the project must come into compliance with current requirements for trash, recycling and compost in the municipal code. The proposed area in the garage has been evaluated and generally confirmed (full approval happens at building permit), but an area at street level is needed to allow for trash pick-up. A trash enclosure was initially proposed adjacent to the ramp to the garage (where current trash is serviced and located in the ROW) but has been restudied and is now proposed for a location on Mountain Chalet property accessed from Dean Street. Balconies along Mill Street – While not at ground level and not technically associated with the building footprint and site planning issues, the new design proposes new dimensions for balconies for the lodge rooms along Mill Street and deserves discussion. The 2001 PD depicted balconies in this location but due to the poor quality of drawings from the approval, it was difficult to understand the relationship of the approved balconies to the property line and adjacent ROW. Some drawings showed the balconies within the property line – others showed the 110 Page 7 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission balconies crossing into the ROW. Because of the depiction in the PD of these balconies, the limited nature of the infringement into the ROW – and most importantly the long-standing existence of a permanent encroachment license for the ramp to the driveway that is immediately below these balconies, City Engineering has agreed to allow for these design changes. A condition of approval specifies that the existing encroachment license (for the ramp) be amended to authorize the location of the balconies above. New Reception Center on Dean Street – This is a new addition to the project that was not contemplated by the site planning of the 2001 PD approval. As depicted, the proposed space complies with the dimensional limitations of the PD. Additionally, from a commercial design perspective, staff views this addition as a positive as the current entry onto the property for lodge guests is not well defined. The only question raised by this addition to the site is the potential relationship to Pedestrian Amenity requirements (more discussion on this, below). Redesigned and improved sidewalks on Durant and Mill – the applicant team worked with City agencies (primarily Engineering and Parks) to improve the conditions along the Durant and Mill sidewalks. These improvements will significantly benefit pedestrian safety and experience. Figure 3 – comparison of proposed and existing – North Elevation, Durant Avenue Figure 4 – comparison of proposed and existing – South Elevation, Dean Street Evaluation of Review Criteria Exhibit B includes all of the review criteria for the required reviews. These are extracted from the Land Use Code and then responded to by staff. Findings related to these reviews provide the basis for staff’s recommendation and should serve as the primary 111 Page 8 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission justification for P&Z member’s individual vote on the proposed Resolution. Below is a summary of staff’s findings for each of the reviews. Planned Development - 26.445.050 (Project Review); 26.445.070 (Detailed Review) In the initial review of a new Planned Development, there are two stages of review. The first step is known as Project Review and establishes the dimensions, uses, and other fundamental aspects of a project. The second step is called Detailed Review and grants approval for more specific elements of the project – including architectural details and materials, landscaping, lighting, engineering design standards, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, etc. In the review of an Amendment to a PD for an existing building (as is the case with the Mountain Chalet), many of the criteria will be “not applicable”. It is staff’s responsibility to identify the applicable criteria that do apply and evaluate any changes to the project against these criteria. As staff evaluated these criteria, the focus was on the changes to site planning, architectural features and character, ability of the design to comply with the City’s Engineering Design standards, and ultimately, whether anything proposed was in conflict with the original PD approval or any current, applicable requirements in the municipal code. Staff has found that the project meets the applicable review criteria for Planned Development. Commercial Design Review – 26.412.060 Commercial Design Review applies to all commercial, lodging and mixed-use development within the City that requires a building permit. Like PD review, Commercial Design review is initially done in 2-steps (Conceptual and Final). As this is part of an amendment process, we are combining these two reviews (pursuant to 26.304.060.B). Commercial Design Review includes criteria that are specified in two places: 1) in the Land Use Code, and 2) In a separately adopted document: Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines. There are three, primary sets of criteria: General – these apply to all development and set basic design expectations for site planning and streetscape; parking; building mass, height and scale; street level design (that includes entry features); roofscapes; materials; lighting; service and mechanical areas. Mountain Base – The Mountain Chalet is located in the Mountain Base Character Area. The Character Areas were established to reinforce historic and existing development patterns and neighborhood design features. A focus in the Mountain Base area is on architectural features and materials that respond to mountain topography and the varied architectural styles located in the neighborhood. Pedestrian Amenity – This requirement encourages intentionally designed and meaningful open space that conveys human scale, provides relief from the built environment, and improves the pedestrian experience. This is a new requirement that did not exist when the 2001 PD was approved (although the PD did 112 Page 9 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission contemplate a % of “open space” on the property). Since the Mountain Chalet project as proposed is not crossing the important threshold of “demolition” as defined by the code, it is not required to meet the 25% of the Gross Lot Area as Pedestrian Amenity. However, because the new reception center is proposed for location in an area that is defined as Pedestrian Amenity, the proposed project is reducing existing Pedestrian Amenity area. As such, a condition of approval is included that will require the project to show during building permit that the property provides at least 25% of its Gross Lot Area as Pedestrian Amenity area that includes the reduction proposed by the addition of the reception building. If 25% is not reached, the project would be required to provide a Cash-in-Lieu payment to mitigate for the area lost by the inclusion of the reception building. The payment, if required, would equate to $100 per square foot of the floor area of the reception building. For P&Z’s information, monies collected for these requirements are utilized by the City to improve pedestrian-related facilities and beautification projects in the ROW. There is certainly a subjective nature to some of the Commercial Design Review criteria. Most of the really challenging aspects under these requirements (mass, scale, rooflines, etc.) were already established by the PD. In staff’s view however, the improvements to site planning, the updating of architectural features and materials, and a redesigned entry and site circulation, are positive aspects of the proposed project. Staff finds the review criteria to be met, with the one condition related to Pedestrian Amenity. Growth Management – 26.470.080 (General) Expansion of Commercial Net Leasable (26.470.100.E) There are two aspects to this evaluation and the eventual approval. First, new commercial net leasable square footage requires the issuance of GMQS allotments by the square foot. In this case Mountain Chalet proposes approximately 2,335 sf of new Net Leasable area. There are sufficient allotments available for 2023 and this amount will be deducted from the annual growth allotment for commercial. The Resolution will grant an allotment of 2,575 sf of new commercial Net Leasable area allowing for some flexibility (up to 10% additional) as the project is further designed. The final number will be established at building permit. Second is the calculation of affordable housing mitigation for the new commercial area. This is a complex topic for lodges in general and for the Mountain Chalet in particular. Lodges have common spaces that are used by guests. These areas are called “lodge amenity” areas and are not considered “net leasable”. This is important because lodge amenity area does not require AH mitigation, but net leasable does. Many lodges also have spaces that are designed to encourage use by the general public – these could include bar or restaurant areas, or spas and workout facilities. 113 Page 10 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission There is often a blending of these areas both in how they are configured physically and in how they are used – making the distinction sometimes difficult. In the floor plans submitted by the applicant, staff is in general agreement with the physical allocations that have been identified between the two uses. A spa is proposed for guest use – and is depicted as lodge amenity. A condition in the approval is included that limits this area for guest use only. If at some point in the future, the spa is made available to the general public, the area of the spa would be considered Net Leasable area and AH mitigation would be required. These spaces will be formally reviewed and calculated during building permit review. The Mountain Chalet had an additional complexity to navigate. While the 2001 PD approval did not identify any commercial areas within the lodge, there is a clear history of commercial use within the lodge that was approved and acknowledged by the City in various ways including during building permit reviews. Restaurants, a gym made available to the public, and a commercial kitchen rented to a local catering company are examples of this. An important part of the review process to date was the inclusion in the Lodge Audit (Exhibit D) of an evaluation of the existing commercial area. Staff concluded that the identified areas should be formally established as Net Leasable. The existing Net Leasable area identified in the audit is approximately 2,660sf. The applicant has estimated approximately 4,995 sf of total Net Leasable in the proposed floor plans. As identified above this creates roughly 2,335 of new Net Leasable area. As this space is all below grade, the code provides for a 25% deduction – leaving roughly 1,751 sf of area subject to AH mitigation. These numbers will will be confirmed and finalized during building permit review. However, 1,751sf of new area would translate into a mitigation requirement of roughly 5.35 FTEs. (2,335/1000 x 4.7 x .75 = 8.23 x .65) Affordable Housing Units (26.470.100.C) The 2001 PD approval included five, on-site employee housing units. These were to be included in Phase 2 – and have not yet been built. The proposed project includes these same five units in roughly the same location in the basement although with some modifications. Most of the requirements related to the qualities of AH units are under APCHA jurisdiction. APCHA has reviewed the proposed units and is fully supportive of the quality of the units (size, storage, parking, etc.). The Land Use Code has one requirement for AH units – that they be at least 50% above grade. Units that do not meet this requirement can be approved through Special Review. Because these units are located in relatively the same area as approved in the 2001 PD and supported by APCHA, staff fully recommends approval of Special Review. As proposed, the five units would provide housing for 7.25 FTEs. The units are proposed to be rented at Category 2 rental rates under APCHA guidelines. It is also important to note that the project is proposing that the units, 114 Page 11 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission if housing Mountain Chalet employees, be exempt from APCHA income and asset limitations. Staff is supportive of these provisions. Evaluation of Lodge Units, including the need for new allotments (26.470.100.G) Landing on a clear understanding of the progression of the number of lodge rooms from the conditions at the Mountain Chalet prior to the 2001 PD, to the additions and reconfigurations that have subsequently been completed since the PD, to the proposal considered by this review has been a challenge. In short, staff is supportive of the applicant’s position that the number of units prior to the 2001 PD was 59 and is consistent with the number of units proposed for the renovated lodge. Because the project is not triggering Demolition, as defined by the code, there is no additional mitigation required for the lodge aspect of the project. Staff finds the applicable GMQS review criteria to be met. Transportation and Parking Management This is a set of topics with overlap between the 2001 PD approval and current code requirements. The project has completed the required Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). • The 2001 PD approval approved a parking requirement of .49 spaces per bedroom. This is part of the previous approval that staff agrees is vested. With 59 lodge units and five employee units, the lodge and AH housing uses require 33.9 parking units (parking units can either be provided by physical spaces or cash-in- lieu). • The expansion of Net Leasable is subject to current requirements. 2,325sf of new area translates into 2.3 new parking units. • The total number of parking units required is 36.2. • Number of on-site parking spaces available is 35. • The application proposes to provide the deficit of 1.2 units as cash-in-lieu. This would translate into approximately $45,600. • Because calculations are dependent on a final number for Net Leasable, this is another topic that will be confirmed at building permit. • Due to the limitation of space in the subgrade parking garage, parking space size and configuration are subject to Special Review. • Because some details related to necessary fire lanes and other functional needs are still being evaluated, the number of on-site parking units may continue to fluctuate as the project reaches final design. Flexibility is granted in this area – and Cash-in-Lieu can be used up to the allowance granted by the code. Staff finds the Transportation and Parking review criteria to be met. 115 Page 12 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission Special Review Parking – space size and configuration A few of the parking spaces in the subgrade garage and minimally substandard in relation to size. Additionally, to maximize the number of on-site units, the application proposes that tandem, or stacked spaces be incorporated. Both of these conditions are typical across lodge operations and their associated parking areas. Staff is supportive of this proposal as long as valet service is required for garage access and egress. Two conditions will be associated with this review: 1) That a parking plan that includes a description of the valet service be included in the updated Development Agreement; and 2) That the five spaces connected to the employee units not be assigned to any of the designed tandem configurations. Affordable Housing Units This review is required to approve the employee units that are located entirely below grade in the basement. As discussed above, staff is fully supportive of this design and location. Staff finds that the review criteria for both Special Reviews are met. Conditional Use The Lodge (L) Zone District, the underlying zoning for the Mountain Chalet, identifies restaurants as a conditional use – this means they are allowed as long as they meet additional review criteria (26.425.040). The review criteria are meant to ensure that the use will be consistent with the intent of the zone district and that the use will reduce or mitigate any negative impacts. Staff has little concern in this area of the proposal and finds the review criteria for the restaurants as a conditional use to be met. Mountain View Plane The Mountain Chalet is located in the background of the Wheeler Opera House view plane and is subject to review. As it is in the background, rather than foreground of the view plane, review standards are minimal. Additionally, since the 2001 PD approval established a maximum height and defined other aspects of building massing – and approved view plane review, most of the applicable view plane requirements are met. However, because minimal changes are being made to the roof to accommodate increased mechanical needs and access to these mechanical areas, it does need review. Staff finds the criteria to be met – with a condition that all elements meet the maximum height established by the PD and all mechanical and other attachments meet the Allowed Exceptions to Height Limitations described in 26.575.020.F.4. Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit The application has requested that any excess between the housing provided by the five employee units less the mitigation requirements for the expansion of Net Leasable 116 Page 13 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission be eligible for the issuance of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits. As the housing units are supported both by APCHA and staff, this is an appropriate request. Staff finds the criteria to be met. For P&Z’s information, based on the estimates described above (again to be confirmed at building permit), the following is an approximation of the calculation for the issuance of these certificates. • Mitigation Requirement: 5.35 FTEs at Category 4 • Housing Provided: 7.25 FTEs at Category 2 • Conversion between the Categories is necessary. 7.25 x $408,362 (Cat 2 FIL) = $2,960,625 / $328,533 (Cat 4 FIL) = • 9.01 FTEs (Cat 4) – 5.35 FTEs (Cat 4) = 3.66 FTEs (Cat 4) issued as AH Credits. One additional condition of approval When a PD is approved, one final requirement is necessary before a development can proceed to building permit. A Development Agreement is a document that commits the applicant and the City to any requirements of the PD approval. It essentially takes the approval and translates the requirements into a type of contract. Additionally, following approval by the review board, the applicant puts forward a final “Approved Plan Set” that contains the official drawings that will be used to review the approval against the eventual building permit. These “Approval Documents” are reviewed and finalized administratively by staff and then recorded with the County Clerk and Recorder. In the case of Mountain Chalet, both a development agreement and plan set were recorded following the 2001 PD approval. Since the project as proposed presents significant changes, both the applicant and staff agree that a new Development Agreement and Plan Set should be recorded that reflects the amended project. These documents would need to be recorded prior to the submission of a building permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Mountain Chalet is a prominent building in a very visible location. It has served an important role for visitors and residents over the years and for many people, it continues to represent fond memories of Aspen’s past and of the Melville family. It is an important building and any changes need to be considered carefully. Because of the complex history of the property and the partially completed phasing of the 2001 PD approval, evaluating the nature of the proposed amendment was complex. After navigating this complexity with the applicant and other City departments, the project as proposed broadly remains consistent with the 2001 PD approvals. Where new elements are proposed or new code now applies, staff believes the project meets applicable review criteria and code requirements, with the conditions as proposed. Staff recommends approval of the project as proposed, subject to the conditions outlined in the Resolution. 117 Page 14 of 14 Mountain Chalet – Minor PD Amendment Staff Memo – Planning and Zoning Commission PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. XX, Series of 2023. EXHIBITS: A – Application B – Review Criteria and Staff Findings C – PD Approval Ordinance and Approved Drawings (2001) D – Lodge Audit 118 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 City Attorney, James R. True officially moved the meeting to Council Chambers. Commissioners in attendance: Maryann Pitt, Marcus Blue, Eric Knight, Jason Suazo, Tom Gorman, Christine Benedetti, and Teraissa McGovern. Tracy Sutton and Ken Canfield are absent. Staff present: Ben Anderson, Deputy Community Development Director James R. True, City Attorney Luisa Berne, Assistant City Attorney Nicole Henning, City Clerk Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. McGovern ask which Resolution number they are using, Nicole replied #7. STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Anderson said it is great to see a full P&Z board. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. MINUTES: Ms. Pit mo�oned to approve the minutes for August 1st, 2023, and the mo�on was seconded by Mr. Knight. Ms. McGovern asked for a roll call: Ms. Pit, yes; Mr. Blue, yes; Mr. Knight, yes; Mr. Suazo, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Ms. Benede�, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes; for a total of six (6) in favor – zero (0) not in favor. The mo�on passed. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: No Conflicts. SUBMISSION OF PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Mr. True said the notice is acceptable. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 333 E. Durant Ave. – Mountain Chalet – Resolution #7 Mr. Anderson said this is for Mountain Chalet Lodge. Minor amendment to a planned development and related reviews. He explained the basics of a planned development to the board. Mountain chalet received approval in 2001 for a planned development that continues to serve as the basis for the property’s current development rights. He went over the 2001 approvals regarding the phased project and dimensions. He went through the steps they took to get here and the history of the project. Applicant Presenta�on: Chris Bendon - Bendon Adams Mr. Bendon introduced himself and said he is here on behalf of the applicant 2021 Aspen Mountain Chalet LLC. Also in attendance are Zach Pepperman and Larry McGuire, principals of the ownership group, Craig Melville, previous owner of the chalet. Craig is now the minority owner and still general manager. Jodi Surfas is the owner’s rep and project manager. Dave Ryback is the local architect for the project. Lake Flato is the design architect out of Austin. Paul Squadrito is the principal from design workshop. Roaring fork engineering is not here but involved in the project. Chris gave the history of the property, including the phases of construction and prior approvals. He spoke about parking spaces, balconies, the transformer on Durant, trash facilities, and the commercial versus lodge amenity spaces. He described the affordable housing plan as five onsite units, three studios and two one bedrooms. He said they are overproviding on affordable housing in exchange for affordable housing credits. 119 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 Craig Melville spoke and gave his family history and their involvement in the project. Their family has been here for 70 years, and it has been a very living part of their family and he still works there. He mentioned they are struggling with problems, including leaking pipes. They have always had offers to buy the Chalet and always said no. Larry and Zach came and they turned them down, but then after they presented their vision, the family agreed to sell it. They wanted to respect its past and bring it into the future. They got the family to finally agree to sell it because it fit what they see as the Mountain Chalet. The family is very supportive of the project. Larry McGuire spoke and said they’ve been active in the Aspen hospitality market since opening Clark’s about 6 years ago and more recently Las Montañas and Louis Swiss bakery. They are based in Austin as MML Hospitality. They partnered with a good friend Liz lambert who started a boutique hotel company called the Bunkhouse, so they are a full-service development management group who pride themselves on going after unique properties. They have one other hotel that they own and operate in New Orleans. They seem to go after tough projects and enjoy a mix of preservation and enhancement. Zack Cupperman spoke and said thank you to Ben and his team at the city. It’s been a long complex project with a lot of nuances. He is based in New Orleans and does a lot of preservation and hotel reno work. He is grateful for the opportunity to carry on the legacy and honored to carry forward what the Melville family has built. Mr. Bendon spoke again about the resolution. He said it provides flexibility on parking and the net leasable which is important to them. There is a requirement for a development agreement and a new set of development plans. It took a lot of work to get here, and they are happy to get to this point and appreciate staff effort. Ms. McGovern asked if the east building redevelopment is the original building. Mr. Bendon said yes. Mr. Gorman asked if the transformer location is in the public right of way. Mr. Bendon said the transformer sits on a pad that will be in the row by one foot which will allow for clearances. Ms. Pitt asked about adding an addition floor instead of adding another bike or ski shop. Mr. Bendon said that area is best suited for back of house or commercial. He said the ski and bike shops would be a guest amenity. Ms. Sutton asked if the gym will be part of the commercial space or just guest amenity and will the restaurant space be a breakfast and lunch space. Mr. Bendon said the gym that is there will not be coming back. There is currently a spa that is in the basement that is guest amenity space, and it will increase in space, but it is not a commercial space. There are two formal restaurants that are open to the public and a guest amenity area that will do breakfast service and après ski service. Staff Presenta�on: Ben Anderson – Deputy Community Development Director Mr. Anderson recapped the reviews this project has already been through. He said a big topic was whether this project would trigger demolition and that if they were thinking that this review would have been much different. He said a lot of the things are to be confirmed at building permit, the approval in front of you is not approving a whole lot of new things, the restaurants as a conditional use, but we wanted to make sure as this project moves from its fairly far along conceptual schematic design to construction documents that it remains in conformance that will be confirmed during zoning and other reviews. Staff recommends approval of the resolution provided. 120 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 Mr. Gorman asked about the budget and what if they must go over. Mr. Anderson said there are allowances for these types of situa�ons regarding mold, etc. Ms. McGovern clarified that it must be put back in the same exact way. Mr. Suazo asked why the fifth floor wasn’t added to net leasable space and how does it change the GQMS, if it changes the pedestrian amenity, and if they could change it. Mr. Anderson said that was something they thought about, they tried to give definition to lodge amenity spaces and net leasable spaces in hotels and it’s a really difficult thing for staff to evaluate. If five years from now that space starts to be advertised as a separate space, that might get re-evaluated. We have some guard rails around it, but staff agrees with how its depicted. They had a conversation surrounding this topic. Mr. Bendon said there would be two big impacts to them. They did the audit to lessen the number of moving pieces. To the extent that was opened up it would open up other things. It’s also not something that they are proposing, they are proposing to have the space function as it does today, for guests to use and possibly a non-profit occasionally. Ms. Benedetti asked about a trigger in the future for something to be re-evaluated. Mr. Bendon said they plan on using the space in the same way as it has been used. If that is considered net leasable, it provides them more flexibility. He wanted to respect Ben and the process they have been through because it’s a benefit to arrive here both saying the same thing but said if they feel it’s net leasable and can be used that way in the future he won’t quarrel with that position. Ms. McGovern asked if there is a provision in the code to allow for a lodge audit in the future. Mr. Anderson said they can include that as a future provision, but he said those things are carefully evaluated by Zoning during any building permit review. Ms. Pitt asked if the five proposed APCHA units will be built and how many onsite employees will use those units. Mr. Bendon replied yes, they will be built, and they will be filled 100%. They wish they could have more. Ms. Pitt asked what the height of the elevator shaft is. Mr. Anderson replied that elevators get a 10-foot exemption and that it is not taller that the highest point of the building. Ms. McGovern asked if the commission is willing to extend this meeting or if they need to reschedule as they are getting close to 7pm. Commission said yes to extending. Ms. McGovern closed the presentation portion of the hearing and opened public comment. PUBLIC COMMENT: Ms. Susan Melville Warren, sibling of Craig, said this is an awesome project. She said if Ralph was here, he would be thrilled, he always loved to build. She said that Marian loved the presenta�on as well and would be thrilled to see this happening. Mr. Lex Tarumianz said this group will be great stewards of this building and of our community. He thinks it’s a great project and thinks the community is in full support of it too. Ms. McGovern closed the public comment por�on of the hearing and opened board discussion. 121 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 BOARD DISCUSSION: Mr. Suazo supports amending the proposal to include net leasable. He thinks it’s marketed and used as net leasable space currently. Ms. McGovern asks what they get from that. Ms. Sutton agrees with Teraissa that there is more benefit to leave it as is. Ms. Benedetti agrees that if they come back and ask for net leasable in the future, the community benefits from that. Mr. Blue agrees with the others. He said that right now, this isn’t their issue to decide. He loves the design and that it keeps and improves on the historical aspect. He appreciates the thoughtfulness of the whole design. Ms. Sutton said she likes the design and thinks staff has answered the questions she had. They are preserving an asset of the community that she agrees with. It’s keeping with the character of the town and is a nod to our history since the 50’s. Mr. Gorman said this is not an easy project, it’s complex. He’s looking forward to seeing what happens. Ms. Pitt agrees with the project. Ms. Benedetti agrees and thank you for all the work on this. Mr. Knight said he likes the design and how it respects the history of the building. Ms. McGovern said she has some issues with housing credits. They are over mitigating and asking for the ability to sell these credits on units that are not top-notch units. Mr. Knight and Mr. Suazo agree. Ms. McGovern doesn’t want to approve the affordable housing credits. She wants to see credits sold for great units. She asked if they as a board want to approve credits for below grade units all the time. Ms. Sutton asked what her solution for that is. Mr. Bendon said that these are killer units. He said we as a community have an affordable housing crunch and for a long time, we have looked for opportunity to squeeze in affordable housing units. They are not forever units but have great light and come with extra storage and a parking space. Ms. McGovern asked for a motion to extend the meeting. Ms. Benedetti motioned to extend the meeting to 7:15, Mr. Blue seconded, All in Favor, motion carried. Ms. McGovern said she is willing to accept the credits but would like to state that if we are going to over mitigate on site that there not be accommodations made. Mr. Suazo said he is ok leaving the amenity space as it. MOTION: Mr. Blue mo�oned to approve resolu�on #7. Mr. Gorman seconded. Jim True suggested a minor amendment that the numbering be corrected, there are two 8’s and two 12’s. 122 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 15TH, 2023 Roll call vote: Ms. Blue, yes; Mr. Knight, yes; Mr. Suazo, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Mr. Benede�, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes; Ms. Pit, yes. 7-0 vote, mo�on passes. Ms. Pit mo�oned to adjourn the mee�ng. Mr. Blue seconded. All in favor, mee�ng adjourned. ____________________ Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk 123 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines: General Site Planning and Streetscape 1.1 All projects shall provide a context study. • The study should include the relationship to adjacent structures and streets through photographs, streetscape elevations, historic maps, etc. Staff Response: Not applicable. The primary mass and scale of the building is not changing from 2001 PD Approval. 1.2 All projects shall respond to the traditional street grid. • A building shall be oriented parallel to the street unless uncharacteristic of the area. Refer to specific chapters for more information. • Buildings on corners shall be parallel to both streets. Staff Response: Not applicable. The orientation of the building is not changing from 2001 PD Approval. Although existing conditions do meet this requirement. 1.3 Landscape elements (both hardscape and softscape) should complement the surrounding context, support the street scene, and enhance the architecture of the building. • This applies to landscape located both on-site and in the public right-of-way. • High quality and durable materials should be used. • Early in the design process, consider stormwater best management practices as an integral part of the landscape design process. Staff Response: Landscaping improvements are proposed and significant attention has been given to resolving grade issues and accommodating existing trees along Durant. 1.4 Where there is open space on a site, reinforce the traditional transition from public space, to semi-public space to private space. • This may be achieved through a fence, a defined walkway, a front porch element, covered walkway, or landscape. Staff Response: In staff’s view, this is particularly accomplished along Dean Street as one moves onto the property past the new reception area, into the circulation above the pool courtyard and into the internal spaces of the lodge. 1.5 Maintain alignment of building facades where appropriate. • Consider the entire block of a neighborhood to determine appropriate building placement. Carefully examine and respond to the variety of building alignments that are present. • Consider all four corners of an intersection and architectural context to determine appropriate placement for buildings located on corners. • Consider the appropriate location of street level Pedestrian Amenity when siting a new building. Staff Response: Not applicable. The siting and orientation of the building is not changing from 2001 PD Approval. 124 1.6 When a building facade is set back, define the property line. Review the context of the block when selecting an appropriate technique. Examples include: • A fence which is low in height and mostly transparent so as to maintain openness along the street. • Landscaping, though it may not block views of the architecture or a Pedestrian Amenity space. Hedgerows over 42 inches are prohibited. • Benches or other street furniture. Staff Response: Staff Response: Not applicable. The siting and orientation of the building is not changing from 2001 PD Approval. Alleyways 1.7 Develop alley facades to create visual interest. • Use varied building setbacks and/or changes in material to reduce perceived scale. Staff Response: Not Applicable 1.8 Consider small alley commercial spaces, especially on corner lots or lots with midblock access from the street (See Pedestrian Amenity Section PA4). • Maximize visibility and access to alley commercial spaces with large windows and setbacks. • Minimize adverse impacts of adjacent service and parking areas through materials, setbacks, and/or landscaping. Staff Response: Not Applicable Parking 1.9 Minimize the visual impacts of parking. • All on-site parking shall be accessed off an alley where one is available. • Break up the massing of the alley facade, especially when garage doors are present. • Consider the potential for future retail use accessed from alleys and the desire to create a safe and attractive environment for cars and people. • If no alley access exists, access should be from the shortest block length. • Screen surface parking and avoid locating it at the front of a building. Landscaping and fences are recommended. • Consider a paving material change to define surface parking areas and to create visual interest. • Design any street-facing entry to underground parking to reduce visibility. Use high quality materials for doors and ramps and integrate the parking area into the architecture. Staff Response: Parking is provided along Dean Street in front of the lodge entry. While on-street parking, the provided spaces are actually on the Mountain Chalet’s property. Most of the on-site parking is provided by a sub grade parking garage accessed from Mill Street . Building Mass, Height, and Scale 1.10 A new building should appear similar in scale and proportion with buildings on the block. Staff Response: Staff Response: Not applicable. The mass and scale of the building is not changing in any significant way from 2001 PD Approval. 125 1.11 A minimum building height difference of 2 feet from immediately adjacent buildings is required. • The height difference shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide. • The height difference should reflect the range and variation in building height in the block. • This may be achieved through the use of a cornice, parapet or other architectural articulation. Staff Response: Not applicable. The mass and scale of the building is not changing in any significant way from 2001 PD Approval. 1.12 On lots larger than 6,000 square feet, break up building mass into smaller modules. • A street level front setback to accommodate Pedestrian Amenity in accordance with the Pedestrian Amenity Guidelines may be an appropriate method to break up building mass. • Building setbacks, height variation, changes of material, and architectural details may be appropriate techniques to vertically divide a building into modules. Staff Response: Not applicable. The mass and scale of the building is not changing in any significant way from 2001 PD Approval. 1.13 Development adjacent to a historic landmark should respond to the historic resource. • A new building should not obscure historic features of the landmark. • A new large building should avoid negative impacts on historic resources by stepping down in scale toward a smaller landmark. • Consider these three aspects of a new building adjacent to a landmark: form, materials and fenestration. • When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource. • When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site, and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of pedestrian scale. • When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size, shape, and proportion to those of the historic resource. Staff Response: Not applicable as there are no adjacent historic landmarks. Street Level Design 1.14 Commercial entrances shall be at the sidewalk level and oriented to the street. • Finished floor and sidewalk level shall align for at least 1/2 the depth of the ground floor where possible. If significant grade changes exist on property, then the project will be reviewed on a case- by-case basis. • All buildings shall have at least one clearly defined primary entrance facing the front lot line, as defined in the Land Use Code. An entrance located within a chamfered corner is an alternative. (See Commercial Core Historic District). • If a building is located on a corner lot, two entrances shall be provided; a primary entrance facing the longest block length and a secondary entrance facing the shortest block length. Staff Response: This is a mix of met and not applicable. Staff views the placement of the new reception center as an improvement over existing conditions related to this topic. The primary entrance onto the property from Dean Street will be much better defined. The third requirement is 126 not applicable as the Mill Street façade is generally unchanged from the 2001 PD approvals and there is really not a purpose for including an entry on this façade. The secondary entry on Durant is also more carefully designed in the proposed renovation. 1.15 Incorporate an internal airlock or air curtain into first floor commercial space. • An airlock or air curtain shall be integrated into the architecture. • Adding a temporary exterior airlock of any material to an existing building not allowed. Staff Response: No temporary airlocks are proposed. 1.16 Entries that are significantly taller or shorter than those seen historically or that conflict with the established scale are highly discouraged. • Transom windows above an entry are a traditional element that may be appropriate in neighborhoods with 19th century commercial buildings. • Entries should reflect the established range of sizes within the context of the block. Analyze surrounding buildings to determine appropriate height for entry doors. Staff Response: Entry doors are of a traditional height – consistent with the scale of fenestration across the site and throughout the core. 1.17 ATMs and vending machines visible from the street are prohibited. Staff Response: Not applicable, none are proposed. Roofscape 1.18 The roofscape should be designed with the same attention as the elevations of the building. • Consolidate mechanical equipment, including solar panels, and screen from view. • Locate mechanical equipment toward the alley, or rear of a building if there is no alley access. • Use varied roof forms or parapet heights to break up the roof plane mass and add visual interest. Staff Response: The provided roof plan meets these requirements. The roof does contain necessary and allowed mechanical and a photo voltaic array. 1.19 Use materials that complement the design of the building facade. • Minimize the visual impact of elevator shafts and stairway corridors through material selection and placement of elements. Staff Response: The elevator shaft is a prominent feature of the dean street façade, materials on the elevator are consistent with the other elements of the lodge. 1.20 Incorporate green roofs and low landscape elements into rooftop design where feasible. Staff Response: Not proposed and not feasible with the approved rooflines. 1.21 Minimize visibility of rooftops railings. • Mostly transparent railings are preferred. • Integrating the rooftop railing into the architecture as a parapet or other feature, may be appropriate considering the neighborhood context and proposed building style. • Set back the railing a distance that equals or exceeds the height of the railing. 127 Staff Response: Roof top railings will only be utilized as necessary safety features required by building code in the area of mechanical equipment. Materials and Details 1.22 Complete and accurate identification of materials is required. • Provide drawings that identify the palette of materials, specifications for the materials, and location on the proposed building as part of the application. • Physical material samples shall be presented to the review body. An onsite mock-up prior to installation may be required. 1.23 Building materials shall have these features: • Convey the quality and range of materials found in the current block context or seen historically in the Character Area. • Convey pedestrian scale. • Enhance visual interest through texture, application, and/or dimension. • Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not appropriate as a primary material. • Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen’s climate. • A material with an integral color shall be a neutral color. Some variation is allowed for secondary materials. 1.24 Introducing a new material, material application, or material finish to the existing streetscape may be approved by HPC or P&Z if the following criteria are met: • Innovative building design. • Creative material application that positively contributes to the streetscape. • Environmentally sustainable building practice. • Proven durability. Staff Response: A material palette has been presented that is consistent with the stucco, wood and updated chalet features that have long been a part of the property’s aesthetic. 1.25 Architecture that reflects corporate branding of the tenant is not permitted. Staff Response: Not applicable, Not proposed. Lighting, Service, and Mechanical Areas 1.26 The design of light fixtures should be appropriate to the form, materials, scale, and style of the building. 1.27 Trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located along an alleyway where one exists, and screened from view with a fence or door. • Screening fences shall be 6 feet high from grade (unless prohibited by the Land Use Code), shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than 90% opaque, unless otherwise varied based on a recommendation from the Environmental Health Department. 1.28 Design trash and recycle areas thoughtfully and within the style of the building, with the goal of enhancing pedestrian and commercial uses along alleys. 128 1.29 Delivery areas shall be located along an alleyway where one exists. • Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 1.30 Mechanical equipment, ducts, and vents shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or co-located on the roof. • Screen rooftop mechanical equipment and venting with a low fence or recess behind a parapet wall to minimize visual impacts. 1.31 Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. • Group and discreetly locate these features. • Use screening and materials that compliment the architecture. 1.32 Transformer location and size are dictated by City and utility company standards and codes. • Place a transformer on an alley where possible. • Provide screening for any non-alley location. Staff Response: There is significant discussion in the staff memo regarding the transformer and trash service locations. Both provide significant improvements over the existing conditions. Other mechanical systems as presented comply with the ideas here although ther are site and building constraints that will ultimately determine location of mechanical. Final evaluation will take place during building permit – but mechanical systems will be compliant with the applicable sections of the Land Use Code – that have general applicability to all development in the City of Aspen. Remodel 1.33 All remodel projects shall meet Standards 1.22 and 1.23. Staff Response: This is met. See above. 1.34 Consider updating windows, doors, and/or primary entrances to better relate to the Character Area and pedestrian experience. Staff Response: This will be a major upgrade over existing conditions – both in terms of aesthetic improvement and energy performance. 1.35 Design alterations to relate to the existing building style and form that may remain. 1.36 Incorporate elements that define the property line in accordance with Guideline 1.6. 1.37 Creative solutions that incorporate ADA compliance into the architecture are encouraged. • Minimize the appearance of ramps by exploring other on-site options such as altering interior floor levels or exterior grade. Staff Response: The design of any new elements is consistent with existing style and materials. Accessibility is improved – both in internal and external circulation. Mountain Base Building Placement 129 6.1 On lots greater than 15,000 square feet, the massing of the building should be broken into smaller volumes. Staff Response: Not applicable. The mass and scale of the building is not changing in any significant way from 2001 PD Approval. 6.2 Place a building into the topography to minimize visual impacts from downtown and to reinforce a strong relationship to the mountain. • Make mountain access easier when siting a building. • For larger projects, offer pedestrians multiple entry points. • Emphasize horizontal elements to blend the building into the topography. • Step a building up the hillside to minimize visual impacts and allow points of entry to be at natural grade. Staff Response: Not applicable. The siting and orientation of the building is not changing in any significant way from 2001 PD Approval. 6.3 Minimize retaining walls. • When retaining walls are necessary, integrate them into the architecture. Staff Response: Retaining walls are minimally used on site and impacts are reduced due to location and proposed landscaping 6.4 Incorporate open space into building placement and site design. • Create views through the property to the mountain slopes to strengthen mountain connection to the neighborhood and improve the pedestrian experience. Staff Response: Not applicable. The siting and the footprint of the existing building is not changing in any significant way from 2001 PD Approval. 6.5 Eclectic and creative approaches to break up building mass and scale is encouraged. • Consider separate buildings on a property, or linked exterior walkways instead of internal corridors. Staff Response: The chalet style balconies will be much more prominent on the north, south and east facades of the building – providing improved visual interest. This is one of staff’s favorite elements of the new design. Additionally, the new reception center is proposed as a separate building – providing for articulation along Dean Street. 6.6 Create interest along the street, for instance by providing places for the public to sit. Staff Response: This is provided along Dean and Durant facades – for outdoor dining and general use by pedestrians for sitting. 6.7 Carefully plan parking areas and loading zones to minimize visual impacts. Staff Response: Most of the on-site parking is located in the parking garage. Street level spaces along Dean will serve loading and deliveries. Architecture 6.8 Roof forms should be low pitched to reinforce the mountain character of the neighborhood. 130 • Other roof forms may be considered on a case-by-case basis depending on the context of the block, adjacent historic landmarks, and other restrictions such as viewplanes. • Flat roofs are particularly appropriate to provide upper level decks and for installation of mechanical equipment. Staff Response: Staff would concur that the rooflines of the Mountain Chalet meet this criterion, but technically, this is not applicable as the roofline design was vested by 2001 PD and with the exception of the east wing, the height and perceived massing of the rooflines will remain generally consistent with existing. Details and Materials 6.8 Easily identifiable architectural details are encouraged. • Character defining details are recommended to engage the pedestrian, to promote variety of architecture, and to aid in wayfinding. Staff Response: The redesigned Mountain Chalet will retain many of its “chalet” architectural features – in fact, the balconies will become even more pronounced and will certainly retain other distinct features – differentiating the property from neighboring lodge properties. Pedestrian Amenity Street Level Pedestrian Amenity PA1.1 Maximize solar access to Pedestrian Amenity space on the subject property. • At grade Pedestrian Amenity on the north side of the street is discouraged, except when providing a front yard along Main Street. PA1.2 Consider all four corners of an intersection when designing street level amenity space on a corner lot. • If one or more lots on the intersection already includes a large corner Pedestrian Amenity, a new corner amenity space may not be appropriate. PA1.3 Street level Pedestrian Amenity spaces should be equal to a minimum of 1/3 of the total Pedestrian Amenity requirement. • For example, a requirement of 300 square feet of Pedestrian Amenity can be comprised of three 100 square feet spaces; but cannot be comprised of one 275 square feet space and one 25 square feet space. PA1.4 Street level Pedestrian Amenity shall be within 18 inches above or below the existing grade of the street or sidewalk which abuts the space. PA1.5 Street level Pedestrian Amenity areas shall be open to the sky. • Direct access to the Pedestrian Amenity from the street is required. • A street level Pedestrian Amenity space may be covered, subject to HPC or P&Z approval. If the space is covered, the street-facing portion shall be entirely open. PA1.6 Design meaningful street level space that is useful, versatile, and accessible. • Small unusable spaces are inappropriate. • Consider providing space for future outdoor merchandising or restaurant seating opportunities when designing the space. • Providing good solar access, capturing mountain views, and providing seating is recommended. 131 • Do not duplicate existing nearby open space. • Storage areas, delivery areas, parking areas, or trash areas are not allowed uses within Pedestrian Amenity space. PA1.7 Design amenity space that enhances the pedestrian experience and faces the street. • On corner lots, Pedestrian Amenity space may be considered on side streets or adjacent to the alley rather than facing primary streets. PA1.8 Street level Pedestrian Amenity space should reinforce the property line. Consider the context of the block when selecting an appropriate technique. Examples include: • Overhangs: A cantilevered roof or retractable awning that stretches to the property line. • Fences: A low fence, mostly transparent, that allows views into the Pedestrian Amenity space. • Landscape: Low planter boxes. If including trees, the mature tree canopy size should not prohibit views into the amenity space. Hedgerows over 42 inches are prohibited. • Street Furniture: Permanent, fixed benches or other pedestrian-related elements may be considered to establish property lines. • Surface Material: A change in hardscape material to differientiate between Pedestrian Amenity and right-of-way. PA1.9 Street level Pedestrian Amenity may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis within the Commercial Core Historic District. • Consider the existing context of the block . • Clearly define the property line as defined in PA1.8. • In this District, street level Pedestrian Amenity should be subordinate to the line of building fronts. PA1.10 Street level Pedestrian Amenity may include providing public access to the mountain or river in the Mountain Base and River Approach Character Areas through a trail easement, subject to Parks and Engineering approval. PA1.11 Within the Main Street Historic District, required building setbacks may be used toward a Pedestrian Amenity requirement. Second Floor Pedestrian Amenity PA2.1 A second floor Pedestrian Amenity shall be in the form of a deck that is visible from, and adjacent to the street. • Railing height shall not be increased above the minimum IBC requirement. • Historic landmark parapets may be exempt, subject to HPC approval. • Railings shall be a minimum of 50% transparent unless located in the Commercial Core Historic District where transparent railings may not be appropriate, given the pattern of decorative cornices capping buildings. PA2.2 Pedestrian Amenity is highly discouraged on the roof of the second floor. PA2.3 Second floor amenity shall be accessed directly from the street. • Remodels and historic landmarks may be exempted from this requirement, subject to P&Z or HPC approval. • A separate exterior entrance is preferred. • A public access easement may be requested by the City as part of an approval. 132 PA2.4 Second floor Pedestrian Amenity should be equal to a minimum of 50% of the total Pedestrian Amenity requirement. PA2.5 All second floor Pedestrian Amenity shall be open to the sky. • Small seasonal umbrellas or retractable canopies may be allowed, subject to Planning Staff, HPC or P&Z approval, as long as these features do not cover the entire space and do not obstruct views in from the street. PA2.6 Design meaningful space that is useful, versatile and accessible. • Small unusable spaces are inappropriate. • Consider providing space for future outdoor merchandising or restaurant seating opportunities. • Providing good solar access, mountain views, and seating is recommended. • Storage area or trash area are not allowed uses within pedestrian amenity space. PA2.7 The Pedestrian Amenity shall be directly connected to a publicly accessible area. • A second floor Pedestrian Amenity in a lodge may be accessible from a restaurant, lobby, or other adjacent public space. • Access to second floor Pedestrian Amenity shall be integrated into the architecture, either through an interior or exterior space. PA2.8 Design wayfinding to the second floor amenity into the architecture. Subgrade Courtyard Pedestrian Amenity PA5.1 A subgrade courtyard shall be visible from, and adjacent to the street. • Access shall be provided from the street. • The measurement of a subgrade courtyard shall not exceed 30% of the lot width. • Railings shall allow views into the Pedestrian Amenity space and be a minimum of 50% transparent. PA5.2 New subgrade courtyards are not permitted on corner lots, unless located along the side lot line, towards the rear of the lot. PA5.3 Subgrade courtyard Pedestrian Amenity should be equal to a minimum of 30% of the total Pedestrian Amenity requirement. • Access and circulation are included in the calculation of Pedestrian Amenity. PA5.4 A subgrade courtyard shall be no more than 10 feet below the existing grade of the street or sidewalk which abuts the space. PA5.5 Design of the subgrade courtyard at grade should reinforce the property line. • Consider the context of the block when selecting an appropriate technique to the property line. PA5.6 Design meaningful space that is useful, versatile, and accessible. • Small unusable spaces are inappropriate. • Consider future outdoor merchandising or restaurant seating when designing the space. • Providing good solar access and seating is recommended. North facing courtyards are prohibited. • Storage area or trash area are not allowed uses within Pedestrian Amenity space. PA5.7 All subgrade courtyard spaces shall be open to the sky. 133 • Small seasonal umbrellas or canopies that do not cover the entire space prohibiting views in from the street may be allowed, subject to Planning Staff, HPC or P&Z approval. PA5.8 A subgrade courtyard shall be accessible from the interior of commercial use(s) abutting the Pedestrian Amenity space. • Integrate clear access to this space into the architecture through interior or exterior corridors. • Limit ramps, stairs and elevators leading to the courtyard. PA5.9 Design wayfinding to the subgrade courtyard space into the architecture. Interior Courtyard Pedestrian Amenity PA7.1 Design interior courtyards to be versatile. PA7.2 Interior courtyards shall provide primary access to commercial uses to count as Pedestrian Amenity. PA7.3 Commercial spaces adjacent to an interior courtyard shall have large storefront windows open to the interior courtyard. PA7.4 Interior courtyards should include communal seating and tables. PA7.5 Incorporate wayfinding to the interior courtyard into the architecture. PA7.6 Interior corridors or hallways leading to the interior courtyard do not count as Pedestrian Amenity space. Staff Response: Related to Pedestrian Amenity, the Resolution provides a condition of approval. Existing Pedestrian Amenity space will be evaluated based on the standards and guidelines included above. If the project is over the 25% of gross lot area threshold, no action need to be taken. If it does not include 25%, mitigation for the area of the new reception center may be required. 134 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM February 17, 2022 Updated April 5, 2023 Amy Simon Planning Director City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Mountain Chalet – Minor Amendment to the Planned Development 333. East Durant Avenue Ms. Simon, Please accept this application for an amendment to the planned development approvals for the Mountain Chalet. The Mountain Chalet is located in downtown Aspen and is an iconic lodging property with its roots dating back to the emergence of Aspen as a destination resort. The property was built by Ralph Melville (deceased) and has been owned and managed by the Melville family since the 1950s. To the right is a rendering of the renovated Mountain Chalet In 2001, the City of Aspen granted a planned development approval for a significant expansion and reconstruction of the property. The plan involved a west wing addition of lodge rooms on a new fourth floor and an amenity/event space on the 5th floor. The east wing was planned for complete redevelopment and the addition of lodge rooms on a new fourth floor. The 2001 approval was established as a three-phase project with specific physical improvements and financial obligations in each phase. The approval set forth sequencing provisions but did not state timeframes or time limits for each phase. Phase one has been accomplished. The City of Aspen has determined that the remaining two phases constitute a valid development right.1 1 See email from City staff dated July 13, 2021. 135 Page 2 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM This application relies on the approved Planned Development and contemplates an amendment to the specifics of phases two and three. Slight changes to the interior program are proposed, all within the dimensional allowances of the 2001 approval. The property is slated for a significant rehabilitation – curing long-term deficiencies, adding and reconfiguring lodge rooms, adding publicly-accessible restaurant spaces, updating the overall look and feel of the property, upgrading lodge amenity areas, and positioning the lodge for success over the next 50 years. Two restaurants are proposed for a renovated lower level. These spaces will provide high-quality guest amenity and services throughout the building as well as being open to the general public as bona fide restaurants. As seasonal conditions allow, a lower-level courtyard on the west side of the property will be available for outdoor dining. This existing space currently has minimal use. Five affordable housing units are proposed on-site to assist employee housing needs of the project. These units generally replicate units that were already planned to occur in phase two. The property will continue to provide excellent guest amenity with on-site spa facilities, on-site dining and conference facilities and the ever-popular 5th floor bar and lounge area. All lodge amenity areas have been sized to accommodate guest needs. The iconic character of the Mountain Chalet will remain. The chalet roof forms and appended balconies will remain while new exterior materials will provide a fresh feel. The Durant entrance will remain and vehicle pull-up service will continue to be handled on the Deane Street side. Valet parking will be provided and will enable a more efficient use of the existing parking garage. The rendering to the right shows the renovated Mountain Chalet from Deane Street. This application provides responses to the planned development – minor amendment criteria as well as associated reviews – conditional use, special review, commercial design standards review, transportation/parking review, view planes, affordable housing credits, and growth management. The growth management allotments granted in connection with the 2001 approval have expired. In addition, employee housing mitigation for the already-constructed phase one must be recalculated and provided according to today’s requirements. On-site housing will exceed the mitigation needs of the project. By optimizing available space for affordable housing, the Mountain Chalet is able to provide more housing for its employees, which assists the long-term viability of the Chalet. Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit (AH Credits) are requested for the excess housing. 136 Page 3 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM The graphic to the right shows the layout of the five proposed affordable housing units, each with individual storage units The property is legally described as the Mountain Chalet Planned Unit Development. It is commonly known as 333 East Durant Avenue. The property is comprised of Lots E - I, Block 84, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus the northerly half of the adjacent vacated Deane Street, in total comprising approximately 18,848 square feet. The ownership includes a perpetual subsurface easement interest in the southern portion of adjacent vacated Deane Street accommodating subsurface improvements.2 The property is owned by 2021 Aspen Mountain Chalet LLC, a Delaware limited liability company. Authorized representatives for the owner are Lawrence McGuire and Zachary Kupperman. Mr. Kupperman has authorized BendonAdams to submit this application and represent the owner’s interests before the city. The development team includes Lake Flato Architects, Rybak Architecture and Development, Lambert McGuire Design, Design Workshop, and Roaring Fork Engineering. The attached architectural plans show the intended layout of lodge units and commercial spaces within the building as well as the components of the existing building that will be reconstructed. Parcel Description Legal: Mountain Chalet PUD Subdivision, Pitkin County. Common: 333 East Durant Avenue; Aspen, CO 81611 Parcel ID No.: 2737-182-45-002 2 See attached property survey and easement agreement filed at Book 604, page 184 137 Page 4 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Zone District L-LP-PD The Mountain Chalet property is zoned lodge (L) with a lodge preservation (LP) overlay and a planned development (PD) overlay. The property is located in the lodge zone district. This district covers the area between the base of Aspen Mountain and the downtown. Most of Aspen’s lodges are located in the lodge zone district. Highlights of the lodge district are shown in the table to the right. The property has two zoning overlays. The lodge preservation (LP) overlay has been used by the city to accomplish two goals: to legalize small lodges built in residential zones and to enable targeted allocation of development incentives. When the Mountain Chalet property last went through entitlements, the LP overlay enabled a “minor PUD” review process, which was a shortened version of the full PUD process. The minor PUD process no longer exists. More recently, small lodges within the LP district were able to obtain assistance ranging from energy audits to small grants, loans, and fee abatements from the city to make improvements. The program lasted three years, from 2014 through 2017. The Mountain Chalet is a planned development, approved in 2001 (under the prior planned unit development regulations). The specifics of this approval are discussed below. The city lists Ordinance No. 10, series of 2002, as the zoning ordinance for this property. Permitted Uses – Lodge • Hotel • Timesharing • Affordable multi-family housing accessory to a lodging or timeshare operation and for employees of the operation. • Lodge • Accessory uses and structures. (Food service for on-site lodge guests is an accessory use.) • Free-market multi-family housing. Conditional Uses – Lodge • Retail and restaurant uses (public accessible) • Affordable multi-family housing not accessory to a lodging or timeshare operation • Neighborhood commercial uses • Service uses Permitted Dimensions – Lodge • Maximum FAR 2.5:1 • Lodging FAR 2:1 • Restaurant/Bar FAR .25:1 • Height – 38 feet with ability for 40 feet through design review • Setbacks – 5 feet all sides 138 Page 5 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Past Approvals & Current Proposal 2001 Planned Unit Development The 2001 approval established the allowable dimensions for a significant redevelopment and addition to the property. Included in Ordinance 23-2001 is a dimensional allowances chart which was repeated in the development agreement, as follows: PUD Dimensional Requirements. As set forth in Condition 4, Section 2 of the Ordinance, the following dimensional requirements were approved by the City as part of the Project, are shown on the Final PUD Development Plans, and shall be printed on all final building permit plan sets: a. Minimum Lot Size: 6,000 square feet. b. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit: No requirement. c. Maximum Allowable Density: One lodge or residential bedroom per 197 square feet of lot area. d. Minimum Lot Width: 60 feet. e. Minimum Front Yard: 1 foot. f. Minimum Side Yard: 0 feet. g. Minimum Rear Yard: 10 feet. h. Maximum Site Coverage: No requirement. i. Maximum Height: 51 feet. j. Minimum Distance Between Buildings: 10 feet. k. Minimum Percent Open Space: 4.8 percent. l. Trash Access Area: 7.5 feet by 6 feet (45 square feet in the South Mill Street right-of-way. m. Allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 2.5:1 (including basement additions). n. Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces: 0.49 spaces per bedroom (37 spaces and 76 bedrooms, including the five employee housing bedrooms). Phasing The 2001 project was approved for development over phases. The staff memo delivered to city council described the phases as follows: Phase 1 This phase involves fourth and fifth floor additions to the central portion of the structure. This phase will add eight new lodge units on the fourth floor and a 1,530 sq. ft. lounge on the fifth floor. Employee generation mitigation for this phase will be accommodated by a temporary off-site deed restricted unit at the Kitzbuhel Lodge. Phase 2 This phase includes the demolition of the lodge's eastern wing (2.5 stories) and replacement with a four-story wing containing lodge rooms (7 units per floor) and five sub-grade/ garden level employee housing units. Phase 3 This phase three involves only the interior remodeling of the lobby and common areas on the first and second floors, and improvement of the Durant Avenue sidewalk. 139 Page 6 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM The 2001 project was described as growing from 51 lodge units to 67 lodge units – a net increase of 16 lodge units. The project was granted an allotment of 16 lodge units through the city’s growth management system. The net increase in units compared with the unit counts described in the phasing plan indicate that some units were set to be demolished or combined. The PUD plans filed with the city include a chart describing the number of units, repeated at right. The proposal contemplates a total of 59 lodge rooms. The overall layout of rooms relies on the layout of the current property although several rooms are combined or reconfigured to provide an optimal layout. The 2001 approval provided a 339 square foot average lodge unit size. The proposed layout accommodates an average lodge unit size of 329 square feet. The commercial net leasable area is proposed to increase from today’s 2,668 square feet to a total of 4,995 square feet. This will enable two restaurants, both of which will serve as guest amenity and be open to the public. A separate guest-only dining room is also proposed. Affordable Housing Affordable housing mitigation for phase one was provided through the temporary deed restriction of a unit within the Kitzbuhel property, a property owned by the applicant at the time but no longer part of the Mountain Chalet ownership. This temporary, off-site unit was accepted as the full, on- site mitigation for the entire project would be delivered in phase two. The temporary deed restriction on the Kitzbuhel unit was lifted in exchange for a deed restriction placed on the five units within the Mountain Chalet property. The five affordable units have not been constructed. The five affordable housing units were planned in the basement level of the new east wing – the phase two expansion. This more than satisfied the affordable housing requirements at the time. The 2001 code stated an employee generation rate of 0.4 FTEs per lodge room with a requirement to provide housing for 60% of the employee generated. The 16 units were calculated to require housing for 3.84 employees.3 (16 x .4 x 60% = 3.84) 3 July 9, 2001 memo from City staff to City Council Lodge Rooms 2001 Approval Existing Lodge 51 Rooms Demolished 20 New Rooms 36 Net Gain 16 Total 67 The charts to the right show the affordable housing component of the project as approved in 2001 (above) and as proposed in this application (below). 2001 Approval Unit # Unit Type Net Livable SF 1 studio 380 2 studio 396 3 studio 396 4 studio 447 5 one bedroom 699 Total 2,318 140 Page 7 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM The PUD agreement, filed in 2002, cited 6.75 FTEs – a one-half FTE difference from the application. The plans filed with the agreement show 4 studio apartments and 1 one-bedroom apartment. The change of one unit from a one-bedroom unit to a studio would account for the .5 FTE reduction. In either case, this housing was substantially in excess of the requirement. The current proposal mimics this affordable housing component with five affordable units in the basement of the new east wing. The proposed units are slightly larger and provide a separate dedicated storage space for each unit. The 5 proposed units accommodate housing for 7.25 FTEs. 2019 Elevator Approval The current accessible route to the fifth floor is cumbersome. The current elevator along Deane Street serves the fourth floor. From there, the travel path goes through the lodge to a single-level, hydraulic lift from the fourth floor to the fifth floor. In 2019, the Mountain Chalet received approval to extend the existing elevator to the fifth floor. The elevator extension was approved as an amendment to the PUD approval as it was not identified in the 2001 approvals. The extension was found to be in compliance with the PUD’s 51-foot height allowance and exempt from the mountain view plane regulations. The elevator extension is included in the proposed improvements. The plan below shows the layout of the proposed affordable units. 2022 Proposal Unit # Unit Type Net Livable SF 1 studio 400 2 studio 400 3 one bedroom 560 4 one bedroom 700 5 studio 400 Total 2,460 Shared storage 150 Total w/ Storage 2,610 141 Page 8 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Mountain View Planes The City of Aspen land use code contains seven protected “mountain view planes.” These protect views of surrounding mountains from select locations in town. The view planes are described in survey terms from a point of origin with an aperture and rake. The Mountain Chalet is in two view planes - the Wheeler view plane and the Main Street view plane. The Wheeler view is from the front door of the Wheeler Opera House looking south to Aspen Mountain. The map to the right shows the Mountain Chalet property in the center of the Wheeler view. The map below shows the property within the Main Street view. The view plane restrictions are further specified by foreground, midground, and background with the limitations being less severe the further away from the point of origin. The Mountain Chalet property is in the “background” of both view planes. The 2001 approval went through the mountain view plane review and was found in compliance. The taller St. Regis Hotel (Ritz Carlton at the time) just to the south of the Mountain Chalet was cited as already partially blocking view of Aspen Mountain. 142 Page 9 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Parking City staff memos from the 2001 approval discuss the existing and proposed parking conditions of the property.4 The city recognized a few important factors – the property being walking distance to most destinations, proximity to the Rubey Park Transit hub, and the operator’s experience running the lodge. At the time, the applicant reported using only nine residential parking passes over the previous year. This is a program where a lodge owner can purchase from the city, single- use passes for guests to park in nearby residential parking zones. Single-Use passes were $1 each in 2000. The City has adopted significant changes in the parking requirements since the 2001 approval was granted. The current code attempts to address overall mobility challenges, not just the parking of cars, and includes both a parking minimum and a maximum. There are multiple ways to provide parking units – primarily through providing parking spaces, but also through other mobility enhancements, demand management strategies, and cash-in-lieu. The 2001 PUD approval required parking for the entire development at a rate of .49 spaces per lodging room and 1 space per affordable housing unit. The parking requirement accounted for all lodge amenity space and commercial area, both existing at the time and as proposed in the expansion. This totaled 37 spaces. The affordable housing units were not built. The property currently has 35 parking spaces. Using the .49 space per unit requirement of the 2001 approval, the 59 lodge units generate a requirement for 28.9 parking units. The five affordable housing units require 5 parking spaces. The project is not a demolition and is not required to upgrade various deficiencies during a remodel. The Lodge Audit issued by City staff acknowledged this ability to remodel the commercial without incurring a parking exaction. “Any expansion of commercial Net Leasable beyond the existing net leasable described above, will be evaluated under current parking requirements in the Land Use Code.”5 The addition of 2,327 square feet of net leasable area requires 2.3 parking spaces. The proposed project requires a total of 36.2 parking units. A minimum of 60% of the required parking units must be provided as on-site parking spaces and the remainder can be provided through a payment-in-lieu. The project is providing 35 parking spaces on-site and 1.2 spaces worth of an in-lieu payment at the rate of $38,000 per space. Parking will be managed as a valet service to maximize efficiency of the parking garage. Parking spaces along Deane Street contribute to this overall on-site parking provision. (Deane Street has been vacated with the northern portion now owned in-fee by the Mountain Chalet.) Each of the five affordable housing units is provided with a parking space. Parking will be managed as a valet service to maximize efficiency of the parking garage. Parking spaces along Deane Street contribute to this overall on-site parking provision. (Deane Street has been vacated with the northern portion now owned in fee by the Mountain Chalet.) Each of the five affordable housing units is provided their own parking space. To enhance overall mobility, the lodge will provide guest orientation to transit and WeCycle services through its on-line presence and guest interactions. 4 Sept 10, 2001 memo from City staff to City Council 5 2021 Mountain Chalet Lodge Audit, page 5 143 Page 10 of 11 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM This application provides responses to the planned development – minor amendment criteria as well as associated reviews – conditional use, special review, commercial design standards review, transportation/parking review, view planes, affordable housing credits, and growth management. Responses to each review criterion are attached to this application as Exhibits A1a, A1b, etc. Other pertinent documents are attached for your reference including an updated set of architectural plans dated March 31, 2023. All plans should be considered conceptual as changes may occur through design development and construction plan detailing. We believe this application contains the necessary information for a complete and competent review. We have included responses to previous questions in the exhibits and the drawings have been updated to reflect changes in the electric transformer and trash/recycle area components of the project. Please let us know if additional information is needed. We look forward to your review and will make ourselves available for any questions or concerns you have. We can also arrange a site visit at your request. Sincerely, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC 144 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council THROUGH: Amy Simon, Planning Director FROM: Stuart Hayden, Planner II, Historic Preservation Kirsten Armstrong, Principal Planner, Historic Preservation MEMO DATE: September 18, 2023 MEETING DATE: September 26, 2023 RE: Notice of Call Up, HPC Approval for 420 W. Francis Street – Minor Development, Demolition, and Setback Variations, HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2023 APPLICANT /OWNER: MD Aspen Holdings LLC REPRESENTATIVE: David Rybak, Rybak Architecture and Development, P.C. LOCATION: Street Address: 420 W. Francis Street Legal Description: Lots N and O, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2735-124-13-005 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-6 (Medium Density Residential) PROPOSED ZONING & USE: No change PROCESS SUMMARY: Certain land use approvals granted by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) or Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z) require that Council be notified of the decision through a brief staff summary. The notification is not a public hearing, and no applicant presentation or public comment has been accepted in the past. During the Notice of Call Up, City Council may uphold the HPC or P&Z’s decision. Alternatively, Council may request more detailed information be provided through a presentation by staff and the applicant at a future meeting. After hearing the additional project description, Council may uphold the boards’ decision or may remand it to require reconsideration of specific issues at a new public hearing. HPC’s or P&Z’s decision on remand shall be final. As the Minor Development review included demolition approval for the non-historic secondary building on the parcel, the approval is subject to Notice of Call-Up Figure 1. Site Location Map, 420 W. Francis Street. 420 145 BACKGROUND: 420 W. Francis Street is a 6,000 square foot lot in the R-6 residential zone district (Figure 1). The circa 1886 Late Victorian building can be seen with outbuildings on the 1904 Sanborn Map (Figure 2). The property was designated a historic AspenVictorian landmark as a part of Ordinance #5, Series of 1987. Additions and alterations have been made to the building over the years, including but not limited to, a one-story addition on the west elevation and material changes made pre-1990, and the 1998 excavation of a basement, relocation onto a concrete foundation, addition of dormers, addition to and reconstruction of the rear elevation, and alterations to existing outbuildings, per the 2000 420 W. Francis Street Inventory Form and land use records (see Figures 2-5). The applicant has requested approval for the demolition of an existing two-story, non-historic accessory structure, and the construction of a smaller, one-story single car garage. Renovation activities to the historic resource are proposed, which include but are not limited to the removal of some non-historic elements on the historic resource, restoration of the historic chimney, replacement of non-historic windows, and replacement of the asphalt shingle roof with wood shingle. In regard to the proposed garage, the applicant also requested approval for a rear yard setback variation to keep siting in line with current and historic development along the alley. The proposal was the subject of a public hearing on July 26, 2023, where HPC granted approval with conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff review found the criteria were met for: • Minor Development (Section 26.415.070.C): for the construction of a one-story garage; demolition of some non-historic elements on the historic resource, landscaping, and additional repairs to the exterior of the historic resource and its non-historic additions. • Demolition (Section 26.415.080): for the demolition of the non-historic structure containing an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) located on the landmarked property. Please note that the ADU was a voluntary unit and did not require mitigation to be removed as a use on the site. Figure 4. Circa 1960 photograph of 420 W. Francis Street, part of an appraisal of Walter P. Paepcke’s properties in Aspen (Aspen Historical Society). Figure 5. Circa 1975 photograph of 420 W. Francis Street (Aspen Historical Society). Figure 3. 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map from Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. Figure 2. 2023 site visit to 420 W. Francis St. 146 • Variations (26.415.110.C): for the rear property line setback variation request to keep the construction of the proposed, one-story garage in line with historic development along the alley. Staff recommended approval with conditions to HPC on July 26, 2023. HPC reviewed the proposed project and Staff recommendation and approved the project with conditions by a 7-0 vote. The conditions of approval generally focused on material details regarding the exterior updates to the site. Demolition of the non-historic accessory structure is the only action subject to this Notice of Call-Up. Staff recommends Council uphold HPC’s decision. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: N/A ALTERNATIVES: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council uphold HPC’s decision. No motion needed. Or, “I move to Call-Up HPC’s approval for demolition affecting the property at 420 W. Francis Street, HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2023.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________. ATTACHMENTS: A – HPC Memo, July 26, 2023 (with Staff Response to Demolition Criteria Exhibit) B – HPC Approved Plans C – HPC Meeting Minutes D – HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2023 147 Page 1 of 6 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Memorandum TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Amy Simon, Planning Director FROM: Kirsten Armstrong, Principal Planner Historic Preservation MEETING DATE: July 26, 2023 RE: 420 W. Francis St. – Minor Development, Demolition and Setback Variations, PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: MD Aspen Holdings LLC REPRESENTATIVE: David Rybak, Rybak Architecture and Development P.C. LOCATION: Street Address: 420 W. Francis St. Legal Description: Lot N and Lot O, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2735-124-13-005 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) PROPOSED ZONING & USE: No change SUMMARY: The applicant requests approval for Minor Development, Demolition and Setback Variations to demolish a non-historic two- story accessory structure, construct a one-story garage, and remodel the existing non-historic addition at 420 W. Francis St. Additional improvements to the historic resource, and landscaping changes, are proposed. A setback variation is requested along the rear property line for the proposed garage. As a historically designated landmark, the project is exempt from Residential Design Standards Review (RDS). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with conditions listed on the draft resolution. Site Locator Map – 420 W. Francis St. 420 148 Page 2 of 6 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com BACKGROUND: 420 W. Francis St. is a 6,000 square foot lot in the R-6 residential zone district (Figure 1). The circa 1886 Late Victorian building was originally a two-story, T-shaped, cross gabled building, with a one-story, shed roof covered wing on the rear elevation per the 1904 Sanborn Map (Figure 2). The property was designated a historic AspenVictorian landmark as a part of Ordinance #5, Series of 1987. Additions and alterations have been made to the building over the years, including but not limited to, a one- story addition on the west elevation and material changes made pre-1990, and the 1998 excavation of a basement, relocation onto a concrete foundation, addition of dormers, addition to and reconstruction of the rear elevation, and alterations to existing outbuildings, per the 2000 420 W. Francis St. Inventory Form and land use records (see Figures 1-4). REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: • Minor Development (Section 26.415.070.C) for the construction of a one-story garage; demolition of some non-historic elements on the historic resource, landscaping, and additional repairs to the exterior of the historic resource and its non-historic additions. • Demolition (Section 26.415.080): for the demolition of the non-historic accessory dwelling unit located on the landmarked property. • Variations (26.415.110.C): for the rear property line setback variation request to keep the construction of the proposed, one-story garage in line with historic development along the alley. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority. However, the scope of this application is subject to Notice of Call-up at City Council. Figure 3. Circa 1960 photograph of 420 W. Francis St., part of an appraisal of Walter P. Paepcke’s properties in Aspen (Aspen Historical Society). Figure 4. Circa 1975 photograph of 420 W. Francis St. (Aspen Historical Society). Figure 2. 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map from Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. Figure 1. 2023 site visit to 420 W. Francis St. 149 Page 3 of 6 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing the demolition of an existing two-story, non-historic accessory structure, and the construction of a one-story single car garage. Renovation activities to the historic resource are proposed, which include the removal of some non-historic elements on the historic resource: including a brick chimney on the west elevation; a wood deck adjacent to the west entry porch; a bay window on the North elevation, and the subsequent reduction of the second-floor balcony; reduction of a non-historic porch on the west side of the rear elevation; and a leaded glass panel from the primary entry door on the west entry porch. Non-historic, aluminum clad, double hung windows are proposed to be replaced with metal clad wood double hung window units to match existing size. Non-historic wood guardrails on the non-historic North porch and second floor balcony will be replaced with simple metal guardrails, and the existing window well guardrails will be changed to match the new. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing asphalt shingle with fire treated wood shingles; and replace the existing standing seam roofing on the non-historic West elevation addition with similar standing seam roofing. The original brick chimney on the south will be retained, however, the interior portion of the chimney is proposed to be removed, with a structural frame installed below the roof line. The applicant is requesting a rear yard setback variation of 3’-6” for the construction of the proposed, one-story garage, to keep siting in line with historic development along the alley. STAFF COMMENTS: Exhibits A, B, and C identify the review criteria and design guidelines to be considered for this application. Exhibit D identify initial referral comments from relevant City departments. Exhibit E provides the original application. After discussion with the applicant regarding initial concerns, the applicant has provided select updates to the application and a summary of their response to staff comments, provided in Exhibit F. 1. Minor Development (Section 26.415.070.C) This project involves a net decrease in floor area on the site through the demolition of existing non-historic additions. A new free-standing single car garage of approximately 390 square feet is proposed. Staff made the interpretation that the overall scope of the project qualified as Minor Development. In general, staff finds that the design guidelines are met with conditions. The existing non-historic additions were constructed prior the existence of an historic preservation ordinance in Aspen and/or were approved under an earlier set of Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, resulting in additions that are not well differentiated and without connectors. Staff finds the removal and reduction of non-historic elements detailed above and, in the plans, to be a key first step in removing the layers that obscure the original intent of the resource. Updates to fenestration on the rear non-historic addition have been found to meet the design guidelines, see Exhibit A. Further, the proposed garage is a simple, one-story, front gable garage with a shed roof projection on the west elevation. Staff finds that the design of the garage relates to the historic resource in form and fenestration, while slightly diverging in material, meeting Design Guideline 11.6. 150 Page 4 of 6 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Conditions regarding the windows, vents and flues, roof, and foundation are limited to recommendations regarding materials and requests for material specifications as discussed in Exhibit A and provided in the draft resolution. Landscaping, porch railings, chimneys, and lightwells are discussed in more detail below. Landscaping: Staff is concerned that the landscaping plan for 420 W Francis is overly complex. Trees already line the right-of-way in front of the resource (Figure 5). The planting of an additional tree in Zone A affects the public visibility of the structure. Further, the two proposed secondary walkways contribute to the overcomplication of the site. The removal of one of the secondary walkways may provide a solution. Staff recommends restudy to simplify the landscaping around the historic resource, show restraint in the proposed walkway design, and remove the rocky mountain maple tree. Furthermore, the landscaping plan keeps the footprint of the existing 4’ wide walkway running perpendicular from the street to the main entrance. A 3’ wide walkway is more appropriate for an AspenVictorian property. The application indicates that the proposed paver for the walkways on the property is a basalt paver. Generally, basalt pavers are a dark grey color that are more appropriate for AspenModern properties. The guideline suggests a light grey, or red brick or sandstone for a building of this period. Staff recommends that the material be restudied to comply with Design Guideline 1.6 and that the updated material be submitted for approval by staff and monitor prior to building permit application. Porch: A 1948 photograph of the Hallet House at 432 W. Francis St. shows the corner of the southwest porch at 420 W. Francis St. (Figure 6). A simple wood railing with square, wood balusters can be seen on the right side of this photograph. Staff recommends that the railing be re-built according to historic photographs. Detailed plans must be reviewed and approved at building permit application. Figure 5. Representative view of 420 W. Francis St. from the right-of-way. Figure 1. 1948 photograph with the southwest porch of 420 W. Francis St. seen on the right side of the photograph (Aspen Historical Society) 151 Page 5 of 6 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Chimney: Comparison of the current historic chimney with photographs from the 1960s indicates that the chimney was altered at some point. Photographs from the 1960s appear to show a V shaped, corbelled chimney, similar to that present at the neighboring 432 W. Francis St. property (see Figure 3). Staff recommends that the chimney be reconstructed per historic photos, and that a reconstruction plan be provided for staff and monitor review prior to building permit application. Lightwells: The applicant is proposing to make changes to the guardrails around the already existing lightwells. HPC should be aware that recent changes in Building Code suggest that guardrails are required, where flat grates have been preferred by the Commission in the past. The proposed guardrail replacement eliminates the historic fence design reference of the existing guard and will instead be simple metal posts and horizontal metal rails, see Exhibit F for examples. The existing fence, on the east and west sides separating zones A and B, obscures the lightwells and guardrails from view. Staff finds the visual impact of the lightwells sufficiently minimized through the simple design of the guardrails and location. Staff recommends a detail be provided at building permit application indicating that the proposed guardrails will not attach to the walls of the historic resource. 2. Demolition (Section 26.415.080): The property at 420 W. Francis St. was designated as a representation of the 19th century development of Aspen. A non-historic accessory dwelling unit (ADU) along the rear of the subject property is proposed for demolition. A Notice of Approval was granted on February 24, 2023, regarding the removal of the ADU and the ADU deed restriction. The demolition of this ADU meets Historic Preservation Design Guideline 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 3. Variations (26.415.110.C): The applicant is requesting a setback variation of 3’-6” from the required 5’ rear setback to a 1’-6” rear setback. Historic maps indicate that outbuildings along this block were typically located at the rear property line. The 1898 Sanborn map indicates that a one-and-a-half story, shingle roof stable was historically located along the rear property line on the northwest corner and an additional one-story structure was located along the rear property line at the northeast corner. The 1898 Sanborn map further indicates consisting siting of secondary structures at the rear property line along the 400 block of W. Francis St. Further review of aerial imagery indicates that siting along the property line is consistent with current conditions. 152 Page 6 of 6 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com REFERRAL COMMENTS: The application was referred out to other City departments who have requirements that will affect the permit review. Please see Exhibit D for full comments. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the HPC approve this application with the conditions listed in the resolution. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #____, Series of 2023 Exhibit A – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit B – Demolition Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit C – Setback Variation Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit D – Referral Comments Exhibit E – Application Exhibit F – Applicant Response to Staff Comments 153 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit B Demolition Criteria Staff Findings Sec. 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently, no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. 154 Page 2 of 2 Staff Finding: The property at 420 W Francis was designated as a representation of the 19th century development of Aspen. A 1990s non-historic garage with an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) above it along the rear of the subject property is proposed for demolition. An administrative Notice of Approval was granted by Community Development on February 24, 2023, allowing the removal of the ADU and the ADU deed restriction with no further mitigation required because the ADU was a voluntary affordable housing unit. The demolition of this structure meets Historic Preservation Design Guideline 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. Further staff finds that the criteria highlighted above in Figure 1 are met and recommends HPC approve demolition. Please note that removal of this building is exempt from the City’s new demolition allotment system, which allows six demolitions per year of single-family homes or duplexes, because the subject structure is not one of those building types and because historic properties receive an exemption for the removal of non-historic development. 155 concept package 420 w francis residence 21 july 2023 bluegreen © copyright bluegreen 2014© copyright bluegreen 2014156 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. H-001 PERSPECTIVES MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1 VIEW FROM W FRANCIS 2 VIEW IN ALLEY FROM EAST 3 VIEW SOUTH FROM ALLEY 157 6' - 4 1/2"9' - 9"1' - 9"9' - 9"0' - 10 1/2"1. 2 2 3 4 5 2 6 7 8 2 6 6 7 8 OFFICE 002 CLOSET 003 LIVING 001 LAUNDRY 004 BATH 005 BEDROOM 006 MECHANICAL 008 BEDROOM 010 CLOSET 011 BATH 009 HALL 012 STAIR 013 P N P P N P N P P LIVING 001 OFFICE 002 CLOSET 003 LAUNDRY 004 BATH 005 BEDROOM 006 CLOSET 007 MECHANICAL 008 BATH 009 BEDROOM 010 CLOSET 011 HALL 012 STAIR 013 1 2 2 2 3 4 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-200 BASEMENT PLANS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC BASEMENT- DEMO PLAN 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC BASEMENT-PROPOSED DEMOLITION NOTES KEY NOTE 1. CREATE OPENING FOR NEW DOOR 2 REMOVE DOOR 3 REMOVE EXISTING GAS APPLIANCE F.P. & FLUE 4 REMOVE EXISTING CAB'T 5 REMOVE STAIR ASSEMLBY 6 REMOVE PARTITION WALL 7 REMOVE VANITY 8 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES 9 HISTORIC DOOR TO REMAIN 10 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - REFER STRUCTURAL 11 REMOVE WOOD DECK 12 REMOVE WOOD BURNING FIREPLACE AND FLUE 13 REMOVE METAL GUARDRAIL FROM WINDOW WELLS 14 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR PLATE - REFER STRUCTURAL 15 REMOVE CABINETRY 16 REMOVE APPLIANCES 17 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC EXTERIOR WALLS AS SHOWN 18 REMOVE BAY WALLS & WINDOWS 19 REMOVE PORCH AND STEPS 20 REMOVE PORTION OF DECK 21 REMOVE A/C CONDENSING UNIT 22 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC FLUE 23 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR FRAMING FOR STAIR - REFER STRUCTURAL 24 REMOVE CLOSET SHELVING 25 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - SUPPORT ABOVE CEILING - REFER STRUCTURAL 26 REMOVE ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 27 REMOVE PORCH RAILING 28 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC CHIMNEY 29 REMOVE METAL ROOFING 30 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS 31 CUT BACK EXISTING DECK FRAMING TO WALL PLANE 32 REMOVE LATTICE 33 REMOVE GUARDRAIL 34 REMOVE PORCH & STAIRS 35 HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 36 HISTORIC CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTUAL 37 REMOVE BENCH 38 DEMOLISH EXISTING TWO STORY GARAGE STRUCTURE 39 REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE AND WIRING 40 REPLACE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE PROPOSED REPAIR NOTES KEY NOTE 1 INSTALL INSULATION IN FURRED WALLS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ENERGY CODES 2 INSTALL NEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING OPENING 3 NEW INTERIOR PARTITIONS - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 4 CONSTRUCT NEW STAIR ASSEMBLY 5 EXISTING PORCH AND RAILING TO REMAIN 6 NEW CABINETRY - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 7 EXISTING HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 8 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL AT LIGHT WELLS 9 INSTALL NEW GAS APPLIANCE FIREPLACE 10 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING WALL 11 INSTALL RIGID INSULATION AT INTERIOR OF ALL EXTERIOR WALLS 12 NEW SIDING ON EXTERIOR WALL 13 INSTALL NEW WINDOW 14 INSTALL NEW WINDOW & SIDELIGHT SYSTEM 15 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 16 INSTALL NEW STEPS TO GRADE 17 INSTALL NEW DOOR IN EXISTING OPENING 18 NEW FASCIA AT DECK EDGE 19 INSTALL NEW ROOF SHINGLES 20 EXISTING CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 21 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN - REPLACE LEADED GLASS W/ INSULATED GLASS PANEL 22 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN 23 EXISTING LAP SIDING TO REMAIN 24 EXISTING FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN 25 EXISTING SHINGLE SIDING TO REMAIN 26 EXISTING GABLE VENT TO REMAIN 27 NEW WINDOW OPENING 28 NEW STONE VENEER ALONG WALL - MATCH EXISTING 29 REPAIR ROOF & FASCIA @ CHIMNEY LOCATION 30 CONSTRUCT NEW GARAGE 31 INSTALL NEW FIRE PLACE FLUE TERMINATION 32 INSTALL NEW FIREPLACE AIR INTAKE 33 INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURE NORTH 158 DN DN UP UP DN 0' - 0" 9 9 10 6 11 7 8 12 6 13 13 13 14 5 6 8 15 16 17 18 19 KITCHEN 106 PANTRY 105 FAMILY 104 DINING 107 FOYER 101 POWDER 103 CLOSET 102 PARLOR 108 D D C C A 89 A B B A A A F E FOYER 101 CLOSET 102 POWDER 103 FAMILY 104 PANTRY 105 KITCHEN 106 DINING 107 PARLOR 108 STAIR 109 101 107 106 5 5 3 4 9 6 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 8 8 14 15 16 6 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 N N ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-201 FIRST FLOOR PLANS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 DEMOLITION NOTES KEY NOTE 1. CREATE OPENING FOR NEW DOOR 2 REMOVE DOOR 3 REMOVE EXISTING GAS APPLIANCE F.P. & FLUE 4 REMOVE EXISTING CAB'T 5 REMOVE STAIR ASSEMLBY 6 REMOVE PARTITION WALL 7 REMOVE VANITY 8 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES 9 HISTORIC DOOR TO REMAIN 10 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - REFER STRUCTURAL 11 REMOVE WOOD DECK 12 REMOVE WOOD BURNING FIREPLACE AND FLUE 13 REMOVE METAL GUARDRAIL FROM WINDOW WELLS 14 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR PLATE - REFER STRUCTURAL 15 REMOVE CABINETRY 16 REMOVE APPLIANCES 17 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC EXTERIOR WALLS AS SHOWN 18 REMOVE BAY WALLS & WINDOWS 19 REMOVE PORCH AND STEPS 20 REMOVE PORTION OF DECK 21 REMOVE A/C CONDENSING UNIT 22 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC FLUE 23 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR FRAMING FOR STAIR - REFER STRUCTURAL 24 REMOVE CLOSET SHELVING 25 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - SUPPORT ABOVE CEILING - REFER STRUCTURAL 26 REMOVE ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 27 REMOVE PORCH RAILING 28 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC CHIMNEY 29 REMOVE METAL ROOFING 30 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS 31 CUT BACK EXISTING DECK FRAMING TO WALL PLANE 32 REMOVE LATTICE 33 REMOVE GUARDRAIL 34 REMOVE PORCH & STAIRS 35 HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 36 HISTORIC CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTUAL 37 REMOVE BENCH 38 DEMOLISH EXISTING TWO STORY GARAGE STRUCTURE 39 REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE AND WIRING 40 REPLACE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE PROPOSED REPAIR NOTES KEY NOTE 1 INSTALL INSULATION IN FURRED WALLS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ENERGY CODES 2 INSTALL NEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING OPENING 3 NEW INTERIOR PARTITIONS - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 4 CONSTRUCT NEW STAIR ASSEMBLY 5 EXISTING PORCH AND RAILING TO REMAIN 6 NEW CABINETRY - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 7 EXISTING HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 8 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL AT LIGHT WELLS 9 INSTALL NEW GAS APPLIANCE FIREPLACE 10 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING WALL 11 INSTALL RIGID INSULATION AT INTERIOR OF ALL EXTERIOR WALLS 12 NEW SIDING ON EXTERIOR WALL 13 INSTALL NEW WINDOW 14 INSTALL NEW WINDOW & SIDELIGHT SYSTEM 15 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 16 INSTALL NEW STEPS TO GRADE 17 INSTALL NEW DOOR IN EXISTING OPENING 18 NEW FASCIA AT DECK EDGE 19 INSTALL NEW ROOF SHINGLES 20 EXISTING CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 21 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN - REPLACE LEADED GLASS W/ INSULATED GLASS PANEL 22 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN 23 EXISTING LAP SIDING TO REMAIN 24 EXISTING FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN 25 EXISTING SHINGLE SIDING TO REMAIN 26 EXISTING GABLE VENT TO REMAIN 27 NEW WINDOW OPENING 28 NEW STONE VENEER ALONG WALL - MATCH EXISTING 29 REPAIR ROOF & FASCIA @ CHIMNEY LOCATION 30 CONSTRUCT NEW GARAGE 31 INSTALL NEW FIRE PLACE FLUE TERMINATION 32 INSTALL NEW FIREPLACE AIR INTAKE 33 INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURE 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC FIRST FLOOR PLAN-DEMO PLAN 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC FIRST FLOOR PLAN-PROPOSED NORTH 159 2027 20 21 22 7 8 23 6 24 7 8 5 6 25 MASTER BEDROOM 205 CLOSET 204MASTER BATH 206 BATH 203 STAIR HALL 201 WC 208 SHOWER 207 DEN 202 37 J J J K Q L L L L J 205A MASTER BEDROOM 205 STAIR HALL 201 CLOSET 204 BATH 203 DEN 202 MASTER BATH 206 SHOWER 207 WC 208 J M 4 15 203a 202a 206a 205a 204a 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 M 17 15 18 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-202 SECOND FLOOR PLANS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 DEMOLITION NOTES KEY NOTE 1. CREATE OPENING FOR NEW DOOR 2 REMOVE DOOR 3 REMOVE EXISTING GAS APPLIANCE F.P. & FLUE 4 REMOVE EXISTING CAB'T 5 REMOVE STAIR ASSEMLBY 6 REMOVE PARTITION WALL 7 REMOVE VANITY 8 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES 9 HISTORIC DOOR TO REMAIN 10 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - REFER STRUCTURAL 11 REMOVE WOOD DECK 12 REMOVE WOOD BURNING FIREPLACE AND FLUE 13 REMOVE METAL GUARDRAIL FROM WINDOW WELLS 14 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR PLATE - REFER STRUCTURAL 15 REMOVE CABINETRY 16 REMOVE APPLIANCES 17 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC EXTERIOR WALLS AS SHOWN 18 REMOVE BAY WALLS & WINDOWS 19 REMOVE PORCH AND STEPS 20 REMOVE PORTION OF DECK 21 REMOVE A/C CONDENSING UNIT 22 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC FLUE 23 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR FRAMING FOR STAIR - REFER STRUCTURAL 24 REMOVE CLOSET SHELVING 25 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - SUPPORT ABOVE CEILING - REFER STRUCTURAL 26 REMOVE ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 27 REMOVE PORCH RAILING 28 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC CHIMNEY 29 REMOVE METAL ROOFING 30 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS 31 CUT BACK EXISTING DECK FRAMING TO WALL PLANE 32 REMOVE LATTICE 33 REMOVE GUARDRAIL 34 REMOVE PORCH & STAIRS 35 HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 36 HISTORIC CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTUAL 37 REMOVE BENCH 38 DEMOLISH EXISTING TWO STORY GARAGE STRUCTURE 39 REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE AND WIRING 40 REPLACE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE PROPOSED REPAIR NOTES KEY NOTE 1 INSTALL INSULATION IN FURRED WALLS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ENERGY CODES 2 INSTALL NEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING OPENING 3 NEW INTERIOR PARTITIONS - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 4 CONSTRUCT NEW STAIR ASSEMBLY 5 EXISTING PORCH AND RAILING TO REMAIN 6 NEW CABINETRY - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 7 EXISTING HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 8 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL AT LIGHT WELLS 9 INSTALL NEW GAS APPLIANCE FIREPLACE 10 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING WALL 11 INSTALL RIGID INSULATION AT INTERIOR OF ALL EXTERIOR WALLS 12 NEW SIDING ON EXTERIOR WALL 13 INSTALL NEW WINDOW 14 INSTALL NEW WINDOW & SIDELIGHT SYSTEM 15 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 16 INSTALL NEW STEPS TO GRADE 17 INSTALL NEW DOOR IN EXISTING OPENING 18 NEW FASCIA AT DECK EDGE 19 INSTALL NEW ROOF SHINGLES 20 EXISTING CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 21 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN - REPLACE LEADED GLASS W/ INSULATED GLASS PANEL 22 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN 23 EXISTING LAP SIDING TO REMAIN 24 EXISTING FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN 25 EXISTING SHINGLE SIDING TO REMAIN 26 EXISTING GABLE VENT TO REMAIN 27 NEW WINDOW OPENING 28 NEW STONE VENEER ALONG WALL - MATCH EXISTING 29 REPAIR ROOF & FASCIA @ CHIMNEY LOCATION 30 CONSTRUCT NEW GARAGE 31 INSTALL NEW FIRE PLACE FLUE TERMINATION 32 INSTALL NEW FIREPLACE AIR INTAKE 33 INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURE 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC SECOND FLOOR PLAN-DEMO PLAN 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC SECOND FLOOR PLAN-PROPOSED NORTH 160 26 28 29 2 H-501 -- - 19 19 1920 19 2 H-501 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-203 ROOF PLANS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 DEMOLITION NOTES KEY NOTE 1. CREATE OPENING FOR NEW DOOR 2 REMOVE DOOR 3 REMOVE EXISTING GAS APPLIANCE F.P. & FLUE 4 REMOVE EXISTING CAB'T 5 REMOVE STAIR ASSEMLBY 6 REMOVE PARTITION WALL 7 REMOVE VANITY 8 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES 9 HISTORIC DOOR TO REMAIN 10 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - REFER STRUCTURAL 11 REMOVE WOOD DECK 12 REMOVE WOOD BURNING FIREPLACE AND FLUE 13 REMOVE METAL GUARDRAIL FROM WINDOW WELLS 14 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR PLATE - REFER STRUCTURAL 15 REMOVE CABINETRY 16 REMOVE APPLIANCES 17 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC EXTERIOR WALLS AS SHOWN 18 REMOVE BAY WALLS & WINDOWS 19 REMOVE PORCH AND STEPS 20 REMOVE PORTION OF DECK 21 REMOVE A/C CONDENSING UNIT 22 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC FLUE 23 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR FRAMING FOR STAIR - REFER STRUCTURAL 24 REMOVE CLOSET SHELVING 25 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - SUPPORT ABOVE CEILING - REFER STRUCTURAL 26 REMOVE ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 27 REMOVE PORCH RAILING 28 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC CHIMNEY 29 REMOVE METAL ROOFING 30 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS 31 CUT BACK EXISTING DECK FRAMING TO WALL PLANE 32 REMOVE LATTICE 33 REMOVE GUARDRAIL 34 REMOVE PORCH & STAIRS 35 HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 36 HISTORIC CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTUAL 37 REMOVE BENCH 38 DEMOLISH EXISTING TWO STORY GARAGE STRUCTURE 39 REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE AND WIRING 40 REPLACE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE PROPOSED REPAIR NOTES KEY NOTE 1 INSTALL INSULATION IN FURRED WALLS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ENERGY CODES 2 INSTALL NEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING OPENING 3 NEW INTERIOR PARTITIONS - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 4 CONSTRUCT NEW STAIR ASSEMBLY 5 EXISTING PORCH AND RAILING TO REMAIN 6 NEW CABINETRY - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 7 EXISTING HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 8 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL AT LIGHT WELLS 9 INSTALL NEW GAS APPLIANCE FIREPLACE 10 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING WALL 11 INSTALL RIGID INSULATION AT INTERIOR OF ALL EXTERIOR WALLS 12 NEW SIDING ON EXTERIOR WALL 13 INSTALL NEW WINDOW 14 INSTALL NEW WINDOW & SIDELIGHT SYSTEM 15 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 16 INSTALL NEW STEPS TO GRADE 17 INSTALL NEW DOOR IN EXISTING OPENING 18 NEW FASCIA AT DECK EDGE 19 INSTALL NEW ROOF SHINGLES 20 EXISTING CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 21 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN - REPLACE LEADED GLASS W/ INSULATED GLASS PANEL 22 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN 23 EXISTING LAP SIDING TO REMAIN 24 EXISTING FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN 25 EXISTING SHINGLE SIDING TO REMAIN 26 EXISTING GABLE VENT TO REMAIN 27 NEW WINDOW OPENING 28 NEW STONE VENEER ALONG WALL - MATCH EXISTING 29 REPAIR ROOF & FASCIA @ CHIMNEY LOCATION 30 CONSTRUCT NEW GARAGE 31 INSTALL NEW FIRE PLACE FLUE TERMINATION 32 INSTALL NEW FIREPLACE AIR INTAKE 33 INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURE 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC ROOF-DEMO PLAN 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC ROOF-PROPOSED NORTH 161 33 33 33 33 33 A A A C C C C C A 33 B B ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-204 EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLANS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC FIRST FLOOR - EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC SECOND FLOOR - EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN NORTH 162 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" 101 107 26 28 29 9 30 11 9 39 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" J J AC 101 107 M M 20 19 2 19 21 2 222 23 24 24 25 26 N N 33 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-301 SOUTH ELEVATIONS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC SOUTH - DEMO ELEVATIONS 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC SOUTH - PROPOSED DEMOLITION NOTES KEY NOTE 1. CREATE OPENING FOR NEW DOOR 2 REMOVE DOOR 3 REMOVE EXISTING GAS APPLIANCE F.P. & FLUE 4 REMOVE EXISTING CAB'T 5 REMOVE STAIR ASSEMLBY 6 REMOVE PARTITION WALL 7 REMOVE VANITY 8 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES 9 HISTORIC DOOR TO REMAIN 10 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - REFER STRUCTURAL 11 REMOVE WOOD DECK 12 REMOVE WOOD BURNING FIREPLACE AND FLUE 13 REMOVE METAL GUARDRAIL FROM WINDOW WELLS 14 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR PLATE - REFER STRUCTURAL 15 REMOVE CABINETRY 16 REMOVE APPLIANCES 17 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC EXTERIOR WALLS AS SHOWN 18 REMOVE BAY WALLS & WINDOWS 19 REMOVE PORCH AND STEPS 20 REMOVE PORTION OF DECK 21 REMOVE A/C CONDENSING UNIT 22 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC FLUE 23 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR FRAMING FOR STAIR - REFER STRUCTURAL 24 REMOVE CLOSET SHELVING 25 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - SUPPORT ABOVE CEILING - REFER STRUCTURAL 26 REMOVE ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 27 REMOVE PORCH RAILING 28 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC CHIMNEY 29 REMOVE METAL ROOFING 30 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS 31 CUT BACK EXISTING DECK FRAMING TO WALL PLANE 32 REMOVE LATTICE 33 REMOVE GUARDRAIL 34 REMOVE PORCH & STAIRS 35 HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 36 HISTORIC CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTUAL 37 REMOVE BENCH 38 DEMOLISH EXISTING TWO STORY GARAGE STRUCTURE 39 REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE AND WIRING 40 REPLACE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE PROPOSED REPAIR NOTES KEY NOTE 1 INSTALL INSULATION IN FURRED WALLS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ENERGY CODES 2 INSTALL NEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING OPENING 3 NEW INTERIOR PARTITIONS - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 4 CONSTRUCT NEW STAIR ASSEMBLY 5 EXISTING PORCH AND RAILING TO REMAIN 6 NEW CABINETRY - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 7 EXISTING HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 8 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL AT LIGHT WELLS 9 INSTALL NEW GAS APPLIANCE FIREPLACE 10 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING WALL 11 INSTALL RIGID INSULATION AT INTERIOR OF ALL EXTERIOR WALLS 12 NEW SIDING ON EXTERIOR WALL 13 INSTALL NEW WINDOW 14 INSTALL NEW WINDOW & SIDELIGHT SYSTEM 15 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 16 INSTALL NEW STEPS TO GRADE 17 INSTALL NEW DOOR IN EXISTING OPENING 18 NEW FASCIA AT DECK EDGE 19 INSTALL NEW ROOF SHINGLES 20 EXISTING CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 21 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN - REPLACE LEADED GLASS W/ INSULATED GLASS PANEL 22 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN 23 EXISTING LAP SIDING TO REMAIN 24 EXISTING FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN 25 EXISTING SHINGLE SIDING TO REMAIN 26 EXISTING GABLE VENT TO REMAIN 27 NEW WINDOW OPENING 28 NEW STONE VENEER ALONG WALL - MATCH EXISTING 29 REPAIR ROOF & FASCIA @ CHIMNEY LOCATION 30 CONSTRUCT NEW GARAGE 31 INSTALL NEW FIRE PLACE FLUE TERMINATION 32 INSTALL NEW FIREPLACE AIR INTAKE 33 INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURE PHOTO A: 1948 PHOTO DOCUMENTS NO WOOD DECK TO WEST OF PORCH PHOTO C: EXISTING CONDITION -STREET FACADE PHOTO D: EXISTING CONDITION -EAST PORCH, GLASS PANEL IN DOOR, NO LEADED GLASS PHOTO B: EXISTING CONDITION -LEADED GLASS PANEL IN DOOR, WOOD DECK TO WEST OF PORCH 163 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" 28 26 30 33 31 18 17 32 13 38 2 H-501 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" AB Q A A F L L N PPNPP J 26 24 23 25 24 5 19 2 15 12 8 8 30 2 H-501 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-302 EAST ELEVATIONS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC EAST - DEMO ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC EAST - PROPOSED PHOTO D: EAST FACADE 196, NORTH PORCH NOT YET ENCLOSED PHOTO F: EAST FACADE 1975, IMAGE IS MIRRORED, DETERMINED BY CHIMNEY LOCATION PHOTO G: EXISTING EAST ELEVATION, SOUTH END PHOTO H: EXISTING EAST ELEVATIONS, NORTH END 164 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" 10 26 30 11 13 18 20 33 21 35 36 37 38 2 H-501 39 40 39 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" L L K J BADD106 P N P 19 2 15 23 14 15 16 8 20 24 25 19 24 23 2 23 28 30 31 32 2 H-501 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-303 WEST ELEVATIONS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC WEST - DEMO ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC WEST - PROPOSED PHOTO I: WEST FACADE, 1960 PHOTO J: EXISTING WEST FACADE, SOUTH END PHOTO K: EXISTING WEST FACADE, NORTH END PHOTO L: NON-HISTORIC CHIMENY, AC CONDENSER & LINE SETS 165 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" 26 2 31 17 18 32 28 33 20 34 40 39 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 100' -0" SECOND FLOOR PLAN 110' -3 1/2" BASEMENT 88' -9" ROOF 118' -8 1/2" E J C 205A 7' - 10 3/4"9' - 11 1/2" 19 26 24 23 25 15 12 27 28 29 2 8 28 16 15 32 31 33 3 H-501 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-304 NORTH ELEVATIONS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC NORTH - DEMO ELEVATIONS 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC NORTH - PROPOSED DEMOLITION NOTES KEY NOTE 1. CREATE OPENING FOR NEW DOOR 2 REMOVE DOOR 3 REMOVE EXISTING GAS APPLIANCE F.P. & FLUE 4 REMOVE EXISTING CAB'T 5 REMOVE STAIR ASSEMLBY 6 REMOVE PARTITION WALL 7 REMOVE VANITY 8 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES 9 HISTORIC DOOR TO REMAIN 10 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - REFER STRUCTURAL 11 REMOVE WOOD DECK 12 REMOVE WOOD BURNING FIREPLACE AND FLUE 13 REMOVE METAL GUARDRAIL FROM WINDOW WELLS 14 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR PLATE - REFER STRUCTURAL 15 REMOVE CABINETRY 16 REMOVE APPLIANCES 17 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC EXTERIOR WALLS AS SHOWN 18 REMOVE BAY WALLS & WINDOWS 19 REMOVE PORCH AND STEPS 20 REMOVE PORTION OF DECK 21 REMOVE A/C CONDENSING UNIT 22 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC FLUE 23 CREATE OPENING IN FLOOR FRAMING FOR STAIR - REFER STRUCTURAL 24 REMOVE CLOSET SHELVING 25 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY FLUE - SUPPORT ABOVE CEILING - REFER STRUCTURAL 26 REMOVE ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF 27 REMOVE PORCH RAILING 28 REMOVE NON-HISTORIC CHIMNEY 29 REMOVE METAL ROOFING 30 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS 31 CUT BACK EXISTING DECK FRAMING TO WALL PLANE 32 REMOVE LATTICE 33 REMOVE GUARDRAIL 34 REMOVE PORCH & STAIRS 35 HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 36 HISTORIC CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTUAL 37 REMOVE BENCH 38 DEMOLISH EXISTING TWO STORY GARAGE STRUCTURE 39 REMOVE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE AND WIRING 40 REPLACE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE PROPOSED REPAIR NOTES KEY NOTE 1 INSTALL INSULATION IN FURRED WALLS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ENERGY CODES 2 INSTALL NEW WINDOWS IN EXISTING OPENING 3 NEW INTERIOR PARTITIONS - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 4 CONSTRUCT NEW STAIR ASSEMBLY 5 EXISTING PORCH AND RAILING TO REMAIN 6 NEW CABINETRY - REFER I.D. DRAWINGS 7 EXISTING HISTORIC WINDOW TO REMAIN 8 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL AT LIGHT WELLS 9 INSTALL NEW GAS APPLIANCE FIREPLACE 10 NEW OPENING IN EXISTING WALL 11 INSTALL RIGID INSULATION AT INTERIOR OF ALL EXTERIOR WALLS 12 NEW SIDING ON EXTERIOR WALL 13 INSTALL NEW WINDOW 14 INSTALL NEW WINDOW & SIDELIGHT SYSTEM 15 INSTALL NEW GUARDRAIL 16 INSTALL NEW STEPS TO GRADE 17 INSTALL NEW DOOR IN EXISTING OPENING 18 NEW FASCIA AT DECK EDGE 19 INSTALL NEW ROOF SHINGLES 20 EXISTING CHIMNEY TO REMAIN - REFER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS 21 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN - REPLACE LEADED GLASS W/ INSULATED GLASS PANEL 22 EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN 23 EXISTING LAP SIDING TO REMAIN 24 EXISTING FISHSCALE SHINGLES TO REMAIN 25 EXISTING SHINGLE SIDING TO REMAIN 26 EXISTING GABLE VENT TO REMAIN 27 NEW WINDOW OPENING 28 NEW STONE VENEER ALONG WALL - MATCH EXISTING 29 REPAIR ROOF & FASCIA @ CHIMNEY LOCATION 30 CONSTRUCT NEW GARAGE 31 INSTALL NEW FIRE PLACE FLUE TERMINATION 32 INSTALL NEW FIREPLACE AIR INTAKE 33 INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURE PHOTO O: NORTH FACADE, PORCH, DECK AND GARAGE ENCROACHMENT PHOTO M: EXISTING CONDITION NORTH FACADE PHOTO N: EXISTIN CONDITION NORTH FACADE 166 GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" GARAGE SECOND FLOOR 105' -8 1/4" 12 8 12 8 17' - 8 7/8"GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" GARAGE SECOND FLOOR 105' -8 1/4" GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" GARAGE SECOND FLOOR 105' -8 1/4" GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" GARAGE SECOND FLOOR 105' -8 1/4" ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-401 EXISTING GARAGE ELEVATIONS MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC GARAGE EXISTING - NORTH 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC GARAGE EXISTING - EAST 1/4" = 1'-0"3 HPC GARAGE EXISTING - SOUTH 1/4" = 1'-0"4 HPC GARAGE EXISTING - WEST FULL DEMO OF EXISTING GARGE/ CDU STRUCTURE 167 G100 G102G101 3' - 4 1/2"8' - 3 1/2"6' - 5 1/2" 18' - 1 1/2"5' - 9"12' - 1"5' - 7 1/2"5' - 7 3/4"8' - 9"4' - 2" 5' - 2 1/2"12' - 11"8' - 2 1/2"15' - 3"23' - 5 1/2"SL SL SL SL SL FLOOR DRAIN 8 H-402 8 H-402 7 H-402 7 H-402 GROSS FLOORA AREA 382 SF 3 H-501 8 H-402 8 H-402 7 H-402 7 H-402 3 H-501 GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" VERTICAL WD SIDING WD TRIM HORIZ WD SIDING ON SCREEN EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" VERTICAL WD SIDING WD SCREEN 6' - 6"WD FASCIA S.S. METAL ROOFING PROOPSED HEAT PUMPS GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" VERTICAL WD SIDING WD TRIM G102 G101 12 8 12 8 12 3 11' - 5 1/4"EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" VERTICAL WD SIDING WD FASCIA S.S. METAL ROOFING WD TRIM WINDOW W/ TRANSLUCENT FLIM HEAD HT.7' - 0"G1G1 7 H-402 7 H-402 3 H-501 GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" 8 H-402 8 H-402 12 8 12 3 GARAGE 97' -2 1/4" 7 H-402 7 H-402 ISSUE: SCALE: c Rybak Architecture and Development, P. C. 1/4" = 1'-0" H-402 PROPOSED GARAGE MD ASPEN HOLDINGS HPC 03/31/23 1/4" = 1'-0"1 HPC GARAGE -PROPOSED 1/4" = 1'-0"2 HPC GARAGE - ROOF PLAN 1/4" = 1'-0"3 HPC GARAGE PROPOPSED - SOUTH 1/4" = 1'-0"4 HPC GARAGE PROPOSED - WEST 1/4" = 1'-0"5 HPC GARAGE PROPOSED - NORTH 1/4" = 1'-0"6 HPC GARAGE PROPOSED - EAST 1/4" = 1'-0"7 HPC PROPOSED GARAGE SECTION - CROSS1/4" = 1'-0"8 HPC GARAGE-LONGITUDINAL SECTION NORTH 168 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:30pm. Commissioners in attendance: Peter Fornell, Roger Moyer, Jodi Surfas, Barb Pitchford, Kim Raymond, Riley Warwick and Kara Thompson. Absent was Jeffrey Halferty. Staff present: Amy Simon, Planning Director Kirsten Armstrong, Principal Planner Historic Preservation Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Ms. Thompson moved to approve the minutes from 6/28/23. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Mr. Warwick, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 6-0 vote; motion passes. Ms. Pitchford moved to approve the minutes from 7/12/23 with the correction to the formatting issue. Ms. Raymond seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; Mr. Warwick, yes; 5-0 vote; motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS: Mr. Fornell brought up previous conversations about the benefits of having models. He showed a physical model he had used in his own business to present in front of the Board of Adjustment and mentioned it only cost him $1,500 and took less than a week to produce. He said the model helped him get in and out of that meeting in only one session. He stated that it was not difficult, expensive or time consuming. Ms. Pitchford agreed with Mr. Fornell and asked staff why they can only request a physical model and not require it. Ms. Simon reviewed the code language and noted that it leaves it up to some discretion of the applicant to choose how to represent the context of a project. There was then some discussion about the process to create a physical model and Ms. Simon noted that it can be difficult for an applicant to anticipate what HPC may want when it come to a representation of a project. He said staff would continue to emphasize to applicants that HPC appreciates as much analysis as possible. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None. PROJECT MONITORING: None. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon updated the commissioners about the progress on the Boomerang Lodge. The chief building official is pursuing the process as the Land Use Code lays it out. There was a site visit with the chief building official, a structural engineer, and the ownership team. She then mentioned the Red Onion Office Building and referenced the meeting from a few months ago related to the west wall. She talked about the current condition and construction details of the existing wall next to the Aspen Sports building and said it was inadequate. Ms. Simon said the work session with Council is still tentatively scheduled for September 5th, 2023. 169 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. CALL UP REPORTS: None. SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Johnson said that she reviewed public notice, and that notice was provided per the code for both the agenda items. OLD BUSINESS: 205 W. Main Street- Minor Development and Relocation, PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM June 28th, 2023 Applicant Presentation: Mr. Mitch Haas – Haas Land Planning, LLC Mr. Haas started by going over the history of the historic structure and the lot. He then talked about the project objectives, being the proposal of a 100% affordable housing project, restoration of the historic asset and removal of all non-historic additions. He said the relocation would move the asset to the most prominent location on the lot, being the front corner. He detailed the zone district and highlighted the property’s location on Main St., noting that it is close to amenities like parks and transportation hubs. He then highlighted the relocation standards related to a 100% affordable housing projects and noted that staff memos had always found the project to be consistent with the standards. He said the most important standard states that the HPC may not deny the relocation but needs to consider the relocation to best meet the historic preservation guidelines, while accommodating the allowable development rights of the property. He noted that the full site plan for the project was included in their packet. He then went over the proposed on-site relocation and detailed the location and stated for the record their commitments to the historic asset. This included using different color pallets for the historic asset versus the new structure and that the new structure would have a greater setback from Main St. than the historic. He moved on to go over the allowed development rights for the lot and lot size. He showed diagrams of different buildable areas based on various potential relocations of the historic asset and the resulting remaining developable area. He showed an example of a straightforward move of the asset and explained how this would not mathematically allow for the full amount of square footage development rights on the property. He stated that the asset must be moved to the front most corner that the setbacks allow to leave enough developable area to achieve the development rights of the zone. Next, he went over the relocation setbacks and noted the mixed-use zone setback distances. He presented several diagrams of the zone district context and detailed the setbacks of other structures on Main St. and in the district. He then showed a few context pictures taken at the site that included stakes placed that outline the proposed relocation of the historic asset. He stated that their proposed relocation not only moves the historic asset to prominence but also to consistency with the surrounding structures. Next, he detailed their restoration actions planned for the asset and also other site improvements and landscaping. He wrapped up by going over the main accomplishments of the project, including 170 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 advancing City Council’s goals of increasing livable affordable housing, restoration and preservation of the historic asset, restoration of the streetscape on First and that no variations were being requested. Ms. Surfas asked Mr. Haas how they came up with the average setback number for the district. Mr. Haas said the only way to consistently measure the various setbacks was from the curb line and that is what the entire context study was based on. Ms. Raymond thanked Mr. Haas for all the extra studying and effort. She asked him about the commitment he mentioned about setting the new building behind the front of the historic asset. Mr. Haas said the new building will not be at the 10-foot setback but would be set back further. Ms. Raymond appreciated all the restoration work they are doing, bringing the Victorian back to what it was. Mr. Fornell asked if the applicant believed that they will be able to achieve the allowable Floor Area Ratio of 1.25:1. Mr. Haas said that they think with their proposed relocation that they can. He also noted again that without their proposed relocation, they don’t believe they can reach it. Mr. Warwick asked how many units were being proposed including both the historic asset and the new building. Mr. Haas said they did not know that number yet. Ms. Thompson said that they need to limit the discussion to the historic resource. Mr. Hass said there would be two units in the resource. Ms. Pitchford asked if she was allowed to ask what the height of the new building would be. Ms. Thompson said that is not part of this review process, but it would have to meet zone district requirements and historic preservation guidelines. Ms. Pitchford said it would be important in her decision on relocation. Ms. Raymond asked what the height of the historic resource was. Mr. Haas said he was not sure of its exact height, but it was less than the 28-foot height limit. Staff Presentation: Amy Simon – Planning Director Ms. Simon started by going over some details of the minor development and relocation for this property and also those sections of the Land Use Code. She again went over the relocation standards and noted the specific standard staff believes has been met and the reasoning for this. She then showed pictures of the few landmarked historic structures that have been preserved in a way that makes a future addition impossible or very unlikely. She also mentioned the importance of having affordable housing to be located in a historic asset, being that it will be a full-time “lights on” situation. She then addressed the zone district setback context diagram and said that there is no consistent setback line that is being disturbed by this relocation and the existing home is not original to the lot or neighborhood. She referenced the diagram that was presented showing the potential footprint of the new development. She again noted that the tighter that the development envelope gets, still fitting the allowable square footage to be built, the less opportunity the applicant has to pull back, step down or reduce the massing of the new development. She then noted that staff is recommending approval with the conditions included in the resolution. She then showed a list of those conditions and noted that some of the things that have been discussed could 171 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 be added as conditions. These could include commitments that the applicant has made. She went over details of a few of the conditions. Mr. Fornell wanted to clarify that the stated commitment of the applicant to differentiate the color pallets of the two structures was a condition that HPC could add to the resolution. Ms. Johnson said yes, in a way it would be memorializing that commitment. Ms. Raymond asked if the same could be done for the applicant’s commitment to set the new development back from the historic asset. Ms. Simon said that could be included when a motion is made. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mr. David Scruggs had Ms. Simon had out a letter to the commissioners. He began by stating that the commissioners’ job is to determine the relocation based on the historic preservation guidelines. He said they need to relocate it so that there is livable space for the new development and that it is compatible with the setbacks of the neighborhood. He stated that the neighbors are asking for a 15-foot setback from Main St. and to maintain the 15-foot setback from First St. He went over their reasons for this. He then detailed the setbacks of the 3 contiguous properties to this one and others in the neighborhood, stating that they all have greater than 15-foot setbacks. He said he did not know how the HPC could ignore these facts. He finished by again asking that HPC maintain the consistency of the neighborhood. Ms. Thompson asked if all commissioner if they had read the public comment email from Elizabeth Milias. All commissioners said yes. Ms. Thompson then closed public comment. BOARD DISCUSSION: Ms. Thompson opened the board discussion and noted that most of concern the board has had is related to the relocation and that members have supported the removal of the non- historic additions and the overall restoration efforts the applicant is making. She maintained her support of the proposed relocation and thought that it is in context with the surrounding area and meets the design guidelines. Ms. Raymond said that after listening to past meetings and reading all the comments she was in support of the proposed relocation. She said part of her reasoning is the balance that HPC needs to meet for the City’s goals of affordable housing and the restoration efforts being proposed by the applicant. Another reason she noted was the more the historic resource gets pushed back the denser the applicant’s new building has to get, which would overpower the Victorian. With the applicant’s commitment of holding the new building back to keep the historic asset prominent, she felt it met the guidelines in her mind. Ms. Surfas still thought historic asset was being moved too far forward. She was ok with the east movement but thought the forward movement should at least be in line with the average setback. Mr. Fornell said he continued to support the project and thought they had a great combination of preservation and “local living” affordable housing. He would be giving his support to this. Mr. Warwick said he was in support of the project and that moving the historic resource to the north and east only makes it more prominent, which is important. He thought the affordable housing is a gift, especially in this location, inside the roundabout. He agreed with Ms. Raymond’s comments regarding the potential density and height. He thought preserving the historic resource and making it prominent relative to the new building was important. 172 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 Ms. Pitchford agreed with Ms. Surfas that it was being moved too far forward. She referenced guidelines 9.3 and 1.1 and felt that the move was too far forward. She was not thrilled that it was being moved laterally but could let that go for not moving it so far forward. She understood the other’s perspective about allowing it to be more prominent, but she thought the grass area in the front is important and should be consistent. She appreciated a lot about the project, including the restoration, removal of non- historic additions, the east side parking going away and the employee housing, but that it was still moving too far forward. Mr. Moyer said it was interesting how people play the game and he thought that they just lost. He also agreed with Ms. Surfas. He would be ok with the move to the east but not forward. He spoke to the two new members and said that their job was the historic building and nothing else. He said the commission has been screwed by City Council and staff with the new affordable housing ordinance. He said it was very disappointing. He was not disappointed in the two new members and thought their comments were valid but thought that Council and staff’s mandate is that employee housing takes precedent over everything. Ms. Pitchford added to Mr. Moyer’s comment and agreed that their job was the preservation of the historic asset and nothing else. She also felt that they were stuck and that her job was preservation not affordable housing. Mr. Moyer then talked to the two new commissioners and described another project that he believed was one of their biggest mistakes. He said that when they were talking about the new code amendment before it was adopted, he thought that it was conceptually a good idea. He was looking at it in a situation of a historic resource with a vacant lot next to it. He did not think of a situation of someone buying a historic resource on a lot and wanting to put something around or next to it. He thought the two new members were making a huge mistake. Ms. Thompson commented on the project that Mr. Moyer referenced as HPC’s biggest mistake, stating that she thought it was entirely subjective. She noted that, at the moment they cannot relitigate the code change, but they have to operate under what is in front of them now. Ms. Raymond asked Mr. Moyer and Ms. Pitchford what about moving the Victorian forward was not preserving it. Mr. Moyer responded that they do not know what is going to be built around the resource and overwhelm it. Ms. Raymond agreed with Mr. Moyer on that but reiterated that the more you push it back the bigger and maybe more blocky the new building is going to become. MOTION: Ms. Thompson moved to approve the next resolution in the series with the following revisions to the conditions. Revision to condition #8 to state that location of ground mounted mechanical equipment around the historic resource will also be provided for review. The addition of condition #11 to say that the historic resource and any new construction will be of different color pallets as agreed to by the applicant. Also adding condition #12 to say all new construction will have a greater front setback than the north face of the historic resource as agreed to by the applicant. Mr. Fornell seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, no; Ms. Surfas, no; Ms. Pitchford, no; Ms. Raymond, yes; Mr. Warwick, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 4-3 vote, motion passes. 173 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 NEW BUSINESS: 420 W. Francis Street. - Minor Development, Demolition, Setback Variations - PUBLIC HEARING Applicant Presentation: David Rybak, Rybak Architecture and Development P.C Mr. Rybak started by going over some the history of the property and the many additions that had been added over the years. He said these have all contributed to a tight site and an overwhelmed north side of the resource. The intent of the applicant is to take some these off, remove the existing garage and CDU and construct a new single story one car garage on the alley and renovate the interior of the resource. He then showed a site plan of the existing conditions and detailed some the current distances between structures. He said their proposal will reduce the size of the outbuilding and give some breadth to the historic resource achieving the 5-foot requirement for separation between the two structures. Next, he showed a few 3D renderings of the proposed new garage and an elevation of the front façade, stating that they will be replacing all the existing aluminum clad windows with new wood units. They would also be removing a non-historic chimney and existing AC units on the west façade. He showed a sample of a lap siding material proposed for the north side of the existing addition, trying to differentiate old from new. He went over some details of their proposed new design for the historic chimeny, changing from a stepped look to more of a tapered look as consistent with historic photos. He continued detailing some of the proposed changes and the design of the new garage. He showed more historic pictures of the property, highlighting a few details. He then turned it over to Mr. Matt Moritz to go over the landscape plan. Mr. Moritz went over the details of their proposed plan. He said that the existing Herbert Bayer fence on the property would be repaired. He detailed some of the proposed materials for the walkways. Ms. Pitchford asked what the disatance was of the current garage from the historic resource. Mr. Rybak said it angled from 1’ to 1’8”. He showed the site plan of the existing conditions to better show this distance. Ms. Thompson asked if the neighbors’ shed was historic, to which Mr. Rybak said he did not believe so. Mr. Fornell said that it looks like there are currently two front doors and was wondering if that was a historic condition or a result of the remodels over time. Mr. Rybak said that the two doors had always been there, but over time the roof over the east door has gotten larger and now matches closer to the west doors making them look similar. Mr. Fornell asked if they were planned on changing those current conditions. Mr. Rybak said they did not intent to change them and showed a few historic pictures to show the evolution of the porch size. Mr. Fornell then brought up the CDU above the garage and asked Mr. Rybak to define a CDU. Mr. Rybak said it was a voluntary caretaker’s unit that was constructed in 1998 for which there was no employee mitigation. Mr. Fornell asked if it was a designated ADU. Ms. Simon said it was a voluntary ADU and that the applicant went through the process to remove the designation and that no mitigation was required because it was voluntary. Ms. Thompson asked for the site plan showing the dimension from the property line to the new proposed garage. Mr. Rybak said it was 5’ to the west and 1’ 6” from the rear property line. Ms. Raymond asked if they intended to keep the front porch railing shown in one of the historic pictures. Mr. Rybak said it does not currently exist and they are not intending on replacing it. 174 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 Staff Presentation: Kirsten Armstrong – Principal Planner Historic Preservation Ms. Armstrong began by going over the background of the property and some details of the lot. She then went over the applicant’s proposals, that include exterior updates to the historic resource, demolition of an existing non-historic two story detached accessory dwelling unit, construction of a new one story, one car garage and requested setback variations. Next, she went over the background of the historic resource and noted it was designated as a landmark property in 1987. She described the original, historic conditions and the additions and alterations that have occurred over the years. She went over the major portions of the applicant’s requests and noted that this project involves a net decrease in floor area due to the removal of some non-historic additions. She presented the proposed site plan pointing out the smaller garage, setback farther from the resource. She went over a summary list of the exterior scope of work and stated that in general, staff finds the design guidelines are met with conditions and most of the recommended conditions in the draft resolution involve details of materials, which staff believes can be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. She noted that there are few topics staff feels need some additional consideration and one of these is the landscaping plan. She said that as proposed, staff finds that it is complex and clutters views of the historic resource. She highlighted a few existing trees that currently somewhat block the view of the resource and the applicant’s proposed addition of another tree in front of the resource will add to the clutter and further block the view, which does not meet design guidelines. She said staff is also concerned about the multiple proposed walkways. Staff recommends a restudy of the landscaping plan to simplify it and that the proposed 4-foot front walkway be reduced to 3 feet. Staff also recommends the front porch be rebuilt per historic photographs if it is found to be original. Next, she talked about the demolition of the detached non-historic ADU and noted that it meets the design guidelines. As far as the requested variations, she noted that the new garage is proposed to be sited in a similar position to the current structure at the rear property line. The current structure has a zero-foot setback and with the new garage the applicant is requesting a 1’ 6” setback, which given the smaller size is in line with the historic configuration of the site and draws construction away from the historic resource. She closed by stating that staff finds that the minor development, demolition, and variation criteria are met with the conditions listed in the resolution and recommends HPC approval. Mr. Fornell said that he did not find there to be a variety of setbacks of neighboring properties along the alley, as staff stated in the memo. He asked if there was evidence of these setbacks. Ms. Armstrong said she did not believe in her response that she discussed varied setbacks and based on the Sanborn map there were mostly consistent setbacks for out buildings at the property lines along the alley. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. BOARD DISCUSSION: Ms. Thompson started with the proposed demolition of the non-historic two-story structure at the back of the property and said that she was ok with it. 175 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 Mr. Fornell asked with the proposed demolition and subsequent reduction in floor area what the difference in the resulting total floor area would be compared to the total allowable floor area for the lot. Ms. Pitchford commented that she liked a lot about this project, especially that they are reducing the mass, but also restoring the Bayer fence and the chimney. Ms. Thompson moved on to discuss the architectural elements and the lightwell guards. She did not have an issue with the vertical railings. Mr. Fornell stated that they usually asked that lightwell guards not be visible. Ms. Thompson believed that the building department was changing their requirements, going to vertical rails. There was some discussion on the life safety reasoning for the change in requirements. The other commissioners were all ok with the proposed horizontal bars on the vertical railings. Ms. Thompson spoke about the proposed siding materials and thought that there were too many different materials on an already complicated structure. She asked if the applicant would be ok with using the same siding on the new garage as the north side of the main structure. This would keep anything new the same. There was some discussion about this. Mr. Fornell asked if the applicant had found the floor area numbers he was asking about earlier. Mr. Rybak said the allowable is 3,240 square feet, existing is 3,227 and the proposed after demolition would be 2,447. Mr. Fornell asked if they would be eligible to request historic TDRs, to which Ms. Simon said yes. Ms. Raymond stated that the variation request for the new garage was consistent with where the existing building is, just making it straight, and consistent with other historic buildings, so she was ok with the request. Ms. Thompson did not believe she had enough context to approve the setback variation at this time. She said that when she visited the site, she could not tell how close some of the neighboring structures were to property lines. She would need more information about the setbacks of the surrounding structures along the alley on that block. Mr. Rybak responded, stating that their proposed siting was based on the existing conifer trees on the west property line. They are placing their new foundation in the east west direction so that they are not disturbing the roots of those trees and in the north south direction to meet the required 5-foot separation between buildings, which is something that does not exist currently. He stated that if they do not get the rear setback variation, they do not have a garage. Ms. Thompson argued that they could flip or mirror the orientation of the garage and meet the separation requirements. Mr. Rybak responded that a flip would not work, again because of the neighboring trees and the foundation. As it was approaching 7:00pm, Ms. Thompson moved to extend the meeting until 7:15pm. Mr. Fornell seconded. All in favor, motion passes. Ms. Thompson moved on to discuss the landscape plan and agreed with staff that the proposal for three walkways in the front of the house was a little overwhelming but was fine with keeping the four-foot front walkway. Ms. Raymond agreed that there was too much hardscape in the front yard because it is not historic. 176 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 26TH, 2023 Mr. Moyer agreed about the hardscape and walkways but noted that people would still walk around the house regardless and he would be ok with a dirt path. Ms. Thompson was also ok with the proposed tree. MOTION: Ms. Thompson moved to approve the next resolution in the series with the following edits. To remove condition #2 and to amend current condition #3 to remove the language requiring the removal of the rocky mountain maple from the landscape plan. Also, to simplify the landscape plan in zones A and B to be reviewed by staff and monitor. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; Mr. Warwick, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 7-0 vote, motion passes. Ms. Pitchford and Mr. Warwick were assigned as monitors for 420 W. Francis St. and Ms. Raymond was assigned monitor for 205 W. Main St. ADJOURN: Ms. Thompson motioned to adjourn the regular meeting. Mr. Moyer seconded. All in favor; motion passes. Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 177 HPC Resolution # 10, Series of 2023 Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION #10 (SERIES OF 2023) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MINOR DEVELOPMENT, DEMOLITION, AND SETBACK VARIATION REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 420 WEST FRANCIS STREET, LOTS N AND O, BLOCK 34; CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-13-005 WHEREAS, the applicant, MD Holdings Aspen, LLC, 9100 Burning Tree Road, Bethesda, MD 20817, represented by David Rybak, Rybak Architecture and Development, P.C., 600 E Hopkins Avenue, Suite 303, Aspen, CO 81611, has requested HPC approval for Minor Development, Demolition, and Setback Variations for the property located at 420 West Francis Street, Lots N and O, Block 34; City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Minor Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.C of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of the Demolition, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.080, Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.C, Benefits, Variations; and WHEREAS, as a historic landmark, the site is exempt from Residential Design Standards review; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with applicable review standards and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on July 26, 2023. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comment, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval as proposed by a vote of 7 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 178 HPC Resolution # 10, Series of 2023 Page 2 of 4 Section 1: Approval That HPC hereby approves Minor Development, Demolition and Setback Variations for 420 W. Francis St. with the following conditions: 1. The following variations are approved: • a setback variation of 3’-6” from the required 5’ rear setback to a 1’-6” rear setback 2. Restudy the landscaping plan to simplify the landscaping in Zones A and B. A final landscaping plan must be provided for staff and monitor review and approval prior to building permit application. 3. A 1’ gravel filled maintenance border is required around the entirety of the historic resource. 4. Replacement windows on the historic resource, excluding those proposed on the north addition, must be painted wood, double hung units, with no metal cladding. The dimensions of the window components, such as stiles and rails, will be reviewed for consistency with typical 19th century windows in Aspen. Spacers between all proposed insulated glass must be a dark color. Updated specification sheets will be reviewed by staff and monitor prior to building permit application. 5. Further study of the entry porch railing is requested. Additional detail to be provided to staff and monitor. 6. Proposed vents and flue caps must be dark colored and as flush as possible to the building. 7. A plan to return the historic chimney to the corbelled, V-shape, seen in 1960s photographs, must be provided for staff and monitor review and approval prior to building permit application. Methods to minimize damage to any remaining historic brick should be discussed in the chimney plan. 8. Specification for roof flashing material, and snow stops must be provided for staff and monitor review prior to building permit application. Painted or galvanized metal in a dark color is preferred. Snow clips are preferred to snow rails. 9. At building permit application, plans must include a detail indicating that the proposed window well guardrails will not terminate into the walls of the historic resource. 10. Revise the stone veneer application to the foundation of the addition to differentiate the foundation from the historic resource. Updated material must be reviewed by staff and monitor prior to building permit application. 11. The southwest entry porch must only have either can lights or a single sconce. Can lights are recommended. An updated exterior lighting plan must be provided for staff and monitor review prior to building permit application. 12. Fire Department Connection (FDC) hookup and strobe must be sensitively placed. The casing for the strobe must be white. 13. Per referral comments received by the Parks Department, continue to work with the Parks Department regarding tree protection, tree removal and required mitigation, and provide an explanation of methodology for the preservation and enhancement of the existing lilacs at building permit application. Section 2: Material Representations 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 Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development 179 HPC Resolution # 10, Series of 2023 Page 3 of 4 approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 3: Existing Litigation 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: Severability 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. Section 5: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site-specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 420 West Francis Street. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 26th day of July, 2023. 180 HPC Resolution # 10, Series of 2023 Page 4 of 4 Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ________________________________ ________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Kara Thompson, Chair ATTEST: ________________________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 181 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Clare McLaughlin, Sustainability Programs Administrator THROUGH: Tessa Schreiner, Sustainability Manager; CJ Oliver, Director of Environmental Health and Sustainability; Phillip Supino, Director of Community Development MEMO DATE: September 5, 2023 MEETING DATE: September 26, 2023 RE: Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2023 – First Reading Proposed Code Amendments to Building IQ REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that City Council review and approve Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2023, which amends Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2022 on First Reading. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: In January 2022, the City adopted science- based targets that direct Aspen to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 63% by 2030 and by 100% by 2050. Building sector emissions account for 57% of Aspen’s total emissions, therefore, reducing emissions from buildings is the most important strategy to reach the City’s targets. Council regulates the built environment and addresses these emissions through Title 8, which includes leading- edge building and energy codes for new and existing buildings. Building IQ augments the City’s existing building code to address emissions from existing buildings.. Without Building IQ, which includes benchmarking and developing a building performance standard, the City will not reach its climate goals. Building IQ requirements: Building IQ works to address emissions from existing buildings through a phased, two- part program: the first phase is benchmarking, and the second phase is building performance standards (BPS). Programs like Aspen’s are being implemented across the nation (e.g., City of Boston, City of Chula Vista, State of Colorado, City of Denver, Federal Government, New York City, City of St. Louis, State of Washington, Washington D.C.). For a matrix comparing finalized and signed BPS laws among other jurisdictions, see Appendix A. For a map of jurisdictions committed to developing and passing BPS policies, see Appendix B. This is a nationally accepted regulatory model for addressing emissions in existing buildings. 182 2 Benchmarking is the process in which building owners track their building’s energy and water use over time and report data to the City annually. Benchmarking data set a baseline for understanding how a building is performing and where opportunities exist in buildings to make efficiency improvements over time. The data collected provides valuable information to develop better targeted and supportive programs for property owners to assist the community in meeting adopted emissions reductions targets. The second phase, a BPS, responds to the baseline data found in benchmarking and requires buildings owners and tenants to reach a certain standard related to energy use, GHG emissions, and water use, which may require upgrades, depending on the building performance. The specific performance standards and metrics for a BPS in Aspen are under development, with the support of the BPS Stakeholder Committee (Appendix C includes a list of Committee members). Creating a BPS for existing buildings is similar to building and energy codes for new buildings –mechanisms to improve building performance, health, safety, and to support the City’s multi-decade response to the climate crisis. Building Performance Standards Stakeholder Committee: The Building IQ ordinance adopted by Council in 2022 requires staff develop a BPS through a stakeholder engagement process. Beginning in January 2023, City staff launched the BPS Stakeholder Committee (Committee), a group of 24 stakeholders representing expertise and interests across multiple areas and sectors including: building owners and managers, building industry professionals (i.e., engineers, planners, architects), City of Aspen Community Development; energy efficiency and climate- focused nonprofits, local utilities, and a public participation/communications representative. The charge of the Committee is to provide input to City staff in developing draft BPS Guidelines for existing buildings that are responsive to the economic and practical realities of building ownership and management, and help the City reach its goal of zero GHG emissions by 2050. The Committee’s charter can be found in Appendix D. The BPS Guidelines will serve as the guiding document for the BPS, establishing which buildings will need to meet the BPS, a timeline, performance metric(s), baseline metric(s), alternate compliance options, and violations and enforcement for buildings that do not meet their set BPS. Thus far, the Committee has met for four, three-hour sessions between January and April. They discussed the goals, purpose, and desired outcomes for BPS; which building types and sizes to cover; potential performance metrics and timelines; potential policy options for energy efficiency; potential policy options for beneficial electrification; technical and financial support; and potential alternative compliance options. Committee members also volunteered to participate in working groups, which investigated related topics including equity and affordability and workforce. BPS Stakeholder Committee request: Modeling the approach taken by other communities with similar programs , the City had planned to convene the Committee monthly between January and May 2023, developing final recommendations over the summer. However, a t the March and April BPS 183 3 Stakeholder Committee meetings, stakeholders asked for additional cost information to support more informed discussion and recommendations on energy efficiency and beneficial electrification policy options. Specifically, they asked for on-the-ground, local examples of what making building improvements to reduce GHG emissions could look like—both what technology is available and what it could cost. In response to this feedback, the City shifted and updated the Committee process address this feedback and meet the needs of stakeholders by spending additional time gathering more data. This community-responsive approach to the stakeholder process is critical to the success of the Building IQ program, as policy design must consider the on-the-ground realities of buildings in Aspen and its unique building stock relative to other jurisdictions (i.e., smaller buildings, different mechanical equipment use, cold climate). Staff response to stakeholders’ request: To gather the new information requested by stakeholders, stakeholders and staff decided to conduct case studies to inform collective thinking about how best to structure the eventual building performance standards. To collect and analyze the requested loc al data, the City has contracted Iconergy to conduct eight ASHRAE Level 2 building audits during the summer and fall of 2023. Audits include four City -owned buildings and four privately-owned commercial and multi-family buildings. These eight buildings represent a mix of sizes and use-types most prevalent in Aspen’s multifamily and commercial building stock. From these building audits, Iconergy will assess the economics of implementing energy conservation and electrification measures relative to projected energy savings and emissions reductions. Ultimately, this information will be presented to the Committee in the fall when the group resumes meetings. These case studies will help stakeholders better understand the likely benefits, costs, and other potential implications of a BPS policy in Aspen. DISCUSSION Update Guidelines Date Ordinance No. 05 included a specific date by which staff would return to Council for adoption of proposed BPS standards (October 1, 2023). Responding to the Stakeholder Committee’s request for more data by gathering data on local buildings and running the best possible process requires additional time and analysis. The original October date was included in the ordinance to create clarity for Council and the community on how the program would be developed and implemented. In learning from the Stakeholder Committee and responding to them, staff has realized that an arbitrary deadline could serve as an obstacle to getting the BPS ordinance right. As such, Ordinance No. 16 amends the original ordinance to remove the date by which staff is required to return to Council with a BPS ordinance. Staff will keep Council informed in 2024 through information only memos on the progress of BPS development with the committee. Adopting Guidelines Currently, Ordinance No. 05 does not specify how the Guidelines will be adopted. Ordinance No. 16, as proposed by staff, adds language to specify that Guidelines will be 184 4 adopted through ordinance. This amendment will create clarity for Council and the community as to next steps in the development of the program. ALTERNATIVES: Council could not approve removing the date by which staff bring BPS guidelines to Council, as recommended by the BPS Stakeholder Committee, which would impact the amount of stakeholder feedback considered in the development of the Guidelines. Should Council not favor removing the date, staff will return to Council as soon as is practicable with a BPS ordinance. However, because of a truncated process, that ordinance would not be as responsive to stakeholder input as Council and the community would otherwise expect. Additionally, Council could not approve staff’s recommended path for Guidelines adoption and recommend an alternative pathway. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There is no direct financial impact to either proposed change. Staff has been directed to create a Building IQ implementation funding plan as per Council Protect the Environment goal, which staff will bring to Council in Q3 2024. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Building IQ (benchmarking and building performance standards) will drive environmental impact at scale necessary to respond to the climate emergency. Benchmarking provides data and tools for energy management and consumption reduction for most of Aspen’s commercial and multifamily square footage. Building Performance Standards will require buildings to mee t a standard that will help the City reach its climate goals. Building IQ is an integral part of the Aspen Sustainability Action Plan (ASAP) and enables future ASAP actions, furthermore, it is a central component of Council’s 2023-2025 goal to Protect the Environment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend Council approve Ordinance 16, Series of 2023 on first reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Appendix A: Comparison Matrix of U.S. Building Performance Standards Appendix B: National Building Performance Standards Coalition Member Map Appendix C: BPS Stakeholder Committee Roster Appendix D: BPS Stakeholder Committee Charter 185 Comparison of U.S. Building Performance Standards August 2023 GOVERNMENT POLICY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT EXEMPTIONS City/County/State Boston MA Name Building Emissions Reduction and Disclosure Ordinance (Chpt VII, Sec 7-2.1 & 7-2.2) Year Enacted 2021 Covered Buildings All Public/Gov’t. Comm & MF buildings ≥ 20,000 sq. ft., 15 residential units Performance Metrics Annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (kgCO2e/sq. ft./year) Performance Targets/Standards Building targets are set by building type on an emissions intensity basis, each building’s target being multiplied by its gross floor area (blended average for multi-use buildings). Buildings must meet their targets annually starting in 2025, with the targets becoming more stringent every 5 years. Building owners can apply for an individual compliance schedule achieving 50% emissions reduction by 2030 and 100% by 2050 using a 2005 or later baseline. Compliance Cycle Annually starting in 2025 for buildings ≥ 35,000 sq. ft. and 2030 for those between 20,000 - 34,999 sq. ft., with emissions targets ratcheting down every 5 years thereafter until zero carbon in 2050. Compliance Pathways Buildings must meet emissions targets based on their use type, or their individual compliance schedule aligned with a 50% reduction by 2030 and 100% reduction by 2050 targets. Buildings with more than one primary use may comply with a blended CO2 emission standard. Failure to comply with emission standards will result in a fine of $1000 a day for non-residential buildings 35,000 sq. ft. or two or more buildings on a parcel ≥ 100,000 sq. ft and for residential buildings ≥ 35,000 sq. ft. or with 35 dwelling units or more. Failure to comply with emission standards will result in a fine of $300 a day for non-residential buildings ≥ 20,000 sq. ft. but < 35,000 sq. ft. and for residential buildings ≥ 20,000 sq. ft. but < 35,000 sq. ft. or with ≥ 15 dwelling units but < 35 dwelling units. Does not cover state, county, or federal buildings. Exemptions for newly constructed buildings, those with permits for demolition, and those facing spe- cific financial distress, single family housing and multifamily housing with under 15 dwelling units. Cambridge MA Name Building Energy Use Disclosure Ordinance (Ordinance 2021-26) Year Enacted 2023 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t ≥ 10,000 sq. ft., Comm ≥ 25,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics GHG Intensity Performance Targets/Standards Straight line trajectory from baseline to zero carbon by 2035 for buildings ≥ 100,000 sq. ft. and 2050 for buildings ≥ 25,000 - 99,999 sq. ft. For covered properties that receive their certificate of occupancy in the years 2018 through 2024, the baseline shall be the average GHG for the first two full calendar years following the certificate of occupancy. Compliance Cycle Annually for buildings ≥ 25,000 sq. ft. with emissions targets ratcheting down every 5 year compliance cycle thereafter until net-zero in 2035 for buildings ≥ 100,000 sq. ft. and 2050 for buildings ≥ 25,000 - 99,999 sq. ft. Compliance Pathways Buildings must meet targets based on their use type, with targets becoming more stringent ever 5 year compliance cycle until net-zero in 2035 for buildings ≥ 100,000 sq. ft. and 2050 for buildings ≥ 25,000 - 99,999 sq. ft. Up to $300 per day per violation, each day counting as a separate violation. TBD Note: Government abbreviated as “Gov’t”; Multifamily abbreviated as “MF”; Commercial abbreviated as “Comm” 186 Comparison of U.S. Building Performance Standards | 2IMT – August 2023 GOVERNMENT POLICY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT EXEMPTIONS City/County/State Chula Vista CA Name Building Energy Saving (Ordinance 3498) Year Enacted 2021 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t, Comm, & MF ≥ 20,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics ENERGY STAR score or Weather Normalized Site EUI Performance Targets/Standards Conservation requirements differ based on property type. Non-residential and multifamily both have conditions under which they have the option of adhering to performance target requirements. Non-residential buildings are required to meet EITHER the performance targets OR both the audit requirements and minimum improvement requirements. Multifamily properties are subject to Multifamily Prescriptive Measure requirements; multifamily properties with significant common load are required to meet EITHER the performance tar- gets OR both the audit requirements and minimum improvement requirements. Performance targets are based on ENERGY STAR Score and if that is not available, EUI-WN : baseline year ENERGY STAR Score 0-45 or EUI-WN 80+ : 30% baseline year ENERGY STAR Score 46-65 or EUI-WN 51-79: 20% baseline year ENERGY STAR Score 66-79 or EUI-WN 19-50: 10% baseline year ENERGY STAR Score 80+ or EUI-WN 0-18: none Compliance Cycle Every five years beginning 2023 for buildings ≥ 50,000 sq. ft. and 2026 for buildings ≥ 20,000 sq. ft. Compliance Pathways Buildings that do not qualify as HPBs must complete conservation requirements to comply. Multifamily buildings must perform a minimum number of prescriptive measures within all tenant spaces where utility costs are borne by tenants. Non-residential buildings and Multifamily buildings with significant owner-paid energy use must either (1) achieve a minimum EUI improvement or (2) complete an Energy Audit and Retrocommissioning and meet a smaller mandatory minimum improvement by the end of the next compliance cycle. Non-compliance may result in a notice of failure to comply; on the 60th day following the issuance of said notice, public disclosure of non-compliance and monetary fines may be issued. Maximum fine amounts depend on property size: 20,000-49,999 sq. ft. up to $750, 50,000-99,999 sq. ft. up to $1,500, 100,000+ sq. ft. up to $2,250. The law does not apply to county, state, and feder- al buildings, Metropolitan Transit Service buildings, or buildings owned by the Chula Vista and Sweet- water School Districts. Properties meeting any of the following conditions are exempt from the performance standard requirements: • Properties that have been occupied less than 5 years • Properties in financial distress • Properties with a permit for demolition that have already commenced demolition work • Properties that have not been previously subject to the benchmarking requirement Colorado Name Energy Performance for Buildings (HB 21-1286) Year Enacted 2021 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t, Comm, & MF ≥ 50,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics TBD in regulations by the Air Quality Control Commission. Site EUI is recommended Task Force metric. Performance Targets/Standards TBD by Air Quality Control Commission in consultation with a BPS task force. Standards must achieve a GHG emissions reduction of 7% from 2021 levels by 2026 and 20% from 2021 levels by 2030. The task force must also recommend to the Commission a process for determining standards for 2030 to 2050. Compliance Cycle Every four years, beginning in 2026 and going through 2050. Compliance Pathways TBD in regulations by the Air Quality Control Commission. An owner that fails to comply may be subject to a civil penalty of up to $2000 for a first violation and up to $5,000 for each subsequent violation. Storage facilities, stand-alone parking garages, or airplane hangars that lack heating and cooling. Buildings where more than half of gross floor area is used for manufacturing, industrial, or agricultural purposes. Single family homes, duplexes, and triplexes. 187 Comparison of U.S. Building Performance Standards | 3IMT – August 2023 GOVERNMENT POLICY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT EXEMPTIONS City/County/State Denver CO Name Energize Denver (Bill 21-1310) Year Enacted 2021 Covered Buildings All Comm & MF buildings ≥ 25,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics Weather Normalized Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) Performance Targets/Standards Each covered building must meet a maximum site EUI standard based on its occupancy type by the year 2030. Buildings are required to meet interim perfor- mance targets in 2024 and 2027 to ensure progress toward the final, 2030 standard. Interim targets are determined according to the building’s “trajectory” from its baseline site EUI performance in 2019 to the final site EUI standard for its property type. Compliance Cycle Covered buildings must comply with interim performance targets in 2024 and 2027 before meeting a final performance standard in 2030. Compliance Pathways To comply buildings must meet the interim and final performance targets and maintain that level of performance afterward. The law allows buildings to deduct the value of investments in onsite or offsite solar from its measured site EUI. Renewable short- term contracts can now be used for interim targets to offset building electricity usage. • 2024 - 2026 up to 20% of building’s electricity usage. • 2027 - 2029 up to 10% of the building’s electricity usage. • Long-term only after 2030. An owner that violates any provision of the ordinance or its rules and regulations is subject to a civil penalty of up to $0.70 per year for each required kBtu reduction that the owner’s building failed to achieve in that year. If unpaid within 180 days the penalty becomes a lien on the property. A fine of $2000 can be levied for failing to correct benchmarking errors, or knowingly submitting inaccurate information, or withholding information. Starting in 2031, maintenance penalties may occur if an owner fails to maintain their 2030 target indefinitely, as defined as the annual site EUI being 5% worse than the maintenance target. The penalty is $0.30/kBtu. Exemptions currently exist for some buildings related to demolition, manufacturing and agricultural processes, low occupancy, construction, and difficulty obtaining energy data. Federal BPS Name Federal Building Performance Standard (Section 510(b)(ii) of E.O. 14057) Year Enacted 2022 Covered Buildings Refer to Section 3.2 - Federal BPS Applicable Facilities Performance Metrics MT CO2e/yr. The performance pathway is measured through annual scope 1 GHG emissions from fossil fuels combusted on-site. Performance Targets/Standards 30% (by total building area) of each Federal agency’s buildings to eliminate all Scope 1 emissions — on-site fossil fuel use — by 2030. No later than 2028, CEQ will set new targets for years 2038 and 2045 for the per- centage of buildings that every agency must electrify. Compliance Cycle Agencies will capture data in their annual Compliance Tracking System (CTS) reporting to FEMP (Federal Energy Management Program) based on forthcoming guidance from CEQ and FEMP. Reporting will begin as part of the FY 2024 CTS data report. Agencies will set annual progress targets in consultation with CEQ and OMB (Office of Management and Budget), beginning with FY 2024. CEQ and OMB will review progress annually and assess satisfaction in FY 2030. Compliance Pathways Performance pathway: Facility achieves zero scope 1 emissions from on-site fossil fuel emissions. The federal BPS document does not mention penalties. 188 Comparison of U.S. Building Performance Standards | 4IMT – August 2023 GOVERNMENT POLICY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT EXEMPTIONS City/County/State Maryland Name Climate Solutions Now Act (SB 528) Year Enacted 2022 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t, Comm, & MF buildings ≥ 35,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics Net direct emissions standards (kg CO2e per square foot) for interim standards and Site EUI Standards (kBTU per square foot) for the final standard for 2040 and beyond. Performance Targets/Standards Existing buildings over 35,000 square feet achieve a 20% reduction in net direct greenhouse gas emissions on or before January 1, 2030, as compared with 2025 levels for average buildings of similar construction; and net–zero direct greenhouse gas emissions on or before January 1, 2040. Compliance Cycle Five year cycle starting in 2030 and final standards in 2040. Compliance Pathways Buildings must meet interim and final net direct emissions and final site EUI standards according to their property type. Payments will be based on the social cost of carbon and rules have not been set for this in Maryland as of yet. The Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases in 2030 are estimated to average $230 per metric ton of CO2e. Single family, fast food restaurants, food services, restaurants, and parking are exempt from BPS. Montgomery County MD Name Building Energy Use Benchmarking and Performance Standards (Bill 16-21) Year Enacted 2022 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t, Comm, & MF buildings ≥ 25,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics Normalized Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) Performance Targets/Standards Trajectory approach, numerical values still to be set. Compliance Cycle 5 years. Uses IMT’s trajectory approach. Requirements phase-in by building type/size. Properties will have to meet 1 interim standard five years from their start date and a final standard 5 years after that. Compliance Pathways If owners believe they will be unable to meet the standards by the deadline or will be exceptionally burdened by doing so, they may propose an alternative compliance plan for consideration by the Building Energy Improvement Board. Still to be determined. Currently, the County has the authority to assess a fine of up to $1,000. State legislation that would allow the County to increase fines above the statutory capped and increase the amount up to $10 per square foot of gross floor area to enforce local building energy performance laws failed in 2022 session. Single family homes. Buildings where 10% or more of their total floor space is used for public assembly in a building without walls; warehousing; self-storage; or a use classified as manufacturing and industrial or transportation, communication, and utilities. 189 Comparison of U.S. Building Performance Standards | 5IMT – August 2023 GOVERNMENT POLICY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT EXEMPTIONS City/County/State New York City NY Name Sustainable Buildings NYC (Local Law 97) Year Enacted 2019 Covered Buildings Comm & MF buildings ≥ 25,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics Annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (tCO2e/sq. ft.) Performance Targets/Standards Targets change every five years to allow fewer building emissions. Building emissions limits are set for each building by multiplying the corresponding building type’s building emissions intensity limit (in tCO2e/sq. ft.) by the building’s gross square floor area (in sq. ft.). Greenhouse gas emissions (building emissions) for a building are calculated by multiplying the total energy consumption of each fuel type consumed on the building’s premise (utility electricity, natural gas, #2 and #4 fuel oils, district steam, other; all in kBtu) by the corresponding greenhouse gas coefficient for that fuel type (in tCO2e/ kBtu) and totaling the resulting emissions. Compliance Cycle Covered buildings must comply annually beginning in 2024. Emissions limits become increasingly stringent every five years. Compliance Pathways Buildings must meet the standard annually, but buildings can use RECs and offsets to compensate for going over the emissions limits. Additionally, the City is studying a carbon trading system so buildings that do not meet the annual emissions limits could buy credits from buildings that are below the limits. Exceeding annual building emissions limit: Civil penalty of not more than an amount equal to the difference between the building emissions limit for such year and the reported building emissions for such year, multiplied by $268. Failure to file a report: Penalty no more than an amount equal to the gross floor area of such covered building, multiplied by $0.50, for each month that the violation is not corrected within the 12 months following the reporting deadline; provided, however, that an owner shall not be liable for a penalty for a report demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this article if such report is filed within 60 days of the date such report is due. False statement: Fine of not more than $500,000 or imprisonment of no more than 30 days, or both, in addition to a civil penalty of not more than $500,000. • Single family homes; • Industrial facility used for generating electric power or steam; • Dwellings less than three stories consisting of attached, detached, or semi-detached housing for which owners are responsible for HVAC and hot water; • City buildings; • NYC Housing Authority buildings; • Rent-regulated accommodation; • Real estate owned by religious corporations and used as a place of public worship; • Property owned by a housing development fund organized pursuant to article 11 of the Private Housing Finance Law. Oregon Name Energy Performance Standards (HB 3409) Year Enacted 2023 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t & MF ≥ 35,000 sq. ft., Comm ≥ 20,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics EUI Performance Targets/Standards TBD Compliance Cycle Every five years beginning July 2025. Compliance Pathways TBD $5,000 plus continuing violations assessed daily; total may not exceed $1/yr/sq. ft. Primary use for is manufacturing or another industrial use, as defined in accordance with the following use designations of the International Building Code; designated as an historic property under a state or local statute, ordinance, rule or other legislative act. See Section 10 for specific provisions. 190 Comparison of U.S. Building Performance Standards | 6IMT – August 2023 GOVERNMENT POLICY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT EXEMPTIONS City/County/State St. Louis MO Name Building Energy Performance Standards (Ordinance 71132) Year Enacted 2020 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t, Comm, & MF ≥ 50,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics Site energy use intensity (EUI) Performance Targets/Standards Standards to be set no lower than the 65th percentile by property type, so that at least 65% of the buildings of the property type have a higher EUI. The Office of Building Performance will issue new performance standards at the end of each compliance cycle. Compliance Cycle Every four years for most buildings, beginning May 2021. Most buildings will have a four year compliance cycle to meet the standard. Qualified affordable housing buildings and houses of worship will have a six year compliance cycle to meet the standard. There will be one year in between each compliance cycle to recalculate the standard for the next cycle. Compliance Pathways There are four compliance pathways under the St. Louis BEPS: 1) Performance Path: properties that hit the target for their Property Type will be compliant for that cycle. 2) Early Adopter Path: Properties that both (a) hit the target for their property type and (b) achieve at least 20%/50% reduction in their EUI compared to Baseline year performance can be compliant for that cycle and the next 1-2 cycles. 3) Narrow the Gap Path: Properties that are unable to hit their target achieve compliance by reducing their EUI to halfway between their property baseline and target. This is only available for the first 2 compliance cycles and to properties that submitted a valid 2018 benchmarking report. 4) Custom Alternative Compliance Path (CACP): Properties that demonstrate they can neither hit their target (Paths 1 & 2) nor Narrow the Gap due to unique limitations may apply for an CACP, which entails undergoing a 3rd-party energy audit and obtaining OBP approval of a proposed plan of action. If data is not reported and an alternative compliance plan is not presented within 60 days of the compliance date, a fine between $1 - $500 is issued for each day beyond the 60 days. Withholding and/or denial of occupancy permits. Single family housing; primarily used for industri- al or manufacturing purposes, water treatment, communications infrastructure, or as a data center; stand alone parking lots or garages that are not a part of a larger property. Other exemptions: • Demolition permit issued or demolition is planned during the compliance cycle; • Financial hardship or if compliance would not be in public interest; • Primary use of building is industrial; • Property is communications infrastructure; • Property is owned by the state or federal government. 191 Comparison of U.S. Building Performance Standards | 7IMT – August 2023 GOVERNMENT POLICY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE ENFORCEMENT EXEMPTIONS City/County/State Washington Name Clean Buildings Performance Standard (HB 1257) Year Enacted 2019 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t ≥ 10,000 sq. ft. Comm & MF ≥ 20,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics Weather-normalized Energy Use Intensity Performance Targets/Standards EUI targets must be no greater than the average energy use intensity for the building’s occupancy type with adjustments for unique energy-using features. EUI targets initially based on ASHRAE standard 100– 2018. Proposed rules set first target at 15% below average EUI for building type. Compliance Cycle Standard must be updated in 2029 and every five years thereafter. Compliance Pathways Buildings must meet the EUI target specified for their building type, or satisfy an investment criteria pathway consisting of an energy audit identifying all cost effective energy efficiency measures. Complete one of the following: - Target EUI path: benchmark building?s performance and calculate EUI target. Meet target by compliance deadline (conditional compliance period of 180 days) - Investment Criteria path: Conduct an audit and identify all EEMs. Identify an optimized bundle of EEMs that provides maximum energy savings without resulting in a savings-to-investment ratio of less than one. The optimized bundle of measures shall be implemented based on the schedule established within the energy management plan. The Department of Commerce may impose a penalty up to $5,000 plus an amount based on the duration of any continuing violation. The additional amount for a continuing violation may not exceed a daily amount equal to $1 per gross square foot of floor area. The Department may raise penalty rates to adjust for inflation. Administrative penalties collected must be deposited into the low-income weatherization and structural rehabilitation assistance account. Federal buildings and buildings belonging exclusively to recognized Tribes are not required to comply with the standard. Historic buildings do not need to meet any requirement that would compromise their historical integrity. Other exemptions: • No Certificate of Occupancy for all 12 months prior to compliance date • Average occupancy less than 50% • Primary use of building is industrial • Primary use of building is agricultural • Building meets conditions of financial hardship Washington DC Name Building Energy Performance Standards and Benchmarking (D.C. Law 22-257) Year Enacted 2018 Covered Buildings Public/Gov’t ≥ 10,000 sq. ft. Comm & MF ≥ 25,000 sq. ft. Performance Metrics ENERGY STAR score or an equivalent metric (source EUI for buildings ineligible for ENERGY STAR). Law directs department to assess a metric based on emissions by 2023. Performance Targets/Standards For buildings that are eligible for an ENERGY STAR score, the building energy performance standard shall be no lower than the District median ENERGY STAR score for buildings of each property type. The District Department of Energy & Environment (DOEE) will issue new performance standards every six years. The law directs DOEE to set campus-wide standards for educational campuses and hospitals. Compliance Cycle Compliance cycles are 5 years long. While standards are recalculated every 6 years. Compliance Pathways Performance Pathway: Reduce site EUI 20% Stan- dard Target Pathway: Reach the standard for the building’s property type (only available for property type groups performing above the national median) Prescriptive Pathway: Conduct audit, create action plan, implement EE measures, complete monitoring, evaluation, and verification. The BEPS Compliance Regulations establish the maximum alternative compliance penalty amounts with the maximum penalty for buildings at ten dollars ($10) per each square foot of gross floor area. The building gross square footage is based on the ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager® calculation as reported on the building’s most recent District Benchmark Results and Compliance Report. The maximum penalty for a building shall be no greater than $7,500,000. Monies collected pursuant to this provision shall be deposited into the Sustainable Energy Trust Fund. DOEE has established exemption criteria for qualifying buildings to delay compliance with the building energy performance requirements for up to three years if the owner demonstrates financial distress, change of ownership, vacancy, major renovation, pending demolition, or other acceptable circumstances determined per criteria set through regulation. 192 Atlanta, GA Boston, MA Cambridge, MA Chicago, IL Columbus, OH Denver, CO Fort Collins, CO Ithaca, NY Los Angeles, CA Howard County, MD Orlando, FL Sacramento, CA San Francisco, CA Seattle, WA Ann Arbor, MI Aspen, CO Grand Rapids, MI Philadelphia, PA Pittsburgh, PA National Building Performance Standards Coalition August 2023 Annapolis, MD Chula Vista, CA Evanston, IL Kansas City, MO New York, NY Portland, OR Prince George’s County, MD Reno, NV St. Louis, MO Savannah, GA Washington, DC Washington Colorado Milwaukee, WI Montpelier, VT Boulder, CO County of Los Angeles San Diego, CA States Counties Cities California Berkeley, CA Minneapolis, MN New Orleans, LA Santa Monica, CA Maryland Montgomery County, MD West Hollywood, CA Oregon 193 APPENDIX C Stakeholder Committee Member Roster Field or Specialty Committee Member Building Owners/Managers 1. Mike Bouchet, Aspen Skiing Company 2. Matthew Gillen, Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) 3. Jimmy Marcus, M Dev Co 4. Kym Ryan, M&W Properties 5. Benjamin Wolff, Frias Property Managers Building Tech 6. August Hasz, REG 7. Joshua Kace, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 8. Ben Levenson, Asset, City of Aspen 9. Bob Narracci, Zoning, City of Aspen 10. Mary Oliver, Design Workshop 11. Dave Rybak, Rybak Architecture & Development, P.C. 12. Derek Skalko, Historic Preservation, 1 Friday Designs 13. Nick Thompson, Buildings, City of Aspen Environment/ Clean Energy/ Sustainability 14. Christine Brinker, Southwest Energy Efficiency Project (SWEEP) 15. Ryland French, Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) 16. Luke Ilderton, Energy Outreach Colorado 17. CJ Oliver, Environmental Health & Sustainability, City of Aspen 18. Amanda Poindexter, United States Green Building Council (USGBC) 19. Erin Sherman, Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) 20. James Burton, Institute for Market Transformation (IMT) Utilities 21. Justin Forman, City of Aspen Utilities 22. Kyle Lord, Holy Cross Energy 23. Jason Auslander, Black Hills Energy Public Participation and City Governance Counsel 24. Carolyn Sackariason, City of Aspen 194 1 City of Aspen Building Performance Standard Stakeholder Committee Charter and Operating Procedures Transforming our Built Environment with Jobs, Health, Equity, and Achievable Climate Solutions Table of Contents Background ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Charge ......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Expected Outcomes .................................................................................................................................... 3 Term and Timeline ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Leading with Equity ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Stakeholder Committee Meeting Format ................................................................................................... 5 Stakeholder Committee Structure .............................................................................................................. 5 Membership ............................................................................................................................................ 5 City Staff .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Workgroups ............................................................................................................................................ 6 Roles and Expectations ............................................................................................................................... 6 Resources to Inform and/or Support Stakeholder Committee Decision Making....................................... 7 Stakeholder Committee Members ............................................................................................................. 8 Draft Work Plan .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Background Buildings account for 57% of Aspen’s greenhouse gas emissions. The City of Aspen’s Building IQ Program directly addresses emissions from the built environment and will help the City reduce emissions to reach our science-based targets of 63% reductions by 2030 and 100% by 2050. 195 2 The Building IQ ordinance, effective June 1, 2022, first focuses on benchmarking, an annual process in which buildings track and report their energy and water consumption over time. Building IQ’s second phase, a building performance standard (BPS), requires property owners to meet performance targets by actively improving their buildings over time. The BPS Stakeholder Committee will help the City of Aspen’s Environmental Health and Sustainability Department (EHS) develop the specific BPS guidelines and targets by providing input and feedback from a broad range of industries, property owners, building users, climate organizations, environmental justice groups, and the community at large. EHS will use this input to inform its recommendations to Aspen City Council on BPS guidelines. Charge The BPS Stakeholder Committee will provide input to City staff in developing draft Building Performance Standards Guidelines for existing buildings that helps the City of Aspen reach its goal of zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Additionally, these Guidelines may consider related opportunities to develop workforce skillsets, foster job creation, and improve healthy and equity. Specifically, the Guidelines must determine: 1) The years by which final and interim performance standards must be reached, before and including the year 2035; 2) The chief performance metric or metrics; 3) The process for advising, soliciting public input on, and making recommendations to Council on performance standards for 2040 and 2050; 4) The definition of BPS-covered buildings required to reach the final and interim building performance standards; 5) The baseline metric for covered buildings with consideration of building type and benchmarking and other energy data; 6) Alternate compliance options by rule that add flexibility for BPS-covered building owners while achieving the same end goal. Such options shall include, but are not limited to, a process to adjust timing for meeting the established building performance standards, a process to adjust the end goal due to a building use or inherent characteristic of the building, and prescriptive options; and 7) Violations and enforcement for buildings that do not meet their set building performance standards by the established required dates. The Guidelines should also consider: Policy features and programs that can be implemented to enhance equitable outcomes Feedback from a broad range of industries, property owners, building users, climate organizations, environmental justice groups, and the community at large; Property types with unique energy needs; Workforce availability and equitable workforce development related to building energy performance; Financial and nonfinancial costs and benefits of upgraded building energy performance; Availability of programs, technical assistance, and incentives to support property owners; and 196 3 How regulations and support could help ensure property owners avoid fines through compliance with performance standards. The Committee’s input will be considered by City staff and summarized in a staff report to City Council. The Report will highlight key themes, areas of strong Committee support and/or agreement, as well as areas of concern and/or divergence of opinion. The greater the level of Committee support, the stronger a particular proposal to City Council is likely to be. Expected Outcomes The BPS Stakeholder Committee will produce a report with recommendations for BPS Guidelines that transition existing buildings to zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. City staff will translate these recommendations into guidelines to be considered and adopted by City Council on or before October 1, 2023. Term and Timeline The Stakeholder Committee is expected to meet more or less monthly from January to May, 2023. Its report will be completed by July 2023. Leading with Equity The City of Aspen’s Policy Agenda states the City is “committed to creating an inclusive and equitable community… In this commitment, we are affirming that our individual and collective diversity in gender, race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, age, sexual orientation, gender identify, citizenship status, education, disability, socio-economic status, or any other identify is a valuable asset to Aspen’s present and future. Accordingly, we will support policies and efforts that have the potential to increase, promote, achieve, and foster inclusivity and equity in Aspen and the great Roaring Fork Valley region.” Inclusive: we strive to give all people a place at the table as we engage in the processes to consider policies and make decisions toward our shared future. We will work to ensure that everyone, regardless of identity, feels welcome and is able to contribute to, and enjoy, the vibrancy of the community. Equitable: the outcomes of our inclusive processes aim to create conditions where all people, especially historically marginalized groups, have full and equal access to the opportunities and resources necessary to thrive in the community. We will identify and remove any structural inequities in our city policies, land use regulations, city charter, or other governing documents. Consistent with this policy agenda, the BPS Stakeholder Committee process will prioritize equity in process and outcomes. This is particularly relevant because the climate crisis disproportionately affects under resourced communities. Under resourced communities are also the least able to afford the investments to improve buildings. In this process, the City of Aspen will prioritize under-resourced constituents’ interests in the development of policy, investments, services, and programs to transition buildings to zero greenhouse gas emissions. 197 4 Specifically, equity is a key principle for developing and implementing the BPS guidelines and equitable outcomes is a key metric for policy success. BPS guidelines must provide support for under- resourced buildings so that under-resourced community members are not additionally energy and housing cost burdened by this policy. Additionally, BPS guidelines should also consider equity as a principle in workforce development so that any recommendations prioritize opportunities for under-resourced communities. Guiding Principles The Committee process will prioritize the following: Reaching Aspen's decarbonization goal. Ensuring the policy is easy to understand and achievable. Ensuring BPS is feasible and practical from the perspective of building owners and managers. Ensuring less resourced buildings are prioritized, e.g., HOAs and other multifamily units. Ensuring the policy is enforceable and has teeth. A focus on people, real human lives and overall well-being. 'Alternative compliance pathways' for buildings should be the exception, not the norm. The BPS should be flexible and responsive to emergent needs and new technologies. In determining efficiency targets, consider focusing on Energy Use Intensity (EUI) rather than carbon emissions, which are more complex to measure. Consider the role of electrification as well as implications for the grid. The BPS should help encourage elements of economy-wide decarbonization, such as grid integration, energy storage, Electric Vehicle (EV) infrastructure, and overall management of energy use. Align the BPS with Aspen’s building code and other programs, with County regulations, and with Colorado’s new building performance standard, to make it easier for buildings to comply. Ensuring we can monitor the BPS to learn, adapt and iterate on the policy going forward. Incentivizing and supporting all buildings to comply, particularly less resourced buildings. Sufficient flexibility and nuance to account for Aspen’s hundreds of historic buildings. Avoiding cost burdens for those least able to afford it; ensure the costs of compliance are not born by the most vulnerable citizens and don’t impact remaining affordable housing in Aspen. Avoiding unintended consequences in terms of costs and energy use. Having transparent conversations about policy trade-offs, from climate impacts to community costs and benefits. Ensuring transparency in implementation, e.g., accessing compliance information. Incentivizing the adaptation of current infrastructure to minimize demolition waste. Consider how other City policies and processes can support desired BPS outcomes, such as aligning the land use code. Keeping Committee discussions sufficiently high-level to develop a realistic framework and fleshing out the BPS over time in light of unique circumstances and/or subsequent policy needs. Use of pilot projects and ‘proof of concept’ case studies where useful to promote learning and build buy-in, receive and incorporate feedback from building owners, and adapt accordingly. Consider the nuanced interplay between energy efficiency and the electric grid. 198 5 Promoting good, livable jobs and support small businesses in the Roaring Fork Valley, with sufficient workforce development to help Aspen transition to zero carbon buildings. A policy that is easily replicable for other jurisdictions in the Valley. Consider large, luxury single-family homes and outdoor heating as significant users of energy, even when fully electrified. A wide range of tools to incentivize compliance, including expedited permitting. Providing buildings with information so they can plan capital expenditures within different compliance periods. Consider outreach as well as technical and financial assistance to ensure successful compliance. Building community awareness about long-term financial, climate, and health-related savings, as well as the upfront costs to buildings. Stakeholder Committee Meeting Format 1. The BPS Stakeholder Committee will hold in-person kick-off and closing meetings with an option for limited hybrid participation. Other Committee meetings are expected to be virtual. 2. Transparency: BPS Stakeholder Committee meeting agendas and summaries will be posted online at https://www.aspen.gov/1245/Building-IQ and available to the public throughout the process. Meetings will not be recorded and will not be open to the public. Opportunities for public comment on municipal processes are always available at council work sessions; the schedule is here https://www.aspen.gov/685/Ways-to-Stay-in-Touch. The public can provide comment via email at PublicComment@aspen.gov. Opportunities for the public to provide feedback on the Stakeholder Committee's recommendation, and to review project process and provide input will be available later this year. 3. Meetings will be held January through May at the end of each month, when possible, for 2.5 hours. Stakeholder Committee Structure The Stakeholder Committee includes the following roles, with specific roles and expectations defined further below. Membership For the BPS Stakeholder Committee, the City of Aspen invited stakeholders from across sectors including property owners, developers, and managers, affordable housing representatives, technical building experts, sustainability and energy advocates, utilities representatives, and communications professionals. A full list of members is provided at the end of this Charter. City Staff Clare McLaughlin, Sustainability Administrator, will lead the BPS Stakeholder Committee process for the City. Other staff who will help support the Stakeholder Committee are: Lauran Garcia, City of Aspen Climate Intern Carolyn Sackariason, City of Aspen Senior Communications Specialist Tessa Schreiner, City of Aspen Sustainability Manager Independent Facilitator 199 6 The Stakeholder Committee will be facilitated by Ryan Golten of the Consensus Building Institute (CBI), who will be an advocate for members’ procedural interests while remaining impartial to the substance of the issues under discussion. Technical Consultant Group 14 Engineering will provide modeling support to assist the Committee in decision making. Workgroups The City may convene topical workgroups as deemed useful by the City and/or Committee to help digest Stakeholder Committee discussions and/or formulate policy ideas and options for the Committee’s consideration. Roles and Expectations Stakeholder Committee members are expected to: Attend all meetings or notify City staff if they cannot attend a particular meeting (there will not be alternates or substitutes, considering the pace and complexity of Committee topics). City staff will incorporate comments from absent members if sent in advance of meetings. Committee meetings will be approximately 2.5 hours monthly from January to May 2023. Prepare for meetings by reviewing materials circulated by staff, considering issues, reviewing the agenda, and engaging with peer community or networks to solicit feedback. Committee members should expect to spend roughly 1-3 hours per month on the above tasks, depending on the nature of their interests and need for peer community input. Try to remain open-minded and avoid judging ideas. Strive to listen actively, bridge gaps in understanding, and seek to resolve differences. Help create an environment that is safe, respectful, and constructive for participation. Stay on track with agenda topics, working on the issues at hand. Provide input based on the perspectives and interests of members and their peer communities. Strive for evidence-based recommendations while recognizing decisions will need to be made in the face of uncertainty and incomplete data. Regularly communicate with peer community regarding issues and ideas being considered by the Stakeholder Committee and bring relevant input or concerns to meetings (note that only official Stakeholder Committee members will be able to participate in meetings themselves). City staff will: Work with the facilitator to develop focused agendas. Circulate materials at least one week before Stakeholder Committee meetings, so members can review them with their peer community and receive input prior to meetings. Provide for all logistics, including virtual meeting needs, scheduling, and direct communications with the Stakeholder Committee. Coordinate effectively among City staff, managers and elected officials. Prepare written materials for Stakeholder Committee discussion and to inform Committee members how their input has been addressed. Provide opportunities for broader public input following the Committee process. 200 7 Provide resources to empower Committee members to share project objectives and solicit input from their peer community. Develop regulatory language based on input received from the Stakeholder Committee in a timely fashion for consideration by City Council. The CBI Facilitator will: Structure and conduct inclusive, productive, and engaged Committee meetings. Work with participants to ensure ground rules are met. Work with City staff to develop meeting agendas, prepare draft and final meeting summaries, and to review other Committee materials as needed. Help participants resolve their differences on the issues raised. Be accountable to the entire Stakeholder Committee and work in a non-partisan and impartial manner. Resources Materials to Inform and/or Support Stakeholder Committee Decision Making This resource list may be updated throughout the Committee process. It is intended to provide helpful background information to inform key discussion areas. Resources specific to each Committee meeting will be sent in advance with meeting materials. BPS BACKGROUND, STRATEGIES, AND BEST PRACTICES What is a BPS Infographic- Institute for Market Transformation (IMT) BPS Implementation Guide – IMT National BPS Landscape – National BPS Coalition/ IMT Leveling up BPS – American Council for Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) Summer Study Mandatory Building Performance Standards: A Key Policy for Achieving Climate Goals - ACEEE Example BPS Task Force Recommendations – Energize Denver Task Force, City of Denver LOCAL CONTEXT Building IQ Website – City of Aspen Environmental Health & Sustainability Department, Climate Action Building IQ Ordinance – City of Aspen City Council Aspen Climate Action Plan – City of Aspen Environmental Health & Sustainability Department, Climate Action (2017 plan, 2023 plan will be shared upon publication) City of Aspen Building and Energy Code Update – City of Aspen Buildings Department Aspen’s Path to 100% Renewable Electricity – City of Aspen Utilities 100 x 30: Our Journey to 100 Travel Guide- Holy Cross Energy EQUITY & WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT Equity and Building Framework – Urban Sustainability Directors Network (USDN), American Cities Climate Challenge, Emerald Cities Collaborative, Upright Consulting 201 8 Equitable Approaches to Building Performance Standards - Building Electrification Institute (BEI) Energy Burden Explainer video - ACEEE Case Study: Saint Paul Career in Climate & Energy Initiative – City of Saint Paul, American Cities Climate Challange, Inclusive Economics Working with a Community Accountability Board – IMT BPS Module: Affordability – IMT ELECTRIFICATION Beneficial Electrification Case Studies- The Climate Action Collaborative for Eagle County Cost Effective Strategies for Electrification – City and County of Denver, Group 14 Engineering Stakeholder Committee Members Many members have expertise and interest across multiple areas and sectors. But to help remember who is who, we have grouped participants according to their primary role. Building Owners/Managers 1. Mike Bouchet, Aspen Skiing Company 2. Matthew Gillen, Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) 3. Jimmy Marcus, M Dev Co 4. Kym Ryan, M&W Properties 5. Benjamin Wolff, Frias Property Managers Building Tech 6. August Hasz, REG 7. Joshua Kace, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 8. Ben Levenson, Asset, City of Aspen 9. Bob Narracci, Zoning, City of Aspen 10. Mary Oliver, Design Workshop 11. Dave Rybak, Rybak Architecture & Development, P.C. 12. Derek Skalko, Historic Preservation, 1 Friday Designs 13. Nick Thompson, Buildings, City of Aspen Environment/ Clean Energy/ Sustainability 14. Christine Brinker, Southwest Energy Efficiency Project (SWEEP) 15. Ryland French, Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) 16. Luke Ilderton, Energy Outreach Colorado 17. CJ Oliver, Environmental Health & Sustainability, City of Aspen 18. Amanda Poindexter, United States Green Building Council (USGBC) 19. Erin Sherman, Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) 20. James Burton, Institute for Market Transformation (IMT) 202 9 Utilities 21. Justin Forman, City of Aspen Utilities 22. Kyle Lord, Holy Cross Energy 23. Jason Auslander, Black Hills Energy Public Participation and City Governance Counsel 24. Carolyn Sackariason, City of Aspen Draft Work Plan (subject to change) Time Mtg# Purpose: Outcome: January 24, 2023 1 Develop a sense of common purpose, clarify Committee role and workplan, including role of equity, and launch the process. Members have clarity and buy-in on the Committee’s task, including issues to be addressed. February 28, 2023 2 Discuss which buildings are covered; energy efficiency targets and alternate compliance options; and workforce, incentives, and supports needed. Clarify which buildings are covered, efficiency policy options, and what support is needed for compliance. Begin to discuss workforce needs. March 21, 2023 3 Discuss electrification policy and alternate compliance options; and what workforce, incentives and supports needed. Clarify electrification recommendations; begin drafting recommendations for supporting buildings (support, incentives). April 2023 4 Discuss plan to address costs, particularly for low- and middle-income community members; plans for compliance, including considering a review board; and workforce, incentives, and supports needed. Draft recommendations for funding, compliance, and workforce. May 2023 5 Synthesize Committee input and recommendations. Finalize report with recommendations and next steps. 203 Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.60 Energy Benchmarking Ordinance 16, Series 2023 Page 1 of 3 ORDINANCE No. 16 (Series of 2023) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CHAPTER 8.60 ENERGY BENCHMARKING TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS WHEREAS,on or about April 12, 2022, the City of Aspen adopted Ordinance #5, Series of 2022, which added Chapter 8.60, to Title 8 of the Aspen Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance #5, the City of Aspen recognized that anthropogenic climate change and the impacts to theecological and economic health of the community constitutes an emergency and a threat to the health and safety of the residents of the City of Aspen and the global community; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen is a signatory to the US Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement, the Chicago Climate Exchange, and the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, and is committed to the Race to Zero campaign and the provisions of its own Ecological Bill of Rights; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance #5, Series of 2022, the Department of Environmental Health and Sustainability was directed to develop proposed building performance standard guidelines to be considered and adopted by City Council on or before October 1, 2023; and WHEREAS,modeling the approach taken by other communities with similar programs, the City had planned to convene a committee of stakeholders monthly between January and May 2023 to provide input on BPS guidelines, developing final recommendations over the summer. However, at the March and April BPS Stakeholder Committee meetings, stakeholders asked for additional cost information to support more informed discussion and recommendations on energy efficiency and beneficial electrification policy options. Specifically, they asked for on- the-ground, local examples of what making building improvements to reduce GHG emissions could look like—both what technology is available and what it could cost. In response to this feedback, the City shifted and updated the Committee process to address this feedback and meet the needs of stakeholders by spending additional time gathering more data. This community- responsive approach to the stakeholder process is critical to the success of the Building IQ program, as policy design must consider the on-the-ground realities of buildings in Aspen and its unique building stock relative to other jurisdictions (i.e., smaller buildings, different mechanical equipment use, cold climate); and, WHEREAS,based on the foregoing, the Department of Environmental Health and Sustainability is requesting that the provision of Section 8.60.120 (a) setting out a specific date of October 1, 2023 for submission of proposed building performance guidelines be deleted; and WHEREAS,the proposed amendment to Section 8.60.120 (a), with additions in red and deletions reflected in red with a strikethrough notation will read as follows: Pursuant to the powers and authority conferred by the Charter of the City, the Department of Environmental Health and Sustainability shall develop proposed building performance standard 204 Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.60 Energy Benchmarking Ordinance 16, Series 2023 Page 2 of 3 guidelines to be considered and adopted by City Council by ordinance. on or before October 1, 2023. The building performance standards shall address following: ...; and WHEREAS,the remainder of Section 8.60.120, including the remainder of subsection (a), shall remain the same; and WHEREAS,the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1:Section 8.60.120 (a), of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Pursuant to the powers and authority conferred by the Charter of the City, the Department of Environmental Health and Sustainability shall develop proposed building performance standard guidelines to be considered and adopted by City Council by ordinance. The building performance standards shall address following: Section 2: All other provisions of Section 8.60.120, including the remaining portions of subsection (a), shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3:Any scrivener’s errors contained in the code amendments approved by Ordinance #5 (Series of 2022) or set forth herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 4: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any actionor 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 5: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance 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. Section 6: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 7: Public Hearing A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10th day of October 2023, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. 205 Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.60 Energy Benchmarking Ordinance 16, Series 2023 Page 3 of 3 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of September 2023. Attest: ______________________________________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk Torre, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ___ day of October 2023. Attest: _____________________________________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk Torre, Mayor Approved as to form: ___________________________ James R. True, City Attorney 206 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer THROUGH:Sara Ott, City Manager Kim Ferber, Chief of Police Scott Miller, Public Works Director Tyler Christoff, Assistant Public Works Direction MEMO DATE:September 15, 2023 MEETING DATE:September 26, 2023 RE:15 MPH De Facto Speed Limit – Second Reading REQUEST OF COUNCIL:Ordinance 14 approving a new De Facto Speed Limit for the City of 15 mph is presented at the request of City Council. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: During July 17, 2023 Council meeting, the Council directed a change to speed limits be considered for citywide implementation and directed the city manager to bring forward an ordinance to accomplish this work for Council’s consideration. The current de facto speed limit is 20 mph which was established in 2013. This speed limit is applicable where there is not another speed limit posted. Figure 1 below shows the areas in green where the de facto speed limit is relevant. The other colors represent posted speed limits outside the 20 mph limit. 207 Figure 1: Current Speed Limit Postings On September 12, 2023 Council passed the first reading of the 15 mph de facto speed limit. DISCUSSION:The following is a response to the questions brought up during the first reading of Ordinance 14 creating a de facto Speed limit of 15mph. Examples of other communities with de facto speed limits: The towns of Telluride, Crested Butte, and Ridgway have adopted speed limits of 15 mph within town limits. The Town of Telluride has a speed limit of 15 mph on Mainstreet. Telluride Police Chief Josh Comte stated that despite the speed limit, the Town still sees people speeding (20-25 mph) on the sides streets and as they are leaving town. However, once a driver enters the commercial district pedestrian traffic makes it difficult for drivers to reach the 15 mph limit. The Town of Crested Butte has a de facto speed limit of 15 mph, and a seasonal speed limit of 10 mph on Elk Avenue. Crested Butte Community Development Director Troy Russ noted that the Town utilized Streetlight data to support the speed limit reductions. 208 The Town of Ridgway adopted a de facto 15 mph speed limit in 2017. Preston Neil, Town Manager of Ridgway noted that the de facto 15 mph speed limit was adopted after the Town implemented several recommendations from 2011 Traffic Flow plan that were insufficient. Transit Impacts: City of Aspen bus routes operate on headways of 12-30 minutes, depending on the route and the season. Several city routes have tight timelines including but not limited to the Cross Town Shuttle, Castle Maroon, Mountain Valley and Burlingame. If these routes were to struggle as a result of a lower speed limit, routes frequency would have to be reduced or additional buses and drivers would be added to maintain route reliability. RFTA has noted that the Music School buses would be a concern in terms of timing. Additionally, RFTA operations has expressed concern about possible regional effects that could result from the slower movement of its valley services into and out of Rubey Park. With that being said, RFTA has stated that they cannot provide an opinion or quantify impact without conducting an analysis. Examples of the negative impacts of speed differentials: A reduction in the speed limit would not necessarily reduce the average speed vehicles travel. This most commonly occurs when the speed limit is set below what drivers perceive as a safe traveling speed based upon roadway design and surrounding conditions. In turn, there will likely be an increase in the speed differential in vehicle speeds. Statistically, greater variation likely results in increased frequency of accidents and severity of accidents. A frequently cited study titled, “Speed Variance and Its Influence on Accidents” (Garber and Gadiru, 1988), includes the following conclusions: Accident rates increase with increasing speed variance for all classes of roads. Speed variance on highway segment tends to be a minimum when the difference between the design speed and the posted speed limit is between 5 and 10 mph. The difference between the design speed and the posted speed limit has a significant effect on the speed variance. Below is an excerpt taken from a fact sheet on the relation between speed and crashes from FHWA: Institute for Road Safety Research highlights multiple studies that illustrate the impact on speed differentials and crash risk. Aarts and Van Schagen’s 2006 study “Driving speed and the risk of road crashes: A review” noted that streets with large 209 speed variance are less safe than roads with small speed variance. Additionally, several studies conducted in Australia (Kloden et al., 1997; 2001; 2002) illustrates the crash risk for vehicles driving faster or slower than the average speed on the road. As can be seen in Figure 2, vehicles driving faster than the average speed have an increased crash rate. Figure 2. In our analysis of the figure above, we converted speed units from kilometers per hour (km/h) to miles per hour (mph). The figure above reveals a significant decrease in safety on urban roads when there is a speed differential greater than 6 mph; this improvement follows an exponential trajectory. In evaluating the road network of Aspen based on the above safety criteria in figure 4, we found that implementing a city-wide speed limit of 15 mph would have a negative impact on a variety of city streets.The attached graphs highlight the streets where the average speeds exceed 21 mph, thus having a speed differential greater than 6 mph. These roads are indicated with a green circle. We wish to emphasize that the roads marked are not an exhaustive list of all the roads in the city. The analysis is confined to the roads depicted in the graphs due to limitations in the available data. 6 mph (ie Increased Crash Risk) 210 Figure 3 Figure 4. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 West End Design Speed / 85 percentile Average Speed 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Various Streets Design Speed / 85 percentile Average Speed = increased crash risk = increased crash risk 211 Figure 5. Should the Council wish to approve Ordinance 14, the Council will need to clarify if any roadways should have an alternative speed limit.Council’s authority is limited to only those streets that are city streets. At this time Council does not have jurisdiction over HWY 82 or private roads. To support the Council in this discussion, below is a map the Council may wish to consider for alternative speed limits. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Harmony Cemetery Lane Maroon Mill St Park Cir Collectors Design Speed / 85 percentile Average Speed = increased crash risk 212 Figure 6. Regardless of the decision to change the de facto speed limit, the Council should consider installing infrastructure to provide more immediate driver feedback on traveling speeds throughout the city and are further explained in Attachment B which is the first reading of Ordinance 14 . FINANCIAL IMPACTS:There are financial impacts to reducing the de facto speed limit in town. If this increases travel times,there are costs associated with the delay in commuter and bus traffic. If the speed limit reduction results in increased accidents occurrence and severity there are costs associated with damaged infrastructure, equipment, and medical services. The direct financial impacts to the reduction of the de facto speed limit are as follows: Additional signage will cost approximately $15,000 213 o Speed limit radar signage will cost approximately $2,000 - $5,000 per location, and will be installed and regularly maintained by staff. The funding for the de facto speed limit would appear as a fall supplemental appropriations request from the Asset Management Plan (AMP) Fund. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Lowering speed limit to 15 mph can lead to more frequent acceleration and deceleration, resulting in higher fuel consumption for vehicles. Consequently, this may lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. ALTERNATIVES: West End 15mph Speed Limit: Council could direct staff to pursue the reduction of speed limits in the West End only. This option could provide the community an opportunity to provide feedback on the new speed limits and could provide a framework for future speed reductions in the City. Incremental Approach to 15 mph de facto:Apart from the West End, the city does not have comprehensive speed data. Before pursuing a de facto speed limit, over the next few months the city could collect speed data on is road way system. While collecting this data the city could also collect background safety data. When the city does pursue lower speed limits the city could then measure the impacts of the new speed limits. RECOMMENDATIONS:It is important to maintain the distinction between the posted speed limit and actual or observed speed. A speed limit being lowered does not necessarily mean that observed speeds will decrease accordingly. A relevant excerpt from the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy is as follows: Engineering studies show that speed limit signs are not the most significant factor influencing driver speeds and that changing posted speed limits has only a minor effect on driver behavior (FHWA, 1997) 7. Research indicates that a reasonable driver will drive at the speed suggested by roadway and traffic conditions, to the extent of disregarding the posted speed limit. A speed limit that is unrealistic invites the majority of drivers to disregard posted speeds. The roadway and traffic conditions on most of our streets do not suggest to a reasonable driver that they should be going 15 mph. If the speed limit were to be reduced to 15 mph, a negligible change in observed speeds would be expected. Some drivers would lower their speed, but many others would not. This change would result in decreased compliance with the posted speed limits and increased speed variability. It is expected that this would have a negative impact on safety. As a result, MUTCD limits Staff’s ability to approve the reduction of the de facto speed limit. However, because cities may establish their own warrants or modify those 214 suggested by the MUTCD to suit their context, Council can approve the reduction of the de facto speed limit. So, in order to achieve a de facto speed limit of 15 mph, council can approve Ordinance 14. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: My recommendation is not to create a de facto 15 mph speed limit throughout the City of Aspen because: 1. Decreased safety implications: A de facto 15 mph speed limit does not align with the design speed of our City streets. Establishing a speed limit that is below what a street is designed for will increase the speed variance, or the difference in operating speeds of vehicles traveling on the same road as noted above. A roadway’s operating speed is determined by the 85th percentile of speeds observed by drivers in a free-flow condition. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) states that “when a speed limit within a speed zone is posted, it should be within 5 mph of the 85th-percentile speed of free-flowing traffic.” Colorado traffic law requires that a speed limit cannot be higher or lower than the prima facie speed limits (speed limits that “at first appearance” are reasonable and safe under standard conditions) unless a traffic investigation or study can support the change. In 2018, the Colorado Legislature passed House Bill 1191, which allows counties and municipalities to consider road characteristics, current and future development, environmental factors, parking practices, pedestrian and bicycle activity, and crash statistics from the most recent year, along with conducting a traffic investigation or survey when altering speed limits for residential neighborhoods within the city or county’s jurisdiction. 2. Increased need for enforcement and difficulty in enforcing the new speed limits: Reducing speed limits alone will not lead to increased driver compliance. In fact, because many drivers will continue to drive at the speed suggested by the roadway design, incompliance will increase. Increased traffic enforcement is necessary to encourage compliance. Reduced speed limits in already low speed designated areas of the city have limited impact and are challenging to enforce. Reduced speed limits in these areas increase public perception of speeders and citizen complaints, placing further demand on the police department. Please see the attached memo of Chief Ferber’s initial impressions. A review of traffic accidents in Aspen from 2015-2022 found that 15 accident reports noted speed as a factor. Of those 15, there were six incidents that occurred on city streets and noted speeding, excessive speed or traveling over the posted speed limit as a cause for the accident. Of those six accidents, two may have resulted in injuries with one report indicating that injuries were unknown and another report not indicating injury status. 3. Potential impacts to bus routes: Reducing the speed limit to 15 mph will impact local transit. Lower speed limits will have the greatest impact on the already most time- constrained city bus routes. There are five RFTA bus routes operating in the city year- round, with four more running seasonally. The Hunter Creek route and other across city 215 routes, such as Cemetery Lane, will be the most impacted by this speed limit reduction. The Hunter Creek route is already the most time-constrained city route, so much so that bus drivers are often unable to take their breaks to meet scheduled times. At a minimum, I encourage the Council to maintain posted speed limit signs for the arterials and collector streets identified by engineering where speed limits are already posted at higher than 20 mph, maintain 20 mph speed limits for the streets that are most important for local bus routes, and anticipate that additional appropriations will be needed to assist in encouraging compliance. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Draft Model Traffic Code Ordinance - Title 24 – Traffic and Motor Vehicles Attachment B: De Facto 15 mph - First Reading Memo dated 9/12/23 216 ATTACHMENT A Ordinance No.14 Series of 2023 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO ADOPT A CITY WIDE SPEED LIMIT OF 15 MPH WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is more appropriate to have a city wide speed limit at 15 mph. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; Section 1. That Title 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended as follows: TITLE 24 TRAFFIC AND MOTOR VEHICLES1, 2 Chapter 24.04 GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 24.04.020. Model Traffic Code. (a) Adoption. Pursuant to Parts 1 and 2 of Article 16 of Title 31 and Part 4 of Article 15 of Title 30, C.R.S., there is hereby adopted by reference Articles I and II, inclusive, of the 2003 edition of the "Model Traffic Code" promulgated and published as such by the Colorado Department of Transportation, Safety and Traffic Engineering Branch, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, EP 700, Denver, Colorado 80222. The subject matter of the Model Traffic Code relates primarily to comprehensive traffic control regulations for the City. The purpose of the Ordinance and the Code adopted herein is to provide a system of traffic regulations consistent with state law and generally conforming to similar regulations throughout the State and nation. Three (3) copies of the Model Traffic Code adopted herein are now filed in the office of the City Clerk, and may be inspected during regular business hours. (b) Deletions. The 2003 edition of the Model Traffic Code is adopted as if set out at length save and except the following articles and/or sections which are declared to be inapplicable to this municipality and are therefore expressly deleted: Please see the Section on additions and modifications immediately following. 217 (c) Additions or modifications. The said adopted Code is subject to the following additions or modifications: (1) Article I. (D)Model Traffic Code Section 1101(2)(c) is hereby repealed and reenacted to read as follows: (2)Except when a special hazard exists that requires a lower speed, the following speeds shall be lawful: (a)Twenty (20) miles per hour throughout the City of Aspen unless otherwise posted (a) Fifteen (15) miles per hour throughout the City of Aspen unless otherwise posted Section 2: This Ordinance 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 construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion ofthis Ordinance 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. Section 4: A first reading of the ordinance was read and published on the 12th day of September,in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of September2023. ATTEST: _________________________________________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk Torre, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _______day of __________2023. _______________________________ Torre, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 218 _______________________________ ______________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk James R. True, City Attorney 219 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer Jack Danneberg, P.E., Project Manager THROUGH:Sara Ott, City Manager Scott Miller, Public Works Director Tyler Christoff, Assistant Public Works Direction MEMO DATE:August 31, 2023 MEETING DATE:September 12, 2023 RE:15 MPH De Facto Speed Limit REQUEST OF COUNCIL:Ordinance 14 approving a new De Facto Speed Limit for the City of 15 mph is presented at the request of City Council. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: In response to concerns about vehicle traffic safety and volume in the West End neighborhood, Council and staff initiated a project in 2021 that began with a traffic evaluation in accordance with the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy. Council also directed staff to develop a third-party traffic study for outreach and decision-making support. The outcomes of both the traffic calming policy evaluation and the traffic study were presented to Council during a previous work session on August 22, 2022. The recommendation from that traffic study concluded that any physical traffic measures installed in the West End neighborhood would either be ineffective at reducing traffic volume or would significantly impact Main Street traffic congestion; therefore, staff and Council should implement projects to reduce westbound Main Street congestion. City Council members supported the following next steps in that 2022 meeting: 1. The recommendations of the traffic calming policy and traffic study, which do not recommend the installation of infrastructure measures. 2. The review of potential traffic devices such as four-way stop signs, crosswalks, and speed limit reduction. 3. Increased support of existing projects to manage traffic and mobility in Aspen, such as the CDOT approved Highway 82 re-alignment (known as the New Castle Creek Bridge Project or Entrance to Aspen), parking management, transportation demand management, and pedestrian and bicycle masterplan projects. 4. The development of Main Street capacity or efficiency concepts, specifically focusing on Cemetery Lane traffic light efficiency. 220 In support of step number two above, a safety study was commissioned in spring 2023 by Consor Engineering to guide potential safety improvements. The study provided a summary of the challenging traffic characteristics previously identified, the previous traffic control measures implemented or tested, and reviewed analog communities that may provide insights on solutions. It also evaluated three commonly requested elements that residents perceive as solutions to improved pedestrian/bike/vehicle safety. This study was presented to Council on June 19, 2023. The Council requested the following outcomes be brought forward for implementation: 1. Decreasing the speed limit in the West End from 20 mph to 15 mph 2. Adding additional four – way stop controls at additional intersections in the West End 3. An additional cross walk at 4 th and Smuggler 4. Increasing the speed limit sign density in the West End 5. Center line and parking area street markings and temporary curb extensions with the use of flexible delineators 6. Gathering targeted feedback on creating a pedestrian safe route on one side of Smuggler by eliminating parking on one side of the street Later, at the July 17, 2023 Council meeting, the Council directed that the consideration of a change to speed limits be considered for citywide implementation and directed the city manager to bring forward an ordinance to accomplish this work for Council’s consideration. The current de facto speed limit is 20 mph established in 2013. This speed limit is applicable where there is not another speed limit posted. Figure 1 below shows the areas in green where the de facto speed limit is relevant. The other colors represent posted speed limits outside the 20 mph limit. 221 Figure 1: Current Speed Limit Postings DISCUSSION:The attached ordinance is presented at the request of Council. The ordinance will reduce the de facto speed limit from 20 mph to 15 mph. If Council chooses to advance this ordinance to second reading, it is tentatively scheduled for September 26, 2023. Speed limits in the city vary between 10 mph up to 45 mph. Several factors are taken into consideration when choosing an appropriate speed limit. These factors include volume, roadway design, adjacent speed limits, rate of elevation changes, presence of limited sight lines and proximity to parks and schools and other pedestrian and bike generators. Streets are then classified based upon their primary function into different categories. This is a universal classification system used throughout the country. A street that makes several connections to other streets, designed for higher speeds, and high traffic volume, such as Main Street, is classified as an arterial street. This classification has the highest design and maintenance standards. There are also collector streets, which do not serve the volume of a connector street, but perform similar connections. An example is Mill Street. Finally, in Aspen the lowest classification is local streets, such as residential roadways, alleys, etc. 222 Should the Council wish to advance this ordinance, the Council will need to clarify if any roadways should have an alternative speed limit. To support the Council in this discussion, below is a map the Council may wish to consider for alternative speed limits. Figure 2: Alternative Speed Limit Postings Please note, a reduction in the speed limit would not necessarily reduce the average speed vehicles travel. This most commonly occurs when the speed limit is set below what drivers perceive as a safe traveling speed based upon roadway design and surrounding conditions. In turn, there will likely be an increase in the standard deviation between vehicle speeds. Statistically, greater variation likely results in increased frequency of accidents and severity of accidents. Regardless of the decision to change the de facto speed limit, the Council should consider installing infrastructure to provide more immediate driver feedback on traveling speeds throughout the city. These radar signs display real-time vehicle speeds to approaching drivers, reinforcing the awareness of the speed limit. These signs cost approximately $2,000 - $5,000 per install and require regular maintenance by the street department. These signs have been found effective in changing driver behavior. 223 Figure 3: Speed Radar Signage FINANCIAL IMPACTS:There are financial impacts to reducing the de facto speed limit in town. If this increases travel times,there are costs associated with the delay in commuter and bus traffic. If the speed limit reduction results in increased accidents occurrence and severity there are costs associated with damaged infrastructure, equipment, and medical services. The direct financial impacts to the reduction of the de facto speed limit are as follows: Additional signage will cost approximately $15,000 Speed limit radar signage will cost approximately $2,000 -$5,000 per location, and will be installed and regularly maintained by staff. The funding for the de facto speed limit would appear as a fall supplemental appropriations request from the Asset Management Plan (AMP) Fund. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Lowering speed limit to 15 mph can lead to more frequent acceleration and deceleration, resulting in higher fuel consumption for vehicles. Consequently, this may lead to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. ALTERNATIVES: Council could direct staff to pursue the reduction of additional street speed limits. Staff would need to contract out a warrant study for the speed limit reduction and could present findings to council when available. These findings could be available spring 2024. Council could direct staff to pursue the reduction of additional street speed limits without a warrant study. 224 RECOMMENDATIONS:It is important to maintain the distinction between the posted speed limit and actual or observed speed. A speed limit being lowered does not necessarily mean that observed speeds will decrease accordingly. A relevant excerpt from the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy is as follows: Engineering studies show that speed limit signs are not the most significant factor influencing driver speeds and that changing posted speed limits has only a minor effect on driver behavior (FHWA, 1997) 7. Research indicates that a reasonable driver will drive at the speed suggested by roadway and traffic conditions, to the extent of disregarding the posted speed limit. A speed limit that is unrealistic invites the majority of drivers to disregard posted speeds. A frequently cited study titled, “Speed Variance and Its Influence on Accidents” (Garber and Gadiru, 1988), includes the following conclusions: Accident rates increase with increasing speed variance for all classes of roads. Speed variance on highway segment tends to be a minimum when the difference between the design speed and the posted speed limit is between 5 and 10 mph. The difference between the design speed and the posted speed limit has a significant effect on the speed variance. The roadway and traffic conditions on most of our streets do not suggest to a reasonable driver that they should be going 15 mph. If the speed limit were to be reduced to 15 mph, a negligible change in observed speeds would be expected. Some drivers would lower their speed, but many others would not. This change would result in decreased compliance with the posted speed limits and increased speed variability. It is expected that this would have a negative impact on safety. As a result, MUTCD limits Staff’s ability to approve the reduction of the de facto speed limit. However, because cities may establish their own warrants or modify those suggested by the MUTCD to suit their context, Council can approve the reduction of the de facto speed limit. So, in order to achieve a de facto speed limit of 15 mph, council can approve the first reading of Ordinance 14. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: My recommendation is not to create a de facto 15 mph speed limit throughout the City of Aspen because: 1. Decreased safety implications: A de facto 15 mph speed limit does not align with the design speed of our City streets. Establishing a speed limit that is below what a street is designed for will increase the speed variance, or the difference in operating speeds of vehicles traveling on the same road as noted above. A roadway’s operating speed is determined by the 85th percentile of speeds observed by drivers in a free-flow condition. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) states that “when a speed limit within a speed zone is posted, it should be within 5 mph 225 of the 85th-percentile speed of free-flowing traffic.” Colorado traffic law requires that a speed limit cannot be higher or lower than the prima facie speed limits (speed limits that “at first appearance” are reasonable and safe under standard conditions) unless a traffic investigation or study can support the change. In 2018, the Colorado Legislature passed House Bill 1191, which allows counties and municipalities to consider road characteristics, current and future development, environmental factors, parking practices, pedestrian and bicycle activity, and crash statistics from the most recent year, along with conducting a traffic investigation or survey when altering speed limits for residential neighborhoods within the city or county’s jurisdiction. 2. Increased need for enforcement and difficulty in enforcing the new speed limits: Reducing speed limits alone will not lead to increased driver compliance. In fact, because many drivers will continue to drive at the speed suggested by the roadway design, incompliance will increase. Increased traffic enforcement is necessary to encourage compliance. Reduced speed limits in already low speed designated areas of the city have limited impact and are challenging to enforce. Reduced speed limits in these areas increase public perception of speeders and citizen complaints, placing further demand on the police department. Please see the attached memo of Chief Ferber’s initial impressions. A review of traffic accidents in Aspen from 2015-2022 found that 15 accident reports noted speed as a factor. Of those 15, there were six incidents that occurred on city streets and noted speeding, excessive speed or traveling over the posted speed limit as a cause for the accident. Of those six accidents, two may have resulted in injuries with one report indicating that injuries were unknown and another report not indicating injury status. 3. Potential impacts to bus routes: Reducing the speed limit to 15 mph will impact local transit. Lower speed limits will have the greatest impact on the already most time- constrained city bus routes. There are five RFTA bus routes operating in the city year- round, with four more running seasonally. The Hunter Creek route and other across city routes, such as Cemetery Lane, will be the most impacted by this speed limit reduction. The Hunter Creek route is already the most time-constrained city route, so much so that bus drivers are often unable to take their breaks to meet scheduled times. At a minimum, I encourage the Council to maintain posted speed limit signs for the arterials and collector streets identified by engineering where speed limits are already posted at higher than 20 mph, maintain 20 mph speed limits for the streets that are most important for local bus routes, and anticipate that additional appropriations will be needed to assist in encouraging compliance. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Draft Model Traffic Code Ordinance - Title 24 – Traffic and Motor Vehicles 226 Attachment B: Memo re: Aspen Police Department Considerations for 15 mph de facto speed limit 8/25/23 227 ATTACHMENT A Ordinance No.14 Series of 2023 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TO ADOPT A CITY WIDE SPEED LIMIT OF 15 MPH WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is more appropriate to have a city wide speed limit at 15 mph. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO; Section 1. That Title 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended as follows: TITLE 24 TRAFFIC AND MOTOR VEHICLES1, 2 Chapter 24.04 GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 24.04.020. Model Traffic Code. (a) Adoption. Pursuant to Parts 1 and 2 of Article 16 of Title 31 and Part 4 of Article 15 of Title 30, C.R.S., there is hereby adopted by reference Articles I and II, inclusive, of the 2003 edition of the "Model Traffic Code" promulgated and published as such by the Colorado Department of Transportation, Safety and Traffic Engineering Branch, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, EP 700, Denver, Colorado 80222. The subject matter of the Model Traffic Code relates primarily to comprehensive traffic control regulations for the City. The purpose of the Ordinance and the Code adopted herein is to provide a system of traffic regulations consistent with state law and generally conforming to similar regulations throughout the State and nation. Three (3) copies of the Model Traffic Code adopted herein are now filed in the office of the City Clerk, and may be inspected during regular business hours. (b) Deletions. The 2003 edition of the Model Traffic Code is adopted as if set out at length save and except the following articles and/or sections which are declared to be inapplicable to this municipality and are therefore expressly deleted: Please see the Section on additions and modifications immediately following. 228 (c) Additions or modifications. The said adopted Code is subject to the following additions or modifications: (1) Article I. (D)Model Traffic Code Section 1101(2)(c) is hereby repealed and reenacted to read as follows: (2)Except when a special hazard exists that requires a lower speed, the following speeds shall be lawful: (a)Twenty (20) miles per hour throughout the City of Aspen unless otherwise posted (a) Fifteen (15) miles per hour throughout the City of Aspen unless otherwise posted Section 2: This Ordinance 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 construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion ofthis Ordinance 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. Section 4: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 26th day of September,in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of September2023. ATTEST: _________________________________________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk Torre, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _______day of __________2023. _______________________________ Torre, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 229 _______________________________ ______________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk James R. True, City Attorney 230 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM: Kim Ferber, Chief of Police THROUGH: Sara Ott, City Manager MEMO DATE: August 25, 2023 RE:20-mph to 15-mph Speed Regulation Changes REQUEST OF COUNCIL:Identify the level of service desired when considering a change to the de facto speed limit in Aspen. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:In support of City Council’s concern about traffic safety, the Aspen Police Department has directed resources in the west end and other areas of the city to provide education, deterrence, and enforcement as traffic safety countermeasures. Additionally, recent feedback received from the community revealed a desire to see an increase in law enforcement presence in the core and neighborhoods. In support of these requests, staff has directed additional foot, bicycle, and vehicle patrols to increase visibility; community awareness; education; compliance; and when necessary, enforcement of speed and other local, county, and state laws. In years past, the police department has supported the community’s desire to increase visibility by using overtime funds to staff personnel in the west end. To supplement these efforts, VMS signs and radar speed trailers were also deployed as traffic calming strategies. The feedback has been positive and community members have expressed their appreciation for increased law enforcement presence; however, mandatory overtime to meet minimum staffing requirements is a competing priority to other overtime requests and employee fatigue a consideration. DISCUSSION:In support of City Council’s direction, I inquired with law enforcement executives across the State of Colorado, through the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, and requested research results, recommendations, and/or outcomes surrounding 15-mph regulations implemented in their respective jurisdictions. There were few responses; however, coupling responses with my previous experience as a traffic officer, crash reconstruction expert, and Lead Project Manager for the Governor’s Highway Safety Office, the consensus is that reduced speed limits, in already low speed designated portions of the community, are challenging to enforce, create a greater perception of speeders, and increase calls for service. 231 On the side of City Council’s concerns about safety, the comprehensive staffing and operational assessment of the police department completed in 2019 may provide additional insight. The study concluded, in part, there had been a 4% (one employee) increase in sworn positions between 2015 and 2019, workload had increased, and at minimum (depending on schedule and service levels desired) 2.3 additional sworn positions were necessary to meet current demands. City Council has supported the police department with an increase of one sworn FTE, which was assigned to patrol’s staffing, since the study. For City Council’s additional consideration, legislative and organizational demands have increased workload, programs, and program management which has resulted in reduced time for community policing and proactive initiatives. Lastly, Colorado Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) training hours have also increased, criminal investigations are more complex and require more resources than ever. FINANCIAL IMPACTS:There are potential financial impacts to the police department when considering a reduction in the de facto speed limit from 20-mph to 15-mph in Aspen. Staff believes this will increase service requests and expectations of the police department. To meet these requests and provide the level of service City Council and the community desire, the police department proposes an incremental increase to the number of sworn FTE’s, to be implemented over the next five years. An increase to sworn FTE will also have a significant positive impact, to staff, by reducing mandatory overtime and providing a better work-life balance. If supported by City Council, staff will present additional information to help inform a decision about the number of FTEs required to meet current and future service demands. The following are the financial considerations for each additional FTE. Police Officer total compensation package: $117,000 per officer Fleet: Electric vehicles plus upfit - $103,000 per vehicle Additional Equipment: Lidar - $3,000 per unit Initial uniform - $1,800 per officer Body Armor - $900 per officer Firearms - $4,500 per officer Initial Training - $4,500 per officer Computer, phone, and special equipment – $4,500 per officer On going uniform, equipment and training - $4,000 per officer 232 ALTERNATIVES: City Council could request information on red light cameras, photo enforcement, or speed warning devices as traffic safety countermeasure strategies. City Council could maintain the 20-mph de facto speed limit and identify high-risk areas for 15-mph speed limit zones, based on crash data. RECOMMENDATIONS: Maintain the current de facto speed limit of 20-mph, identify high-risk areas for 15-mph speed limits, and increase personnel to support service requests city-wide. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 233 Resolution No. 141, Series of 2023 540 W Smuggler, Demo Allotment Request Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #141 SERIES OF 2023 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A DEMOLITION ALLOTMENT PER LAND USE CODE SECTION 26.470.110.G FOR 540 W. SMUGGLER STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: LOTS K, L, AND M, BLOCK 26, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. WHEREAS,on February 13, 2023, a PreApplication Summary was issued to Chris Bendon of BendonAdams, LLC as representative of the owner of 540 W. Smuggler Street, describing the Land Use process to apply for a 2023 GMQS Demolition Allotment for single family and duplex residential structures; and, WHEREAS,a Land Use Application was submitted to Community Development on March 23, 2023, by Chris Bendon of BendonAdams, LLC on behalf of the owner of 540 W. Smuggler Street. The application was reviewed for completeness and compliance; and, WHEREAS,on May 26, 2023, a Notice of Denial was issued by the Community Development Director in response to the Land Use application, as no 2023 GMQS Demolition Allotments were available as the six annual allotments had previously been granted; and, WHEREAS,on June 12, 2023, Community Development received an amended application from Chris Bendon of BendonAdams, LLC on behalf of the owner of 540 W. Smuggler Street, pursuing a Demolition Allotment under 26.470.110.G –which allows two additional, annual allotments for long-time locals who have owned and occupied their homes for more than 35 years; and, WHEREAS,on July 13, 2023, Community Development received an addendum to the amended application from Chris Bendon of BendonAdams, LLC on behalf of the owner of 540 W. Smuggler Street; and, WHEREAS,Community Development staff have reviewed the amended application and have provided a memorandum for City Council consideration recommending denial of the request; and, WHEREAS,City Council at a regular meeting on September 26, 2023 considered Community Development’s recommendation, reviewed application materials and heard testimony from the owner of the property and/or their representative; and, WHEREAS, by a vote of X to X (X to X) City Council approved Resolution #141, Series of 2023, granting approval of a Demolition Allotment to 540 W. Smuggler Street; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. 234 Resolution No. 141, Series of 2023 540 W Smuggler, Demo Allotment Request Page 2 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: A. A 2023 GMQS Demolition Allotment is granted to the Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust for the property at 540 W. Smuggler Street. B. The Demolition Allotment is granted per 26.470.110.G –Additional Allotments for local property owners of Single-Family and Duplex Development or Expansion that does trigger Demolition. C. The allotment is subject to the following conditions: All requirements of the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards in place on August 8, 2022, must be met prior to building permit issuance. The building permit submission must include a signed and notarized affidavit the property owner, or successors, will comply with the requirements of the Building IQ program. The building permit submission must include a signed and notarized affidavit the property owner, or successors, will comply with the requirements of the Embodied Carbon requirement prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy. Approval and related vesting are limited to the issuance of a GMQS Demolition Allotment and Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards. The property is subject to all other requirements of the Land Use and Building Codes in effect at the time of building permit submission. Section 2: 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 resolutions or ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions or ordinances. Section 3: 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. FINALLY,adopted this 26th day of September, 2023. ______________________________________ Torre, Mayor 235 Resolution No. 141, Series of 2023 540 W Smuggler, Demo Allotment Request Page 3 of 3 ATTEST:APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________________________ Nicole Henning,City Clerk James R. True, City Attorney 236 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM March 24, 2023 Ben Anderson Assistant Community Development Director City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Pl. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 540 W. Smuggler Street – One Single Family Demolition and Redevelopment Allotment Mr. Anderson, Please accept this application for one growth management – single family demolition redevelopment allotment for 540 West Smuggler Street. The property is owned by the Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust. Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee, has authorized BendonAdams to submit this application. The property currently contains a single-family home that is proposed to be 100% demolished. Parcel Legal Description Lots K, L, and M, Block 26, City and Townsite of Aspen The map to the right shows the property location Parcel ID Number 2735-124-04-004 Demolition Percentage 100% The applicant requests one allotment for the demolition of the single-family home at 540 West Smuggler Street. An existing single-family home is currently located on the property that is already served by public facilities. Infrastructure improvements may be proposed as per the City of Aspen Municipal Code. A conceptual site plan is included and attached to this application illustrating the existing footprint of the house to be demolished and revegetation of the property. A future single-family home will be proposed on the property that will comply with all dimensional requirements, as may be amended or varied. Plans for the future home will be finalized and included in a future building permit application, per City of Aspen requirements. 237 Page 2 of 2 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM The property owners commit to meeting the required Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards (RDRS), or to seek a variance if required during the building permit review process. RDRS and growth management review criteria are addressed and attached as an exhibit to this application. Mitigation of affordable housing impacts, according to adopted regulations of the City of Aspen, will be provided as part of the building permit application for a new home. All required approvals will be obtained, including residential design standards or variations thereof and all new development will comply with setbacks and other development parameters unless varied by a duly authorized entity. The applicants have attempted to address all relevant provisions of the code and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application. Responses to all review criteria are attached. Upon request, BendonAdams will gladly provide additional information as may be required during your review. We are also happy to organize a site visit at your request. Sincerely, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC Attachments – 1. Response to review criteria 2. Land use application form 2.1 Pre-application 3. Agreement to pay 4. HOA status form 5. Authorization letter 6. Proof of Ownership 6.1 Statement of Authority 7. Vicinity Map 8. Property Survey 9. Existing Floor Plans 9.1 Demolition Calculations 10. Conceptual Site Plan 238 Page 1 of 7 Exhibit 1 Demolition Allotment 26.470.090.C Single Family and Duplex Redevelopment or Expansion that does trigger Demolition as defined by Section 26.580. Demolition and Redevelopment of Single-Family and Duplex properties shall require a land use application pursuant to Section 26.304, the allocation of a Growth Management allotment, and shall provide affordable housing mitigation in one of the methods described below. 1. Applicability This review shall apply to all applications for development and redevelopment of single-family and duplex development that is established as Demolition in Section 26.580, unless otherwise exempted in Section 26.580.050. Response – This application triggers demolition with 100% of the existing structure proposed for removal. The applicant requests a Demolition Allotment as addressed below. 2. Procedures for Review. a. General. An application for a GMQS review of the Demolition and Redevelopment of a single-family or duplex projects shall be submitted (subject to the requirements of 26.304, 26.580 and 26.470.090.C) and will be considered in an Administrative Review by the Community Development Director. Following review, an approval would be granted by a recorded Notice of Approval and the issuance of a Development Order. On a single parcel, the Demolition of a Single Family, two detached dwellings, or a Duplex residential structure shall require one allotment. Response - This application is submitted in accordance with the requirements of 26.304, 26.580, and 26.470.090.C as applicable. One allotment is requested for the subject property. b. Determination of Applicability. The applicant may request a preliminary Demolition pre-application conference with the Community Development staff to determine the applicability of the Chapter and the application submission requirements. If a project is likely to trigger Demolition, a meeting should be set up with a Zoning Officer to confirm if the project is subject to Section 26.580- Demolition. An applicant must request a Pre-application conference summary outlining application requirements when a project triggers Demolition pursuant to Section 26.580 Demolition. Response - A pre-application summary is included in the application. c. Timing. Applications for a Demolition Allotment shall be received and processed on a first come, first serve basis. An application shall not be reviewed or considered until determined “Complete” per 26.304. An application may be submitted concurrently with a building permit application for the project. Once determined “Complete” the application will be considered in order with any other “Complete” applications, based on the date and time at which the applications were deemed “Complete.” Once in review, the ordering of applications for consideration of an allotment will remain. 239 Page 2 of 7 Response - This project may elect to submit a building permit application while the Demolition Allotment is processed. d. Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards. This document sets the standards under which a redevelopment project will be reviewed and will serve as the basis under which a project will be approved for the issuance of a development allotment. This document, as amended from time to time, is available on Community Development’s web page or may be requested from a staff planner. Response - RDRS is addressed below. e. Combined Reviews. An application for growth management review may be combined with development applications for other associated land use reviews, pursuant to Section 26.304.060.b.1, Combined Reviews. Response - Combined review is not requested at this time; however applicant reserves the right to amend this application to combine reviews during the review process. f. Variations. An application requesting a Variation of the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards, or the review standards identified below, shall be processed as a Special Review in accordance with the common development review procedures set forth in 26.304. The Special Review(26.3430.040.J) shall be considered a public hearing for which notice has been provided pursuant to 26.304.060.e.3. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. In this case, the granting of the development allotment would not be granted until Planning and Zoning Commission approves the Special Review. Response – Variations are not requested at this time; however, applicant reserves the right to amend this application to request variations if necessary during the review process. g. Insufficient Demolition allotments. Any property owners within the City who is prevented form redeveloping a property because that year’s Demolition allotments have been entirely allocated may apply for City Council Review for a Multi-Year Development Allotment subject to 26.470.110.A. Response – The applicant is submitting a request for one 2023 demolition allotment and, if denied, reserves the right to apply for a multi-year development allotment at a later date, as well as all rights to appeal such denial. 3. Review Standards for projects requesting a Demolition Allotment 1. Adequate growth management allotments are available or the project and the project meets any applicable review criteria in Chapter 26.470 – Growth Management Quota System. Response - The applicant is submitting a request for one 2023 demolition allotment. 240 Page 3 of 7 2. The project shall meet the requirements of the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards prior to building permit issuance. The project shall be subject to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards in effect at the time of building permit submission is deemed complete. Response - RDRS is addressed below. 4. Application Contents A. Demolition diagrams depicting total area to be demolished consistent with the methodology outlined in Section 26.580.040. Response - 100% demolition of the existing single family home is proposed. A new single family home will be proposed in the future to replace the existing house. B. A written response to all applicable review criteria, including responses to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards, as amended from time to time pursuant to Chapter 26.580. Response - This project shall comply with the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards (RDRS) as addressed below and as addressed in a future building permit application. 5. Affordable Housing Mitigation Requirements a. Affordable housing mitigation requirements for free-market residential development that triggers Demolition pursuant to Chapter 26.580, shall be as follow. The application shall have four options: iii. Providing a fee-in-lieu payment or extinguishing a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit in a full time equivalent (FTE) amount based on the following schedule. Response – This project will comply with Aspen Land Use Code section 26.470.090.C.5.a.iii by providing affordable housing credits if available with the potential of requiring City Council approval for cash in lieu should housing credits for mitigation over 0.1 FTEs not be available at the time of building permit issuance. 26.580.030 Demolition Applicability This chapter applies to land use applications and building permit submissions for development within the City limits for projects that meet or exceed the definition of Demolition, unless exempted by Subsection 26.580. Response – This project proposes 100% complete demolition of all structures on the property and therefore is subject to Section 26.580. 241 Page 4 of 7 Affordable Housing Mitigation Requirements A description of the proposed affordable housing and how it provides adequate mitigation for the project and conforms to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. Response – This project will comply with City of Aspen Land Use Code section 26.470.090.C.5.a.iii by providing affordable housing mitigation in the form of affordable housing credits, if available in the marketplace, with the potential of requesting City Council approval for cash in lieu should housing credits for mitigation over 0.1 FTEs not be available at the time of building permit issuance. Mitigation of affordable housing impacts will be mitigated, according to the City’s requirements and in conformance with APCHA regulations. 26.580.080 Adoption of Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards for Projects that meet the definition of Demolition. Pursuant to the powers and authority conferred by the Charter of the City, the City Council hereby adopts and incorporates by refence redevelopment standards, hereinafter referred to as the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Performance Standards which are incorporated by reference into the City of Aspen Land Use Code. The Residential Demolition and Redevelopment standards set forth the design parameters to ensure residential redevelopment improves solid waste diversion, increases the energy efficiency of structures, and reduces negative impacts of construction. The Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards may be amended, updated, and expanded from time to time by City Council Resolution. The Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards shall be available for public inspection at the Community Development Departments web page. Projects that are pursuing a demolition allotment as described in Section 26.470.090.C will be reviewed pursuant to these standards. Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards Requirements: Projects that trigger Demolition and are seeking a Demolition Allotment pursuant to Section 26.470.090.C must satisfy the following required Performance Elements prior to building permit issuance and will be included as a condition of approval: 1. Waste Diversion: All projects are required to source separate non-hazardous waste materials and divert a minimum of 35%, by weight, from the landfill. Materials may be salvaged or recycled to meet the waste diversion requirements. This will be included as a condition of approval to be met prior to building permit issuance and prior to final inspection, and shall be documented in the Construction Management Plan. A. Recyclable/diverted materials may include: i. Asphalt, ii. Clean concrete, iii. Metals, iv. Wood, v. Single stream recyclables, vi. Gypsum board, vii. Carpet. 242 Page 5 of 7 *A final determination of actual recyclable materials will be based on the local recycling facility capability. B. A construction waste management plan may include salvage for resale, salvage and reuse (on or off site), recycling, and disposal. C. The project must track all waste materials by type through the WasteTracking (formerly Green Halo) System. All waste must by quantified by weight or volume, but the same units of measure must be used through the project. D. All waste generated by the project that is to be included as diverted waste to meet the minimum diversion requirements shall be recycled at the Pitkin County Landfill, or another approved recycling facility as approved by the Construction Mitigation Officer. E. A Waste Management Plan shall be included as part of the Construction Management Plan to be approved prior to building permit issuance. Response – A waste management plan will be included in the CMP as part of the building permit application and will address subsections i, ii, and iii below. i. Waste reduction calculations, including anticipated rates for salvage, recycling, and disposal as a percentage of total waste generated by the work, using the WasteTracking system. The waste management plan must indicate anticipated types and quantities of demolition and construction waste generated by the work, including estimated quantities and assumptions. ii. Plan implementation: The project must maintain logs of each load including: 1. Type of Load 2. Load weight 3. Name of hauling service 4. Landfill or recycling center 5. Date accepted by the recycling center or landfill iii. A final waste diversion report shall be submitted as part of the Final Inspections for the project prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 1. The final waste diversion report shall include recycling and processing facility records that indicate acceptance of recyclable waste by recycling and processing facilities, and other records including sales and donations as applicable and required to substantiate conformance with waste diversion requirements. Response – This project expects to source separate non- hazardous waste materials and divert a minimum of 35%, by weight, from the landfill. Materials will be salvaged and/or recycled to meet waste diversion requirements as specified in this section. The construction waste management plan will include salvage for reuse, recycling, and disposal and will track all waste materials by type through the Waste Tracking system as indicated by this section to the greatest extent possible. All waste generated by the project 243 Page 6 of 7 determined to be included as diverted waste that meets the minimum diversion requirements shall be recycled at the Pitkin County Landfill or another City approved recycling facility to the greatest extent possible. A Waste Management Plan, including waste reduction calculations, will be included as part of the Construction Management Plan prior to building permit issuance. All loads will be logged and a final waste diversion report will be submitted. 2. Embodied Carbon: EPD Disclosure. Product-specific Type III EPDs shall be submitted for 50% of steel and concrete. EPDs used for compliance with this section shall be certified as complying with the goal and scope for the cradle-to-gate requirements in accordance with ISO Standards 14025 and 21930 and be available in a publicly accessible database. Response - Type III EPDs will be submitted for 50% of steel and concrete materials per the requirements of this subsection to the greatest extent possible. 3. Energy Reporting: All projects that trigger Demolition are subject to Section 8.60 – Building IQ of the Aspen Municipal Code and shall follow the requirements for a “Non-City Covered Property.” The Single-Family and Duplex structures subject to these Redevelopment Requirements shall comply with the requirements of the Multi-Family Residential structures over 15,000 square feet. This will be included as a condition of approval. This requirement shall supersede the applicability statements in Section 8.60.030 and the exceptions listed in Section 8.60.020.M. Response – This project will follow the requirements for a “non-city covered property.” The applicant proposes construction of a new single-family home but will comply with the requirements of the multi-family residential structures over 15,000 square feet as per the requirements of this subsection to the greatest extent possible. 4. Building Energy Performance: Projects are subject to the requirements of the Supplemental Building Code requirements attached as Appendix A to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards. Response - This project will comply with the requirements of the Supplemental Building Code requirements attached as Appendix A to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards as per this subsection to the greatest extent possible. 5. Engineering: In addition to compliance with all applicable requirements of the URMP, CMP, and the Engineering Design Standards, the project shall meet the following requirement: A. Runoff from 50% of the site impervious area shall be treated in above grade sustainable BMPs such as bioretention areas, pervious pavers, tree canopy, grass buffer or other approved above grade BMPs as outlined in the URMP. 50% of the site’s impervious area is permitted to be treated in subsurface BMPs. 244 Page 7 of 7 Response - This project will comply with all applicable requirements of the URMP, CMP, and the Engineering Design Standards as determined by the City. Runoff from 50% of the site’s impervious area will be treated in above-grade sustainable BMPs such as bioretention areas, pervious pavers, tree canopy, grass buffer or other approved above-grade BMPs as outlined in the URMP to the greatest extent possible. 245 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Review: Administrative or Board Review Net Leasable square footage Lodge Pillows Free Market dwelling units Affordable Housing dwelling units Essential Public Facility square footage FEES DUE: $ Pre-Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary Name: Address: Phone#: email: Address: Phone #: email: Name: Project Name and Address: Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) Required Land Use Review(s): Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: BendonAdams 300 So. Spring St #202; Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.2855 chris@bendonadams.com x x x x 1 (existing development right) na na na 1,300 540 W. Smuggler Street; Aspen 2735-124-04-004 Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-274-1280 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com 0 common development, allotment procedures, single family & duplex demolition and redevelopment, demolition Single-Family home. Proposed demolition. Exhibit 2 246 2023 SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX DEMOLITION AND REDEVELOPMENT ALLOTMENT PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATE: February 13, 2023 PLANNER: Garrett Larimer, garrett.larimer@aspen.gov PROJECT ADDRESS: 540 W Smuggler PARCEL ID: 2735-124-04-004 REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Bendon, BendonAdams (Chris@bendonadams.com) REQUEST: Growth Management – Single Family and Duplex Demolition and Redevelopment Allotment DESCRIPTION: The Demolition of a free-market single family or duplex residential structure requires a Growth Management Quota System Allotment pursuant to Chapter 26.580 and Section 26.470.090.C. Typically there are six demolition allotments available each year, however, City Council awarded six multi-year Demolition allotments via Resolution No. 140, Series of 2022 in December of 2022 from the available 2023 Demolition Allotments. Because of this action, no 2023 Demolition allotments are available to be approved and issued administratively. The following options are available for property owners to pursue a Demolition Allotment in 2023. 1.Multi-Year Demolition Allotment – Section 26.470.110.A An application may be submitted to be considered by City Council for a Multi-year Demolition allotment. This review requires a project to demonstrate compliance with five or more of the review criteria established by this section. Multi-year allotments are considered at a public hearing and approved by resolution at City Council’s discretion. Any allotments awarded through this review are subtracted from future years available allotments. 2.Additional Allotments for Local Property Owners who have owned and occupied their residence for at least 35 years. – Section 26.470.110.G If a property owner has owned and occupied their residence for 35+ years, and can provide adequate documentation demonstrating continual occupancy and ownership, City Council may grant up to two (2) additional allotments beyond the initial six available each year. These allotments are not subtracted from subsequent years. In order to submit for a one of the additional allotment pursuant to Section 26.470.110.G, an application must first be accepted for an administrative Demolition allotment Pursuant to Section 26.470.090.C and must include the standards application contents listed below. That application will be denied via a Notice of Denial, once denied, an amended application can be submitted to pursue an Additional Allotment for Local property owners. The amended application must contain the required additional application contents for this review, as described below. All demolition applications for 2023 additional allotments will begin to be accepted on January 3rd, 2023. 3.Section 26.470.160.C – Insufficient Development Allotment Appeal This code section allows for an appeal to be considered by City Council when no allotments are available. In order to submit for an Appeal due to Insufficient Development Allotments, an Exhibit 2.1 247 application must first be submitted for an administrative Demolition allotment Pursuant to Section 26.470.090.C, and must include the standards application contents listed below. That application will be denied via a Notice of Denial, once denied, an amended application can be submitted to pursue the Appeal option. The appeal procedures in Chapter 26.316 apply to this process. Six Demolition allotments will be available in 2024, unless awarded through a Multi-Year allotment review by City Council. A new pre-application summary will be required for any 2024 Demolition allotment applications. Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use Application Land Use Code Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.470.040 Allotment Procedures 26.470.090.C Single Family & Duplex Demolition and Redevelopment 26.470.110.A Multi-year Demolition Allotments 26.470.110.G Additional Allotments for Local Property Owners 26.470.160.C Insufficient Development Allotment Appeal 26.580 Demolition Review by: Staff will initially review for completeness for all applications. Option 1: Staff will provide a recommendation to City Council. City Council for Decision. Option 2 & 3: Staff will review and issue a Notice of Denial due to insufficient allotments. Following request for options 2 or 3 after issuance of denial, Staff will provide a recommendation to City Council based on review process requested (option 2 or 3). City Council for Decision Public Hearing: Option 1: Yes, City Council Option 2 & 3 Initial review and denial will be administrative. Subsequent reviews for Options 2-3 will be reviewed by City Council Planning Fees: Option 1: $3,250 deposit (for 10 hours of staff work). Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour. Option 2 & 3: $1,300 deposit (for 4 hours of staff work) for the administrative review and denial. Any additional hours required for the subsequent submission requesting review for Options 2 & 3 (Local Owner and Appeal options) will be billed at a rate of $325/hr. 248 TOTAL: Option 1: $3,250 Option 2 & 3: $1,300 To apply, email the following information in a single pdf to CDEHadmins@aspen.gov. Standard Application Contents for Demolition Allotment applications: Completed Land Use Application. An 8 1/2” x 11” vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements a ffecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application. Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of Colorado. HOA Compliance form. Written Project Summary. Complete responses to all Review Criteria in Section 26.470.090.C sufficient to analyze and determine that review criteria are met. Conceptual site plan. Additional application Contents for: Multi-Year Demolition Allotment – Section 26.470.110.A Adequate documentation, drawings and reports that the review criteria for Section 26.470.110.A have been met. A summary of the project elements that meet the requirements of this review. Insufficient Development Allotment Appeal - Section 26.470.160.C: Responses to review criteria in Section 26.316. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 249 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 Agreement to Pay Application Fees Please type or print in all caps sentative Name (if different from Property Owner) Contact info for billing: e-mail: Phone: I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2017, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $. flat fee for . $. flat fee for $. flat fee for . $. flat fee for For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ deposit for hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Phillip Supino, AICP Community Development Director City Use: Fees Due: $ Received $ Case # Signature: PRINT Name: Title: BendonAdamsProperty Owner Name: Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to: 1300 4 An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Address of Property: 540 w. Smuggler St.. Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com970-274-1280 Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope Trustee, Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 1,300 4 Exhibit 3 250 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT April 2020 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 Homeowner Association Compliance Policy All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association Compliance Form (this form) certifying the scope of work included in the land use application complies with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by the property owner or Attorney representing the property owner. Property Owner (“I”): Name: Email: Phone No.: Address of Property: (subject of application) I certify as follows: (pick one) □This property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant. □This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. □This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvementsproposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I understand that this document is a public document. Owner signature: date: Owner printed name: or, Attorney signature: date: Attorney printed name: Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com 970-274-1280 Exhibit 4 251 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM March 22, 2023 Amy Simon Planning Director City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 540 W. Smuggler St.; Aspen, CO Ms. Simon: Please accept this letter authorizing BendonAdams LLC to represent our ownership interests in 540 West Smuggler Street and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property – 540 W. Smuggler Street; Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description – Lots K, L, and M, Block 26, City and Townsite of Aspen Parcel ID – 2735-124-04-004 Owner – Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust, dated August 21, 2001; Christine Ann Lee Pope, Trustee. SoA at 639334 Kind Regards, Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-274-1280 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com Exhibit 5 252 Land Title Guarantee Company Customer Distribution PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions. Order Number:Q62015015 Date: 02/08/2023 Property Address:540 W SMUGGLER ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS For Closing Assistance For Title Assistance Land Title Roaring Fork Valley Title Team 533 E HOPKINS #102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 927-0405 (Work) (970) 925-0610 (Work Fax) valleyresponse@ltgc.com Seller/Owner CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST Delivered via: Electronic Mail ROCKY MOUNTAIN SURVEYING Attention: STEVE YELTON 2816 PRIMROSE CT MONTROSE, CO 81401 (970) 964-6105 (Cell) (970) 964-6105 (Work) syelton00@gmail.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail Agent for Seller LORRIE B ASPEN AND ASSOCIATES Attention: LORRIE WINNERMAN 600 E HOPKINS #305 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 618-7772 (Cell) (970) 920-0020 (Work) (970) 920-0010 (Work Fax) lorrie@lbaspen.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail Exhibit 6 253 Land Title Guarantee Company Estimate of Title Fees Order Number:Q62015015 Date: 02/08/2023 Property Address:540 W SMUGGLER ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 Parties:A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 Visit Land Title's Website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices. Estimate of Title insurance Fees "TBD" Commitment $265.00 Total $265.00 If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at closing. Thank you for your order! Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the effect of these documents on your property. Chain of Title Documents: Pitkin county recorded 06/21/2017 under reception no. 639333 Pitkin county recorded 11/29/2016 under reception no. 634214 Pitkin county recorded 05/15/2015 under reception no. 619922 Pitkin county recorded 10/14/1997 under reception no. 409418 254 Copyright 2006-2023 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Property Address: 540 W SMUGGLER ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 1.Effective Date: 01/27/2023 at 5:00 P.M. 2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment Proposed Insured: A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED $0.00 3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: A FEE SIMPLE 4.Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 5.The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOTS K, L AND M, BLOCK 26, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:Q62015015 255 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: Q62015015 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 1.EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED. 2.RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED JANUARY 05, 2021 FROM CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF PITKIN COUNTY FOR THE USE OF BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. TO SECURE THE SUM OF $1,000,000.00 RECORDED JANUARY 21, 2021, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 672788. 3.THE FULLY EXECUTED TRUST AGREEMENT OF CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001, A TRUST, MUST BE FURNISHED TO LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY PRIOR TO CLOSING SO THAT THE COMPANY CAN CONFIRM THE ACCURACY OF THE STATEMENTS APPEARING IN THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY OR TRUST AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC RECORD. 4.WRITTEN CONFIRMATION THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY FOR CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 RECORDED JUNE 21, 2017 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 639334 IS CURRENT. NOTE: SAID INSTRUMENT DISCLOSES CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE AS THE TRUSTEE AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING, ENCUMBERING OR OTHERWISE AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF SAID ENTITY. IF THIS INFORMATION IS NOT ACCURATE, A CURRENT STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST BE RECORDED. 5.GOOD AND SUFFICIENT DEED FROM CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 TO A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY. NOTE: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OR EXCEPTIONS MAY BE NECESSARY WHEN THE BUYERS NAMES ARE ADDED TO THIS COMMITMENT. COVERAGES AND/OR CHARGES REFLECTED HEREIN, IF ANY, ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE UPON RECEIPT OF THE CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. 256 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8.RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN RECORDED DECEMBER 28, 1887 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 222, PROVIDING AS FOLLOWS: THAT NO TITLE SHALL BE HEREBY ACQUIRED TO ANY MINE OF GOLD, SILVER, CINNABAR OR COPPER OR TO ANY VALID MINING CLAIM OR POSSESSION HELD UNDER EXISTING LAWS. 9.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF FENCELINE AGREEMENT RECORDED MARCH 16, 1999 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 428779. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: Q62015015 257 LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). (B) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. (C) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. (A) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. (B) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. (C) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. (E) 258 Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-11(4)(a)(1), Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any document. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (A) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. (B) 259 JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 260 Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a) “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (b) “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c) “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (d) “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e) “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (g) “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h) the Notice;(a) the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b) the Commitment Conditions;(c) Schedule A;(d) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (a) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (b) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (c) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (d) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e) 261 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II —Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (f) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (c) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (d) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f) 262 Exhibit 6.1 263 Exhibit 7 540 West Smuggler Avenue – Vicinity Map 264 Exhibit 8265 TRUE DIMENSIONS540 W Smuggler St. ASPEN, CO 81611THESE DRAWINGS ARE PRODUCED IN14" SCALE. IF THIS ABOVE DIMENSIONDOES NOT MEASURE WITH A RULERONE INCH (1"), THAN THESE DRAWINGSHAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCEDTHEREFORE AFFECTING THE LABELEDSCALE.THESE DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY& COPYRIGHT OF TRUE DIMENSIONS,ASPEN, CO & SHALL NEITHER BE USEDON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USEDBY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USEWHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTENPERMISSION.1 " INCHSTORAGE - CEILING HEIGHT 4' - 0"DNUPKITCHENPRIMARY BEDROOMPRIMARY CLOSETBEDROOMBEDROOMOFFICECLOSETCLOSETFOYERLIVING ROOMDININGBARDNPANTRY64'-87 8" 24'-41 2"7'-9"2'-01 2"7'-103 4"12'-91 2"6'-01 2"5"5"22'-9"17'-412"20'-4"21'-4"13'-512"1'-4"3'-2"8'-10"10'-6"20'-014"12'-1"24'-718"8'-012"15'-512"7'-712"11'-712"4'-012"7'-818"26'-612"39'-038"36'-534"18'-212"4'-934"12'-1"20'-014"1EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLANExhibit 9266 TRUE DIMENSIONS540 W Smuggler St. ASPEN, CO 81611THESE DRAWINGS ARE PRODUCED IN14" SCALE. IF THIS ABOVE DIMENSIONDOES NOT MEASURE WITH A RULERONE INCH (1"), THAN THESE DRAWINGSHAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCEDTHEREFORE AFFECTING THE LABELEDSCALE.THESE DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY& COPYRIGHT OF TRUE DIMENSIONS,ASPEN, CO & SHALL NEITHER BE USEDON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USEDBY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USEWHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTENPERMISSION.1 " INCH2EXISTING LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLANBEDROOMBEDROOMPOOLEXERCISEMECHANICALSTORAGEMECHANICALSTORAGE / MECH.GARAGEDN64'-87 8" 43'-5"1'-11 2"12'-3"6'-01 2"22'-7"8'-234"12'-434"17'-612"20'-4"5'-712"12'-9"3'-10"20'-6"24'-718"11'-712"4'-278"634"19'-112"3'-412"39'-4"36'-614"13'-0"21'-6"8'-1112"2'-014"9'-612"13'-8"2'-1014"8'-014"18'-514"11'-1012"15'-434"LIVING ROOMSTORAGE267 540 West Smuggler Street demolition planaspen | coloradoExhibit 9.1268 540 West Smuggler Street demolition planaspen | colorado269 540 West Smuggler Street demolition planaspen | colorado270 540 West Smuggler Street conceptual site plan.NTS aspen |colorado 1.STRUCTURES TO BE REMOVED IN THEIR ENTIRETY,SITE LEVELED, AND STABILIZED. ALL DEMOLITION ACTIVITY TO BE CONDUCTED ACCORDING TO REQUIRED PERMITS AND OBSERVING MANDATED PRACTICES,INCLUDING THOSE REGARDING FENCING,SOUND SUPPRESSION,DUST SUPPRESSION, MUD TRACKING, STAGING, HAUL ROUTES, AND HOURS/DAYS OF OPERATION. ALL ASBESTOS REMEDIATION TO OCCUR ACCORDING TO STATE AND APPLICABLE LOCAL PERMITS AND PURSUANT TO REQUIRED PROTOCOLS.ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS TO BE EXPORTED.NO CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS WILL REMAIN ON SITE OR BURIED WITHIN THE PROPERTY. 2.SITE TO BE BACKFILLED, AS NECESSARY WITH FINISHED SLOPES NOT EXCEEDING CITY OF ASPEN STANDARDS. IMPORTED MATERIAL,IF NEEDED,WILL BE CLEAN FILL MATERIAL.SOIL TO BE STABILIZED WITH PITKIN COUNTY SEED MIX AND COVERED WITH STRAW THROUGH GERMINATION.TEMPORARY IRRIGATION WILL BE IN PLACE THROUGH FIRST SEASON AFTER INITIAL GERMINATION OR AS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN EXISTING VEGETATION.IF SITE IRRIGATION NOT AVAILABLE, DISTURBED PORTION OF SITE WILL BE COVERED WITH TWO INCHES OF 3/8”MINUS IMPORTED AGGREGATE.SITE TO BE HYDROSEEDED IF REQUIRED BY CITY OF ASPEN STANDARDS. 3.ALL VEGETATION TO REMAIN EXCEPT AS PERMITTED AND APPROVED FOR REMOVAL PURSUANT TO CITY OF ASPEN STANDARDS,AS APPLICABLE. 4.ALL NEW IMPROVEMENTS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF ASPEN ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS,AS MAY BE AMENDED OR VARIED,AND WILL BE DEVELOPED PURSUANT TO REQUIRED PERMITS.PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINTS, IF SHOWN, ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY OWNER AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE STANDARDS. OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SEEK VARIANCES AND VARIATIONS. 5.REFER TO SURVEY FOR INFORMATION REGARDING EXISTING VEGETATION. Notes: Exhibit 10 • • EXISTIN G HOUS E TO BE DEMOLISHED AREA TO BE REVEGETATED, REFER TO NO TE 2 271 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM June 12, 2023 Ben Anderson Assistant Community Development Director City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Pl. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 540 W. Smuggler Street Single Family Demolition and Redevelopment 35+ Year Allotment Mr. Anderson, Please accept this application for one growth management – single family demolition redevelopment allotment for 540 West Smuggler Street. Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope is a long-time local, having lived in Aspen and operated a business since 1981. The 540 home is in a declining condition and Ms. Pope is not able to afford ongoing maintenance and is looking to “downsize” by selling the home and buying a smaller property with less upkeep responsibilities. The 540 home is not in marketable condition and without a demolition permit allowing a buyer to redevelop the home, Ms. Pope will be forced to accept a significant financial impact on the sale. Ms. Pope is seeking City Council approval for one of the two demolition allotments reserved for long-time locals. Parcel Legal Description Lots K, L, and M, Block 26, City and Townsite of Aspen The map to the right shows the property location Parcel ID Number 2735-124-04-004 Demolition Percentage 100% The applicant requests one allotment for the demolition of the single-family home at 540 West Smuggler Street. An existing single-family home is currently located on the property that is already served by public facilities. Infrastructure improvements may be proposed as per the City of Aspen Municipal Code. A conceptual site plan is included and attached to this application illustrating the existing footprint of the house to be demolished and revegetation of the property. A future single- family home will be proposed on the property that will comply with all dimensional requirements, 272 Page 2 of 2 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM as may be amended or varied. Plans for the future home will be finalized and included in a future building permit application, per City of Aspen requirements. The property owner commits to meeting the required Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards (RDRS), or to seek a variance if required during the building permit review process. RDRS and growth management review criteria are addressed and attached as an exhibit to this application. Mitigation of affordable housing impacts, according to adopted regulations of the City of Aspen, will be provided as part of the building permit application for a new home. All required approvals will be obtained, including residential design standards or variations thereof and all new development will comply with setbacks and other development parameters unless varied by a duly authorized entity. We have attempted to address all relevant provisions of the code and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application. Responses to all review criteria are attached. Upon request, BendonAdams will gladly provide additional information as may be required during your review. We are also happy to organize a site visit at your request. Sincerely, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC Attachments – 1. Response to review criteria 1.1 Owner affidavit 2. Land use application form 2.1 Pre-application 3. Agreement to pay 4. HOA status form 5. Authorization letter 6. Proof of Ownership 6.1 Statement of Authority 7. Vicinity Map 8. Property Survey 9. Existing Floor Plans 9.1 Demolition Calculations 10. Conceptual Site Plan 273 Exhibit 1 Demolition Allotment 26.470.090.C Single Family and Duplex Redevelopment or Expansion that does trigger Demolition as defined by Section 26.580. Demolition and Redevelopment of Single-Family and Duplex properties shall require a land use application pursuant to Section 26.304, the allocation of a Growth Management allotment, and shall provide affordable housing mitigation in one of the methods described below. 1. Applicability This review shall apply to all applications for development and redevelopment of single-family and duplex development that is established as Demolition in Section 26.580, unless otherwise exempted in Section 26.580.050. Response – This application triggers demolition with 100% of the existing structure proposed for removal. This application requests a Demolition Allotment as addressed below. 2. Procedures for Review. a. General. An application for a GMQS review of the Demolition and Redevelopment of a single-family or duplex projects shall be submitted (subject to the requirements of 26.304, 26.580 and 26.470.090.C) and will be considered in an Administrative Review by the Community Development Director. Following review, an approval would be granted by a recorded Notice of Approval and the issuance of a Development Order. On a single parcel, the Demolition of a Single Family, two detached dwellings, or a Duplex residential structure shall require one allotment. Response - This application is submitted in accordance with the requirements of 26.304, 26.580, and 26.470.090.C as applicable. One allotment is requested for the subject property. b. Determination of Applicability. The applicant may request a preliminary Demolition pre-application conference with the Community Development staff to determine the applicability of the Chapter and the application submission requirements. If a project is likely to trigger Demolition, a meeting should be set up with a Zoning Officer to confirm if the project is subject to Section 26.580- Demolition. An applicant must request a Pre-application conference summary outlining application requirements when a project triggers Demolition pursuant to Section 26.580 Demolition. Response - A pre-application summary is included in the application. c. Timing. Applications for a Demolition Allotment shall be received and processed on a first come, first serve basis. An application shall not be reviewed or considered until determined “Complete” per 26.304. An application may be submitted concurrently with a building permit application for the project. Once determined “Complete” the application will be considered in order with any other “Complete” applications, based on the date and time at which the applications were deemed “Complete.” Once in review, the ordering of applications for consideration of an allotment will remain. 274 Response - This project may elect to submit a building permit application while the Demolition Allotment is processed. d. Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards. This document sets the standards under which a redevelopment project will be reviewed and will serve as the basis under which a project will be approved for the issuance of a development allotment. This document, as amended from time to time, is available on Community Development’s web page or may be requested from a staff planner. Response - RDRS is addressed below. e. Combined Reviews. An application for growth management review may be combined with development applications for other associated land use reviews, pursuant to Section 26.304.060.b.1, Combined Reviews. Response - Combined review is not requested at this time; however applicant reserves the right to amend this application to combine reviews during the review process. f. Variations. An application requesting a Variation of the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards, or the review standards identified below, shall be processed as a Special Review in accordance with the common development review procedures set forth in 26.304. The Special Review(26.3430.040.J) shall be considered a public hearing for which notice has been provided pursuant to 26.304.060.e.3. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. In this case, the granting of the development allotment would not be granted until Planning and Zoning Commission approves the Special Review. Response – Variations are not requested at this time; however, applicant reserves the right to amend this application to request variations if necessary during the review process. g. Insufficient Demolition allotments. Any property owners within the City who is prevented form redeveloping a property because that year’s Demolition allotments have been entirely allocated may apply for City Council Review for a Multi-Year Development Allotment subject to 26.470.110.A. Response - The applicant is submitting a request for one 2023 demolition allotment for owners with 35+ years of ownership and occupancy and, if denied, reserves the right to apply for a multi-year development allotment at a later date, as well as all rights to appeal such denial. 3. Review Standards for projects requesting a Demolition Allotment 1. Adequate growth management allotments are available or the project and the project meets any applicable review criteria in Chapter 26.470 – Growth Management Quota System. Response - The applicant is submitting a request for one 2023 demolition allotment for owners with 35+ years of ownership and occupancy. 275 2. The project shall meet the requirements of the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards prior to building permit issuance. The project shall be subject to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards in effect at the time of building permit submission is deemed complete. Response - RDRS is addressed below. 4. Application Contents A. Demolition diagrams depicting total area to be demolished consistent with the methodology outlined in Section 26.580.040. Response - 100% demolition of the existing single-family home is proposed. A new single family home will be proposed in the future to replace the existing house. B. A written response to all applicable review criteria, including responses to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards, as amended from time to time pursuant to Chapter 26.580. Response - This project shall comply with the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards (RDRS) as addressed below and as addressed in a future building permit application. 5. Affordable Housing Mitigation Requirements a. Affordable housing mitigation requirements for free-market residential development that triggers Demolition pursuant to Chapter 26.580, shall be as follow. The application shall have four options: iii. Providing a fee-in-lieu payment or extinguishing a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit in a full time equivalent (FTE) amount based on the following schedule. Response – This project will comply with Aspen Land Use Code section 26.470.090.C.5.a.iii by providing affordable housing credits if available with the potential of requiring City Council approval for cash in lieu should housing credits for mitigation over 0.1 FTEs not be available at the time of building permit issuance. 26.470.110 City council applications The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.060, Procedures for Review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.080. Except as noted, all City Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotments. (g) Additional allotments for local property owners of Single-Family and Duplex Redevelopment or Expansion that does trigger Demolition as defined by Chapter 26.580 and Section 26.470.090(c). Any property owner within the City who applied for an allotment through Section 26.470.090 and was not granted an allotment due to a lack of 276 allotments available for the calendar year can request an allotment from future years. Up to two (2) allotments may be granted through this process and shall not be deducted from a future year's available allotments. This review procedure is available only to property owners who can establish, through such procedures and documentation set forth below, that the property proposed for redevelopment or expansion has been owned and occupied by the applicant or applicant's immediate family members for at least 35 years. All other property owners may request an allotment through the Multi-year development allotment procedures outlined in Section 26.470.110(a). The following review criteria shall apply to the consideration of the award of additional allotments pursuant to this subsection (g): 1. The property owner or immediate family members have owned and occupied the property for at least thirty-five (35) years. Documentation evidencing ownership and residency shall be provided, which may include but is not limited to property transactions records, property tax remittance, voter registration records, and the like. Additionally, signed affidavit(s) attesting to ownership and occupancy for all thirty-five (35) years must be submitted. Response – An affidavit is attached to this application that reflects the Applicant's long tenure residing within the city of Aspen and at this residence. 2. The granting of the allotment furthers the goals, objectives and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response – As noted in the attached ownership affidavit, the home at 540 W. Smuggler was built prior to 1960 and has fallen into disrepair, causing a financial and logistical hardship to the Applicant. Granting of this allotment will reestablish a more sustainable quality of life for the Applicant that will enable her to continue residing in Aspen. Over her over 40-year tenure in Aspen, the Applicant has contributed to the vitality of the community as a former gallery owner and it is her hope that the granting of this allotment will allow that to continue for her as well as the future occupants of the property. 3. The project meets all review criteria in Section 26.470.090(c)(3), or a variation is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Response – Section 26.470.0909(c)(3) is addressed above. 26.580.030 Demolition Applicability This chapter applies to land use applications and building permit submissions for development within the City limits for projects that meet or exceed the definition of Demolition, unless exempted by Subsection 26.580. Response – This project proposes 100% complete demolition of all structures on the property and therefore is subject to Section 26.580. 277 Affordable Housing Mitigation Requirements A description of the proposed affordable housing and how it provides adequate mitigation for the project and conforms to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. Response – This project will comply with City of Aspen Land Use Code section 26.470.090.C.5.a.iii by providing affordable housing mitigation in the form of affordable housing credits, if available in the marketplace, with the potential of requesting City Council approval for cash in lieu should housing credits for mitigation over 0.1 FTEs not be available at the time of building permit issuance. Mitigation of affordable housing impacts will be mitigated, according to the City’s requirements and in conformance with APCHA regulations. 26.580.080 Adoption of Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards for Projects that meet the definition of Demolition. Pursuant to the powers and authority conferred by the Charter of the City, the City Council hereby adopts and incorporates by refence redevelopment standards, hereinafter referred to as the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Performance Standards which are incorporated by reference into the City of Aspen Land Use Code. The Residential Demolition and Redevelopment standards set forth the design parameters to ensure residential redevelopment improves solid waste diversion, increases the energy efficiency of structures, and reduces negative impacts of construction. The Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards may be amended, updated, and expanded from time to time by City Council Resolution. The Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards shall be available for public inspection at the Community Development Departments web page. Projects that are pursuing a demolition allotment as described in Section 26.470.090.C will be reviewed pursuant to these standards. Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards Requirements: Projects that trigger Demolition and are seeking a Demolition Allotment pursuant to Section 26.470.090.C must satisfy the following required Performance Elements prior to building permit issuance and will be included as a condition of approval: 1. Waste Diversion: All projects are required to source separate non-hazardous waste materials and divert a minimum of 35%, by weight, from the landfill. Materials may be salvaged or recycled to meet the waste diversion requirements. This will be included as a condition of approval to be met prior to building permit issuance and prior to final inspection, and shall be documented in the Construction Management Plan. A. Recyclable/diverted materials may include: i. Asphalt, ii. Clean concrete, iii. Metals, iv. Wood, v. Single stream recyclables, vi. Gypsum board, vii. Carpet. 278 *A final determination of actual recyclable materials will be based on the local recycling facility capability. B. A construction waste management plan may include salvage for resale, salvage and reuse (on or off site), recycling, and disposal. C. The project must track all waste materials by type through the WasteTracking (formerly Green Halo) System. All waste must by quantified by weight or volume, but the same units of measure must be used through the project. D. All waste generated by the project that is to be included as diverted waste to meet the minimum diversion requirements shall be recycled at the Pitkin County Landfill, or another approved recycling facility as approved by the Construction Mitigation Officer. E. A Waste Management Plan shall be included as part of the Construction Management Plan to be approved prior to building permit issuance. Response – A waste management plan will be included in the CMP as part of the building permit application and will address subsections i, ii, and iii below. i. Waste reduction calculations, including anticipated rates for salvage, recycling, and disposal as a percentage of total waste generated by the work, using the WasteTracking system. The waste management plan must indicate anticipated types and quantities of demolition and construction waste generated by the work, including estimated quantities and assumptions. ii. Plan implementation: The project must maintain logs of each load including: 1. Type of Load 2. Load weight 3. Name of hauling service 4. Landfill or recycling center 5. Date accepted by the recycling center or landfill iii. A final waste diversion report shall be submitted as part of the Final Inspections for the project prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 1. The final waste diversion report shall include recycling and processing facility records that indicate acceptance of recyclable waste by recycling and processing facilities, and other records including sales and donations as applicable and required to substantiate conformance with waste diversion requirements. Response – This project expects to source separate non-hazardous waste materials and divert a minimum of 35%, by weight, from the landfill. Materials will be salvaged and/or recycled to meet waste diversion requirements as specified in this section. The construction waste management plan will include salvage for reuse, recycling, and disposal and will track all waste materials by type through the Waste Tracking system as indicated by this section to the greatest extent possible. All waste generated by the project determined to be included as diverted waste that meets the minimum diversion requirements shall be recycled at the Pitkin County Landfill or another City approved recycling facility to the greatest extent possible. A Waste Management Plan, including 279 waste reduction calculations, will be included as part of the Construction Management Plan prior to building permit issuance. All loads will be logged and a final waste diversion report will be submitted. 2. Embodied Carbon: EPD Disclosure. Product-specific Type III EPDs shall be submitted for 50% of steel and concrete. EPDs used for compliance with this section shall be certified as complying with the goal and scope for the cradle-to-gate requirements in accordance with ISO Standards 14025 and 21930 and be available in a publicly accessible database. Response - Type III EPDs will be submitted for 50% of steel and concrete materials per the requirements of this subsection to the greatest extent possible. 3. Energy Reporting: All projects that trigger Demolition are subject to Section 8.60 – Building IQ of the Aspen Municipal Code and shall follow the requirements for a “Non-City Covered Property.” The Single-Family and Duplex structures subject to these Redevelopment Requirements shall comply with the requirements of the Multi-Family Residential structures over 15,000 square feet. This will be included as a condition of approval. This requirement shall supersede the applicability statements in Section 8.60.030 and the exceptions listed in Section 8.60.020.M. Response – This project will follow the requirements for a “non-city covered property.” The applicant proposes construction of a new single-family home but will comply with the requirements of the multi-family residential structures over 15,000 square feet as per the requirements of this subsection to the greatest extent possible. 4. Building Energy Performance: Projects are subject to the requirements of the Supplemental Building Code requirements attached as Appendix A to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards. Response - This project will comply with the requirements of the Supplemental Building Code requirements attached as Appendix A to the Residential Demolition and Redevelopment Standards as per this subsection to the greatest extent possible. 5. Engineering: In addition to compliance with all applicable requirements of the URMP, CMP, and the Engineering Design Standards, the project shall meet the following requirement: A. Runoff from 50% of the site impervious area shall be treated in above grade sustainable BMPs such as bioretention areas, pervious pavers, tree canopy, grass buffer or other approved above grade BMPs as outlined in the URMP. 50% of the site’s impervious area is permitted to be treated in subsurface BMPs. Response - This project will comply with all applicable requirements of the URMP, CMP, and the Engineering Design Standards as determined by the City. Runoff from 50% of the site’s impervious area will be treated in above-grade sustainable BMPs such as bioretention areas, pervious pavers, tree canopy, grass buffer or other approved above-grade BMPs as outlined in the URMP to the greatest extent possible. 280 Exhibit 1.1281 282 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Review: Administrative or Board Review Net Leasable square footage Lodge Pillows Free Market dwelling units Affordable Housing dwelling units Essential Public Facility square footage FEES DUE: $ Pre-Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary Name: Address: Phone#: email: Address: Phone #: email: Name: Project Name and Address: Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) Required Land Use Review(s): Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: BendonAdams 300 So. Spring St #202; Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.2855 chris@bendonadams.com x x x x 1 (existing development right) na na na 3,250 540 W. Smuggler Street; Aspen 2735-124-04-004 Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-274-1280 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com 0 common development, allotment procedures, single family & duplex demolition and redevelopment, demolition Single-Family home. Proposed demolition. Exhibit 2 283 2023 SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX DEMOLITION AND REDEVELOPMENT ALLOTMENT PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATE: February 13, 2023 PLANNER: Garrett Larimer, garrett.larimer@aspen.gov PROJECT ADDRESS: 540 W Smuggler PARCEL ID: 2735-124-04-004 REPRESENTATIVE: Chris Bendon, BendonAdams (Chris@bendonadams.com) REQUEST: Growth Management – Single Family and Duplex Demolition and Redevelopment Allotment DESCRIPTION: The Demolition of a free-market single family or duplex residential structure requires a Growth Management Quota System Allotment pursuant to Chapter 26.580 and Section 26.470.090.C. Typically there are six demolition allotments available each year, however, City Council awarded six multi-year Demolition allotments via Resolution No. 140, Series of 2022 in December of 2022 from the available 2023 Demolition Allotments. Because of this action, no 2023 Demolition allotments are available to be approved and issued administratively. The following options are available for property owners to pursue a Demolition Allotment in 2023. 1.Multi-Year Demolition Allotment – Section 26.470.110.A An application may be submitted to be considered by City Council for a Multi-year Demolition allotment. This review requires a project to demonstrate compliance with five or more of the review criteria established by this section. Multi-year allotments are considered at a public hearing and approved by resolution at City Council’s discretion. Any allotments awarded through this review are subtracted from future years available allotments. 2.Additional Allotments for Local Property Owners who have owned and occupied their residence for at least 35 years. – Section 26.470.110.G If a property owner has owned and occupied their residence for 35+ years, and can provide adequate documentation demonstrating continual occupancy and ownership, City Council may grant up to two (2) additional allotments beyond the initial six available each year. These allotments are not subtracted from subsequent years. In order to submit for a one of the additional allotment pursuant to Section 26.470.110.G, an application must first be accepted for an administrative Demolition allotment Pursuant to Section 26.470.090.C and must include the standards application contents listed below. That application will be denied via a Notice of Denial, once denied, an amended application can be submitted to pursue an Additional Allotment for Local property owners. The amended application must contain the required additional application contents for this review, as described below. All demolition applications for 2023 additional allotments will begin to be accepted on January 3rd, 2023. 3.Section 26.470.160.C – Insufficient Development Allotment Appeal This code section allows for an appeal to be considered by City Council when no allotments are available. In order to submit for an Appeal due to Insufficient Development Allotments, an Exhibit 2.1 284 application must first be submitted for an administrative Demolition allotment Pursuant to Section 26.470.090.C, and must include the standards application contents listed below. That application will be denied via a Notice of Denial, once denied, an amended application can be submitted to pursue the Appeal option. The appeal procedures in Chapter 26.316 apply to this process. Six Demolition allotments will be available in 2024, unless awarded through a Multi-Year allotment review by City Council. A new pre-application summary will be required for any 2024 Demolition allotment applications. Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Land Use Application Land Use Code Land Use Code Section(s) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.470.040 Allotment Procedures 26.470.090.C Single Family & Duplex Demolition and Redevelopment 26.470.110.A Multi-year Demolition Allotments 26.470.110.G Additional Allotments for Local Property Owners 26.470.160.C Insufficient Development Allotment Appeal 26.580 Demolition Review by: Staff will initially review for completeness for all applications. Option 1: Staff will provide a recommendation to City Council. City Council for Decision. Option 2 & 3: Staff will review and issue a Notice of Denial due to insufficient allotments. Following request for options 2 or 3 after issuance of denial, Staff will provide a recommendation to City Council based on review process requested (option 2 or 3). City Council for Decision Public Hearing: Option 1: Yes, City Council Option 2 & 3 Initial review and denial will be administrative. Subsequent reviews for Options 2-3 will be reviewed by City Council Planning Fees: Option 1: $3,250 deposit (for 10 hours of staff work). Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour. Option 2 & 3: $1,300 deposit (for 4 hours of staff work) for the administrative review and denial. Any additional hours required for the subsequent submission requesting review for Options 2 & 3 (Local Owner and Appeal options) will be billed at a rate of $325/hr. 285 TOTAL: Option 1: $3,250 Option 2 & 3: $1,300 To apply, email the following information in a single pdf to CDEHadmins@aspen.gov. Standard Application Contents for Demolition Allotment applications: Completed Land Use Application. An 8 1/2” x 11” vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements a ffecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application. Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of Colorado. HOA Compliance form. Written Project Summary. Complete responses to all Review Criteria in Section 26.470.090.C sufficient to analyze and determine that review criteria are met. Conceptual site plan. Additional application Contents for: Multi-Year Demolition Allotment – Section 26.470.110.A Adequate documentation, drawings and reports that the review criteria for Section 26.470.110.A have been met. A summary of the project elements that meet the requirements of this review. Insufficient Development Allotment Appeal - Section 26.470.160.C: Responses to review criteria in Section 26.316. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 286 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 Agreement to Pay Application Fees Please type or print in all caps sentative Name (if different from Property Owner) Contact info for billing: e-mail: Phone: I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2017, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $. flat fee for . $. flat fee for $. flat fee for . $. flat fee for For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ deposit for hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Phillip Supino, AICP Community Development Director City Use: Fees Due: $ Received $ Case # Signature: PRINT Name: Title: BendonAdamsProperty Owner Name: Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to: 1 4 An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Address of Property: 540 w. Smuggler St.. Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com970-274-1280 Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope Trustee, Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 3,250 10 Exhibit 3 287 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT April 2020 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 Homeowner Association Compliance Policy All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association Compliance Form (this form) certifying the scope of work included in the land use application complies with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by the property owner or Attorney representing the property owner. Property Owner (“I”): Name: Email: Phone No.: Address of Property: (subject of application) I certify as follows: (pick one) □This property is not subject to a homeowners association or other form of private covenant. □This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. □This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvementsproposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I understand that this document is a public document. Owner signature: date: Owner printed name: or, Attorney signature: date: Attorney printed name: Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com 970-274-1280 Exhibit 4 288 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM March 22, 2023 Amy Simon Planning Director City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 540 W. Smuggler St.; Aspen, CO Ms. Simon: Please accept this letter authorizing BendonAdams LLC to represent our ownership interests in 540 West Smuggler Street and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property – 540 W. Smuggler Street; Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description – Lots K, L, and M, Block 26, City and Townsite of Aspen Parcel ID – 2735-124-04-004 Owner – Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust, dated August 21, 2001; Christine Ann Lee Pope, Trustee. SoA at 639334 Kind Regards, Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope, Trustee Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust 540 W. Smuggler Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-274-1280 christyleepope@gmail.com with copy to: desmondrduggan@gmail.com Exhibit 5 289 Land Title Guarantee Company Customer Distribution PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions. Order Number:Q62015015 Date: 02/08/2023 Property Address:540 W SMUGGLER ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS For Closing Assistance For Title Assistance Land Title Roaring Fork Valley Title Team 533 E HOPKINS #102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 927-0405 (Work) (970) 925-0610 (Work Fax) valleyresponse@ltgc.com Seller/Owner CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST Delivered via: Electronic Mail ROCKY MOUNTAIN SURVEYING Attention: STEVE YELTON 2816 PRIMROSE CT MONTROSE, CO 81401 (970) 964-6105 (Cell) (970) 964-6105 (Work) syelton00@gmail.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail Agent for Seller LORRIE B ASPEN AND ASSOCIATES Attention: LORRIE WINNERMAN 600 E HOPKINS #305 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 618-7772 (Cell) (970) 920-0020 (Work) (970) 920-0010 (Work Fax) lorrie@lbaspen.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail Exhibit 6 290 Land Title Guarantee Company Estimate of Title Fees Order Number:Q62015015 Date: 02/08/2023 Property Address:540 W SMUGGLER ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 Parties:A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 Visit Land Title's Website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices. Estimate of Title insurance Fees "TBD" Commitment $265.00 Total $265.00 If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at closing. Thank you for your order! Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the effect of these documents on your property. Chain of Title Documents: Pitkin county recorded 06/21/2017 under reception no. 639333 Pitkin county recorded 11/29/2016 under reception no. 634214 Pitkin county recorded 05/15/2015 under reception no. 619922 Pitkin county recorded 10/14/1997 under reception no. 409418 291 Copyright 2006-2023 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Property Address: 540 W SMUGGLER ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 1.Effective Date: 01/27/2023 at 5:00 P.M. 2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment Proposed Insured: A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED $0.00 3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: A FEE SIMPLE 4.Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 5.The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOTS K, L AND M, BLOCK 26, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:Q62015015 292 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: Q62015015 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 1.EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED. 2.RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED JANUARY 05, 2021 FROM CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF PITKIN COUNTY FOR THE USE OF BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. TO SECURE THE SUM OF $1,000,000.00 RECORDED JANUARY 21, 2021, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 672788. 3.THE FULLY EXECUTED TRUST AGREEMENT OF CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001, A TRUST, MUST BE FURNISHED TO LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY PRIOR TO CLOSING SO THAT THE COMPANY CAN CONFIRM THE ACCURACY OF THE STATEMENTS APPEARING IN THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY OR TRUST AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC RECORD. 4.WRITTEN CONFIRMATION THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY FOR CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 RECORDED JUNE 21, 2017 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 639334 IS CURRENT. NOTE: SAID INSTRUMENT DISCLOSES CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE AS THE TRUSTEE AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING, ENCUMBERING OR OTHERWISE AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF SAID ENTITY. IF THIS INFORMATION IS NOT ACCURATE, A CURRENT STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST BE RECORDED. 5.GOOD AND SUFFICIENT DEED FROM CHRISTINE ANN LEE POPE REVOCABLE TRUST, DATED AUGUST 21, 2001 TO A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY. NOTE: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OR EXCEPTIONS MAY BE NECESSARY WHEN THE BUYERS NAMES ARE ADDED TO THIS COMMITMENT. COVERAGES AND/OR CHARGES REFLECTED HEREIN, IF ANY, ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE UPON RECEIPT OF THE CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. 293 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8.RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN RECORDED DECEMBER 28, 1887 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 222, PROVIDING AS FOLLOWS: THAT NO TITLE SHALL BE HEREBY ACQUIRED TO ANY MINE OF GOLD, SILVER, CINNABAR OR COPPER OR TO ANY VALID MINING CLAIM OR POSSESSION HELD UNDER EXISTING LAWS. 9.TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF FENCELINE AGREEMENT RECORDED MARCH 16, 1999 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 428779. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: Q62015015 294 LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). (B) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. (C) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. (A) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. (B) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. (C) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. (E) 295 Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-11(4)(a)(1), Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any document. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (A) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. (B) 296 JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 297 Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a) “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (b) “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c) “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (d) “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e) “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (g) “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h) the Notice;(a) the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b) the Commitment Conditions;(c) Schedule A;(d) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (a) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (b) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (c) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (d) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e) 298 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II —Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (f) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (c) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (d) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f) 299 Exhibit 6.1 300 Exhibit 7 540 West Smuggler Avenue – Vicinity Map 301 Exhibit 8302 TRUE DIMENSIONS540 W Smuggler St. ASPEN, CO 81611THESE DRAWINGS ARE PRODUCED IN14" SCALE. IF THIS ABOVE DIMENSIONDOES NOT MEASURE WITH A RULERONE INCH (1"), THAN THESE DRAWINGSHAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCEDTHEREFORE AFFECTING THE LABELEDSCALE.THESE DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY& COPYRIGHT OF TRUE DIMENSIONS,ASPEN, CO & SHALL NEITHER BE USEDON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USEDBY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USEWHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTENPERMISSION.1 " INCHSTORAGE - CEILING HEIGHT 4' - 0"DNUPKITCHENPRIMARY BEDROOMPRIMARY CLOSETBEDROOMBEDROOMOFFICECLOSETCLOSETFOYERLIVING ROOMDININGBARDNPANTRY64'-87 8" 24'-41 2"7'-9"2'-01 2"7'-103 4"12'-91 2"6'-01 2"5"5"22'-9"17'-412"20'-4"21'-4"13'-512"1'-4"3'-2"8'-10"10'-6"20'-014"12'-1"24'-718"8'-012"15'-512"7'-712"11'-712"4'-012"7'-818"26'-612"39'-038"36'-534"18'-212"4'-934"12'-1"20'-014"1EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLANExhibit 9303 TRUE DIMENSIONS540 W Smuggler St. ASPEN, CO 81611THESE DRAWINGS ARE PRODUCED IN14" SCALE. IF THIS ABOVE DIMENSIONDOES NOT MEASURE WITH A RULERONE INCH (1"), THAN THESE DRAWINGSHAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCEDTHEREFORE AFFECTING THE LABELEDSCALE.THESE DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY& COPYRIGHT OF TRUE DIMENSIONS,ASPEN, CO & SHALL NEITHER BE USEDON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USEDBY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USEWHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTENPERMISSION.1 " INCH2EXISTING LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLANBEDROOMBEDROOMPOOLEXERCISEMECHANICALSTORAGEMECHANICALSTORAGE / MECH.GARAGEDN64'-87 8" 43'-5"1'-11 2"12'-3"6'-01 2"22'-7"8'-234"12'-434"17'-612"20'-4"5'-712"12'-9"3'-10"20'-6"24'-718"11'-712"4'-278"634"19'-112"3'-412"39'-4"36'-614"13'-0"21'-6"8'-1112"2'-014"9'-612"13'-8"2'-1014"8'-014"18'-514"11'-1012"15'-434"LIVING ROOMSTORAGE304 540 West Smuggler Street demolition planaspen | coloradoExhibit 9.1305 540 West Smuggler Street demolition planaspen | colorado306 540 West Smuggler Street demolition planaspen | colorado307 540 West Smuggler Street conceptual site plan.NTS aspen |colorado 1.STRUCTURES TO BE REMOVED IN THEIR ENTIRETY,SITE LEVELED, AND STABILIZED. ALL DEMOLITION ACTIVITY TO BE CONDUCTED ACCORDING TO REQUIRED PERMITS AND OBSERVING MANDATED PRACTICES,INCLUDING THOSE REGARDING FENCING,SOUND SUPPRESSION,DUST SUPPRESSION, MUD TRACKING, STAGING, HAUL ROUTES, AND HOURS/DAYS OF OPERATION. ALL ASBESTOS REMEDIATION TO OCCUR ACCORDING TO STATE AND APPLICABLE LOCAL PERMITS AND PURSUANT TO REQUIRED PROTOCOLS.ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS TO BE EXPORTED.NO CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS WILL REMAIN ON SITE OR BURIED WITHIN THE PROPERTY. 2.SITE TO BE BACKFILLED, AS NECESSARY WITH FINISHED SLOPES NOT EXCEEDING CITY OF ASPEN STANDARDS. IMPORTED MATERIAL,IF NEEDED,WILL BE CLEAN FILL MATERIAL.SOIL TO BE STABILIZED WITH PITKIN COUNTY SEED MIX AND COVERED WITH STRAW THROUGH GERMINATION.TEMPORARY IRRIGATION WILL BE IN PLACE THROUGH FIRST SEASON AFTER INITIAL GERMINATION OR AS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN EXISTING VEGETATION.IF SITE IRRIGATION NOT AVAILABLE, DISTURBED PORTION OF SITE WILL BE COVERED WITH TWO INCHES OF 3/8”MINUS IMPORTED AGGREGATE.SITE TO BE HYDROSEEDED IF REQUIRED BY CITY OF ASPEN STANDARDS. 3.ALL VEGETATION TO REMAIN EXCEPT AS PERMITTED AND APPROVED FOR REMOVAL PURSUANT TO CITY OF ASPEN STANDARDS,AS APPLICABLE. 4.ALL NEW IMPROVEMENTS WILL COMPLY WITH CITY OF ASPEN ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS,AS MAY BE AMENDED OR VARIED,AND WILL BE DEVELOPED PURSUANT TO REQUIRED PERMITS.PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINTS, IF SHOWN, ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY OWNER AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE STANDARDS. OWNER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO SEEK VARIANCES AND VARIATIONS. 5.REFER TO SURVEY FOR INFORMATION REGARDING EXISTING VEGETATION. Notes: Exhibit 10 • • EXISTIN G HOUS E TO BE DEMOLISHED AREA TO BE REVEGETATED, REFER TO NO TE 2 308 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM July 13, 2023 Ben Anderson Assistant Community Development Director City of Aspen 427 Rio Grande Pl. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Supplemental Information 540 W. Smuggler Street Single Family Demolition and Redevelopment 35+ Year Allotment Mr. Anderson, Please accept this supplemental information regarding the application for a demolition allotment for 540 West Smuggler Street. Christine “Christy” Ann Lee Pope is a long-time local, having lived in Aspen and operated a business since 1981. While her tenure in Aspen exceeds 40 years, Ms. Pope has resided at 540 West Smuggler for less than 35 years. Ms. Pope applied under the 35- year provision as a means to speak with the City Council about the criteria for the “long-term local” provision that was installed to address cases where the City’s new demolition allotment process creates severe inequity. The 540 home is not in a marketable condition and is falling into disrepair. Ms. Pope is not able to afford the ongoing maintenance and repairs needed for the house to remain viable and is looking to “downsize” by selling the home and buying a smaller property with less upkeep responsibilities. Selling the property without a demolition permit requires Ms. Pope accept a significant, below- market offer. A qualified real estate professional has opined that the discount Ms. Pope will be forced to accept will be at least $2.5 Million, but more likely 40-50% of the fair-market value of the property. Experience so far has proven that buyers are highly reluctant due to the lack of a demolition permit. One of the area’s top brokers familiar with the property has said, “My buyers will not move forward on this property unless there is a demo permit.” This is indicative of the market’s general attitude towards Ms. Pope’s property. This severe financial impact on Ms. Pope serves no public interest. A buyer will almost certainly be a speculative investor who will undoubtedly obtain a demolition permit, even if it takes multiple years to acquire. The property will ultimately be redeveloped. Denying the demo permit now only serves to transfer value from Ms. Pope, a longtime local for whom this property is her primary retirement asset and who cannot afford to render it livable in today’s construction market, to the developer, who (by buying low from Ms. Pope and selling high once a demo permit is ultimately obtained) will extract a higher profit margin at Ms. Pope’s expense. 309 Page 2 of 2 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM The City’s discussion when adopting the new legislation acknowledged that “long-time locals” may be especially harmed by the new policy. Long-time residents tend to have their entire savings, their “nest egg”, wrapped up in their property. Sale of the property is viewed by many locals as their means to transition into retirement, downsize or relocate, and deal with other family and estate planning or end of life planning matters. Our view of the 35-year marker is that it was an attempt to define “long-term local” without knowing the circumstance of any specific property or property owner. These are the points Ms. Pope would like to discuss with City Council during her hearing, in her own words, and with her own detail on the predicament she feels “stuck” in. We do offer a means of addressing Ms. Pope’s dilemma. Pursuant to Section 26.470.160.c, a property owner may apply for, and City Council may grant, a one-time development allotment in circumstances where an owner is severely harmed by the lack of allotments. No other “long-time local” allotments have been granted for the 2023 year and none were granted in 2022. City Council is authorized to utilize this provision and doing so would not affect the validity of the program or harm any other applicant. But it would relieve Ms. Pope of the dilemma she finds herself in and will allow her to transition out of the property in a way that does not represent financial harm to her or her family. We hope the City staff and the City Council have attempted to address all relevant provisions of the code and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application. Responses to all review criteria are attached. Upon request, BendonAdams will gladly provide additional information as may be required during your review. We are also happy to organize a site visit at your request. Sincerely, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC Exhibit 1 – Email from Realtor Mandy Welgos 310 From:Lorrie B. Winnerman To:Chris Bendon; Lucas Van Arsdale Cc:Jackie Friedman Subject:Fwd: 540 W Smuggler Date:Thursday, July 13, 2023 2:37:26 PM Begin forwarded message: From: Mandy Welgos <Mandy.Welgos@aspensnowmasssir.com> Date: July 13, 2023 at 2:24:48 PM MDT To: "Lorrie B. Winnerman" <lorrie@lbaspen.com> Subject: 540 W Smuggler Hi Lorrie, My buyers will not move forward on this property unless there is a demo permit. Let me know how quickly you can get one. Thank you, Mandy Mandy Welgos 970.274.3334 mandywelgos.com #1 Broker by Sales Volume 2022 at Aspen Snowmass Sotheby’s International Realty IMPORTANT NOTICE: Wire fraud, email hacking and phishing attacks are critical security issues. Email is neither secure nor confidential. If you receive an email from anyone concerning any transaction involving Aspen Snowmass Sotheby’s International Realty requesting you to wire funds anywhere or asking you to provide nonpublic personal information (such as credit or debit card numbers, or bank account or bank routing numbers) by unsecured return email, NEVER respond to the message even if it appears to be sent by our company. Instead, immediately call your real estate agent and report the suspicious activity by emailing IT.Support@aspensnowmasssir.com or calling (970) 273-4032. ALWAYS confirm wire transfer instructions by phone to a known number before sending any funds. Exhibit 1 311 312 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council FROM: Ben Anderson, Deputy Director, Community Development THROUGH: Phillip Supino, Community Development Director MEMO DATE: September 20, 2023 MEETING DATE: September 26, 2023 RE: Resolution #141, Series of 2023 Request for Demolition Allotment 2023 local owner allotment – per 26.470.110.G REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Council is asked to review an application submitted by Chris Bendon of BendonAdams, LLC on behalf of the Christine Ann Lee Pope Revocable Trust for the property at 540 W. Smuggler Street. The request is for issuance of one of the two available 2023 “local” demolition allotments. Resolution #141, Series of 2023 is written to approve the issuance of the allotment. Staff recommends denial of the resolution. The request for the Demolition Allotment is being considered within the “Action Item” section in Council’s agenda. While not a public hearing, Staff recommends that the applicant and/or their representative be granted opportunity to address Council during Council’s consideration. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: In the discussion leading up to the passage of Ordinance #13, Series of 2022 (the primary ordinance resulting from the residential building moratorium in 2022) Council was asked to provide additional consideration to longtime locals within the larger topic of the residential Demolition Allotment policies. Council agreed to provide two additional annual allotments for local families who had owned and occupied their homes from 35 years or more. It is important to note that the two additional allotments, if granted, are not to be taken from future years’ available allotments. The process for this request requires an applicant to first pursue one of the six annual demolition allotments that are generally available. If there are none available, a property owner who meets the criteria for the additional two allotments can request Council review. The application requires the submittal of documentation showing evidence of the ownership and occupancy of the property as part of the application. 540 W. Smuggler Street Timeline of Application: • February 13, 2023 – PreApplication Issued for Demolition Allotment Process 313 Page 2 of 3 Resolution #141, Series of 2023 540 W. Smuggler Street • March 23, 2023 – Application for a Demolition Allotment was received • May 26, 2023 – Notice of Denial issued as no 2023 allotments were available • June 9, 2023 – Deadline for submission of Appeal – no appeal was filed. • June 12, 2023 – Amended Application received for “local” Demolition Allotment • July 13, 2023 – Addendum to Amended Application received • September 26, 2023 – Council review of request. The Demolition Allotment application for 540 W Smuggler Street was handled in a manner consistent with the process outlined in the PreApplication summary. The PreApplication identified that no 2023 Demolition Allotments were available but also outlined additional options: 1) Pursue a Multi-Year Allotment per 26.470.110.A – a long-standing provision in the LUC providing a path for Council consideration of issuing a development allotment from a future year. 2) Pursue the process for one of the two 2023, “local” Demolition Allotment 3) Apply, be denied, and appeal, per 26.470.160.C – An Appeal of a GMQS decision – due to insufficient development allotments 4) Wait until 2024 5) Complete a renovation of the home that does not trigger “demolition”. The application for 540 W. Smuggler, like all other application requests for 2023 Demolition Allotments, was denied. An appeal was not submitted, but Community Development staff did receive an amended application pursuing one of the 2023 “local” Demolition Allotments. The application reflected the submission requirements, was deemed “complete” and was reviewed under the provisions of the LUC, particularly 26.470.110.G. STAFF DISCUSSION: 26.470.110.G Additional allotments for local property owners of Single-Family and Duplex Redevelopment or Expansion that does trigger Demolition as defined by Chapter 26.580 and Section 26.470.090(c). Any property owner within the City who applied for an allotment through Section 26.470.090 and was not granted an allotment due to a lack of allotments available for the calendar year can request an allotment from future years. Up to two (2) allotments may be granted through this process and shall not be deducted from a future year's available allotments. This review procedure is available only to property owners who can establish, through such procedures and documentation set forth below, that the property proposed for redevelopment or expansion has been owned and occupied by the applicant or applicant's immediate family members for at least 35 years. All other property owners may request an allotment through the Multi-year development allotment procedures outlined in Section 26.470.110(a). The following review criteria shall apply to the consideration of the award of additional allotments pursuant to this subsection (G): (1) The property owner or immediate family members have owned and occupied the property for at least thirty-five (35) years. Documentation evidencing ownership and residency shall be provided, which may include but is not limited to property transactions records, property tax remittance, voter registration records, and the like. Additionally, signed affidavit(s) attesting to ownership and occupancy for all thirty-five (35) years must be submitted. 314 Page 3 of 3 Resolution #141, Series of 2023 540 W. Smuggler Street The amended application submitted for 540 W. Smuggler provided a narrative, accompanying title work, and an affidavit describing the ownership of the property. These documents describe a family ownership and occupancy of the property since 1997; a period of roughly 26 years. The application materials do not suggest that the property has been owned and occupied for a period of 35 years or more in meeting the requirements of the code provisions. Instead, the application materials do request that consideration should be given to the intent of the code provisions – and of the applicant’s status as a “long-time local”. While staff appreciates nature of the request and the limitations to residential redevelopment scenarios as a result of the passage of the Demolition Allotment provisions, the clear threshold of 35 years established for the additional “local” allotment is not met by this application. For this reason alone, staff recommends denial of Resolution #141, Series of 2023. Should Council agree with staff’s recommendation and deny the Resolution, the owner of 540 W. Smuggler Street, has additional options within the Land Use Code: 1) Submit an application for a multi-year allotment per 26.470.110.A. 2) Wait until 2024 and pursue an allotment again – although since it was denied, the Land Use Code requires that once denied that a project need to wait a year before applying again. 3) Remodel the home in a manner that does not trigger “demolition”. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of Resolution #141, Series of 2023. EXHIBITS: A. Initial Application B. Amended Application C. Supplement to Amended Application D. Correspondence from owner to Council on 6.9.23 315 Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) Thursday, October 5, 2023 - 4:00pm Aspen City Hall Council Chambers 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611 Host and Chair – City of Aspen MEETING IS VIRTUAL AND IN PERSON You can view the livestream on Grassroots TV (Channel 11 CGTV) Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device: Please click this URL to join. https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85814186347?pwd=WQQBPF5Wbel3aKwsBHuxCRY68WoNTe.1 Passcode: 81611 Or join by phone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 719 359 4580 Webinar ID: 858 1418 6347 Passcode: 81611 International numbers available: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kdsGNn2M2P AGENDA I. 4:00 – 4:05 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL II. 4:05 – 4:10 APPROVAL OF JUNE 29, 2023 ACTION MINUTES III. 4:10 - 4:20 PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (Comments limited to three minutes per person) IV. 4:20 – 4:30 INFORMATION ONLY: 2023 WORKPLAN UPDATES A. Brush Creek Park & Ride construction B. HOV Lane Enforcement C. Permanent Automatic Vehicle Counters D. City of Aspen Transportation Projects V. 4:30 – 5:45 PUBLIC HEARING: EOTC 2024 BUDGET and WORK PLAN Decision needed: Administrative direction authorizing staff recommendation (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) 316 VI. 5:45 – 6:00 EOTC MEMBER UPDATES VII. 6:00 ADJOURN MEETING (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) * Next Regular EOTC meeting is March 7, 2024 – Pitkin County, Host & Chair EOTC Background, Documents, and Packet Materials may be found here: https://pitkincounty.com/1322/Elected-Officials-Transportation-Committ EOTC Vision: We envision the Roaring Fork Valley as the embodiment of a sustainable transportation system emphasizing mass transit and mobility that contributes to the happiness and wellbeing of residents and visitors. EOTC Mission: Work collectively to reduce and manage the volume of vehicles on the road and parking system and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multimodal, long-range strategy that will insure a convenient, equitable and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley. Summary of State Statue and Ballot Requirements: The 0.5% County Transit Sales and Use Tax shall be used for the purpose and financing, constructing, operating and managing a public, fixed route mass transportation system within the Roaring Fork Valley. 317 ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC) AGREEMENTS & DECISIONS REACHED REGULAR MEETING June 29, 2023 Location (In Person and Virtual) –Snowmass Village Town Hall Town of Snowmass Village - Host & Chair • For a video production of this meeting, go to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tkx0oxmi_T4&list=PLYAoFMw_qLSv- q6AcF02Zi07y-aPnU3Mp&index=1 • To access the Elected Officials Transportation Committee meeting packet material: https://www.pitkincounty.com/1322/Elected-Officials-Transportation-Committ, then ‘EOTC Archived Packets’) Elected Officials in Attendance: Aspen – 5 Pitkin County - 5 Snowmass - 5 Mayor Torre Chair Francie Jacober Alyssa Shenk, Mayor John Doyle Steve Child Pro Tem Bill Guth Patti Clapper Tom Fridstein Ward Hauenstein Kelly McNicholas-Kury Britta Gustafson Sam Rose Greg Poschman Mayor Bill Madsen Susan Marolt ______________________________________________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Mayor Pro Tem Alyssa Shenk called the meeting of the Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) to order at 4:00 p.m. followed by a roll-call for attendance. APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 6, 2023 ACTION MINUTES Mayor Pro Tem Shenk asked for a motion to approve the Agreements and Decisions reached from April 6, 2023. Commissioner Clapper made the motion; it was seconded by Councilmember Doyle. A group vote was called; all members voted Yes. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Rachel Richards addressed the committee to offer comments and her concerns about the issues surrounding the Entrance to Aspen and Record of Decision, Castle Creek Bridge project, and the EOTC’s need to prioritize the enhancement mass transit, and keep a continued focus on the reduction of Single-Occupant Vehicle trips. EOTC COMMITTEE MEMBER UPDATES 318 Councilmember John Doyle commented that New York City had finally launched its implementation of Congestion Pricing and expressed that the EOTC should keep that strategy on its radar for a possible solution to Aspen’s transportation challenges. Commissioner McNicholas- Kury invited the public to provide input into the Brush Creek to AABC pathway connections project being undertaken by Pitkin County Open Space and Trails. Information on how to comment is on the Pitkin County OST web site. Commissioner McNicholas-Kury would like to know the total amount of funding the EOTC has provided to RFTA at key timelines, any other transit efforts, plus additional transportation projects since the EOTC’s inception. Staff will confirm the details of the request and follow up at a later date. BUTTERMILK PEDESTRIAN CROSSING & TRANSIT SIGNAL BYPASS Project Manager Mark Frymoyer of SGM and the consultant team gave a presentation on preliminary engineering, public outreach and cost estimates for the proposed grade-separated bicycle/pedestrian crossing, plus the analysis of transit signal bypass concepts at the intersections at Harmony Drive and Owl Creek Rd and Hwy 82. The project determined that the signal bypass concepts would not work due to potential safety issues and an insignificant time savings benefit. The team presented the cost estimates, technical warrant analysis and public outreach results for the grade-separated pedestrian crossing. While the idea of a pedestrian underpass or overpass was popular with some members of the public, many more expressed that transportation dollars could be better spent in other strategies. Due to the exorbitant costs for a grade-separated crossing weighed against a lack of technical pedestrian warrants, EOTC staff recommended not to move forward with the project, and presented a roster of design ideas to improve pedestrian safety and comfort for a much lower cost. After input from EOTC members, Mayor Pro Tem Shenk called for motion to vote. Councilmember Hauenstein made the motion to not proceed with the grade-separated crossing at this time. Commissioner Clapper asked if the motion could include direction to staff to explore other safety design alternatives. Councilmember Hauenstein agreed to the change, then the roll call vote was called. Commissioner Poschman had to leave the meeting before the vote was called. All remaining EOTC members voted to support the staff recommendation. INFORMATION ONLY: UPDATES (Q&A) No action or vote was needed on the workplan items. City of Aspen _________________ Torre, Mayor City Council _________________ Nicole Henning City Clerk 319 Town of Snowmass Village _________________ Bill Madsen, Mayor Town Council _________________ Megan Boucher Town Clerk Pitkin County ___________________ Francie Jacober, Chair Board of County Commissioners ___________________ Julia Ely Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners ___________________ Linda DuPriest Regional Transportation Director 320 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY EOTC MEETING DATE: October 5, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2023 Work Plan Updates STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Linda DuPriest, Regional Transportation Director ISSUE STATEMENT: This memo includes key updates on projects from the 2023 Work Plan. A. Brush Creek Park & Ride Project New pavement, parking spaces for 400 vehicles and landscaping have been completed at this time, and the public has been allowed to resume parking in the main lot. Remaining work tasks include installation of electrical infrastructure, lighting and EV conduit. It is expected that these tasks will be completed by early December 2023. No additional funding beyond what the EOTC has already approved is expected to be needed, but until the FHWA closes out the project we won’t be able to confirm it. Next steps in 2024 for Brush Creek is to put out the remaining two options, the restroom building and bus turnaround, out for bid separate from the original FLAP grant, to see if a locally funded and managed project (vs. a federal project) can be completed for more reasonable cost. In addition, a parking management analysis project is proposed for the 2024 Work Plan and Budget. B. HOV Lane Enforcement EOTC Director met with CDOT concerning ongoing questions about the functionality of the HOV lanes. CDOT staff concurred that the original two-lane configuration with the HOV lane on the right side of the road is an anomaly, and likely does not function properly. In addition, they believe there is a new Colorado law that forbids drivers from staying in a passing lane longer than the time and space it takes to overtake a slower driver, so “forcing” slower drivers to use the general purpose lane to avoid violating the two persons per car rule is, essentially, illegal. In any case, CDOT would consider changes to the HOV lane corridor should all entities in Pitkin County plus RFTA come to consensus of how the corridor should function. C. Permanent Automatic Vehicle Counters A trial run of Rekor technology was installed near the Lumberyard area in June. A short presentation of initial findings will be presented at the October 5, EOTC meeting. It is expected that the project team will decide which product to go with by the end of 2023, and will plan for installation in all seven locations in Spring 2024. D. City of Aspen Transportation Projects Deputy City Engineer Pete Rice will give a brief update on City of Aspen transportation projects for the remainder of 2023 and 2024. 321 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY EOTC MEETING DATE: October 5, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EOTC 2024 Budget and Work Plan STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Linda DuPriest, Regional Transportation Director ISSUE STATEMENT: Attached for review and approval is the Proposed 2024 Budget and Work Plan. This is to provide transparency in the work efforts proposed to advance the 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan and 2020 EOTC Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP). In addition to the budget and work items, this Plan also recommends meeting dates for 2024 along with topical focus areas for each of the EOTC meetings. BACKGROUND: The creation of an annual Budget and Work Plan is a requirement of the EOTC Strategic Plan. This Plan is to bring together the following work projects facing the EOTC through 2024. The Plan is not intended to be all-inclusive and is anticipated to be updated as needed. EOTC REVENUES: Funding for EOTC initiatives will increase slightly over the past two years. In 2023, expected revenues will exceed 2022 by 2.5%; in 2024, revenues will exceed 2023 by approximately 1.5%. The attached proposed budget document shows expected revenues and expenditures from 2022 through 2028. Revenue details are as follows: 1% Transit Sales Tax, pass-through – 2023 year end estimate is $20,360,409. The 2024 estimate is $20,663,501. 100% of this revenue category passes through to City of Aspen, Town of Snowmass Village and RFTA. 0.5% Transit Sales Tax – 2023 Year end estimate is $10,529,838. The 2024 projection is $10,687,786. Roughly 81% of this category passes through to RFTA, leaving the remainder for EOTC initiatives, yielding $1,996,457 to EOTC in 2023 and a projected $2,026,405 in 2024. Other EOTC revenues -- This includes construction use tax, intergovernmental contributions and interest income. Total revenues in these categories in 2023 is $1,497,016. In 2024 this category represents $1,156,750. The difference is partially attributed to the contribution RFTA made in 2023 for the Brush Creek Park & Ride project, plus an FLMM grant for the Buttermilk Crossing and Truscott Trail projects. Fund Balance – With the expected revenues and proposed projects and work plan, fund balance at the end of 2023 is expected at $6,306,456. In 2024, the fund balance projection is $6,737,058. Both of these amounts are in addition to the $6,000,000 in reserve for the Snowmass Transit Center. 322 2 2024 WORK PLAN AND BUDGET: Note that while the Work Plan includes all proposed projects to be undertaken by the EOTC in the coming year, some projects also require a budget expenditure to proceed, while others require funding from EOTC but no significant staff time. EOTC staff proposes the following for 2024: Brush Creek Park and Ride - EV Charger Install -- (Work Plan; possible budget amendment if federal grant awarded) Continue Partnership with Holy Cross Energy to fund and install both Level 1 and Level 2 chargers. - Intercept lot parking monitoring and management analysis – Work Plan and Budget: $100,000 With the completion of the Brush Creek FLAP grant project, with expanded parking spaces, landscaping and lighting, EOTC staff wishes to optimize the functionality, convenience and above all, safety of the regional park & ride lot. There is also a need to better manage for the original agreement with CDOT for allowed uses. For example, a few businesses have been allowed to store private corporate fleets at the lot, plus long-term camping, RV use and “inhabited vehicles” contribute to a free-for-all atmosphere that encourages trash, unsafe practices such as open gasoline storage and generators, and a feeling of insecurity reported by some parents of teenagers and late shift workers returning to their vehicles in the wee hours. EOTC staff recommends hiring a parking lot consultant to analyze current conditions, work with stakeholders and the public, recommend technological solutions such as security camera monitoring, license plate reading, possible payment systems for approved long term uses, and best practices from regional parking lots dealing with modern workforce issues such as housing costs which lead some workers to live in their vehicles. The analysis would recommend a management plan for Brush Creek Park & Ride, which could shift responsibilities between members of the EOTC for the most efficient and cost effective scenario. -Restrooms and Bus Turnaround Bid Planning – Work Plan and Budget: $5,000 The Brush Creek FLAP project originally included two work items that had to be omitted in 2023 due to high construction costs. It is likely that one cause of the exorbitant costs and lack of bids was the nature of the project being funded and managed by the Federal Highway Administration; many potential bidders avoid federally-managed infrastructure projects. It is possible that a locally-managed bid process could yield more reasonable costs that would allow the original vision for improving Brush Creek Park & Ride to be fully realized. EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program - Truscott to Owl Creek Trail – Work Plan and Budget: $100,000 Design, Construction Documents Public Input, Identification of Funding Sources, coordination with City of Aspen trails capital planning. - Buttermilk Bike/Pedestrian Crossing Improvements – Work Plan and Budget: $250,000 Design, Public Outreach, Funding identification (if additional needed), and begin implementation on alternative pedestrian safety treatments including prohibiting right turn on red and providing a pedestrian 323 3 leading interval at Owl Creek Rd, speed table across Owl Creek Rd, additional signage and lighting, enhanced law enforcement during ski season, and other potential solutions. - Town of Snowmass Village Transit Service Enhancements -- Work Plan; possible budget amendment pending RFTA capability to add service) - Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters -- Work Plan and Budget: $252,500 equipment + $35,000 Pitkin County Telecommunications staff time Counters will be installed in seven locations by late spring 2024: Brush Creek Rd; Owl Creek Rd; Airport/AABC Area; McClain Flats Rd; Castle Creek Bridge; Power Plant Rd; Maroon Creek Rd. Comprehensive Travel Data Report submitted for review in August; to include motor vehicle counts, transit ridership, bicycle/pedestrian volumes on selected trails Additional Work Plan and Budget Items Snowmass Village Pedestrian/Bikeway, Brush Creek Rd from Divide Road to Mall – Budget only: $650,000 Project will provide retaining wall, roadway widening, delineators, signs and markings to enhance bicycling and walking safety for residents of Mountain View/Creekside employee housing accessing transit station, employment and other Mall destinations. Work plan demands on EOTC staff will be minimal, as the project will be managed by Town of Snowmass Village Public Works Department. Ongoing Transportation Project funding – Budget Only: $218,000 Included in this budget item are the annual contribution to X Games transit service at $115,000, and support of valley-wide WE-Cycle operations at $103,000. WE-Cycle Expansion to Pitkin County – Budget only: $50,000 In 2024 WE-Cycle is expanding to Pitkin County, placing bike share stations within the AABC and at the Airport. This item will help fund site planning activities. City of Aspen transportation projects support and technical committee – Work Plan only – EOTC staff will participate as appropriate in Parking and TDM Study, Castle Creek Bridge analysis, other transportation studies TBD. Aspen Pitkin County Airport multimodal transportation planning -- Work Plan only – EOTC staff will provide multimodal transportation planning expertise for Airport Layout Plan project, ongoing in 2024. The Work Plan includes the following regular meeting / retreat dates, host, and topic area for 2024: 324 4 Date Location Time Estimate Anticipated Topic March 7, 2024 (Thursday) Pitkin County 4pm to 6pm Truscott Trail 90% design and proposed capital plan Brush Creek Park & Ride Parking Management Analysis update City of Aspen project updates June 6, 2024 (Thursday) Town of Snowmass Village 4pm to 6pm Permanent Automatic Vehicle Counters Project Review Buttermilk Bike/Pedestrian Crossing Improvements Review August 22, 2024 (Thursday) Pitkin County 4pm to 6pm Snowmass Village Pedestrian/Bikeway, Divide Rd To Mall project review Comprehensive Travel Data Report Review October 24, 2024 (Thursday) City of Aspen 4pm to 6pm 2024 Budget and Work Plan Project and work plan updates as needed The Work Plan also calls for additional meetings, if necessary, in order to complete necessary tasks identified within the Plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION: - Adopt staff recommended 2024 EOTC Budget, Work Plan and Meeting Schedule (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) Adoption of the annual EOTC Work Plan and Meeting Schedule requires resolutions of approval from the City of Aspen, Town of Snowmass Village, and Pitkin County. Draft resolutions are attached to this memo. An affirmative vote by each jurisdiction at the EOTC meeting authorizes signature on these resolutions. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed 2024 Budget 2. Town of Snowmass Village Brush Creek Rd multimodal walkway funding request letter 3. City of Aspen Draft Resolution of Approval 325 2022 Actual2023 Initial Budget2023 Budget AdjustmentsProjected Savings & Overages2023 Year-End Estimate 2024 Budget 2025 Budget 2026 Budget 2027 Budget 2028 BudgetRevenues1% Transit Sales Tax19,846,068 16,909,260 - 3,451,149 20,360,409 20,663,501 21,490,041 22,349,643 23,243,629 24,173,374 Pass-Through of 1% Sales Tax(19,846,068) (16,909,260) - (3,451,149) (20,360,409) (20,663,501) (21,490,041) (22,349,643) (23,243,629) (24,173,374) Net 1% Transit Sales Tax(0) - - - - - - - - - 0.5% Transit Sales Tax10,273,013 8,787,837 - 1,742,001 10,529,838 10,687,786 11,115,297 11,559,909 12,022,305 12,503,197 Pass-Through of 0.5% Sales Tax (81.04%) (8,325,250) (7,121,663) - (1,411,718) (8,533,381) (8,661,381) (9,007,836) (9,368,149) (9,742,875) (10,132,590) Net 0.5% Transit Sales Tax1,947,763 1,666,174 - 330,283 1,996,457 2,026,405 2,107,461 2,191,760 2,279,430 2,370,607 Use Taxes 807,937 600,250 - 600,250 695,000 695,000 695,000 695,000 695,000 Intergovernmental 2,983 769,279 - (150,587) 618,692 - - - - - Fees and Charges for Services 6,600 - - - - - - - - Interest Income 175,473 278,074 - 278,074 461,750 418,170 496,210 496,010 568,370 Total Net Revenues 2,940,756 3,313,777 - 179,696 3,493,473 3,183,155 3,220,631 3,382,970 3,470,440 3,633,977 ExpendituresSalaries and Wages 148,028 124,086 - 124,086 125,066 131,319 136,572 142,035 147,716 Employee Benefits 29,759 26,251 - 26,251 26,580 27,909 29,025 30,186 31,393 Health Insurance 11,144 11,145 - 11,145 11,642 12,457 13,329 14,262 15,260 Professional & Technical Services 24,099 37,311 - 37,311 32,487 33,332 34,332 35,362 36,246 Studies / Planning / Consultants 196,183 638,559 17,952 (100,000) 556,511 160,000 - - - - Property Services 57,710 82,000 - 82,000 104,500 107,217 110,434 113,747 116,591 Other Services 3,449 12,900 - 12,900 12,900 13,235 13,632 14,041 14,392 121 1,000 - 1,000 1,000 1,026 1,057 1,089 1,116 - - - - Machinery & Equipment - 252,500 - (252,500) - 252,500 - - - - Computers & Computer Equipment 1,962 2,000 - (2,000) - 2,000 - - - - ProjectsSnowmass Mall Transit Station - 6,000,000 - (6,000,000) - - - - - - Pedestrian Access to SMV Mall - - - - 650,000 - - - - Brush Creek P&R FLAP Grant Match - 4,266,672 - 4,266,672 500,000 - - - - Buttermilk Pedestrian Crossing Improv. - - - - 250,000 - - - - WE-Cycle Site Planning - - - - 50,000 - - - - Other Grants & Contributions 511,975 248,000 - 248,000 218,000 223,668 230,378 237,289 243,221 Other Expenditures 150,626 170,790 - 170,790 285,878 293,311 302,110 311,173 318,952 Total Expenditures 1,135,056 11,873,214 17,952 (6,354,500) 5,536,666 2,682,553 843,474 870,869 899,184 924,887 Transfer to Other Funds - (120,000) - 95,000 (25,000) (35,000) 1,805,700 (8,679,437) (17,952) 6,629,196 (2,043,193) 465,602 2,377,157 2,512,101 2,571,256 2,709,090 Beginning Available Fund Balance14,374,649 12,306,456 12,737,058 15,114,215 17,626,316 20,197,572 Ending Available Fund Balance12,306,456 12,737,058 15,114,215 17,626,316 20,197,572 22,906,662 Reserved for Snowmass Village6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 Unassigned Fund Balance6,306,456 6,737,058 9,114,215 11,626,316 14,197,572 16,906,662 2024 Budget & Five-Year Plan Supplies Property Annual Surplus/(Deficit) Pitkin County Transit Sales & Use Tax Fund326 Town of Snowmass Village P.O. Box 5010, Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 970.923.3777 www.tosv.com TO: Linda DuPriest, Regional Transportation Director FROM: Anne Martens, TOSV Public Works Director CC: Clint Kinney, Town Manager Mike Horvath, Town Engineer Sam Guarino, Transportation Director DATE: September 18, 2023 RE: Brush Creek Road – Multi-model Walkway from Mountain View workforce Housing to the Snowmass Village Mall and RFTA Depot Background: The Snowmass Village Town Council has set the goal and made the commitment to take the necessary steps to improve community safety and accessibility by making the Village more walkable and bikeable. The highest priority is to improve the multimodal connections between Base Village, the Snowmass Mall, and the Snowmass Center. After years of analysis and discussion, in June of 2022 the Community Connectivity Plan (CCP) was adopted by the Snowmass Town Council. This plan identified high priority projects that are in line with the Council Goals. This specific Brush Creek Road project is to implement a safe access path from the Mountain View work force housing complex (at Divide Road) to the Snowmass Village Mall and primary RFTA terminus. The Town has entered into a design services contract with Sopris Engineering to survey the existing conditions, analyze historic use, consider maintenance, and formulate recommendations. After thorough evaluation, a recommendation to construct a walkway on the uphill side of the Brush Creek Road is moving forward with design. This location is difficult due to the amount of vehicle traffic, location, and topography. It is this intensity of use that makes this project vital. This area is the desired route for approximately 200 rental and deed restricted owned units to connect with RFTA service and local dining/ shopping. This is the best route to access both the regional and local transportation hub at the Snowmass Village mall, as well as a point of destination for a major economic and employment hub in the village. The proposed design includes reducing the traffic lanes to 11 feet in width and building platforms for an 8 foot wide walkway. This will require retaining walls, handrails, a new guardrail and widening. Currently the project team is further refining the design with the intent to construct in 2024. The request for funding is based on initial engineer cost estimates as follows: 327 Town of Snowmass Village P.O. Box 5010, Snowmass Village, Colorado 81615 970.923.3777 www.tosv.com Design Services $ 87,600 Construction $ 961,800 Admin/ contingency $ 250,600 $1,300.000 The Town of Snowmass respectfully requests a funding match of $650,000, which is 50% of the project estimate. Attached to this memo is the CCP plan, council goals, engineers preliminary estimate and typical sections. 328 RESOLUTION NO. ____ SERIES OF 2023 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE 2024 BUDGET AND WORK PLAN FOR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC) WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Town Council of Snowmass Village (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) dated May 3rd, 2021 which identifies the method and process by which the Parties are to implement the Plan; and WHEREAS, at the EOTC meeting held on October 5, 2023, the Parties considered and approved the attached 2024 Budget and Work Plan for the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen wishes to ratify the approvals given at the EOTC meeting by adoption of this resolution. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, that the attached 2024 budget and work plan for the one-half cent transit sales and use tax is hereby approved. RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 5th day of October, 2023, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. _________________________ Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk, do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held October 5, 2023. _________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk 329 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 1 Updated: 6/5/2023 CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION (Short Form) Project #2023-308 THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into on September26, 2023, by and between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, hereinafter called the “City”, and Frontier Paving, Inc., hereinafter called the “Contractor”. THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and Contracts herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 1. Construction of Project. Contractor agrees to furnish all labor, materials, tools, machinery, equipment, temporary utilities, transportation and any other facilities needed therefor, and to complete in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner the Project as described in the Scope of Work and/or Proposal appended hereto as Exhibit “A” which is incorporated herein as if fully set forth (the “Project”). 2. Plans and Specifications; Compliance with Laws. The Project is to be constructed and completed in strict conformance with the Scope of Work and/or Proposal appended hereto for the same approved in writing by the parties hereto. The Project shall also be constructed and completed in strict compliance with all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations of all applicable governmental authorities, and the City of Aspen Procurement Code, Title 4 of the Municipal Code, including the approval requirements of Section 4- 08-040. Contractor shall apply for and obtain all required permits and licenses and shall pay all fees therefor and all other fees required by such governmental authorities. 3. Payments to Contractor. In consideration of the covenants and Contracts herein contained being performed and kept by Contractor, including the supplying of all labor, materials and services required by this Contract, and the construction and completion of the Project, City agrees to pay Contractor a sum not to exceed _one hundred sixty-nine thousand, six hundred fifty-eight ($169,658.00) DOLLARS or as shown on Exhibit “A”. 4. Commencement and Completion. Contractor agrees to commence work hereunder immediately upon execution hereof, to prosecute said work thereafter diligently and continuously to completion, and in any and all events to substantially complete the same not later than October 31, 2023, subject to such delays as are permissible under the “Extension of Time for Completion” section of this Contract. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 61330 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 2 Updated: 6/5/2023 5. Payment of Bills and Charges. Contractor shall pay promptly all valid bills and charges for material, labor, machinery, equipment or any other service or facility used in connection with or arising out of the Project, and shall obtain periodic releases from all subcontractors and material suppliers supplying labor or materials to the Project concurrently with Contractor's delivering any payment to such subcontractors and material suppliers. Contractor shall indemnify and hold City and City's officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns free and harmless against all expenses and liability suffered or incurred in connection with the claims of any such subcontractors or material suppliers, including but not limited to court costs and attorney's fees resulting or arising therefrom; provided that Contractor shall be excused from this obligation to the extent that City is in arrears in making the payments to Contractor. Should any liens or claims of lien be filed of record against the Property, or should Contractor receive notice of any unpaid bill or charge in connection with construction of the Project, Contractor shall immediately either pay and discharge the same and cause the same to be released of record, or shall furnish City with the proper indemnity either by title policy or by corporate surety bond in the amount of 150% of the amount claimed pursuant to such lien. 6. Releases. Contractor shall, if requested by City, before being entitled to receive any payment due, furnish to City all releases obtained from subcontractors and material suppliers and copies of all bills paid to such date, properly receipted and identified, covering work done and the materials furnished to the Project and showing an expenditure of an amount not less than the total of all previous payments made hereunder by City to Contractor. 7. Hierarchy of Project Documents. This Contract and the Proposal or Scope of Work appended hereto as Exhibit “A” are intended to supplement one another. In case of conflict, however, this Contract shall control both. 8. Changes in the Work. Should the City at any time during the progress of the work request any modifications, alterations or deviations in, additions to, or omissions from this Contract or the Proposal/Scope of Work, it shall be at liberty to do so, and the same shall in no way affect or make void this Contract; but the amount thereof shall be amortized over the remaining term of this Contract and added to or deducted, as the case may be, from the payments set forth in Paragraph 3 above by a fair and reasonable valuation, based upon the actual cost of labor and materials. This Contract shall be deemed to be completed when the work is finished in accordance with the original Proposal or Scope of Work as amended or modified by such changes, whatever may be the nature or the extent thereof. The rule of practice to be observed in fulfillment of this paragraph shall be that, upon the demand of either City or Contractor, the character and valuation of any or all changes, omissions or extra work shall be agreed upon and fixed in writing, signed by City and Contractor, prior to performance. 9. Contractor's Failure to Perform. Should Contractor, at any time during the progress of the work, refuse or fail to supply sufficient material or workmen for the expeditious progress of said work or fail to perform any other provisions of this Contract, City may, upon giving notice in writing to Contractor as provided herein and upon DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 62331 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 3 Updated: 6/5/2023 Contractor's failure to remedy any such failure within 3 days from receipt of such notice, terminate this Contract and provide the necessary material and workmen to finish the work and may enter upon the Property for such purpose and complete said work. The expense thereof shall be deducted from the payments remaining under Paragraph 3 above, or if the total cost of the work to City exceeds the amount of such remaining payments, Contractor shall pay to City upon demand the amount of such excess in addition to any and all other damages to which City may be entitled. In the event of such termination, City may take possession of all materials, equipment and appliances belonging to Contractor upon or adjacent to the Property upon which said work is being performed and may use the same in the completion of said work. Such termination shall not prejudice or be exclusive of any other legal rights which City may have against Contractor. 10. Extension of Time for Completion. Time is of the essence of this Contract and Contractor shall substantially complete the work during the time provided for herein. However, the time during which Contractor is delayed in said work by (a) the acts of City or its agents or employees or those claiming under Contract with or permission from City, or (b) the acts of God which Contractor could not have reasonably foreseen and provided against, or (c) unanticipated stormy or inclement weather which necessarily delays the work, or (d) any strikes, boycotts or obstructive actions by employees or labor organizations and which are beyond the control of Contractor and which it cannot reasonably overcome, or (e) the failure of City to make progress payments promptly, shall be added to the time for completion of the work by a fair and reasonable allowance. Contractor recognizes, however, that the site of the work is in the Rocky Mountains at a high elevation where inclement whether conditions are common. This fact has been considered by Contractor in preparing its Proposal and or agreeing to the Scope of Work. Furthermore, Contractor shall have the right to stop work if any payment, including payment for extra work, is not made to Contractor as provided in this Contract. In the event of such nonpayment, Contractor may keep the job idle until all payments then due are received. 11. Unforeseen Conditions. It is understood and agreed that Contractor, before incurring any other expenses or purchasing any other materials for the Project, shall proceed to inspect the work site and all visible conditions and that if, at the time of inspection therefor, the Contractor finds that the proposed work is at variance with the conditions indicated by the Proposal, Scope of Work, or information supplied by City, or should Contractor encounter physical conditions below the surface of the ground of an unusual nature, differing materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract or inherent in a work site located in the Rocky Mountains, Contractor shall so notify City, and City shall at that time have the right and option to immediately cancel and terminate this Contract or to instruct Contractor to continue the work and add the additional amount attributable to such unforeseen conditions to the payments due Contractor as set forth above. It is agreed that in the event of any cancellation by City in accordance with this section, Contractor shall be paid the actual costs of the work done prior to the time of cancellation. In computing such costs, building permit fees, insurance and such financing DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 63332 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 4 Updated: 6/5/2023 and title charges as are not refundable shall be included; provided that supervision time, office overhead and profit shall not be included in such costs to be refunded to Contractor by reason of such cancellation. 12. Acceptance by City. No payment hereunder nor occupancy of said improvements or any part thereof shall be construed as an acceptance of any work done up to the time of such payment or occupancy, but the entire work is to be subject to the inspection and approval of City at the time when Contractor notifies City that the Project has been completed. 13. Notice of Completion; Contractor's Release. City agrees to sign and file of record within five (5) days after the substantial completion and acceptance of the Project a Notice of Completion. If City fails to so record the Notice of Completion within said five (5) day period, City hereby appoints Contractor as City's agent to sign and record such Notice of Completion on City's behalf. This agency is irrevocable and is an agency coupled with an interest. Contractor agrees upon receipt of final payment to release the Project and property from any and all claims that may have accrued against the same by reason of said construction. If Contractor faithfully performs the obligations of this Contract on its part to be performed, it shall have the right to refuse to permit occupancy of any structures by City or City's assignees or agents until the Notice of Complet ion has been recorded and Contractor has received the payment, if any, due hereunder at completion of construction, less such amounts as may be retained pursuant to mutual Contract of City and Contractor under the provisions of Paragraph 3 above. 14. Indemnification. Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this contract, to the extent and for an amount represented by the degree or percentage such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the wrongful act, omission, error, contractor error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Contractor, any subcontractor of the Contractor, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Contractor or of any subcontractor of the Contractor, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Contractor or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Contractor. The Contractor agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Contractor, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Contractor for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 64333 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 5 Updated: 6/5/2023 15. Insurance. a. The Contractor agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Contractor shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to the terms of this Contract by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. b. Contractor shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Contractor to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed in the Supplemental Conditions. If the Supplemental Conditions do not set forth minimum insurance coverage, then the minimum coverage shall be as set forth below. Such coverage shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to City. All coverage shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. 1. Worker's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) for each accident, ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) disease - policy limit, and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) disease - each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Worker's Compensation requirements of this paragraph. 2. Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000.00) each occurrence and THREE MILLION DOLLARS ($3,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall include coverage for explosion, collapse, and underground hazards. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. 3. Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate with respect to each Contractor's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the services. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Contractor has no DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 65334 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 6 Updated: 6/5/2023 owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Contractor providing services to the City under this contract. c. Except for any Contractor Liability insurance that may be required, the policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City of Aspen and the City of Aspen's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City of Aspen, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City of Aspen, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Contractor. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. d. The certificate of insurance provided to the City of Aspen shall be completed by the Contractor's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverage, conditions, and minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Aspen prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverage afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City of Aspen. e. In addition, these Certificates of Insurance shall contain the following clauses: Underwriters and issuers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the City of Aspen, it being the intention of the parties that the insurance policies so effected shall protect all parties and be primary coverage for any and all losses covered by the above-described insurance. To the extent that the City's insurer(s) may become liable for secondary or excess coverage, the City's underwriters and insurers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the Contractor. The insurance companies issuing the policy or policies shall have no recourse against the City of Aspen for payment of any premiums or for assessments under any form of policy. Any and all deductibles in the above-described insurance policies shall be assumed by and be for the amount of, and at the sole risk of the Proposer. Location of operations shall be: "All operations and locations at which work in connection with the referenced project is done." DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 66335 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 7 Updated: 6/5/2023 Certificates of Insurance for all renewal policies shall be delivered to the Architect at least fifteen (15) days prior to a policy's expiration date except for any policy expiring on the expiration date of this Contract or thereafter. e. Failure on the part of the Contractor to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverage, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith. All moneys so paid by City shall be repaid by Contractor to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against moneys due to Contractor from City. f. City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. 16. Damage or Destruction. If the Project is destroyed or damaged by any accident or disaster, such as fire, storm, flood, landslide, earthquake, subsidence, theft or vandalism, any work done by Contractor in rebuilding or restoring the work shall be paid for by City as extra work under Paragraph 8 above. If, however, the estimated cost of replacement of the work already completed by Contractor exceeds twenty (20%) percent of the insured sum set forth in Paragraph 14 above, City shall have the option to cancel this Contract and, in such event, Contractor shall be paid the reasonable cost, including net profit to Contractor in the amount of ten (10%) percent, of all work performed by Contractor before such cancellation. 17. Notices. Any notice which any party is required or may desire to give to any other party shall be in writing and may be personally delivered or given or made by United States mail addressed as follows: To City: City of Aspen Parks Department 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 To Contractor: Frontier Paving, Inc. 854 Bedrock Lane Rifle, CO 81650 DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 67336 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 8 Updated: 6/5/2023 subject to the right of either party to designate a different address for itself by notice similarly given. Any notice so given, delivered or made by United States mail, shall be deemed to have been given the same day as transmitted by telecopier or delivered personally, one day after consignment to overnight courier service such as Federal Express, or two days after the deposit in the United States mail as registered or certified matter, addressed as above provided, with postage thereon fully prepaid. 18. Inspections; Warranties. (a) Contractor shall conduct an inspection of the Project prior to final acceptance of the work with City. (b) Contractor shall schedule and cause to be performed all corrective activities necessitated as a result of any deficiencies noted on the final inspection prior to acceptance. The costs of material and/or labor incurred in connection with such corrective activities shall not be reimbursed or otherwise paid to Contractor. (c) Contractor shall obtain, at City's expense, third party warranty contracts (to be entered into by City). 19. Licensure of Contractor. Contractor hereby represents and warrants to City that Contractor is duly licensed as a general contractor in the State of Colorado, and if applicable, in the County of Pitkin. 20. Independent Contractor. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing in this Contract shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. The Contractor shall be, and shall perform as, an independent the Contractor who agrees to use his best efforts to provide the Work on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of the Contractor shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. The City is interested only in the results obtained under the Contract Documents. The manner and means of conducting the Work are under the sole control of the Contractor. None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees including, but not limited to, worker's compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from the City to the employees, agents or servants of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of the Contractor's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of the Contract. THE CONTRACTOR, AS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR, SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO PAY FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON ANY MONEYS EARNED PURSUANT TO THE CONTRACT. 21. Assignment. This Contract is for the personal services of Contractor. Contractor shall not transfer or assign this Contract or its rights and responsibilities under this Contract nor subcontract to others its rights and responsibilities under this Contract, and any attempt to do so shall be void and constitute a material breach of this Contract. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 68337 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 9 Updated: 6/5/2023 22. Successors and Assigns. Subject to paragraph 22, above, this Contract shall be binding on, and shall inure to the benefit of, City and Contractor and their respective successors and assigns. 23. Entire Contract. This Contract contains the entire Contract between City and Contractor respecting the matters set forth herein and supersedes all prior Contracts between City and Contractor respecting such matters. 24. Waivers. No waiver by City or Contractor of any default by the other or of any event, circumstance or condition permitting either to terminate this Contract shall constitute a waiver of any other default or other such event, circumstance or condition, whether of the same or of any other nature or type and whether preceding, concurrent or succeeding; and no failure or delay by either City or Contractor to exercise any right arising by reason of any default by the other shall prevent the exercise of such right while the defaulting party continues in default, and no waiver of any default shall operate as a waiver of any other default or as a modification of this Contract. 25. Remedies Non-Exclusive. No remedy conferred on either party to this Contract shall be exclusive of any other remedy herein or by law provided or permitted, but each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. 26. Governing Law. This Contract shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any action at law or equity shall be Pitkin County. 27. Attorneys' Fees. If either party to this Contract shall institute any action or proceeding to enforce any right, remedy or provision contained in this Contract, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to receive its attorneys' fees in connection with such action from the non-prevailing party. 28. Severability. Any provision in this Contract which is held to be inoperative, unenforceable or invalid shall be inoperative, unenforceable or invalid without affecting the remaining provisions, and to this end the provisions of this Contract are declared to be severable. 29. Nondiscrimination. During the performance of this Contract, the Contractor agrees as follows: The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, marital status, sexual orientation, being handicapped, a disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Vietnam era veteran. The Contractor will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, handicapped, a disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Vietnam era veteran. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 69338 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 10 Updated: 6/5/2023 to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. Any business that enters into a contract for goods or services with the City of Aspen or any of its boards, agencies, or departments shall: (a) Implement an employment nondiscrimination policy prohibiting discrimination in hiring, discharging, promoting or demoting, matters of compensation, or any other employment-related decision or benefit on account of actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, physical or mental disability, age, military status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or marital or familial status. (b) Not discriminate in the performance of the contract on account of actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, physical or mental disability, age, military status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or marital or familial status. (c) Incorporate the foregoing provisions in all subcontracts hereunder. 30. Prohibited Interest. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County or the Town of Snowmass Village shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Contract or the proceeds thereof. 31. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflict of Interest: a. The Contractor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon a Contract or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingency fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Contractor for the purpose of securing business. b. The Contractor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering of advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Contract or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. c. It shall be a material breach of the Contract for any payment, gratuity, or offer of employment to be made by or on behalf of a Subcontractor under a contract to the prime Contractor or higher tier Subcontractor or any person associated therewith, as an inducement for the award of a Subcontract or order. The Contractor is prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed under this Contract to give up any part of the DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 70339 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 11 Updated: 6/5/2023 compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled. The Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal "anti-kickback" statutes or regulations. 32. Payments Subject to Annual Appropriations. If the contract awarded extends beyond the calendar year, nothing herein shall be construed as an obligation by the City beyond any amounts that may be, from time to time, appropriated by the City on an annual basis. It is understood that payment under any contract is conditional upon annual appropriation of funds by said governing body and that before providing services, the Contractor, if it so requests, will be advised as to the status of funds appropriated for services or materials and shall not be obligated to provide services or materials for which funds have not been appropriate. 33. Worker Without Authorization – CRS §8-17.5-101 & §24-76.5-101. Purpose. During the 2021 Colorado legislative session, the legislature passed House Bill 21-1075 that amended current CRS §8-17.5-102 (1), (2)(a), (2)(b) introductory portion, and (2)(b)(III) as it relates to the employment of and contracting with a “worker without authorization” which is defined as an individual who is unable to provide evidence that the individual is authorized by the federal government to work in the United States. As amended, the current law prohibits all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the Owner, from knowingly hiring a worker without authorization to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a Contractor who knowingly hires with a worker without authorization to perform work under the contract. The law also requires that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. Definitions. The following terms are defined by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the Owner. .1 "E-verify program" means the electronic employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is jointly administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security and the social security Administration, or its successor program. .2 "Department program" means the employment verification program established pursuant to Section 8-17.5-102(5)(c). .3 "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. .4 "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 71340 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 12 Updated: 6/5/2023 .5 “Worker without authorization” means an individual who is unable to provide evidence that the individual is authorized by the federal government to work in the United States By signing this document, Contractor certifies and represents that at this time: 1. Contractor shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment to perform work under the public contract for services; and 2. Contractor has participated or attempted to participate in either the e-verify program or the department program in order to verify that new employees are not workers without authorization. Contractor hereby confirms that: 1. Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with a worker without authorization to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 2. Contractor shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to certify to the Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with a worker without authorization to perform work under the Public Contract for Services. 3. Contractor has confirmed the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment to perform work under the public contract for services through participation in either the e-verify program or the department program. 4. Contractor shall not use the either the e-verify program or the department program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. If Contractor obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a worker without authorization, Contractor shall: 1. Notify such subcontractor and the Owner within three days that Contractor has actual knowledge that the subcontractor is employing or subcontracting with a worker without authorization: and 2. Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not stop employing or contracting with the worker without authorization; except that Contractor shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 72341 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 13 Updated: 6/5/2023 establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with a worker without authorization. Contractor shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S. If Contractor violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the Owner may terminate this Agreement. If this Agreement is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual damages to the Owner arising out of Contractor’s violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. 34. Electronic Signatures and Electronic Records This Agreement and any amendments hereto may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one agreement binding on the Parties, notwithstanding the possible event that all Parties may not have signed the same counterpart. Furthermore, each Party consents to the use of electronic signatures by either Party. The Scope of Work, and any other documents requiring a signature hereunder, may be signed electronically in the manner agreed to by the Parties. The Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the Agreement solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. The Parties agree not to object to the admissibility of the Agreement in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic documents, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the ground that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 73342 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 14 Updated: 6/5/2023 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties agree hereto have executed this Contract for Construction on the date first above written. ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By: ____________ Title:_________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney ATTESTED BY: CONTRACTOR: __________________________ By: __________________________ Title:__________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 9/15/2023 | 4:30:47 PM MDT president Charles Ellsworth 74343 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 15 Updated: 6/5/2023 General Conditions for Construction Contracts and Special Conditions can be found on City of Aspen Website. Purchasing | Aspen, CO Note: Certification of Incorporation shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporation. If a partnership, the Contract shall be signed by a Principal and indicate title. DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 75344 ________________________________________________________________________ CC5-971.doc Page: 16 Updated: 6/5/2023 CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION (To be completed if Contractor is a Corporation) STATE OF ____________________) ) SS. COUNTY OF __________________) On this _______ day of ________________________________, 20____, before me appeared ___________________________________________________, to me personally known, who, being by me first duly sworn, did say that s/he is ___________________________________ of _______________________________________________________ and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors, and said deponent acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL the day and year in this certificate first above written. ______________________________________ Notary Public ______________________________________ Address My commission expires: _______________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: F29AB00D-3241-4A3C-8E29-10C3841399EE 76345 ORDERING DOCUMENT Oracle America, Inc. 500 Oracle Parkway Redwood Shores, CA 94065 Name CITY OF ASPEN Contact Pete Strecker Address 427 Rio Grande Place ASPEN CO 81611 Phone Number Email Address 1-970-920-5007 pete.strecker@apen.gov Renew Subscription Term: 17-Nov-2023 to 16-Nov-2025 Service Period: 24 months Cloud Services Data Center Region Quantity Term Unit Net Price Net Fee B73946 - Oracle Planning and Budgeting Cloud Service - Hosted Named User NORTH AMERICA 25 24 mo 26.09 15,656.76 B86669 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS: Base Fee NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 1,250.00 30,000.00 B86668 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 65.24 1,565.68 B86836 - Oracle Fusion Financials Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 3.04 73,064.88 B86668 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 585.44 14,050.61 B86847 - Oracle Fusion Procurement Contracts Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.54 13,063.68 B84490 - Oracle Additional Test Environment for Oracle Fusion Cloud Service - Each NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 2,835.00 68,040.00 B86838 - Oracle Fusion Expenses Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.30 7,239.46 B86840 - Oracle Fusion Automated Invoice Processing Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.30 7,239.46 B86841 - Oracle Fusion Document Recognition Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.30 7,239.46 B86843 - Oracle Fusion Purchasing Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.54 13,063.68 CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 1 of 4 54346 Service Period: 24 months Cloud Services Data Center Region Quantity Term Unit Net Price Net Fee B84260 - Oracle Talent Acquisition for Midsize Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.41 9,797.76 B84261 - Oracle Talent Management for Midsize Cloud Service - Hosted Named User NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.20 4,898.88 B77399 - Oracle Test Environment for Oracle TBE Cloud Service - Test Environment NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 316.01 7,584.19 B85800 - Oracle Fusion Human Capital Management Base Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 1.62 38,918.88 B86668 - Oracle Cloud Priority Support for SaaS NORTH AMERICA 1 24 mo 314.28 7,542.72 B86334 - Oracle Fusion Payroll Cloud Service for United States - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.87 20,956.32 B75365 - Oracle Fusion Time and Labor Cloud Service - Hosted Named User NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.65 15,552.00 B86848 - Oracle Fusion Self Service Procurement Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.14 3,265.92 B86850 - Oracle Fusion Project Financials Cloud Service - Hosted Employee NORTH AMERICA 1000 24 mo 0.68 16,329.60 Subtotal 375,069.93 Fee Description Net Fee Cloud Services Fees 375,069.93 Net Fees 375,069.93 Total Fees 375,069.93 CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 2 of 4 55347 A. Terms of Your Order 1. Applicable Agreement: a. Public Sector Agreement for Cloud Services US-CSA-CPQ-1352418 effective 05-NOV-2019 2. Cloud Payment Terms: a. Net 30 days from invoice date 3. Cloud Payment Frequency: a. Quarterly in Arrears 4. Currency: a. US Dollars 5. Offer Valid through: a. 30-NOV-2023 6. Service Specifications a. The Service Specifications applicable to the Cloud Services and the Consulting/Professional Services ordered may be accessed at http:// www.oracle.com/contracts. 7. Services Period a. The Services Period for the Services commences on the date stated in this order. If no date is specified, then the "Cloud Services Start Date" for each Service will be the date that you are issued access that enables you to activate your Services, and the "Consulting/Professional Services Start Date" is the date that Oracle begins performing such services. B. Additional Order Terms 1. No Auto-Renewal Notwithstanding any statement to the contrary in the Service Specifications, the parties expressly agree that the Services acquired under this order will not Auto-Renew. 2. Non-Appropriation In the event funds are not appropriated for a new fiscal year period, You may terminate this order immediately without penalty or expense; provided, however, that: (a) for each of the 12-month terms of the order, You must provide a purchase order, and (b) Your issuance of each 12-month purchase order shall signify to Oracle that all funds for the given 12-month term have been fully appropriated and encumbered. Notwithstanding the foregoing, You agree to pay for all services performed by Oracle prior to Oracle's receipt of Your notice of non-appropriation. CITY OF ASPEN {{!doctype_es_:signer1:default("CPQ Print"):font(name=Times, color=#ffffff, size=8)}} Oracle America, Inc. Signature Signature Name Name Title Title Signature Date Signature Date CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 3 of 4 56348 SPACE SPACE BILL TO / SHIP TO INFORMATION SPACE SPACE Bill To Ship To Customer Name CITY OF ASPEN Customer Name CITY OF ASPEN Customer Address 427 Rio Grande Place ASPEN CO 81611 Customer Address 427 Rio Grande Place ASPEN CO 81611 Contact Name Pete Strecker Contact Name Pete Strecker Contact Phone 1-970-920-5007 Contact Phone 1-970-920-5007 Contact Email pete.strecker@apen.gov Contact Email pete.strecker@apen.gov CPQ-3125335 - 1 Issued by Oracle America, Inc. 19-SEP-2023 Page 4 of 4 57349