The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.council.regular.20030609 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA June 9, 2003 5:00 P.M. I) Call to Order III) Schedulee Public Appearances a) Proclamation Elk's Ute Cemetery IV) Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to.address Council on issues NOT on the agenda Please limit your comments to '3 minutes) V) Special Orders of the Day a) Mayor's and Councilmembers' Comments b) City Manager's Comments c) Board Reports VI) Minutes- May 12, 2003 VII) Public Hearings a) Resolution #33 2003 - The Residences at the Little Nell Conceptual Review--~/l b) Ordinance #16 2003 - Trash Corn pactor Zone,¢~q;;~.,~ c) Ordinance #19 2003- Adopting Ethics Code/(J2~.," d) Ordinance #25 2003 - St. Regis PUD Amendmen"'""~t ~ ~'~¢X:~) Ordinance #26 2003 - Water Agreement- Reader/Johnson f) Resolution #49 2003 -Adding AVLT Land to Burlingame COWOP ~ g) Ordinance #27 2003 - Usage Fees for Arc (Continue to 6/23) h) Mascotte Annexation (Continue to 6/23) VIII) Action Items a) Resolution #52, 2003 - ARC C perations Committee & First Amendment of SPARC Agreement IX) Council Members Commendations Xl) Special Orders of the Day ' a) Mayor's and Councilmembers' Comments- ~-- b) City Manager's Comments XI ) Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #50, 2003 - Adopting Memorandum of Understanding Wildfire Mitigation~.~. · XIII) First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #31. 2003-Sagewood Condominiums-Zone Map Change; PUD Amendment P.H. 7/14 XlV) Action Items ¢¢~__ a) Resolution #51. 2003.- Stage One Water Shortage'Declaration 4~ b) Burlingame Road Alignment XV)Executive Session - Negotiations XVI)Adjournment Next Regular Meeting June23, 2003 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. UTE CEMETERY PROCLAMATION CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO WHEREAS, Ute Cemetery was established in 1880, was used as a cemetery until 1940 and is a testament to the numerous laborers, working-class people, and Civil War veterans who helped establish Aspen; and WHEREAS, it is estimated that 200 persons are buried in Ute Cemetery, approximately 40 of whom are Civil War veterans; and WHEREAS, Memorial Day, also known as Decoration Day, was established in the 1860's when Major General John A. Logan ordered his posts to decorate the graves of the Civil War soldiers with "the choicest flowers of spring6me' and urged that they should "guard their graves with sacred vigilance... Let pleasant paths invite the coming and going of reverent visitors and food mourners. Let no neglect, no tax, ages of time, testify to the present or to the coming gencrafions that we have forgotten as a people thc cost bf a fxec and undivided republic;" and WHEREAS, in 1886 the Grand Army Boys cleaned Ute Cemetery to prepare it for that year's Decoration Day and made a plea to future Aspenites that they "should sec to it that hereafter the place is kept halfway respectable;" and ~A'~, Ute Cemetery has not been an active cemetery since 1940 and over the past 60 years has suffered f~om neglect, an overgrowth of native grasses and trees, the deterioration, disappearance, and vandalism of headstones, and other effects of time; and WHEREAS, in thc 1990's and early 2000's, with encouragement from several cit/zens and the Benevolent and Protective Order of the Elks, Lodgc Number 224 the City initiated a process of studying Ute Cemetery and working out ways to preserve its historic integrity; and, WHEREAS, Ute Cemetery was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2002; and WHEREAS, City Council, reco~ni~ing that Ute Cemetery was a sacred space, passed Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2001 declaring Ute Cemetery a Specially Designated Space; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen set aside funds and, in conjunction with a grant from the Colorado State Historical Fund, undcrtook a preservation project in order to repair and preserve the grave sites anti headstones, and to establish a formal enlrance and designated paths throughout Ute Cemetery; and WHEREAS, many local volunteers, including members of the Benevolent and Protective Order of thc Elks, Lodge Number 224, conh'ibuted their time and talents to the removal of vegetation and the restoration and clean-up of Ute Cemetery;, and WHEREAS, for all of the above-reasons and many others, the City wishes to honor the lives of those buried in Utc Cemetery and to preservc its hisWrical integrity for future generations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in honor of those buried at Ute Cemetery and as a place for contemplation and remembrance, the Mayor, Council, and citizens of the City of Aspe~ hereby proclaim and officially m-dedicate Ute Cemetery. Memorial Day, May 26, 2003. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Tom McCabe, Mayor pro rem Things for City Council to consider doing in the near future: No. 1 Develop a plan for the uses and improvements to the Anderson and Francis Whitaker open space parcels. No. 2 Continue to improve customer service at every level in city administration. No. 3 Assist the homeowners at the smuggler mobile home park in rebuilding their water and electric utility systems. No. 4 Establish a citywide preventative maintenance program for all rental properties of affordable housing. No. 5 Create a archival document storage/retrieval system for all city documents, most especially for financial records. No. 6 Establish a long-term plan for the use of the old youth center building. No. 7 Re-evaluate all city water rights with the goal to improve or enhance them and to make sure that we don't let any water rights we possess slip away due to underutilization. No. 8 Establish a large event parking facility at the intersection of Brush Creek and Highway 82. No. 9 Complete a storm water run-off treatment system to keep the runoff from our streets from polluting the river. No. 10 Establish standards and implement a community plan for xeriscaping both public and private spaces. No. 11 Consider making green upgrades to all city projects, especially affordable housing, when budgeting for capital improvements to those facilities. No. 12 Continue to pursue preserving smuggler mountain as our No. 1 open space acquisition priority. No. 13 Expand our wildfire protection plan. No. 14 Take a leadership role in protecting our regional water interests. Respectfully submitted by Tom McCabe MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council - THRU: Julie Ann Woods. Community Development Director FROM: Scott Woodford, City Planner/~q"' RE: RESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL, PUBLIC HEARING, CONCEPTUAL PUD, CONCEPTUAl, TIMESttARE, AND CONCEPTUAL SPECIAL PLANNED AREA AMENDMENT; RESOLUTION NO.~, SERIES 2003 DATE: June 9, 2003 View of the existing Tippler Nightclub and Italian Caviar Restaurant from the Silver Queen Gondola. The outdoor terrace of the proposed Residences at Little Nell will be located in this general area. To make way, the Little NelI Chairlift will be moved slightly to the east. REQUEST SUMMARY: Conceptual PUD and other appropriate land use approvals, in order to demolish the existing Tipple Inn Condomin/ums, Tippler Nightclub and Italian Caviar Restaurant, and Tipple Lodge and to redevelop the properties with a 98,200 square foot, multi-story structure to consist of 24 timeshare un/ts, 8 lodge rooms, I free market condominium unit, 8 on-site affordable housing units, approximately 9,300 square feet of commercial and ancillaiy space and a 60 space sub-grade parking garage. STAFF APPROVAL OF THE CONCEPTUAL PUD, CONCEPTUAL TIMESItARE, AND RECOMMENDATION: CONCEPTUAL SPECIAL PANNED AREA AMENDMENT WITH CONDITIONS KESiDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF P,~EPOKT "- PAGE P2 PROJECT S ITMMARY: The applicant for the Residences at Little Nell, Aspen Land Fund, LLC, proposes demolition of existing swacmres on multiple existing lots and construction of an approximately 98,200 square foot, multi-story structure consisting of 24 timeshare lodge units, 8 traditional lodge units, ] undivided, flee market condothinium unit, and $ on-site, affordable housing units. The su-ucrare would also include approximately 9,300 square feet of commercial space, including a proposed restaurant and retail space and a v~vo- level, sixty (60) space underground parldng garage. As presently envisioned, the 24 timeshare lodge units will be sold in I/7~ shares and nineteen o£ the units will include lock off bedrooms, which b-ill facilitate their rental on the short term accorranodations market. With lock-off capability, a total o£ 51 separately occupiable rooms or "keys" will be provided (19 timeshare lodge units x 2 keys/timeshare lodge units - 5 timeshare lodge units x I key/timeshare lodge unit - 8 lodge rooms x 1 key/room = 51 ~. Twenty one of the 24 timeshare market units will contain three bedrooms, while three will contain four bedrooms and all units will range from 2,350-3,570 square feet and contain full kitchens and wet bar. The 8 lodge rooms will be available for nightly rental and will be about 500 square feet. Both the timeshare lodge units and the lodge rooms are proposed to be managed by the Little Nell Hotel. which will be physically connected to the new lodge by an underground tunnel for service access, which passes through the gondola building. The one free market unit in the timeshare lodge will be conveyed ro a resident of the Tipple Inn, whose existing unit is proposed to be demolished. Eigl~ studio sized, affordabIe housing units are proposed on- site and each will be a minimum of 400 square feet and be deed restricted to APCHA's Category 2 income and occupancy guidelines. The remainder of the lodge's affordable housing requirement will be met off-site in a yet to be determined location. A separate land use entitlement process will be necessary for approval oft_hat separate project. Concurrent with the development of the lodge, the applicant proposes to remove the existing "hump" in Dean Avenue, through excavation, to create a more level grade from Galena Street ro the Silver Queen Gondola Plaza for easier pedestrian access, as well as create street level retail for this development. Street ~rees and furniture are proposed along the pedestrian street. The applicant also proposes ro purchase a portion of the adjacent property owned by the Aspen Skiing Company and incorporate it into the development site so that the lodge building can be located closer to the ski area edge and co provide some additional land for floor area ratio purposes. As placing the structure closer to the Little Nell ski mn would put the structure too close to the Little Nell chairli~t, the applicant proposes relocating the base of the li~t (and 4-5 of the lift poles) ro ~he east. To complement this amenity and ro expand the base area dining and apres ski options, the applicant also proposes ro extend the adjacent gondola plaza towards the Iodge ro provide a seamless interface between the two. ]~ESLDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF P~EPORT PAGE 2 par~ of the proposed PREVIOUS P&Z ACTION: On February 4, 2003, the P&Z approved the C0n'deptual PUD, Conceptual Timeshar6; and Conceptual Special Harmed Area Amendment for the Residences at Little Nell with nine conditions of approval (see the Resolution for the wording of those conditions~ in Exhibit A and P&Z minutes for review of their discussion in Exhibit H). There were four public heatings with the P&Z prior to approval. Soon after the approval, the applicant made the decision to postpone the City Council hearing for' one month so that they could make substantial revisions to the plan based on the comments from the P&Z, staff, and neighbors. Since staff felt that the changes made were in conformance with the specific conditions approved by the P&Z, staff decided to not have the application remanded back to P&Z for their re-approval. The plans (dated February 28, 2003) before you are the revised proposal for the project.' 'To summarize the highlights of the changes made to the plan, see the table below: OverallF oor Area:,Il 109.500 II 98,200 Commercial Sq. Ft.: II t0.200 II . 9.740 · ~ of Timeshare Units: II 30 [t 24 # of Lodge Units: [ 0 [1 8 # of Residential Units [{ I Il ~ ., # of :e' s: Il so Il 51 Maximum Bldg. Height: Il 56' II 47' = °f On-Sit[ Aff°rdable {IHousing Units: 4-1BR [ 8-Studio Iv,.ESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF I~EPORT PAGE 3 P4 king Spaces: of£mpl~yees Mitigated: II 61 off-site) II 52 (off-site~ placement l-Iou~ing [[ i2-BR [ i2-BR quired: . [I 4,4(>9,Sq. Ft. [ 4.469 Sq. Ft. REVIEW PROCESS: ' .~. Pr/or to ~e completion of the Conceptual renew, t~k City Co~ciI should ad'ess whether any of ~e follow~g land use actions pose a problem m ~e project as a whole. Tec~ic~ly, this application request is to dete~e whether it meets the sr~dards for a Conceptual PUD, Timeshare, and Special Plied ~ea ~endment, but it is also appropriate to ~ve the applic~t direction on the oth~ l~d use approves ~at will be necess~ ro gain final approve, as described below: 1) Planned Unit Development (PUD); A PUD is requested to 1.) establish ~e open space, building height, floor ~ea, and p~king requirments for ~e proposed lodge, 2.) allow .timeshare lodge development, and 3.) establish ~e non-confo~ing p~cel ofl~d (smaller ~an minimum lot size) to be conveyed to ~e applic~t by the Aspen Skiing Company ~ a confo~ing p~cel. 2) Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions; GMQS Exemptions are requested for conversion of Residenti~ Reconstruction Credits to To~st Acco~odation Units. Replac~ent of Demolished Units ~ough the Resident Multi-F~ily Replacement Pro~ ~d Recons~ction of Exist~g Co~erci~ Square Footage. ~ese exemptions will provide Ce development hghts for ~e timesh~e lodge u~ts. 3) Subdivision; Subdivision review is required because ~e timesh~e lodge u~ts ge proposed to be condom~umized, a potion of Aspen Ski Comply l~d is proposed to be subdivided ~d ~sfe~ed ro ~e subject site, ~d ~e existing lot lines ~e to be vacated ~d the prope~ re-subdivided. 4) Condo~iu~afion;.Approv~ is required in order to sell the u~ts ~di~dually. 5) Timeshare;~eapplic~tproposesro selI I/7~undividedffactionalinterestsint~ of ~e lodge's u~ts, therefore ~s subject ro ~e timesh~e re~lations (~e applic~t proposes to bi reviewed und~ the recently adopted re~Iations for timeshare even though ~e application was submitted prior ro that adoption date). 6) Special Renew; Off-street p~ng requirmems for ~e on-site affordable housing mrs is established t~ough Special Review. 7) Rezonhg; A rezo~ng is proposed for ~e timeshge lodge lot. going ~om ~e existing L/TR (Lodge/To~st Residmtial) to CL (Co~erciaI Lodge). ~e rezon~g is necess~ ro acco~odate ~e proposed co~ercial uses in ~e lodge. A rezo~ng ro PUD is ~so required wi~ a PUD overlay. ~so, a rezone of the p~cel ro be acq~red ~om the Aspen Shing Comply from C (Cons~ation) to CL (Co~erci~ P~ESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE 4 P5 Lodge) is proposed. The rezone is necessary in order for the lodge and commercial uses proposed to be allowed uses. 8) Specially Planned Area Amendment (SPA); The applicant proposes to amend the SPA for Lot 2 of the Little Nell Subdivision. so that' a portion of it can be subdivided and transferred to the Residences at Little Nell site. 9) 8040 Greenline; All developmem within I50' above or below the 8040 foot elevation are subject to specific environmental impacts review. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The subject site includes four different, contiguous parcels of land assembled by the applicant ro accommodate the proposed development. In order to help understand what uses currently exist on what parcels of land and what new developmem is proposed on those existing areas, a cross referencing table is provided (with map in Exhibit G): ff) t'he¢i~x~E&tstt~g ]Parcel Tipple Irm Lot 1 -Tipple Ima Tipple West Timeshare Lodge A* Condominiums Condominiums Building: 9 units ' Little Tipple ]Building: 3 units Parcel Tippler Lot 1 Tippler Approximately Timeshare Lodge B* Townt~omes Nightclub/ 15,000 'sq. ft. of Subdivision Italian Caviar commercial Tracts I&2 / Restauran~ Lot 1 Tipple Woods Subd. Parcel TippI¢ Lodge Lot I Tipple Lodge I0 Lodge units/2 Timeshare Lodge C* Condominiums studio units / iLot 2 Tipple Woods Sub& ]Parcel Aspen Skiing~ Lot 1 Aspen Skiing Lift ticket booth, Outdoor ]Plaza, H* Corporation Property portion of Little Dirfing Terrace Land Nell chairlift & for Lodge & a lift shack, etc. port,on of the Lodge Parcel designations A-H are used only for purposes of this application and are not legal descriptions of the parcels HISTORY OF EAClt PARCEL: PARCEL A: Tl~s parcel contains t~vo. 3-story multi-family structures known as the Tipple Inn Condominiums and a small parking lot. One structure, referred to as "Tipple West", contains nine units and the other has three units and is known as "Little Tipple". Both were constructed in the early 1960's. A small portion of the adjacent Dean Avenue right- of-way was v. acated by the City in 1965. RESIDENCES AT LITTLE I'~ELL STAFF REPORT ]~AGE 5 P6 View of the Tipple Condominiums that will be demolished as part of th/s application. The structure currernly houses twelve condominium units Ten of the units are lodge units be used for reconstruction credits. Two are dwelling units and Multi-Family PARCEL B: This parcel includes a 15,000 square foot structure that once housed the defunct Tippler Nightclub and Italian Caviar Restaurant. The Parcel contains two tracts- Tract 1 consisting of 9200 square feet and Tract 2 consisting of 8600 sq. ft.. Tract 2 was approved by the Board of County Commissioners in 1959 and annexed to the City in cormection with the so-called "South Annexation" in 196T The Tippler Townhomes Subdivision, a four flee market and four affordable housing unit project, was approved on May 26, 1998. After approval, the project was the subject ro a complaint for judicial review with the District Court, which lasted approximately 21 months. Because the developer was unable to build during this time, the City granted an extension of the development's original vested rights per/od, until February 26, 2003. A building permn application was made to the City in March, 2002, but has not yet been approved due to n6cessary revisions and required fees. The applicant is delay~ng construction of the approved project to see the outcome of this application. Another extension of the vested right's period was approved by the City Council i-n late February, 2003, extending the vested rights period until February 26, 2005. PARCEL C: The existing Tipple Lodge Apartments were approved by the Board of County Commissioners m 1959 and annexed into the City in I967. Constructed in 1967 ~r 1968 as a three-story duplex, it was converted into a lodge by Mary I. and John L. FaulknerSn 1971. In 1979. the lodge units were approved to be condornin/umized. The condominium structure contains I0 lodge units that were historically rented on a short term basis and two studio units that were occupied long term. An eight space surface parking lot directly adjacent to the condominium provides parking for the owners of homes on Lots 3-6 of Tipple Wood Subdivision (aka Parcels D, E, F. and G), located to the south and up the hillside from, this site. An agreement between the properties assures this parking RESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF ~PORT PAGE 6 arrangement and requires that the parking be addressed with redev~lopmem. Access to those homes is provided via a covered, wooden stairway and adjacent tram. PARCEL H: This parcel of land is to be created with this application and acquired from two different lots oWned by the Aspen Skiing Company and will be incorporated into the subject site. It consist of approximately 26,000 square feet of land area. The northern area of newly created Parcel H will consist of a portion of Lot 2 Little Nell Subdivision and the southern area of Parcel H will consist of a portion of land from the fathering parcel from which Lot 2 Little Nell Subdivision was ci-eated. The two lot Little Nell Subdivismn was approved by City Council in 1986 to facilitate the development of the Little Nell Hotel and adjacent Silver Queen Gondola Building. STAFF COMMENTS: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: The PUD is a mechanism that can be used to adjust the dimensional reqmrements of an underlying zone district in exchange for providing a more creative developmem. In this case, the applicant is using the PUD to 1.) establish the building height, open space, floor area, and parking requirements for the proposed lodge, 2.) allow timeshare lodge developmem, and 3.) establish the non-conforming parcel of land (smaller than minimum lot size) to be conveyed to the applicant by the Aspen Skiing Company as a conforming parcel. (Staff Findings related to PUD criteria compliance are referenced in Exhibit A.) Staff review of the requested dimensional standards follows: BUILDING HEIGHT: The maximum height allowed in the CL zone district is 28' (32' with Special Review). Due to concerns expressed with the originally proposed height by the staff, P&Z, and neighbors, the applicant has redesigned the building such that the maximum height has been reduced from 56' to 47'. Overall, the building varies in height from facade to facade, but the average height is approximately 35' - down from a previous average of 42'. The most noticeable change to the elevations are the elimination of .the part of the building located on the hillside, which was the most objectionable portion in terms of height. Some of this is due to the reduction in the overall floor area of the building, while some of it is due to mo,ang a portion of this mass from the hillside down to the flatter area of the site, closer to Dean Avenue. During the P&Z review, the North of Nell Condominium Association expressed concerns about the height of the restaurant in the northeast corner of the site along Dean Avenue, but not specifically about the height of the rest of the structure. In an attempt to address the objections the Association had about the restaurant, the applicant reduced the height of the steeply pitched roof of the restaurant from 40'6" to around 30' and set it back further from the property line With the North of Nell. The height of the building directly fronting Dean Avenue, the side closest to the North .of Nell. remains the same ar about 36-39' (slightly higher for the porte-cochere). Above this level and setback 13' from the fagade, the building increases to 46'; the building recesses another 15' back from this fagade and the height reaehes another [0' higher to 56'. (although this dimensi~on does not count toward the official height, as measure by the Code'~. By the time it reaches this height, however, the building is setback about 28' fromDean Avenue. i:(ESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE 7 Staff finds that the revised plan addresses many of the concerns raised during the P&Z review. One condition required the applicant ro reduce the height of the overall building, specifically the parr on the visible hills/de and ro reduce the height of the roof of the restaurant, both of which have been accomplished with the revised elevations. Some of the height was simply moved closer to Dean Avenue, however, there was direction given ro the applicant to place more of the building mass and height on the flatter parr of the site so that it would be less visible from other parts of town. Despite the increased height ~n this area. the applicant has stepped back much of this additional height along Dean Avenue, such that a pedestrian walking along Dean Avenue will not even notice or a neighbor living in the North of Nell Condominiums w/Il not be more adversely affected by it than what the previous plan proposed. OPEN SPACE: A variation is sought here not for the required amount of open space - the project exceeds the minimum 25% requircmem - but for how it is oriented on the site. The Code requires that the open space be visible from the street, which is a hardship for this project because it has very little street frontage on Galena Street. Staff feels that the frontage along Galena Street that they do have is more important for use as the entrance to the lodge and the parking garage. Instead, the majority of the open space is proposed to be oriented in the courtyard and spa deck. restaurant terrace, and the parcel the applicant plans to purchase from the Ski Company. The open space will be visible at least to the people who frequent the ski area, which staff believes provides a public benefit. FLOOR AREA: If the pr~ect is approved to be rezoned to CL [Cbmmercial Lodge), the project will be subject to a maximum allowable floor area ratio ~FAR) of 2:l The revised lodge ~s proposed to be 98,200 square feet in size, which would result in a FAR of 2.2:I. As the proposed FAR exceeds the max/mum allowable floor area for the CL zone district; PUD approval to establish a h/gher FAR is requested. The project contains slopes greater than 20% (on which, the Code limits development), so there is an adjustment required for determining the allowable floor area, as demonstrated below: 0-20 34,684 sq. ft. None 34,684 so. ft. 20-30 2,145 sq. fl. 50% sq ft. 30> [ 00% Total 59,062 sq. ft. However, as the above chart represents a 40% reduction in the site's allowable area and as the Code states that the maximum reduction may not exceed 25%. the actual site area to calculate the allowable fioor area is 44,702 square feet (59,062 x .75). Although the FAR for the project has increased from 2:1 with the previous proposal to 2.2:I (98,200 square foot structure ,14,072 square foot site) in the revised plan, the overall square footage of the building has been reduced by about 11,300 square feet. The reason for this is due to the reduction in the size of the project site, with the elimination from the plan of I~SIDENCES AT L£TTLE NELL STAFF I~EPORT PAGE 8 PO the two single family lots to the south (which the applicant previously plarmed to buy and demolish and incorporate the land into the overall development site). Previously, staff had some concerns about the mass of the structure, which were also shared by P&Z and the neighbors. Even though the FAR has increased, staff believes that the revised plan results in a more compatible structure with the surrounding development and erases some of the concerns about the mass of the building on the hillside. Staff still believes that an FAR of around 2:I is acceptable for this proposed lodge, given that nvo of its closest neighbors have similar or higher FAR's thernselves (North of Nell Condominiums are at least 3:1 'and the Little Nell Hotel is 1.96:1). Having a comparable sized building on the west side of the bottom of the Little Nell ski run will help frame in the area to make it a more exciting and aesthetic public space, as well as balance out the Little Nell Hotei and the North of Nell Condominiums being larger structures on all three sides of the ski yard edge. PAKKING: A totaI of 60 parking spaces will be provided in a two level, sub-grade parking garage. The original plans included a .third basement level, but that has been eliminated due to concerns about the large associated excavation. As noted in the chart below, the parking provided is less than required, so the applicant is utilizing the PUD to establish site specific reqmremems. Parking spaces that meet the Code requirement are provided for the 8 affordable housing units (8 spaces provided = 1 space/unit) and for the adjacent four single-family residences on the hillside and the 1 Condominium Unit within the proposed lodge (2 spaces/unit). Instead of providing 0.7 spaces per bedroom for the 24 timeshare lodge units and 8 hotel rooms, which would require 58 spaces, the applicant proposes 27 spaces (which equates ro about 0.5 spaces per unit when considering the lock-off capability of 50 units). According to the applicant, 0.5 spaces per lodge and timeshare unit is adequate to meet the demand based on a variety of reasons, including: [] Most guests will arrive to Aspen by air and then will be picked up by shuttles and taken .wherever in town they need to go. Even if guests do drive or rent a car, they cannot store a vehicle in the parking garage. KESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE 9 PlO rn The lodge is located close to the downtown shopping and restaurant area and the bus station. Past precedent of similar types of products proves that .7 spaces per bedroom results in a vastly over-parked project (citing the St. Regis Hotel and the Littie Nell Hotel as exampleM and substantiates a more accurate 0.5 spaces per unit. Staffbelieves that the proposed residential parking numbers will be adequate and concurs with the applicant's supporting arguments. Based on the high end nature of the project, it is unlikely that guest will drive their own vehicles to the units and highly unl/kely that they would drive two vehicles (which the Code ~vould require if the .7 spaces per bedroom were adhered to). For the commerciaI space, 15 spaces are proposed where 19 are required. This results in a 1.5 space per 1.000 square foot reqmremem, rather than the required 2 space per 1,000 square feet. Because the proposed reta/1 spaces are more likely to be frequented by the lodge guests or the guests of neighboring properties who happen to fred it walking by, and nor by customers who specifically drive there, and because the proposed restaurant could be easily walked to, staff finds the proposed numbers to be adequate. (~ROWTIt 3/IANAGErvLENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQS): To accomplish the proposed project, the applicant requests four different exemptions from the City's GMQS as listed below: CONVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION CREDITS TO TOURIST ACCOMMODATION UNITS: The development rights for the proposed lodge are to be derived from the demolition and reconstruction of existing residential and lodge units in the Tipple Inn and Tipple Lodge Condominiums. The demolition and reconstruction is exempt from the GMGS subject to meeting the requirements of the relevant standards. Demolished residential units can be converted to tourist accommodations at the rate of 2.95 tourist accommodation units per each one residential unit demolished. The applicant proposes to convert fourteen of the project site's existing-residential dwelling un/ts to 41.3 lodge units based on the applicable conversion rare of 2.95 lodge units per residential unit. With the ten reconstruction credits from the demolition of the Tipple Lodge, the resulting total is 51.3 lodge development rights, which is adequate to cover the anticipated 51 kexs or lock-off rooms. Although no findings were made ~vith regard to compliance with the standards at this conceptual level, staff's initial review does not indicate any concerns that would impact compliance ar final review. REPLACEMENT OF DEMOLISH]~D MULTI-FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL UNITS: Fourteen Of the sixteen residential reconstruction credits which the applicant proposes to convert ro lodge units are considered to be multi-family units for regulatory purposes. According to the Code, replacement of demolished multi-family units is exempt from GMQS subject ro compliance with the criteria of the Resident Multi-Family Replacement Program. The criteria includes replacing 50% of the net residential area and number of bedrooms of the units demolished, on the same sire as where they were demolished, and the placement of at least 50% of the mass above grade. In addition, the replacement units must be deed restricted as affordable housing. The applicant proposes to comply with all of the above criteria with the exception of the requirement to replace all of the units on the same s~te RESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE 10 Pll that they were demolished. As noted in the chart below, a total of 12 bedrooms and 4,469 square feet of net residential area are required to be replaced due to the demolition of the fourteen multi-family dwelling units located in both the Tipple Lodge and Tipple Inn Condominiums. With the latest proposal, 8 studio units of 400 square fee! each (8 bedrooms and approximately 3,200 square feet total) are proposed on-site with the rernaimng replacmnent requirement (4 bedrooms and 1,169 square feet) to be satisfied on a yet to be determined location off-site Isee discussion later in report on the merits of allowing replacement of these units off-site). The chart below details these requirements: ~.Development ,~,~;~tq~?~ .~be I Extsttng.., ~ ~l] Miotmurn:Re~utre !}~?l Tipple Inn Dwelling Units ................. 12 N/A Bedrooms ....................... 2I Bedrooms ......................11 (21 x 50%=11) Net Residential Area (sq. ft.) 8,022 Net Residential Area (sq. ft.) 4,011 (8,022 x 50%) Tipple Lodge Lodge Units .................... 10 N/A Dwelling Units ................2~ N/A Bedrooms ......................2 Bedrooms ......................1 (2 x 50% = 1) Net Residential Area (sq. fl.) 915 Net Residential Area (sq. fl.) 458 (915x50%o=458) TotalRequirement: Bedrooms ...................... 12 Net Residentia Area (sq. fl.) 4,469 Owening Units .......... '":' II TBD2 Il 8 on-site II Off-site ed oo s ..................... I1Min. of 2 1t8 on-site II Off-site Net Rsd'l Area (sq. ~t.) II Min. of 4,469 II 3,200 on-s te II O~-site R/ECONSTRUCTiON OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: Reconstruction of demolished commercial square footage ~s exempt from GMQS subject ro the provision of parking and affordable housing for the reconstructed space. The prewous commercial business (Tippler Nightclub and Italian Caviar Restaurant) contained around 13,200 sq. ft. and this developmem proposes less than that with about 9,470 sq. ft, of commercial, so there is sufficient commercial reconstruction credit available. Adequate parking and affordable housing mitigation is being proposed to meet the applicable criteria for this exemption. AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS: GMQS exemption is sought for the proposed development's eight, on-site affordable housing units. City Council may exempt dwelIing units deed restricted to APCHA's affordable housing guidelines. These units will be ~pproximately 400 square feet of net livable area and will be deed restr/cted as rental units to APCHA's Category 2 income and occupancy guidelines. ~ There axe 12 units in the Tipple Lodge, however, only two units meet the definition ,f a residential multi- family housing, 'which is a unit that in its history has ever housed a working resident. : The applicant is only required to replace 50% oft. he bedrooms and net residential area under multi-family replacement, l'he number of dwelling units to be replaced, however, is not specified. P~ESiDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAJ:F P,~EPORT PAGE P12 AFFORDABLE I]OUSING (AH) REQUIREMENTS: The affordable housing mitigation requirement for the proposed development is derived fi.om three separate components: 1 .) the operation of the timeshare lodge} 2.) the project's proposed commercial space; and 3.) the replacement provision of the Resident Multi-Family Replacement Program (RMFRP). The following chart breaks down the requirement of each component. I.) Lodge Operations (Employees) II 38 2.)Commercial Space (Employees) ..................... 48 7,720 sq. ft. Restanrant/Bar Space ~ 5.25 Employees/I,000 sq. ft ............ ' .......... 4I 2,020 sq. ft. retail space ~3.5 Employees/I,000 sq. ft .............................................. 7 Total Lodge/Commercial Employees Generated 11 86 (38+48) Lodge/Commercial Employees. to be Housed ~ 52 60% Employees Generated ('86 x .60) 3.) Resident Multi,Family Replacement Program Tipple Inn Bedrooms .................. ~ ................... 11 Net Livable Area ............................. 4,011 sq. ft. Tipple Lodge Bedrooms ...................................... 1 Net Livable Area .............................. 458 sq. ft. Lodge/Commercial Employees [[ 52 Net Livable Area .................................. [I 4,469 sq. ft. LOCATiON OF REOUI~D A_VFORDABLE HOUSING (AH) UNITS (ON-SITE); Per the above chart, a total of 52 employees are required to be housed in addition to providing 12 bedrooms consisting of 4,469 square feet under the. multi-family replacement program. The applicant proposes to satisfy their affordable housing requirements by constructing housing both on and off-site. Eight (8), I BR affordable housing, studio units are planned on the first floor of the west side of the building. Previously, there ~vere only 4 urgts proposed, but the P&Z required that there be more. smaller units for use by employees. Staff has maintained concerns with the proposed location of these units next to the parking garage ramp. While it is recognized that it'is unrealistic to locate these affordable housing units on the slope-side of the building and that the proposed location is likely the orgy feasible one. we are concerned with some of the negative impacts of that location. As proposed, the units will be situated irmmediately adjacent to the ramp that leads down to the parking garage, where it would be expected that the residents of such units will incur the sounds of vehicles accelerating up and braking down the ramp, exhaust emissions that could get trapped and find their way inside their units, and possible headlignt intrusion into their units. The P&Z, during their review of the project concluded that these concerns were not great enough to require the applicant to do any t>~ESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF P~PORT PAGE l 2 P13 further mitigation to reduce these impacts. Despite this. staff would still encourage the applicant to try re mitigate these impacts and make the units as "livable" as possible for their employees. LOCATION OF REQUIRED AFFORDABLE HOUSING (AH) UNn:S (OFF-SrrE); Once the eighI on-site un/ts of 3,200 square feet are accounted for, the remainder of the required affordable housing (for the 52 employees generated and the 4 bedrooms and 1.269 square feet required to be replaced by the multi*family replacement program) is proposed to be mitigated on a yet to be determined parcel. Orig/nally, the applicant had a 1.6 acre site in the Aspen Airport Business Center (AABC) under contract to purchase, but that has since fallen through and the applicant is actively searching for a new site. Whichever site they ultimately find to meet the housing requirement will require a separate entitlement process that the applicant must complete pr/or to securing Final PUD approval for the Residences at Little Nell (the City would likely not schedule the £mal hearing for the Residences at Little Nell until the applicant has received approval for the off-site AH un/rs). Given the limited number of sites within the city to build a new affordable housing project, it is possible that the site they settle on is either located on the outskirts of the city boundaries or in the County, but located within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). If the un/ts are built in the County, it would be, in our recollection, the first project to mitigate a portion of its affordable housing requiremcmts outside of the City limits. Both the AACP and the APCHA Affordable Housing Guidelines prefer that required affordable housing mitigation occur on-site (or, at least within the "core") with off-site mitigation a second choice, and payment in lieu a final option. Some of the policies and goals of the Housing Section of the AACP that support the notion of on-site housing include: · INTEGRATI~ AFFORDABLE HOUSING INTO THE FABRIC OF TI~ TOWN · EACH PROJECT SHOULD ENDEAVOR TO FURTI-JER A Ivl2[X OF INCOME RANGES TO AVOI20 SEGP._EGATION OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CLASSES BY PROJECT · EMPHASIS SHOULD BE PLACED ON PROXIMITY TO TRANSiT, EMPLOYMENT AREAS AND SOCIAL CONNECTiONS DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL TOWNS1TE SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED TO PROTECT OPEN AND RURAL LANDS The potential for off-site mitigation somewhat conflicts with AACP policies that discourage segregated housing developments and those that are not located in the city and located away from employment areas and social connections. However, anoth~ (and somewhat contradicting) goal of the AACP, is to ensure that housing is merely located within the UGB. In staff's opimon, sufficient land with which re mitigate a large redevelopment project is difficult to find in the core of town, therefore, alternatives are necessary. Staff believes and the AACP supports, that affordable housing mitigation projects should be considered in the County, but within the UGB. on a case by case basis. The P&Z, when presented with the question, supported the concept of mitigating affordable housing in the County, as long as it was located within the UGB. t~SiDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE 13 P14 I~SIDENT MULTi-FAM:mY R.EPLACEM:ENT PROGRAmMe. As noted-above in the GMQS section, a portion of the timeshare lodge units are exempt from the City's growth management quota system, subject to compliance with the Resident Multi-Family Replacement Program (RMFRP',. One guideline of the program is that the multi-family replacement units be re-developed on the same site on wkich demolition has occurred, unless the owner demonstrates that replacement of the units on-site would be incompatible with adopted neighborhood plans or would be difficult due ro the site's physical constraints. As proposed, the majority of the required replacement housing will likely occur off-site. Twelve (I2) bedrooms, consisting of 4,469 square feet are the replacement housing requirement and the applicant is proposing to replace eight (8) bedrooms and 3.200 square feet of the requirement on-site. TI'tis leaves four (4) bedrooms and about 1,I69 square feet let5 to be replaced (although this would result in units less than 300 square feet, APCHA reqmrements still require that the units be built to minimum sizes, such as 400 square feet for a studio and 600 square feet for a one bedroom for Category. 2 units). As it stands now, the applicant proposes to satisfy these off-site. Staff has not found any "site constraints" or "adopted neighborho6d plans" which would allow the replacement units being built off-site. Staff has always interpreted site constraints to be physical constraints, such. as steep slopes, wetlands, extensive mature vegetation, but nor financial constraints. The site does not have any unusual characteristics such as sensitive envirom-nental area that would preclude the accommodation of the units. At the same time, staff questions the wisdom of placing all of the required replacement units within the new building, especially if it is at the cost of lodge rooms, which create the "hot beds" that generate income to the community. It has always been staff's position that having the replacement un/ts built on the site where they were demolished is preferable to having them built off-site because in doing so maintains a healthy mix of socio-economic groups, allows occupants of affordable housing ro retain access to established neighborhoods, creates more vitality by having year round residents in these "in-town" locations, and reduces pollution by allowing residents to walk or bike to major activity centers such as downtown and the ski area. In this case, the applicant has changed the plan from the P&Z review to provide more of the required bedrooms on-site and are close to satisfying the reqmrement. Staff would continue to encourage the applicant to provide the entire amount on-site, ifpossible. ARCHITECTURE: With the redesign of the project since the P&Z review, the architecture has changed. According to the application, the architectural character of the proposed structure is influenced by the mining history of Aspen. The architect proposes materials such as rabble and cut stone veneer, timber beams, and weathered copper siding and 'roofing to help convey what the architect calls "the refinement appropriate of a world class destinatiBn resor~ while still paying homage to the area's mining history." Generally, staff finds the design to be appropriate to the Iocation and a good mix of high quality materials and believe that the design will contribute to the existing mixed architectural styles of the base by incorporating similar style elements, while putting forth its own archifectural statement. The AACP encourages this in the following policy: RESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE 14 P15 "RETAIN AND ENCOU1LAGE AN ECLECTIC MIX OF DESIGN STYLES TO MAINTAIN AND ENHANCE THE SPECIAL CHARACTER OF OUI~ COMML~NITY*' There are a couple of areas, however~ that are a concern for s~fk~are with the fiat roofline of the west and east elevaflons mud ~he loss of the mining character that was evident in the original plan. As height was a concc~-n duting the P&Z review the apphcant has worked to low~' the height m certmn places. In order to accommodate the proposed development program and m order to not have too tall of a building, a flatter roofis~ropd~ed. A flatter roof may fit in contextually with the surrounding su'ucmres as both the Little Nell Hotel and the North of Nell Condomiaiums have flatter roof pitches, however, staff would question if that is the standards with which this project should be measured. Furthermore, ihe P&Z directed the applicant to provide some "teeth" in the roofline, or to provide some fluctuation in order to create visual interest. The applicant feels that_ while the roofline appears to be flat in elevation, there will be sufficient architectural "break-up" of the roof through the use of many dormer windows and with off-sets and overhangs of the roofi In addition, they submit that the building will not be greatly visible from many public vantage points other than the ski area side, because of existing and proposed (Grand Aspen Hotel) buildings that block its view. To help bolster their point, the appligant is plating to provide a model oft. he building at the hearing. Staff would like to offer its final comments on the design pending review of the model, but initially feel that more can be done .To bring interest to these rooflines, especially given that at least the east elevation will be quite visible from the sii area side. By incorporating some of the shed roofs that were used in the original design, staff believes that the dual concerns about the roofline and loss of the mining character would diminish. REZONING: The applicant proposes two different rezoning actions to facilitate the development. First, they propose to rezone the parcels that currently contain the Tipple Inn and Tipple Lodge Condominiums and the old nightclub from Lodge/Tourist Residential (L/TR) to Commercial Lodge (CL). The rezone is proposed in order to: 1.) Accommodate the commercial uses in the proposed lodge (L/TR does not allbw commercial uses); and 2.) Attain the desired density (L/TR allows l:l Floor Area Ratio (FAR) while the CL allows a 2:1 FAR). The other proposed rezone is of the parcel that the applicant plans to acquire from the Aspen Skiing Company, which they want to rezone from Conservation (C) Commercial Lodge (CL) in order 1.) Accommodate the lodge, commercial, and timeshare uses in the proposed timeshare lodge (C does not allow any of thc proposed uses); and 2.) Help attain the desired density (CL allows a much higher Floor Area Ratio (FAR) than the C zone district). RESIDENCES AT LITrLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE 15 P16 Section 25.3]0.040 - Standards for Review o£a Rezone: In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and tho Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the propose~ ame~ffdment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with ail elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zbne districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result m demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks. drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the commumty character in the City of Aspen. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affegting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. L/Ti~ ro C£: Staff has reviewed the proposed rezonmg agmnst the standards for an amendment to the Land Use Code in Section 26.310.040 and preliminarily find it to be in compliance with the standards (final staff findings are required with the final revieW). It complies with a number of goals and policies of the AACP, including the Future Land Use Map, which designates this site as Lodging. Being that the site is directly adjacent to the gondola - the most important interface between the ski area and the town - and to other relatively dense and large, tourist oriented buildings, it is vital that what is built here is a dynamic, mixed use, and larger structure that provides a strong presence. To meet these goals, would be difficult under the current L/TR zoning. The following are AACP policies that support the rezone request: · COMk~ACT MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT ENABLE TRAVEL BY FOOT, BIKE, & BUS · PRIVATE SECTOR PROVISION OF A.H HOUSING · MAINTAIN A HEALTHY, VIBRANT AxND DFv'ERSIFEED YEAR AROUND ECONOMY ENHANCE TFfl~ WEALTH GENERATING CAPACITY OF THE LOCAL ECONOMY C to CZ: Staff has reviewed the proposed rezonmg from C to CL against the standards for an amendment to the Land Use Code in Section 26.310.040 and finds it to be generally in compliance with the standards. While staff has not prepared staff findings for the rezone at this conceptual stage, staff analyzes two of the standards in more detail below, which are whether the rezone complies with the AACP and if there has been a changed condition thaf supports the rezone. 12UESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT PAGE t 6 P17 First, staff believes that the proposed rezone is consistent with all.applicable aspects of the AACP. including allowing for the revitalization of a portion of the base of the ski area with a well designed, mixed use, infilI project that includes both on and off-site affordable housing and public amenities. Without the rezone of this portion, the proposed uses would not be permitted and the proposed size of building - allowing for a critical mass of lodge units (and hot beds), space for commercial uses, mitigation Of a portion of the affordable housing requirements and provision of public amenities (improvement of Dean Avenue and the outdoor, apres ski decks) - would not be possible. An area of the AACP that the proposed rezone is not clearly supported, is with regard to the Future Land Use Map (the "Map"): TNs Map shows the parcel to be Existing Open Space as a future land use, whereas the applicant proposes ro use the space for outdoor deck and a portion of the structure. According to the AACP, the Map was developed primarily fi:om existing zoning and generalized to reflect expected future land use. Staff feels that, in this situation, there are circumstances that warrant _flexibility with regard to applying this map. First, when 'viewed on-site, the subject parcel appears to be just part of the development site for the Residences ar Little Nell and nor part of the ski area because of how it is separated from the ski area by a small ridge. The parcel in question does not appear to be cormectei:t with the ski' area, which comprises the majority of the Existing Open Space as designated on the Map in this particular area. In addition, and more importantly, because the project complies with the ali of the AACP policies and will achieve larger community goals of redevelopment and infilI, we find the minor discrepancy with the Map to not be significant. The applicant should, however, propose a Land Use Map Amendment with the final PUD application to better represent the type of land use of the proposed lodge. Secondly, staff believes that there have been changed conditions that support the proposed zoning map amendment. Over the last several years, there has been recognition by the community about the need m revitalize the town with measures to promote economic stability and ro interject more vitality into the downtown area. The Infill Guidelines, which seek to facilitate new redevelopment and infili, are simply a response to those changed conditions. In the case of this development, the proposal is for a larger, mixed use, timeshare development that alms to bring additional excitement and vitality to the ski area base and to encourage the more efficient use of residential units so that there are more visitors in the commumry contributing to the sales tax base. Because this key redevelopment site is fairly narrow, it is difficult to redevelop at any feasible scale befitting of its locale. In order to redevelop the site properly- to be able to provide a critical mass of units, the apres ski outdoor decks, the commercial units, and the on-site provision of some of the affordable housing unit - additional site area is necessary. Then, to accommodate the proposed uses, it is necessary that the parcel be rezoned to Commercml Lodge. TIMESHARE: The sale of fractional interests in the 24 lodge units to be developed ~s proposed. Each purchaser of a fractional interest in the timeshare lodge will own an undivided 1/7'" interest in a specific unit, which will result in 168 timeshare estates (24 units x 7 estates/unit=168 estates). Each room will have lock-off capability for an actual total of 51 possible rooms. The proposed use plan will guarantee each timeshare estate owner use of aumr a maximum of four weeks a year - two weeks in the winter and two I~ESLDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF REPORT ~AGE t 7 P18 weeks in the summer. All days not accounted for as parr of this .system ~vilI be made available to the general public for rental and to the owners, subject ro certain limitations. Details regarding this aspect are still in the conceptual stage and more detail will be provided with the final plan, however, a full complement of amenities will be contained witkin the facility, including two pools, living and fitness rooms, a business center, and a bar and restaurants. In addition, the lodge will contain a fully staffed, on-site front desk ro provide guest registration and reservation servmes, including late check in and other off hour owner and guest needs. Timeshare development provides benefits not only to the developers and owners of such development, but also to the community. The primary benefit of a timeshare development on this site is that there will be more of a turnover in the units with seven different owners rather than one owner with a traditional condominium arrangement. More people in the beds of the lodge translates /nto more sales tax collected for the community both directly from rentals of the units (when the owners are not staying there) and from money guests spend around the community. Real Estate Transfer Taxes will also be paid on each sale of each interest and benefit the community. The alternative to the timeshare concept is the undivided cbndominium unit which may only be occupied several times a year generating little benefit to the community in terms of sales tax. SPECIAL PLANNED AREA AxMENDMENT: The applicant is requesting an amendment to the approved Little Nell Subdivision SPA in order to subdivide a portion of this property and convey it to this developmem parcel. Because the to-be-subdivided parcel is already non- conforming with respect to minimum lot size and because the Code does not allow the subdivision process ro create or extend a non-conformity, the applicant proposes amending the SPA which governs Lots 1 and 2 of the Little Nell Subdivision to reduce the size of Lot 2. The proposed reduction in the size of Lot 2 will have no adverse regulatory impact as the approved floor area for the SPA is based on the portion of the SPA zoned CC, Commercial Core. Because this will have negative impacts on the remaining lot, staffsupports the amendment. Staff findings are contained in Exhibit C. STAFF SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD), Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment for the Residences at Little Nell. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No.~, Series of 2002, for a Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD), Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment for the Residences at Little Nell" ATTACItMENTS: Exhibit A: Findings - Planned Unit Development Standards Exhibit B: Findings - Timeshare Exhibit C: Findings - Special Planned Area Amendment Exhibit D: DRC Referral Comments Exhibit E: P&Z Minutes Exhibit F: Letter from Neighboring Property Owner P~ESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL STAFF P.J~PORT PAGE 18 P19 Exhibit G: Parcel Identifying Map Exhibit H: P&Z Resolution Exhibit I: Housing Board Memo Exhibit J: Original Application (In 3-Ring Binder) & Supplemental Revised Application (Dated Feb. 28, 2003) P,.ESIDENCES A.T LITTLE ~'qELL STAFF REPORT PAGE. P20 RESOLUTION NO. ~..~, (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COI. J'NCIL APPROVING A CONCEPTUAI~ PLAaNNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CONCEPTUAL TINiESHARE, AND A CONCEPTUAL SPECIAL PLANNED AREA AMENDMENT FOR THE RESIDENCES AT LITTLE NELL, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID [Tip£le Lodge Parcel): 2 73 7-182-36945 Parcel ID [Tipple Inn Parcel): 2 73 7-182-36291 Parcel ID ISki Company Parcel): 2 73 7-182-36877 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Aspen Land Fund. LLC (Applicant), represented by Sunny Varm of Varm Associates, requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of a Conceptual Development Plan~ Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment for the Residences at Little Nell Plarmed Unit Development; and, WHEREAS, the application submitted for the Residermes at Little Nell (plans dated October 25, 2002) proposed a 109,500 square foot, multi-story structure consisting of 30 timeshare un/ts, I condominium umt, 4 affordable housing units, approximately 10,000 square feet of corrmaercial and ancillary space, a 72 space sub-grade parking garage, and a request ro establish the non-conforming dimensional standards of the two adjacent single-family residences. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City En~neering, Building Deparrmem, Fire, Streets. Housing, Envirormaental Health, Parks and Water Departments as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, said referral agencies and the Aspen Commm6ty Development Department reviewed the proposed Conceptual PUD, Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Conceptual PUD approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant ro Section 26.590 of the Land Use Code, Conceptual Timesbare approval may be granted by the City Council ar a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission. the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.440 of the Land Use Code, Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agenmes; and, o 20 - P21 WttEREAS. the City of Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Authority forwarded a unammous recommendation of approval to City Council ro approve the proposed affordable housing mitigation and replacement units for the Residences at Little Nell; and WHEREAS, Conceptual PUD, Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment review by the Planning and Zoning Commission requires a public hearing and this application was reviewed ar a public hearing where the recommendations of the Community Development Director and comments from the public were heard; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on December 3, 2002. the Plamfing and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and continued the public hearing to January 7, 2003: then continued it to January 21, 2003; and finally to February 4, 2003. At the February 4, 2003 public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended City Council approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Developmem by a four to zero (4-0) vote, with the findings and conditions listed hereinafter; and, WHEREAS, the Pla~ing and Zoning Commission finds that the development rewew standards for a Conceptual PUD. Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment plan have been met, as long as certa'm conditions are implemented; and, WHEREAS, Conceptual PUD, Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Special Planned Area Amendment approval shall oniy grant the ability for the applicant to submit a Final PUD, Timeshare, and Special Planned Area Amendment Application and the proposed development is further subject ro Final PUD review, Rezoning, Subdiv/sion, Growth Management Quota Sysrem, Special Review, SpecialIy Planned Area, Condominiumization, 8040 Greeniine and Timeshare approval, pursuant to the Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, the applicant amended the application agrer conceptual approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission (plans dated February 28, 2003), and now proposes a 98,200 square foot, multi-story structure consisting of 24 timeshare units, 8 lodge units, 1 condominium umr, 8 affordable housing units, 9,740 square feet of commercial and ancillary space and a 60 space sub-grade parking garage; and, WHEREAS, staff feels that the revised plan more fully addresses the conditions recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission.; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the developmem proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the AsperffPitldn County Housing Authority, the Community Development Director, the Plarmmg and Zoning Commission, and the applicabIe referral agencies and has taken and considered public comment ar a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that the application for a Conceptual Planned Unit DevelopmenT, Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Specially Planned Area Amendment meets or exceeds all applicable standards and ~s consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, -21 - P22 WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council, by a vote o~ to (_-_), approves a Conceptual Planned Unit Development, Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Specially Planned Ar6a Amendment for the Residences at Little Nell; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary, for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the Conceptual Planned Unit Development, Conceptual Timeshare, and Conceptual Specially Planned Area Amendment for the Residences at Little Nell, subject to the conditions listed in Section 1 below. Section 1: The approval is subject to the following conditions: h The Final PUD application shall reflect and demonstrate compliance with this Resolution and the plans dated February 28, 2003. 2. The Final PUD application shall include: a. An application for Final PUD. Subdivision, Rezoning, Spec/al Reviexv for parking, Growth Management Quota System, Spec/ally Planned Area Amendment, 8040 Greeniine Review, Subdivision, Timeshare. Condomimumization. A pre-application conference with a member of the Community Development Deparrrnent is required pnor to submitting an application; b. Delineation of all dimensional provisions to become requirements of the PUD. c. A proposed subdivision plat and PUD plans. d. A construction plan describing timing of construction components, areas of disturbance, contractor parking, and a physical plan for maintaining adequate access, including emergency access, ro land uses remaining active during construction shall be provided with the Final PUD application. e. A detailed phasing plan that describes overall timing of specific project phases, including the off-site unprovements to Dean Avenue and the moving of the Little Nell chairlift, and describing construction affects on the neighboring properties. 3. Based on corm-nents.from the DRC meeting on November 13, 2002. the applicant shall: a. Consult with the City Engineer in order to comply with all required permits and standards. b. Consult with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District in order to comply with all required permits and standards. 4. Prior to submitting an application for a Final PUD, the applicant shall make the following rewsions ro the plan: - 22- P23 a. Buildin~ Height: Lower the heights of the lodge building with the goal of having the structure better conform to the heights of the surrounding structures. In addition, the height of the restaurant is a concern on the part of the neighbors and the Planning and Zoning Commission, so the applicant shall work with the North of Nell Condominium Association in an attempt to find consensus regarding the location and height of the restaurant. b. Building Desitin: The mass of the building shall be additionally broken up with more "teeth", or visual variety, of the roofline. In addition, the design should be modified to better reflect the architectural character of the orig/nal design, which is described by the project architect in the application as drawing from "the rich history of mining in the Aspen area" and demonstrated in its massing, materials, and series of pitched roof elements. c. Resident Multi-Family Replacement Prom'am (R_MFRP): The applicant is not required to replace on-site all twelve (12) bedrooms and 4,469 square feet of net liveable area of the residential units that are required by the RMFRP. Instead, ar least eight (8) of the bedrooms in the range of 450-650 square feet shall be replaced on-site. Lodge employees shall have the first right of refusal to rent the units whenever they become available. The remaining obligation of four bedrooms can be met through off-site housing. 5. Grading Plan: The applicant shall submit a final grading plan (including drainage and erosion controll and a construction management plan as part of the Final PUD plan application and shall make the plan available to the North of Nell Condominium Association and other interested parties. 6. 'Shipping and Rece/ving: No trucking, shipping and/or recmv/ng, service, inspection, or commercial vehicles serving the Residences ar Little Nell and/or associated commercial facilities shall utilize Ute Avenue for such purposes. All shipping and receiving, service vendors, inspection, and other commercial vehicles to and from the Residences ar Little NelI and its assoc/ated commercial facilities shall be only via its parking garage and/or loading dock offof Galena Street. 7. Geo-technical Report: With the Final PUD application, the applicant shall submit a Soil Suitability and Slope Stability Analysis by a licensed engineer with a specialty in geo~tectmical sciences. At a minimum, such report shall determine the feasibility of excavating the hillside and identification of any necessary mitigation during construction of the lodge ro protect adjoinJ_ng properties from damage. In addition, the report shall include a baseline for slope stability prior to any excavation, establish a monitoring program to be implemented throughout the construction and for two years after completion of construction using accepted engineering standards approved by the City of Aspen, including, without limitation, review of all soils, engineering designs, de-watering plans, and other applicable standards. 8. Off-site Affordable Housing: The Planrdng and Zoning Commission stated they support the concept of off-site mitigation of affordable housing, even in the County, but with/fi the Urban Growth Boundary. The approval of such location shall be secured prior to building permit approval for the lodge. 9. Rezorfing: The Planning and Zoning Commission supports a rezone of Parcels A, B, and C (us/rig the Improvement Location Survey in attached Exhibit A as a P24 reference, from their existing zone district, L/TR (Lodge/Tourist Residential) to CL (Commercial ldodge). The underlying zone district should be used a guide m determining the floor area ratio. The rezoning request will be part of the Final PUD approval. Section 2: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall nor operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue oft he ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, semence, 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, distincf and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on Apr/1 14, 2003 ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Helen Klanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcestor, City Attorney P25 EXE[IBIT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAzNNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. A development application for PUD shall comply with the following standards and req~f~rements (staff findings follow each requirement): A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. The proposed development is consistent with the AACP. Among the policies and goals that the project complies with are: compact, mixed use development that enable travel by foot, bicycle, and public transportation, the provision of on and off-site affordable h0uging, enhancement of pedestrian corridors, and the retention of the eclectic mix of design styles within the community to maintain and enhance the character of the community. The AACP also promotes economic sustainability, which includes a sign/ficant tourist element promoting the continued vitality of Aspen's sld base area. In addition, the Action Plan portion of the AACP speaks directly ro the importance of increasing density through infill in Aspen's original townsite, especially for affordable housing. Despite, howev~, preferring that the affordable housing be located as close to the town core as possible, it does state that such housing located with the urban growth boundary would be acceptable as well. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. The proposed development will be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. The subject site is located in a predominantly resort oriented section of the community with numerous condomin/um structures, a hotel, and several duplexes and single family residences in the area. The tourist oriented r--Iyatt Grand Aspen timeshare project will be constrUcted on an immediately adjacent site. As this application proposes timeshare lodge development geared towards tourists, staff finds this land use to be consistent with surrounding land uses. At the same time, an increased buffer between ti'tis proposed large structure and the lower density uses to the west should be addressed at Final Review to provide a smoother transition between two different scaled and massed buildings. It should be noted that by eliminating redevelopment of the residential parcels ro the south, the character remains mixed single-family residential and multi-family/lodging. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Given that the entire surrounding area has already been developed, this project w/il not adversely affect any of its future developmem, or redevelopment. - 25 - P26 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. The proposed lodge units are exempt from GMQS as their development rights are to be derived from residential and lodge reconstruction credits. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. The proposed dimensional requirements are listed below: Dimensional Requirements Comparison 'units measured in feet or s~ Minimum Lot Size (square feet) Lot 1 CL, PUD ......................... 6,000 ..................73,060 Lot 2 L/TR, PUD .................. · .... 6,000 ..................3,540 Lot 3 R-IS, PUD, L ................... 15,000 .................4,600 Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit Lot 1 CL, PUD ......................... No Requirement ..... N/A Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ...................... 6,000 ..................3,540 Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L.....~ .............. I5,000 .................4,600 Maximum Allowable Density N/A N/A Minimum Lot Width Lot 1 CL, PUD ......................... No Requirement....~ 207 feet Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ...................... 60 feet ................ 60 feet Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L ................... 75 feet ................. 60 feet Minimum Front Yard Setback Lot ICL, PUD ......................... No Requirement ..... 2.5 feet Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ...................... 10 feet ................TBD feet Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L ................... 25 feet ........ : ........ 13 feet Minimum West Side Yard Setback Lot 1 CL, PUD ......................... No Requirement ..... 5 feet Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ...................... 5 feet ................ 11.5 feet Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L ................... 10 feet ................. 5.5 feet Minimum East Side Yard Setback Lot 1 CL, PUD ......................... No Requirement ..... 207 feet Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ...................... 5 feet ................ 12 feet Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L ................... 10 feet ................. 4.5 feet Mimmum Rear Yard Setback Lot 1 CL, PUD ......................... No Requirement ..... 20 feet Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ...................... 10 feet ................ 6 feet Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L ................... 10 feet ................. 12 feet Maximum Height . ' Lot 1 CL,'PUD ......................... 28 feet ................. 56 feet Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ...................... 25 feet ................ TBD feet - 26- P27 Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L ................... 25 feet ................. TBD feet MinLmurn Distance b/w Buildings No Requ/reraent 10 feet Minimum Percent of Open Space Lot 1 CL, PUD ......................... 25%. ...................55% Lot 2 L/TR, PUD ....... ' ............... 25% ....................TBD Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L ................... None ................... N/A Allowable Floor Area (FAR) Lot 1 CL, PUD ................ ~ ........ 109,500 ............... 109,500 Lot 2 L/TR., PUD ............... i ...... 2,200 .................. Lot 3 R-15, PUD, L...' ................ 2,412 .................. Minlrnarn Off Street Parkirtg Lodge Units ............................. 7 spaces/BR Lot 1:68 spaces Free Market Dwelling Units ....... :. 2 spaces/D.U Lot 2:2 spaces Corcanercial ............................. 2 spaces/I,000 sq. ft Lot 3:2 spaces Affordable Housing Units ............ Special Review *Setbacks and height Vary in the develc ~ment program. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and land forms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics ofthe property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding The applicant requests variations from the proposed new CL zone dislrict dimensional requirements to include maximum building height and open space (not for the minimum amount, but for how it is oriented on the site). Staff finds the requests are generally appropriate and compatible with all of the criteria above with a few concerns. The proposed height represents an increase over the zone district allowance (47' at the tallest point versus the allowed 32' with a special review'~ The height is slightly taller than the adjacent tourist residential structures, but staff feels that it is appropriate ro its location at the base of the gondola. While this increased height will likely impact the views from the North of Nell Condominiums over what exists now, that impact should only affect the very lower part of the ski mountain and views of existing structures higher up the h/Ilside, and not the vast majority of the upper sections of the ski mountain. Most, if not ali of the existing mature landscaping on site is proposed to be removed for construction of the lodge. There exists some very mature evergreen and deciduous trees on the site. While this impact cannot be denied, the applicant insists that it is necessary, to remove then~ as many of the trees are in the center of the site, wh/ch would make it tmpractical to construct around them. In response, they propose an aggressive replanting P28 of the site after construction is done that they believe wiI1 help soften the visual impact of a large structure and provide an amenity ro its guests. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff believes that the type of development and density proposed is appropriate and favorable to the character of the area. The character of the area is the heart and soul of the base of the sld area and as such, should be a dynamic and inviting place. To help create this type of enwronment, larger, well designed, and higher density buildings fi:aming in the base asea are necessary along with good public spaces to generate a reason for people to congregate. In order to accomplish that goaI. this project requests increases in allowed.height, which allows for higher density with less site coverage and provision of a sizeable ten'ace area fi-onting the ski yard and extra open space. Staff finds this to be a favorable trade-off for allowed increases in height. 3. The appropriate ~umber of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods ofuse, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding: Staff finds the proposed number of parking spaces ro be adequate. While less than the required number of spaces are being provided for the 32 timeshare and lodge units and slightly less than required for the commercial space, the unique nature and location of the project allow a relaxation of the requirement. The high end timeshare and lodge use will promote travel to the area by airplane and shuttle bus and not private automobile. In addition, the convenient location of the site to the sld area gondola and to downtown, along with access to the public bus system, should decrease the need of an automobile. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.' a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. - 28 ~ P29 Staff Finding The project site benefits fi:om adequate infrastructure capabilities to serve the proposed development and, therefore, no density reductions are necessary. As a result of the Development Review Committee (DI~C) meeting for this project, all utilities appear to be available to the site and, with an increase in the size of the water line, the existing capacities will be adequate ro accommodate the proposed density. Galena Street is a City of Aspen public right-of-way and, as such, is already plowed and maintained by the City of Aspen. Dean Avenue is also a public right-of-way, however, is maintained privately by the owners in the v/cinity. The Aspen Fire District station is several blocks fi:om the project site, and this site is served with existing hydrants and is located within the fire protection district. The entire lodge will be required to install a fire sprinkler system as required by the Aspen Fire Marshal. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.' a) The laud is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effect~ of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding With the limited information presented at this stage, the.projeet site appears to be fi:ee of natural hazards and suitable for the proposed development. It is already developed with multipte srrncmres and the proposed expansion will not consume a sig~ficant amount of additional land. The site is relatively flat so that will not present any constraints. A site specific drainage study will be submitted with the final development plan at wkich time, specific drainage impacts to existing drainage and mitigation will be determined. The proposed development should not be detrimental to the natural watershed and should not result in water pollution. No wood burning devices will be installed. Further, the development should not have a pernicious effect on a~r quality as most guests will likely arrive by air and then by shuttle to the lodge where a central location, good pedestrian facilities, and a short walk to the Rubey Park bus station and ski slopes should result in not needing the use of a car. An impact to traffic generated will likely be created by new employees of this facility. It is estimated that the facility will generate the need for 86 employees. Not all of these employees v4ould be likely to drive to work, as parking on site will be limited. Some P30 employees may live in town and will be able to walk or ride a bicycle, while others may ride the bus. Regardless, the applicant will be required ro comply w/th ail requirements of the Env~rornnental Health Department in connection with the issuance of building pcnTnirs, and this will ensure that affects on air quality are addressed. Initial calculations indicate that the number of vehicle tr/ps ro the site will actually be reduced compared to the exasting development on-site. No additional driveways, roads, or trails are proposed on the project site. There are no critical natural features on the site, and site disturbance will be kept to the minimum required for construction. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5. above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. Staff Finding Initial review of the proposal demonstrates that the project will serve to advance many goals of the AACP, however, there is no request by the applicant ar this t/me to increase the density over what is allowed in the CL zone distr/ct. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or ~an-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner, Staff Finding The site does nor contain any unique natural features or a specific reference to the past. 2. Structur6s have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. - 30- P3~ Staff Finding The new development consists of only one structure and will be clustered adjacent to the residences. Significant existing vistas from adjacent structures will likely be impacted with a taller, larger building, however, staff believes that the vast majority views of the upper ski mountain will be retained from most locations~ 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate~ and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding The site has a relatively short street frontage on Galena Street, but the portion of the project that does front that street contributes to the urban context by locating the building ar street edge and signifying its presence and mmn entrance through a peaked design feature. Along DEan Avenue, the structure will greatly enhance the pedestrian experience by adding retail and restaurant spaces and by adding street trees and furniture and removing the service access to another location. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Finding Service vehicles w/il be able to access the building through the underground parking garage. Emergency vehicle access will occur from Galena Street or Dean Avenue. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding Greatly enhanced pedestrian access is proposed with this project. The grade changes in Dean Avenue will be leveled out and street trees and street furniture will be added, along with a new retail element on the first floor of the building, which Wiii~ provide a much improved pedestrian experience. Currently, pedestrians walking in thi~ area experience the service area and the rear of the existing buildings on the subject site. New street front retail opportunities will be created for the North of Nell Condominiums as well, although are nor parr of this application. Skier pedestrian access wilI also be enhanced by extending the existing Gondola Plaza to the new terrace of the new building. Handicapped access will be provided through the front door and via the elevator, through the parking garage and the elevator, or up an ADA accessible ramp from Gondola Plaza to the terrace. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding Based on initial information, the site draLnage will be properly accommodated with an enclosed dra'~age system discharging into City stormwater collection system. A more detailed drainage plan will be submitted and reviewed with the final development plan. -31- F~32 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding The development does include 9.740 square feet of n0n-residential uses and will have ail service access take place in the underground parking garage, therefore there is no need to design outdoor spaces between the buildings for these functions. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding The site has existing, marure landscaping located in places where there isn't already an existing su-ucture or parking lot. Much of what exists now may need tc be removed To make way for the new building and the re-grading of the south eastern portion of the site that is proposed to help make the interface between the adjacent ski slope and the building more seamless. In its place, extensive new landscaping is proposed including trees, ornamental shrubs, and flowers. Street trees along Dean Avenue are proposed to beautify this pedestrian way and additional landscaping is proposed on the lodge's rooftop terrace. At time o£ the Final PUD approval, the applicant will be required To receive tree removal permits fi.om the City Parks Deparvment as necessary as a condition of approval, as well as consult the Ci~j Forester regarding appropriate additionaJ planting to take place on the proper~y. - 32- P33 View of the ski area edge, a portion of wb2ch is proposed to be re-contoured with tiffs developmem proposal. The purpose is to make a better transition between the new lodge and the ski area Ln the process, the base of the Little Nell Lift and up to five lift poles will be moved to E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, le~bility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding Staff believes that the design will be generally compatible with the visuaI character of the city, however, are recommending that the applicant modify the design ro add more variety to the roofline and to add back to the design some of the details and roof forms that were incorporated into the first design for the lodge. Despite these requests, the -33- P34 design appears to adequately accommodate the shedding of snow. ice and water through proper roof design, and &a'mage. F. bighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as m prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Light'mg of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the lrmal PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development Staff Finding Although this is still the Conceptual stage, an outdoor lighting plan has been submitted (such plan will be required with the Final Review), As no fixture details have been provided: staff has not been able to determine its compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards. Wall sconce and ceiling mounted lights are proposed, Any future lighting plan will have to comply with Section 26.575A50. Outdoor Lighting, of the Regulations, and specifically with Section 26.575A50(E), Non*Residential Lighting Standards (including mixed use projects). Compliance with said sections will ensure consistency with tkis PUD review standard, G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed developmen~ includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: i. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development. considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form. and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a' similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument far the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and share~ facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercia or industrial development. Staff Finding The project contemplates an undeveloped open space area between the new building: the ski yard edge and actively developed open space areas m the form of a roof top d P35 and terrace and sun deck. Ail areas will be accessible by the owners of the project and the terrace will be open to the public. These areas enh~mce the character of the proposed developmenr for the areas of the site that have physical and/or visual access to them. How the areas will be maintained and how ownership of these areas will be deeded ro individual owners has not yet been dete~nined. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified Financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the de~;elopment will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding Engineered utility plans are nor required for a Conceptual Review of a PLrD. With the Final Review, en~neered utility, drainage, and grading plans will be submitted and reviewed. Upon early review with' limited information, it appears that the adequate public infrastructure exists to accommodate the development. If it is later determined that there are required upgrades to the public syszem, the developer will be responsible for financing and constructing such improvements. Eight (8) affordable studio dwelling units are proposed for use by employees, and these should have neglig/ble affects on schools and parks. At any rate, the project will be required to pay certain school land dedication fees and park dedication fees as a result of this proposed growth. The roads serving the project site are already plowed and maintained by the City of Aspen. The site is located adjacent to a public street, making it easily accessible for emergency medical services and fire protection. While no adverse impacts on public infi:astmcture are anticipated, the Applicants shall agree to bear the costs Of any necessary connections, upgrades, and line extensions. Pursuant to Section 26.610.020 of the Regulations, park development impact fees for the new lodge bedrooms rout not the affordable housing bedrooms) will be due at the time of building permit issuance. I. Access and Circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate 35- P36 pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each.lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding The structure will have access to a public street (Galena Street) directly via a private ramp leading from a sub-grade parking structure. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding The proposed development should not create any adverse impacts to vehicular access points or create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the development. Sufficient parking is provided in the underground parking garage and severaI loading and unloading spaces are provided in the porte cochere. J. Phasing of Development Plum (Note: this criteria does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defmed in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in- lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD. construction of any required affordable housings and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding This criteria is not applicable at the ConceptuaI Review stage. A detailed assessment of any proposed,phasing will occur at FinaI Review. -36- P37 EXHIBIT B TIMESlZARE -- STAFF FINDINGS An applicant for tLmeshare lodge development shall demonstrate compliance with each of the following standards, as applicable to the proposed development. These standards are in addition to those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and Subdivision applications, A. Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing lodge to a timeshare lodge development shall be required to demonstrate that the proposed conversion will not have a negative tax consequence for the City. In order to demonstrate the tax consequences of the proposed conversion, the applicant shall prepare a detailed fiscal-impact study as part of the final PUD application. STAFF FINDING: This proposal does not involve a conversion of an existing lodge. B. Upgrading qf Existing Projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be converted to a timeshare lodge development shall be physically upgraded and modernized. The extent of the upgrading that is ro be accomplished shall be determined as parr of the PUD review, considering the condition of the 9xisting facilities, with the intent being m make the development compatible in character with surrounding properties and to extend the useful life of the building. I. To the extent that it would be practical and reasonable, existing structures shall be brought into compliance with the City's adopted fire, health, and building codes. 2. No sale of any interest in a timeshare lodge development shall be closed until a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the upgrading. STAFF FINDING: This proposal does not involve a conversion of an ex/sting lodge. C. Preservation of Existing Lodging Ihventory. An express purpose of' these regulations is to preserve and enhance Aspen's existing lodging inventory. Therefore, any proposal to convert an existing lodge or other property that provides short term accommodations to a timeshare lodge should, at a minimum, replace the existing number of units On the property, in the planned fimeshare lodge. If the applicant is unable to replace the existing number of units, then the timeshare lodge development shall replace the existing number of bedrooms on the property, or the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposal complies with the purposes of these regulations, even though the planned t/meshare lodge will not replace either the existing number of units or bedrooms. STAFF FINDING: This proposal does not involve a conversion of an existing lodge. D. Affordable Itousing Requirements. -37- P38 1. Whenever a timeshare lodge development Is required to provide affordable housing, mitigation for the development shall be calculated by applying the standards of the City's housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable housing requirement shall be calculated based on the ma,'CLmum number of proposed lock out moms in the development, and shall also take into account any retail, restaurant, conference, or other functions proposed in the lodge. 2. The conversion of any multi-family dwelling trait that meets the definition of residential multi-family housing ro timesharLng shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 26.530, Resident Malti-Family Replacement Program, even when there is no demolition of the existing multi-family dwelling unit. STAFF FII~ING: The proposed fimeshare lodge's affordable housing mitigation complies with the applicable requirements oft. he Land Use Code and APCHA's affordable housing requirements. E. Parking Requirements. 1. The parking reqmremem for timeshare lodge development shall be calculated by applying the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge uses. The parking requirement shall be calculated based on the maximum number of proposed lock out rooms in the development. 2. The timeshare lodge development shall also provide an appropriate level of guest transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle veh/cles, to offer an alternative to having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen. 3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited fi.om storing a vehicle in a parking space on-site when the owner is not using that estate. ST2kFF FINDING: The parking provided is based on the total number of lock-off rooms proposed (27 spaces for 50 lock-off rooms). The PUD Agreement and fimeshare instruments will prohibit the owners of timeshare estates fi.om storing their vehicles on site when not in residence 'and the PUD Agreement will also require the provision of van service for the use of owners and guests. F Appropriateness of Marketing and Sales Practices. The marketing and sale of timeshare estates shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title 12. Article 61. C.R.S., as may be amended fi.om time to time. The applicant and licensed marketing entity shall present to the City a plan for marketing the ftmeshare development. I. The following marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall not be permitted: a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers of timeshare urtits on any street, mall. or other public property or facility; and P39 b. Any unethical sales and marketing practices which would tend to mislead potential purchasers. 2. Giving of g/ils ro encourage potential purchasers ro attend a sales presentation or ro visk a timeshare development is permitted, provided the g/it reflects the local Aspen economy. For example, g/its for ~avel to or accommodations in Aspen, restaurants in Aspen, and local attractions (ski passes, concert tickets, railing trips, etc.) are permitted. Gills that have no relationship ro the local Aspen economy are not pcm-aitted. The following gifts are also nor permitted: a. Any gift for which an accurate description is not given; b. Any g/il package for which notice is not given to the prospective purchaser that the purchaser will be required to attend a sales presentation as a condition of receiving the g/its; and c. Any g/it package for which the printed announcement of the requirement to attend a sales presentation is in smaller type face than the information on the g/il being offered. STkFF FINI)I~G: The above requirements will be incorporated into the PUD Agreement and timeshare instruments. G. Adequacy of Maintenance and Management Plan. The applicant shall provide documentation and guarantees that the timeshare lodge development will-be appropriately managed and maintained in an manner that will be both stable and continuous. This shall include an identification of when and how maintenance will be provided, and shall also address the following requirements: 1. A fair procedure shall be established for the estate owners ro review and approve any fee increases which may be made throughout the life of the timeshare developmenr, ro provide assurance and protection ro timeshare owners that managememtJassessment fees will be applied and used appropriately. 2. The applicant shall also demonstrate that there will be a reserve fund to ensure that the proposed timeshare development will be properly maintained throughout its lifetime. STAFF FINDING: The above requirements will be incorporated into the PUD Agreement and fimeshare instruments. If. Comzpliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed t/meshare lodge development will comply with all applicable requiremenm of Title 12, Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3. C.R.S.; including the requirements concerning the five (5) day per/od for rescission of a sales contract, and the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow. ~39- P40 STAFF FINDING: The timeshare instruments to be submitted with the-applicant's final PUD application Mil comply w/th the above requirements. Approval By Condominium Owners. If the developmem that is proposed to be timeshared is a condominium, the applicant shall submit written proof that the condominium declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred (100) percent of the owners of the condominium units have approved the timeshare development, including any improvements to the common elements that the applicant may propose, that all mortgagees of the condomimum have approved the proposed timeshare development, and that ali condominium units in the timeshare development will be included in the same sales and marketing program. STAFF FIN]OIl/G: The standard does nor apply, as the applicant is not converting an existing condominium to timeshare. ,f.. Prohibited Practices and Uses. Without m any way Iimiting any requ/rement contained in this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage in any o f the following practices: 1. The creation, operation or sale of a right-to-use interest or any other timeshare concept wkich is not specifically allowed and approved pursuant to the requirements of this section. Right-to-use timeshare concepts (e.g. lease-holds and vacation clubs) are considered inappropriate in Aspen and are not permitted. 2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare approval, timeshare development insrmrnems, or disclosure sraremem. 3. Failure to comply with any representations contained in any application for timesharing or misrepresenting the substance of any such applicafion to another who may be a prospective purchaser ora timeshare interest. 4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a tkneshare estate or interest therein in violation of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval granted pursuant hereto, or cause or a/d and abet another to violate any requirement of this Chapter. or an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter. ST~ FINI)I~XrG: The applicant maintains that they will not engage in any of the above practices and that these restrictions will be included in the timeshare instruments. P41 Exmxc SPECIAL PLANNED AREA AMENDMENT -- STAFF ]FINDINGS A. General In the review of a development application for a conceptual development plan and a final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the rmx of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. STAFF FINDING: Staffbelieves that the amendment to the Special Planned Area to allow a non-conforming parcel with respect to minimum lot size to be subdivided will help the overall development to be compatible with surrounding development in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping, and open space. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. STAFF FINDING: According to City Engineering and the applicable utility deparrmems, there exist sufficient public facilities' and roads to serv/ce the proposed developmem. Where there may not be sufficient facilities, the applicant agrees to upgrade those facilities to meet the applicable standard. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the pdssibility of mudflow, rock fails, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. STAFF FINDING: The parcel is generally suitable for development with regard to the hazards listed above. The final engineered grading and drainage plans will make recommendations, if any, to properly mitigate any hazards. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land-planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse enwronmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project' and the public ar large. STAFF FINDING: Although the structure does not violate any restricted view planes, the developmem will, to a great extent, preserve the majority of the existing views and will not greatly extend above surrounding structures. Regarding environmental impacts, there will be significant excavation to the hillside for the building and the removal of most of the existing vegetation; however, after development is complete and new landscaping is installed, the site will not appear to have been "adversely" impacted. Because the building has been designed to step up the hillside, at least as it will appear above grade, it is our opinion that the overall appearance of the site will nor be greatly altered fi:om what it is today. Public open space in the form of the outdoor decks and privates open space is proposed, a ski trail easement across the upper portion of the property will be maintained P42 and improvement and enhancement of Dean Avenue imo a mixed use, pedestrian walkway is planned. 5. Whether the proposed development ~s in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plma. STAFF FIz'~ING: As is indicated in the findings for PUD, staff believes that the proposed development is m general compliance with the AACP with regard to ali of its applicable policies. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. STAFF FINDING: No expenditure of public funds to provide public facilities to this parcel is contemplated or anticipated. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty (20~ percent meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Section 26.445.040(B)(2). STAFF FINDING: The proposed development meets the slope reduction and density requirements af the Section cited above. 8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. STAFF FINDING: The development has sufficient GMQS allolrnents or exemptions through existing GMQS allotments ~5om the Tippler Townhomes Subdivision, the conversion of residential reconstruction credits ro tourist lodge units, Residential Multi-Family Replacement Program, and replacement of demolished commercial space. P43 EXHIBIT D DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC) REFERRAL COMMENTS; The DRC meeting was held on November i3, 2002. The comments from that meeting follow: Fire Department: How will we access the upper single family lots? (Applicant response: access will be enhanced over the existing situation with the old tram, by the addition of the elevator access, standpipes, and storage box al the top of the hill for extra f~re hose so that the fire department personnel will not have to carry the hose up to this area). Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: In order to construct the service runnel to this building from the Little Nell Hotel; the applicant will have to cross water service lines coming down from the mountain. Three agreements will be necessary, including a service agreement and formal agreement for temporary service. Downstream fees will be high. Environmental Health: Conceptually agree with the applicant's trip generation figures, however would like the additional opportunity to review the project with the potential for 60 Iock-offrooms. Would like to see a shuttle system from the off-site employee housing site; noise ordinance limiting sound to no more th~in 65 dB will be enforces, especially for any special events planned for this site. Parks: Landscape plan and proposed mitigation will be necessary with the Final PUD; would like to arrange for a site visit with the applicant ro discuss trail easement alignment. Parking: Interested in how the business will be serviced - by the alley? (Applicant response: ail service access will be through the underground parking .garage). New ordinance requiting emergency access to be maintained during construction will be enforced. Engineenng: No on-street parking will be allowed in front of the project, on Galena Street due to limited fight-of-way width. A one time construction impact fee (for the haul route to US 82) will be levied. Who will maintain Dean Avenue? (Applicant response: They believe that Aspen Ski Corp. does some of the maintenance. This projem will also contribute to the maintenance as parr of a malnteflance agreement with the surrounding property owners). We will need to collect an access and drainage mitigation impact fee. The site is subject to the Drainage and Mudflow Master Plan which requires the protection of openings in the buildings fi'om mud. Colorado Department of Health requires that site one acre or larger in size need to employ Best Management Practices for sedimentation control. TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Lee Cassin ~fl~'~ CC: Julie Ann Woods. Edward Sadler, Nick Adeh. Paul Menter DATE: June 3. 2003 RE: Second Reading of Postponed Compactor Ordinance SUMMARY: Staff recommends the Compactor Ordinance not be approved on second reading. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: This ordinance passed on first reading on March i0, 2003. It~'fi~s'''~ tabled to the June 9 Council meeting to give staff time to address several i~sues and citizen concerns. BACKGROUND: A nearly identical ordinance was presented to Council about five years ago, and was turned down due to similar concerns on the part of business owners. This ordinance was proposed by the CCLC. and was intended to improve the appearance of downtown alleys and reduce trash truck traffic. As a result of concerns raised by businesses, Council tabled the ordinance and asked staff to r~search impacts of the proposed ordinance, especially costs to businesses and space constraints in the alleys. Staff met with CCLC and discussed areas of research, and will meet again with CCLC on June 18 to discuss the findings in detail. At this time. because of the difficult unresolved issues, staff recommends Council not move forward with this ordinance at this time. DISCUSSION: Among the issues of concern are the following. Details were provided to Council previously, and will be discussed with CCLC at their June 18 meeting. · Nick Adeh has identified only a handful of locations in downtown alleys where compactors could be placed in the public right of way. Other than these eight locations, requiring compactors means the City would be reqmring private businesses to give up parking or other land for use of a compactor shared with other businesses. Many.businesses do not want to g~ve up parking and do not want to be responsible for picking up trash left by others. · Total cost of the program to city businesses is estimated to be $1,175,450. · The cost per compactor is estimated to be $34,572. · Costs will increase for most businesses if this ordinance is adopted, although some high-trash volume businesses would save money. · When a new law went into effect in Breckenridge (still allowing dumpsters if in enclosures), overall costs went up. · Potential costs to the city are not at first apparent. Cities are often asked to take on the billing when compactors are shared In addition, staff time would be significant for approving containers, approving their placement in alleys, and answering questions. · The City does not have funding to pay for the additional enforcement that CCLC feels is crucial. P'4{J A careful analysis of pickup frequencies in several alleys shows that there is not likely to be any significant trip reduction, although there would be a small reduction in vehicle distances traveled. · Wildlife resistance is somewhat, but not significantly, improved by compactors. · Odors are an issue with compactors, because liquids are released inside the compactor, and they are emptied less often than dumpsters. Odor masking agents can be used with partial success. · Noise complaints about slamming compactor doors may be offset by reduced noise from less frequent emptying of dumpsrers. · A significant concern with shared or centralized compactors is the impact on recycling. As proposed, the ordinance does not allow recycling containers. Even if amended, if people have to make two trips to two containers farther down the alley - one for garbage and another for recycling, they are much less likely to recycle. In addition, the financial incentive of saving on dumpster pickups by diverting recyclables, is lost in a shared compactor where businesses are not billed by volume of trash. Loss of recycling is a serious concern wi. th shared trash containers, whether compactors or dumpsters. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: These are described above. Finance Director Paul Mentor has reviewed financial issues involved. RECOMMENDATION: Because so many difficult hurdles exist, staff explored the possibility of providing financial incentives for businesses willing to convert, as an alternative to requiring compactors. However. that proved to be very costly at a time of declining sales tax revenues, even if a fairly small financial incentive were offered. In addition, it raised larger policy questions about the City's involvement in the trash hauling business, and whether money can be more effectively spent in other ways. Also. staff has had considerable success in working with individual businesses to encourage conversion ro compactors where it makes sense. Finally, there may be other ways to krnprove the appearance of downtown alleys that might be more feasible. ALTERNATIVES: Council could adopt the ordinance, direct staff or CCLC to investigate other options, or simply deny this ordinance ar this time. PROPOSED MOTION: (Ail motions are written in the affumaative.) If Council wishes to approve this ordinance the motion could read. "I move to approve Ordinance 3716. Series of 2003, amending the code to require trash compactors in downtown Aspen." P47 P220 ORDINANCE NO, ..[ 5, SERIES OF 2003 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING SECTION 12.04.020 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE "DEPOSITING OF GARBAGE. TRASH, AND A~SiclES,'' BY REQUIRING THE USE OF TRASH COMPACTORS IN AREAS DESIGNATED AS THE "TRASH COMPACTOR ZONE." VVHEt(EAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen previously adopted Municipal Code Section 12.04.020. entitled "Depositing of Garbage, Trash, and Ashes," WHEP,.EAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Comm/ssion believes that it is m th~ best interests of the citizens of the City of Aspen ro amend said sections by reqmring the use of trash compactors in designated downtown areas of A~pen, ~vhich would be kno~vn as the "trash compactor zone," and WHER]SAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission finds that the conversion of dumps~ers ro compactors in the rmsh compactor zbne will benefit the City in the following ways: - By.p~oviding for the free flow of delivery tracks in the alleys, - By permitting emergency vehicles to access the ~Ileys in an easier fashion, - By reducing or eliminating noise. - By eliminating unsightly dumpsters and the unpleasant smells associated with them, - By reducing trash pick-up times from seven days a week to once a week, - Bymaking the alleys cleaner for pedestrians, - By freeing up truck loading zones for paid parking, and WHEREAS. CCLC believ~s that eighteen (18) months would be a reasonable amoum of time to allow for the conversion from dumpsters to compactors, and WHEREAS. the City Council desires to adopt for/he benefit of tile City of Aspen the following code amendments. MOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE .CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. COLORADO, THAT: Section 1 Section I2.04.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and is re-enacted to read as follows: P48 P221 12.04.020 Depositing of garbage, trash and ashes. (a) Except as set forth in subsection Co) below, ~very owner or occupant of premises within the city shall deposit and cau~e to be deposited ail garbage, trash, and ashes which accumulate thereon in (I) animaI-proo~; fly-tight, covered 6ontainers, [2) dumpsrers approved by the env/ronmemal health department, or (3) a trash compactor (or, other trash-containing deyice) approved by the environmental health department. Garbage and trash shalI be secured in throwaway cofitainers or in s~ch a manner that it is not blown or scattered about or alIowed to become a nuisance to the neighbors or the area. If permitted, the city eng/neer/ng department shall approve the location o/ail dumpsters, trash compactors, or other trash-containing devices encroaching upon a city alley or r/ght-of-way. Co) La the city areas designated as the"trash compactor zone," every owner or occupant of premises shatI deposit and cause to be deposited al/garbage, trash, and ashes which accumulate thereon in a trash compactor approved by the environmental health depanmem. Garbage and trash shall be deposited in the trash compactor in such a manner that it is not blown or scattered about or allowed to become a nuisance to the neighbors or the area. White permitted, the cit}/engineering department shall approve the location of ali trash compactors encroacl3ing upon a city alley or right-of-way. A map of the "trash compactor zone," which may be amended admin/stratively from time to time by the City, shall be maintakned and available for public inspection in the city engineering department. Owners and occupants of premises in the'trash compactor zone shall have eighteen (18) months from the effective date of this ordinance to conver~ from the use of ankmai proof containers or dumpsters to trash compactors. (c) Every applicant for a business license shall provide the city frnance dep3xrment with the name of his/her/its fr~sh's~/44~ ~:~o;dd~r.' Fa/l~re to provide the name ofth~ trash service provider shall be cause for the non-issuance of the license. (d) A "trash-containing device" shall be defined as a container approved by the environmental health depanmen[ that is of ad.equate s~ze and construction to contain the trash generated by the user(s). (e) In addition to other enforcement remedies available to the city, the city engineering department may issue a letter of warning [o the owner or occupant of premises within the city or to the trash service company for non-compliance w/th a provision of this section and may revoke an eneroactn'nenr license. Service from another trash service company may then be solicited. Section 2 P49 P222 This ordinance, when effective, shall nor have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding then pending trader or by virtun 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 of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of comp&ent jmqsdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shalI not affect the validi_ry of the remaimng portions thereof. "~: Section 4 A pnblic hearing on the ordinance shall be held o~3 the day of ,2003, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hail, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, iLEAl), AND ORDEI~D PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of ,2003. Helen Kalin Klandet:iid, ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch City Clerk P50 lhe ~i~' e~snen Memorandum oit § otlle'/ 01lice TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: John P. Worcester DATE: June 9, 2003 RE: Ordinance No. 19 - Rules of Ethical Conduct- Second Reading & Public Hearing Attached for your review and consideration is a proposed ordinance that, if adopted, would enact a new chapter in the Aspen Municipal Code relating to Rules of Ethical Conduct. The proposed ordinance was discussed at a work session and approved on First Reading. As a result of the discussions held during the work session, some minor changes have been made to the proposed ordinance as described below. The Rules would apply to City Council members, City employees, and members of City boards. authorities and commissions. With some exceptions that are pointed out below, the proposed ordinance does not change existing ethical rules and policies of the City. The proposed ordinance attempts to codify previously enacted ordinances that have not been codified, existing City policies (particularly a~ they apply.to City employees,) state laws that arguably may not apply to home rule municipalities, previous legal opinions issued by this office, and court decisions interpreting ethical rules of conduct for city officials. The proposed ordinance attempts to locate into a single chapter of tee Municipal Code ali existing City policies on this very ~mporram subject matter. In so doing, a single and relatively convement document should assist anyone with a question or dilemma relating to their official actions. Some of the topics included in the proposed Ordinance may, admittedly, not involve serious ethical considerations, but are included as they are sufficiently related to official conduct and the public perception of proper ethical conduct for City officials and employees. For example, the Rules regulate such conduct as the political activities of employees, the uniform enforcement of City regtdations, and conduct of officials in quasi~judicial proceedings. As you know fi.om your work session on this subject, if the ordinance is adopted, it is staff's intention to distribute a Handbook that has been prepared to assist City Council members, City officials, and City employees to understand the new Rules and ho~v to apply them to real life situations. Page 1 P52 Changes from work session: Only a few minor changes have been made to the proposed ordinance as a result of your discussions at the work session. They are as folloxvs: 1. The definition of a "substantial interest" on page 4 of the ordinance includes the following language: (g) lie or she or a member of his or her immediate family resides or owns property within 300 feet of a property that is the subject ora quasi-judicial proceeding. By the addition of this language, the ordinance makes the assumption that a person has a substantial interest in the outcome of a quasi-judicial proceeding if he or she lives or owns property within 300 feet of a property that is the subjegt of the quasi-judicial proceeding. As you know from our discussions ar the work session, this new language attempts to place some objective criteria for determining when a person has a personal interest that goes beyond a common public interest in the outcome of a quasi-judicial proceeding. Please note that living or owning property more thah 300 feet from the subject property does not mean that the person does not have a substantial interest in the outcome of the quasi-judicial proceeding. It is quite possible that such a person might still have an interest other than a common public interest and might still need to recuse themselves, Those situations would still have to be decided on a case- by-case basis. 2. Section 2.02.030 (h) on page 6 of the ordinance has been altered slightly to make clear that serving on more than a single board or commission is generally permissible, but may be prohibited by the City Charter or the By-laws of one or more of the boards or commissions. 3. Sections 2.02.100 (d)(i) & (ii) on pages 12 and 13 of the ordinance have been amended to delete the word "partisan" when referring ro political office. Highlights of Ordinance Following are highlig,~ts of the proposed ordinance and areas of potential discussion by Council. Section 2.02.030 lists specific rules 'of conduct that are proscribed by the new ordinance. The prohibited conduct includes: (1) The use and disclosure of confidential information; Specific instances where a conflict of interest exists; (3) The acceptance of certain gitSs: (4) The unauthorized use of City owned assets; and (5) Serving on dual capacities. The section on gifts, was taken directly from state law. Council may wish to discuss this section as it currently allows the receipt of "items of perishable or nonpermanent value, including~ but not limited to, meals, lodging, travel expenses, or tickets to sporting, recreational, educational, or cultural events." There is no value maximum. In reviewing similar codes fi'om other cities. I note Page 2 P53 that many of them place a maximum value on these types of gifts. Cotmcil may wish to tig~hien ap this section by limiting the value of such gifts. The City manager has suggested that the section be amended by placing a limit on items of a per/shable or non-permanent value of $250.00 for events that take place outside the Roaring Fork Valley unless the event is directly related to City business. The subsection (2.02.030(h)) prohibiting serving in dual capacities is not an existing City policy, but is recommended to avoid substantial conflicts of interests that may be ct'eater by having people serving the City in dual capacities. Sectio~ 2.02.040 regulates how City Council members, City officials and City employees may appear before the City Council and boards and cormmissions of the City. Page 14 of the Handbook contains a chart that may be helpful in understanding the specific prohibitions on appearances. These rules are not different than those currently in existence by virtue of Ordinance No. 50, Series of 1979. Section 2.02.050 sets forth the proper procedure for affected persons to follow when they have a conflict of interest and the Rules require disclosure and recusal from taking official action. The proposed procedures are not different than the procedures currently followed in the City. Section 2.02.060 regulates how people can or can't contract' With the City. These rules were taken from existing City policy as set forth in Ordinance No. 50, Series of 1979, and the City's procurement Code. Section 2.02.070 regulates employmem of former and present employees. Some of the regulations currently appear in the City's Procurement Code. (They were originally placed in the Procurement Code as there was no other place to put them when the procurement code was adopted.) The proposed ordinance does allow for a waiver procedure. This wmver procedure allows the City Manager to waive a prohibition when it is determined that to do so is in the best interests of the City. The waiver procedure will allow some flexibility on the operation of the Rules when to do so makes sense. There is a new prohibition at subsection 2.02.070(d) which prohibits City Council members from employment with the City for a period of six months following the end of a term of office. This provision is being proposed to prevent potential conflicts of interests and to avoid a situation where a current City Council member places undue influence upon a City employee for employment following their service as a member of Council. Section 2.02.090 codifies and clarifies the current practice of allowing and encouraging affected persons to obtain legal opinions from the City Attorney's Office regarding the appropriateness of the course of action [o be followed in any particular situation. The section also authorizes affected persons to obtain waivers from the str/ct operations of the Rules in employment and contractual situations. Section 2.02.100 accomplishes several things. First, it clarifies that the City will be bound by the Colorado Fair Campaign Practices Act. Some people have argued in the past that this state law does not apply ~o home rule municipalities such as Aspen. Subsection (a) makes clear that the City will comply with the state law regulating campaigns. The remaining subsections make clear Page 3 P54 what political activities are permitted and which are not. In general, th~ proposed regulations do not change existing City policies, but make clear what those policies are. Council may wish to discuss subsection 2.0ZIO0(c)(ii) which prohibits City employees from wearing camping2 buttons on their person on the work site. The City has not generally enforced any such rule in the past. It might seem like a small matter, but in the right circumstances, may create a problem (particularly if the City does not have a specific policy on the matter.) Another subsection Council may wish to discuss is 2.02.100(d)(i) which prohibits a City empIoyee from serving on the City Council or the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners. Serving on the City Council while an employee pretty clearly would create conflict of interest problems. Serving as a County Commissioner while a City employee does not create an inherent conflict, but may be problematic particularly ~vith the City and County engaged m so many joint ventures and projects (joint departments, representation on various quasi-governmental entities, ere3 Section 2.02.110 merely restates existing policy regarding quas~-judicial proceedings. Because of the legal protections afforded such proceedings, rules of conduct may seem superfluous, but restating the City's commitment to fairness in such matters is helpful. Section 2.02.120 relates to the uniform enforcement of City regulations. This section is being proposed as it is a source of concern to many members of the public when the City ts required to enforce its regulations. Selective enforcement or discriminatory treatment is a common complaint when City officials perform their enforcement duties. This section restates the City's intent to ensure that enforcement activities are done fairly, consistently and in accord with established policies. Section 2.02.130 sets forth provtsions for the enforcement of the Rules. Section 2 of the ordinance on the last page merely repeals two sections o{the City's Procurement Code that are being incorporated in the proposed ordinance. PROPOSED ACTION: A motion.to approve Ordinance No. , Series of 2003. on first reading. CITY MANAGER' S COMMENTS: JPW436/03/2003-G:\john word\memos\conflict of interest ordinance.doc Page 4 P55 ORDINANCE NO. 19 (Series of 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING TITLE 2 OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE. ADMINISTRATION. BY THE ADOPTION OF A NEW CHAPTER 2.02. RULES OF ETHICAL CONDUCT. WHERt{AS, Section 4.7 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter prohibits members of Council fi.om voting %n any question in which ti~ hhi a sub~taritial personal or financial interest, other than a common public interest, or on any question conccm~ing his own_conduct;" and WI{EREAS, the Colorado State Legislature has adopted a Code of Ethics which include roles of conduct for local officials and employees; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 50, Series of 1979, to define conflict of interests and to regulate the conduct of City officials deemed to have a conflict of interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that "government is a trust, and the officers of.the government are trustees; and both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people" (Henry Clay, Speech at Ashland. Ky.. March 1829j; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to update the mles of conduct fo?' members of Council. members of appointed City boards, author/ties and commissions, and City employees to ensure that the people maintain their trust in city government. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: P56 Section 1. That Title 2 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Chapter 2.02. which chapter shall read as follows: Chapter 2.02 Rules of Ethical Conduct 2.02.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the public and the integrity of city government by defining and proscribing certain conflicts of interest that may arise between the City and City Council members, employees, or appointees to City boards, authorities, and commissions. The City Council further recognizes that, when citizens of the City of Aspen obtain public office, conflicts may arise between the public 'duty of such a citizen and his or her private interests. The City Council hereby declares that the prescnption of some standards of conduct common to those citizens involved with government is beneficial to all residents of the City of Aspen. This chapter recognizes that some actions are conflicts per se ber~veen public duty and private interest while other actions may or may not pose such conflicts depending upon the totality of the circumstances surrounding certain actions 2.02.020 Definitions. As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requu:es: "Affiliate" or "Affiliated with" means an employee, parmer, agent, stockholder, joint venturer, or corporate director of any business organization or a person who shares office space with such orgahization. "Appear on behalf of" means to act as a witness, advocate, or expert or otherwise to support the position of another person. "Business" means any corporation, limited liability company, partnership, sole proprietorship, trust or foundation, or other individuai or organization carrying on business, whether or not operated for profit. "City Council member" means a member of the Aspen City Council and includes the Mayor. "City official" means and includes any member of a board, authority, commission or other body where the members are appointed by the City Council. "City official" does not mean or include any employee of the City with the exception of the Municipal Court judge. "Compensation" means any money, thing of value, or economic benefit conferred on or received by any person in return for services rendered by himself or another:. P57 "Confidential information" means ali information, whether transmitted brally or in writing, which is of such a nature that it is not, at that time, a matter of public record or public knowledge. "Contract" means and includes any claim, account or demand against, or agreement with, the City of Aspen, express or implied. "Direct official action" means any action which involves: (a) Negotiating, approving, disapproving, administering, enforcing, or recommencFmg for or against a contract, purchase order, lease, concession, franchise, grant, or other similar transaction in wh/ch the City is a parry, or other action, including inaction concerning any legislative, administrative, quas~-judicial, or discretionary act of the City of Aspen, whether by the City Council, a board, commission, court or employee. With regard to "recommending," direct official action occurs only if the person making a recommendation is in the formal line of decision making; (b) Enforcing laws or regulations or issuing, enforcing, or regnlating permits: (c) Selecting or recommending vendors, concessionaires, or other types of entities to do business with the City; (d) Appointing and terminating employees temporary workers, and independent contractors; or (e) Doing research for, representing, or scheduling appointments for an employee, provided that these activities are undertaken with that employee's performance of (a) through (d) above. Direct official actibn does nor include acts that are purely ministerial (that is, acts which do not affect the disposition or decision with respect to th~ matter.) with r~gm-d to the approval of contracts, direct official action does not include the signing of the instmmem unless the signer in/tiated the contract. A person who abstains from voting is not exercising direct official action. "Employee" means any full-time, part-time, temporary, seasonal, or permanent employee of the City of Aspen, except a City Council member and except an independent contractor under contract with the City of Aspen. 'Financial interest" means a substantial interest held by an individual which is: (a) An ownership interest in a business; (b) A creditor interest in an insolvent business; (c) An employmenr or a prospective employment for which negotiations have begun; (d) An ownership interest in real or personal property; (e) A loan or any other debtor interest; or (f) A directorship or officership in a business. "Immediate family member" includes husband, wife, son, daughter, mother, father, grandfather, grandmother, grandchildren, brother, sister, and domestic partner. The term includes any minor children for whom the person or his or her domestic partner provides day-to-day care and financial support. A "dombstic partner" is an unmarried adult, unrelated by blood, with whom an unmarried P58 officer, official, or employee has an exclusive committed relationghip, maintains a mutual residence, and shares basic living expenses. "Person" means and includes any individual, business, proprietorship, firm, emiry, estate, partnership, association, lmst, corporation, holder ora legal or beneficial interest in any of the same. or other similar entity. "Personal servzces" means and includes the employment of a person to perform duties, which labor does not produce tangible commodities. "Quasi-judicial proceeding" means any proceeding at which direcl official action will be taken where (a~ City or state law requires that the body give adequate notice to the community before acting; (b) City or state law requires that the body conduct a public hear/rig, pursuant to notice, ar which concerned citizens must be given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence: and (c) City or state laws requires the body to make a determination by applying the facts ora specific case to certain criteria established by taw. "S~zbstantial interest" means and includes a situation, including without limitation, a pecuniary stake in the outcome of a direct official action in which, considering ail of the circumstances, a reasonably prudent person would expect a marked tendency to make or take a direct official action other than in an objective manner. By way of example, and not limitation, a person shall be deemed to have a substantial interest if: (a) He or she or a member of the immediate family is a parry to a transaction; (b) He, she, a spouse, or a domestic parmer owns a one (1%) percent or more, or a member of the immediate family other than a spouse or domestic partner oxvns five (5%) percent or more, of another parry to the transaction; (c) He or she or a member of the immediate family ~s an officer in another party to the transaction: (d) He or she or a member of the immediate family is directly involved in obtaining the City's business for another party to the transaction; (e) He or she or a member of the immediate family is directly involved/n direct official action regarding a transaction for another party ro the transaction, other than a purely clerical capacity: or (f) A member of his or her immediate family performs more than a nominal portion of the work required by the transaction, or supervises or manages more than a nominal portion of the work. (g) He or she or a member of his or her immediate family resides or owns property within 300 feet of a property that is the subj ecu of a quasi-judicial proceeding, "Transaction" means and includes any contract: any sale or lease of any interest in land. material, supplies, or services; or any granting of a developm~'nt right, hcense, permit, or application. 2.02.03 0 Rules of conduct governing City Council members, city officials and efnployees. P59 A City Council member, City official, or an employee shall not: ia) Disclose or use confidential information acqu/red in the co~u:se o£his official duties in order to further substantially his personal financial interests; (b) Disclose or use confidential informanon acquired in the course of his official duties as an attorney-client communication from the City Attorney or other counsel retained by the City without the consent of the City Council i~e-e~ ,~£ a Cit:, Cu~,~l ~crr2,,~,, o, ~p,~ ~ent r,+' ~ - ' _ ,~,r;., +~'~e n~ ~ C;~~ ofSciaLc~r ~mpln?e; (c) Assist any person for a contingent fee to affect the outcome of a direct official act; (d) Perform a direct official action without following the procedure prescribed by section 2.02.050 of this chapter if such person: (i) Has a substantial interest in any transaction with the City of Aspen; (ii) Has an immediate family member with a substantial interest in any transaction with the City of Aspen; (iii) Has a substantial interest as an affiliate of a firm with a substantial interest m any transaction with the City of Aspen; or (iv) Has a substantial interest as an affiliate of a firm appeanng on behalf of or employed by a person with a substantial interest in any transaction with the City of Aspen. (e) Accept a g/fl of substantial value or a substantial economic benefit tantamount to a g/fl of substantial value which: (1) would tend improperly to influence a reasonable person in his position to depart fi'om the faithful and impartial discharge of his public duties; or (2) he knows or which a reasonable person in his position should know under the circumstances m primarily for the purpose of rewarding him for a direct official action he has taken. The following shall not be considered g/frs of substantial value or gifls of substantial economic benefit tantamount to gifts of substantial value for purposes of this section: (i) Campaign contributions and contr/butions in kind reported as required by section 1-45-108. C.R.S., as amended; (ii) An occasional nonpecuniary g/fl, insignificant in value; (iii) A nonpecuniary award publicly presented by a nonprofit organization m recognition of public service: (iv) Payment of or reimbursement for actual and necessary expenditures for travel and subsistence for attendance at a convention or other meeting at wln_ich such person is scheduled to participate; P60 (v) Reimbursement for or acceptance of an opportunity to participate at a social function or meeting which is offered to such person which is not extraordinary when viewed in light of the position held by such person; (vi) Items of perishable or nonpermanent value, including, but nor limited to, meals, lod~ng, travel expenses, or tickets to sporting, recreational, educational, or cultural events: or (vii) Payment for speeches, appearances, or publications reported pursuant to section 24-6-203, C .R.S Fail ro comply with the Public Official Disclosure Law. 24-6-201, er seq., C.R.S. (This la~v requires incumbents in and candidates elected to public office - City Council members - to publicly disclose the receipt of certain gifts, honoraria and other benefits on forms available from the City Clerk's Office.) (g) Request, use. or permit the unauthorized use of City-owned vehicles, equipment, materials or property for personal convenience or profit. (h) Simultaneously serve in more than one capacity as a City Council member, City official, or employee. City officials may serve on more than one City board, authority, or commission; provided, however, they are not subordinate to one another in any respect; and provided further, that such service does not violate Article VIlI of the City Charter and the by-laws of either board, attthority, or con'amssion. 2.02.040 Appearances before the City Council. boards, commissions, and courts. Noth/ng in this section is intended to apply to any City Council member, City official, or employee who appears before the City Council or any City board, authority, or commission to urge action on a policy or ~ssue of general civic nature or ro the relationship between the City Council, the City. any City board, authority or commissmn, or any department of the City. (ay City Council members. (i) City Council members shall not appear before the City Council or any city board, authority, or commission either on their own behalf or on behalf of another. A City Council member may be affiliated with a firm appearing on behalf of or employed by another person concerning any transaction with the City before the City Council. board, authority or commissmn: provided, however, that the City Council member follows the procedures prescribed by section 2.02.050 of this chapter if the transaction is before the City Council. (ii) A City Council member shall not be a party or, by himself or herself, or as an affiliate ora firm. appear on behalf of a parry in a civil suit, wherein the City is an adverse parry, unless the member first obtains the consem of the City Council. ~b) City officials. P61 (i) City officials may only appear or be affiliate~l with a firm appearing concerning any transaction with the City under the following circumstances: (1) A City official may appear on his own behalf before the Cky Council. (2) A City official may appear on his own behalf before the body of which he or she is a member, provided the City official follows the procedure prescribed by section 2.02.050 of this chapter. (3) A City official may appear on behalf of another person before any City board, authoritv or commission except the City Council or the body of which he or she is a member. (4) A City official may be affiliated with a firm appearing on behalf of or employed by another person concermng any transaction before the City Council, board, authority, or commissmn, provided the City official follows the procedure prescribed by section 2.02.050 of this chapter if the transaction is before the body of which he or she is a member. (ii) A City official shall not be a parry or, by himself or herself, or as an affiliate of a firm, appear on behalf of a parry, m a civil suit, wherein the City is an adverse parry, unless the member first obtains the consent of the City Council (b) City employees. (i) City employees shall nor appear on behalf of or be employed by another person concermng any transaction with the City or before the City Council, or.any c~ board, authority, or commission. (ii) City employees may appear before the City Council or any city board. authority, or commissmn, on their own behalf or on behalf of such employee's immediate family members. (iii) City employees may be affiliated with a firm that appears on behalf of or is employed by another person before the City Council or any city board, authority, or commission; provided, however, the employee discloses his relationship as provided in section 2.02.050. 2.02.050 Voluntary Disclosures of Interests. (a) Whenever the provisions of this chapter require a City Council member, City official, or employee ro disclose an interest, the following procedures shall be followed. The affected person shall disclose th~ interest on the record of a public meeting of the City Council or the City board, authority, or com_nussion of which the person is a member. The interested City Coimcil member, P62 City' official, or employee shall thereafter: (a) refrain from voting upon 6r otherwise taking a direct official action in such transaction; (b) physically absent himself or herself from the room in which the matter is being considered; and (c) not discuss the matter with any other.member of the City Council, board, authority, or commission of which the person ~s a member. In the event that the interest has arisen or become apparent after the City Council member, City official, or employee has taken some direct official action on a transaction, the City Council member, City official or employee shall give written notice of the interest and the nature of the transaction to the City Attorney as soon as reasonably possible. (b) A City Council member or City official may vote notwithstanding subsection (a) hereof if his or her parttc~pation is necessary to obtain a quorum or otherwise enable the body to act; provided, however, that the City Council member or City official discloses his or her interest. 2.02.060 Contracts for Goods and Services - Procurements. The following rules of conduct shall apply m contracts entered into between the City of Aspen and City Council members, City officials or City employees. These rules are in addition to any related provisions set forth in Chapter 4.20 of this Code. City Council members. (i) No contract for compensation ro a City Council member shall be entered into if the City Council member would perform services under the contract. (ii) No contract shall be entered into by the City if a member of the City Council would have an interest therein unless the City council member with an interest follows the procedures prescribed by section 2.02.050 of this chapter. (b) City officials A City official may contract for goods and services with the City of Aspen; provided, however, that the City official does not take any direct official action relating to the contract, (c) City employees. Unless a specific waiver is obtained pursuant to section 2.02.090(b) herein. employees shall not take any direct official action in a transaction when the employee knows that: (1) The employee or any immediate family member of the employee has a financial interesl pertaining to the procurement: (2) A business or organization in which the employee, or the employee's immediate family member, has a financial interest pertaining to the procttrement; or P63 (3) Any other person, business, or organization with whom the employee or the employee's immediate family member is negotiating or has an arrangemem concmming prospective employment is involved in the procurement. P64 2.02.070 Restrictions on employment of present and former employees. (a) Current employees. (i) No employees shall engage in outsicfe employment which in any manner interferes with the proper and effective performance of his or her duties or which results in a conflict of interest. Employees shall report existing or proposed outside employment or other outside business activity to their supervisors prior to accepting the same. Employees shall report any change in employment stares to their supervisors which Could g~ve rise to a confl/ct of interest. (ii) No employee shall take any direct official acnon with respect to their former employers for a period of six (6) months fi:om the date of termination of the prior employment. (iii) Unless he or she obtains a waiver pursuant to section 2.02.090(d), no employee shall appoint or hire a member of his or her immediate family for any type of employment, including, but not limited to, full time employment, pan time employment, permanent employment, temporary employment, and contract employment. (iv) Unless he or she obtains a waiver pursuant to section 2.02.090(d), no employee shall supervise or be indirect line of supervision over a member of his or her immediate family. If an employee comes into a direct line of supervision of a member of his'or her immediate family, he or she shall have six (6) months to come into compliance or to obtain a waiver pursuant to section 2.02.090(d). (b) Permanent disqualification offormer employees. There shall be a rebutable presumption that former employees have a conflict of interest when knowingly acting as a principal, or as an agent for anyone other than the City, in connection with any juclicial or other proceeding, application, request for ruling, or other determination, contract, claim, or charge or controversy, in which the employee participated personally or substantially ~n any direct official action. where the City is a parry, or has a direct or substantial interest. Accordingly, unless the proceaures set forth at section 2.02.090(c) below are properly followed, such former employees shall be permanently disqualified fi:om acting as a pr/nc~pal or as an agent for another on said matters. (cd Six month disqualification offormer emplo) ees. There shall be a rebutable presumption that former employees have a conflict of interest when knowingly acting as a pnnctpaI, or as an agent for anyone other than the City, in connection with any judiciaI or other proceeding, application, request for ruling, or other determination, contract, claim, or charge or controversy, ~n matters P65 which were generally witinn the former employee's official responsibility where the City is a party or has a direct or substantial interest. Accordingly, unless the procedures set forth at section 2.02.090{cj below are properly followed, such former employees shall be disqualified from acfin~ as a principal or as 'an agent for another on said matters for a period of six (6~ months following the former employee's employment with the City. (d) Six month disqualification of City Co~tnciI members for empl°Ymen~.' City Council mYmbers shall be disqnalifled from emploYment with the City for a period of six (6) months from the last day of the term of their elected position without the consent of the City Council. 2.02.090 Opinions and waiver. (a) Advisory opinions On written request of currem, former, or prospective City Council members, City officials, or employees, the City Attorney may render advisory opinions regarding the appropriateness of the course of conduct to be followed in any proposed direct official actions or transactions. If a significant controversy arises under any provision of this chapter, the City Attorney may appoint a neutral outside counsel to assist in resolving the issue. Compliance with the reqmrements of a duly promulgated written advisory opinion of the City Attorney shall be deemed m constitute compliance with the ethical standards of tins chapter (b) Waiver of conflict of interest for procuremems. Employees presumed to have a conflict of interest and therefore disqnalified from ta!dng any direct official action in the procurement process set forth as section 2.02.060(c) may petition the City Manager in writing for relief from disqnalification. The City Manager may waive the former employee's disqualification upon a finding that to do so is in the best interests of the City and may condition the waiver to ensure that conflicts of interests are avoided. (c) Waiver of disqualification for former employees. Former employees presumed to have a conflict of interest and therefore disqualified from acting as a principal, or as an agent for anyone other than the City pursuam to sections 2.02.070(b) and (c) above, may petition the City Manager in writing for relief from disqualification. The City Manager may waive the former employee's disqualification upon a finding that to do so is in the best interests of the City and may condition the waiver to ensure that conflicts of interests are avoided. (d) Waiver of disqualification of employment and supervzsion of immediate family members. Immediate family members of current employees who mfght otherwise be disqualified from employment in accordance with section 2.02.070(a)(iii) or disqualified for certain positions by virtue of section 2.02.070(a)(iv), may petition the City Manager in writing f3r a waiver. The City Manager shall grant a waiver if he or she deems it to be in the best interests of the City to do so and may condition the waiver to ensure that conflicts of P66 interests are avoided. By way of example, and not limitation_ the 'following are examples of circumstances in which a waiver may be appropriate: (i) The family member who is proposed to be hired was certified through a competitive process conducted pursuant to law and the employee would make the appointment did not influence or affect the certification; (ii) The employee who would officially make the appointment is acting riagd'a'e~ and did not participate in the selection of the immediate family -- member or attempt to influence the person who did; (iii) The immediate family member who would be in the line of supervision was already working for the City before the employee came into the line of supervision, and the employee can and will abstain 2om participating in any personnel actions involving the immediate family member. 2.02.100 Political activities. Fair Campaign Practices Act. City Council members, City officials and employees shall not violate any provision of the Colorado Fair Campaign Practices Act. Sections 1-45- 101, ez seq. or the City of Aspen Election Code, Chapter 9.04 of the Aspen Municipal Code. (b) Permitted Political Activities. City Council members. City officials and employees may panic,pate in the following political activities on their own time: (i) Register and vote in any election: (ii) As an individual, privately and publicly express an opinion on political subjects and candidates; (iii). Be a member of a political party and participate in its activities consistent with this section; (iv) Sign a political nomination, initiative, referen&nn, or recall petition as an individual; (v) Make a financial contribution io a political parry, issue committee or candidate's committee; (vi) Be politically active in connection with any issue question or candidatel (vii) Display bumper stickers, posters, or pamphlets on his or her personal proper~y for the endorsement of issues or candidates; (viii) Take an active part in the management of political campaigns; (ik) Directly or indirectly solicit, receive, or account for funds for a partisan political purpose except as prohibited by this section; 12 P67 (x) Solicit votes in support of, or in opposition to, a an issue or candidate; (xi) Serve as a delegate, alternate, or proxy to a political par~y convention; (xii) D:ive voters to the polls on behalf of a politica] party or partisan candidate: and (xiii) Endorse or oppose a partisan candidate for public office or political ~rry _ - office in a political advertisement, broadcast, ~a~..paignAi~eratm~,~6r similar material. _ ~., In addition to the above hsted acuwt~e~, C~ty Cotmcd members may: ¢iv) in political advertisements, endorsements, or speeches; (c) Prohibited Political Activities. The folI~fwing political activities are prohibited for City employees: (i) No employee may use any official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election, nor may funds be solicited or contributions be received from other employees for political purposes; (ii) Bumper stickers and posters may be displayed on private vehicles and property, but campaign materials, pamphlets, and buttons may not be displayed on City vehicles, City property, or by an employee while on a work site or performing his or her official duties: (iii) Activities prohibited for an individual employee are also prohibited for groups or organizations of employees, even though specific activities are being performed by a non-employee as a representative of the employee group; (iv) Activities permitted in subsection (b) of this Section are prohibited when an employee is on duty; they are also prohibited on City property and when an employee ~s wearing a uniform normally identified with the City; and (v) In local issues, an employee shall not use an official City title or designate employment with the City in political advertisements, endorsements, or speeches. without the express consent of the City Cosmcil. (d) Political Candidacy of City Employees. The following shall apply when City employees seek elected office: P68 (i) A city employee may seek election to political office. If elected to political office, and such office is clearly inconsistent, incompatible, in conflict with his or l~er duties as a City employee, or the elected office is that of City Council member or Pitkin County Commissioner. the mnployee shall terminate City employment pr/or to assuming elected office; (ii) An employee may be a candidate for a board such as. but nor limited to, a school board, and if elected, may retain his or her City position. However. if such office is clearly inconsistent, incompatible, or in conflict with his or her duties as a -- City employee, the employee shall terminate City employment ptior to assuming the elected position, 2,02.110 Quasi-judicial proceedings. City Council members, City officials, and employees, required as part of their duties to take dh:ect official action that involves a quasi-judicial proceeding shall: (a) Follow the voluntary disclosure procedures set forth at Section 2.02.050, if he or she has a financial or personal interest in any quasi-judicial proceeding; (b) Attempt as reasonably possible to remain impartial and make final decisions only alter a full and open hearing based on evidence presented at a heating; (c) Avoid as reasonably possible communications outside the heating or public meeting process on pending matters, and disclose all information regarding the pending matter thal he or she may have received from $oumes outside the public decision-making process; (d) Avoid as reasonably possible taking any public position or stance on a pending matter until all of the evidence has been presented and he or she is required to take a direct official action on the pending matter; (e) Avoid as reasonably possible any conduct through words or conduct that would lead a reasonably prudent person ro believe that he or she has prejudged the pending matter until such time as he or she is required to take a direct official action on the matter. (f) Endeavor [o prevent personal feelings about an applicant or an appi/cation from entering tnto the decision making process; and, if personal bias reaches a level where he or she cannot make an impartial decision based on facts in the record, follow the voluntary disclosure procedures set forth at Section 2.02.050: and (g) If in doubt, seek advice fi:om the City Attorney's Office on whether a particular proceeding is a quasi-judicial proceeding. P69 2.02.120 Uniform Enforcement of City Regulations. (a) Purpose of Rules. The City of Aspen ~s charged with the enforcement of numerous state and municipal laws and regulations designed and intended to protect and enhance the public health, safety and welfare. Such regulations entail, for example, building and zoning codes, envirommentaI and health codes, business licensing regulations, and regulations governing the use of public rights-of-way and other public property. In order ro promote consistency, predictability and fairness relevant co Code enforcemem activities, the following rules of ethical conduct relating to code enforcement have been devised to guide code enforcement personnel (excepting Aspen Police Department and Parking Enforcement personnel) in the execution of their enforcement duties and responsibilities. Because the nature and necessity of code enforcement is often dependent upon the particular facts associated with any given situation or event, as well as the availability and extent of enforcement resources, flexibility and sound judgment should always be foremost in the execution of code enforcement activities. Consistent therewith, the following policies are not intended to mandate hard and fast rules to be applied in all circumstances at all times, nor should they be interpreted or applied in a manner that would conflict with preexisting ordinances or other regulatory measures. Rather, the policies are to act as guidelines in assisting enforcement personnel toward a fair and consistent application of municipal regulations. (b) Training. All code enforcement personnel sh~ll be properly trained to carry out their assigned duties and, when legally required, take an oath or affirmation as administered by the City Clerk to faithfully perform such duties and to uphold and enforce the regulations; ordinances and laws of the City of Aspen and State of Colorado: (c) Progresszve enforcement. Code enforcement personnel shalI normally utilize a progressive method of code enforcement in exercising their enforcement duties. Except when circumstances warrant more immediate or 'forceful action, code or regulatory violations shall be addressed as follows: (i) Whenever reasonably possible, direct personal contact shall be made by the enforcemem officer with the violator and/or his representative. If personal contact cannot reasonably be accomplished, then written notification of the violation in the form specified below shall be left with an apprnphate person or posted at a conspicuous location appropriate to the violation. (ii) Llrdess more fomeful action is warranted, an initial violation shall be sub.iect ro a verbal warning to the violator and a request for correction within a time certain, generally no longer than ten (10) days, although a longer or shorter time period may be necessary depending upon the relevant circumstances and the severity of the violation. The enforcement officer involved should always document the nature of the violation, the specifics of the verbal warning provided the violator, and the corrective action ordered. I5 P70 (iii) Upon a failure or refusal to correct a violation'after a verbal, warning, a violator shall be subject to a Written notice of violation, a correction notice and/or a stop work order Such written notice or order shall specify the facts illustrating the vi~)lation, reference the specific ordinance or regulation implicated by the violation, specify the corrective action necessary and the time period within which such corrective action must be completed or undertaken, and specify the name and telephone number of the enforcement officer who can be contacted in regard to the violation. The written notice or order shall be delivered to the violator or his representative or employee, or when such delivery carmo~ be reasonably accomplished, the notice or order shall be posted tn a conspicuous location appropriate to the violation. (iv) Upon a failure or refusal to correct a violation or comply with a written nonce of violation, correction notice or stop work order, the violator shall be subject to the issuance of a summons and complaint commencing a mummpal court prosecution for the violation. The determination to initiate a mumctpal court acnon by the issuance of a summons and complaint shall res~ primarily within the reasonable discretion of the enforcement officer. Departmem heads charged with the supervision of code enforcement personnel may reserve to themselves final discretionary authority over the issuance or non-issuance of a summons and complaint by their subordinates. Enforcement personnel should consult with the City Attorney's office prior to the issuance of a summons and complaint. Likewise, enforcement personnel should confer with the Aspen Police Department regarding appropriate assistance to ensure against possible breaches of the peace in effectuating proper service of any summons and complaint. Once a summons and complaint has been dockete'd with the municipal court, the City Attorney's office, in consultation with the enforcemem officer, shall assume primary responsibility and discretion as to how the violation shall be resolved, i.e., plea negotiation, trial or dismissal. tv) In addition to the issuance of a summons and complain, enforcement personnel may consult with the City Attorney's office regarding the initiation of an injunctive or declaratory relief action in civil court to secure compliance with ordinances or regulatiuns, or to restrain and enjom ongoing or continual ordinance or regulatory violations. (d) Insloections. Whenever necessary to make an inspection to enforce any ordinance or regulation, or whenever a code enforcement officer has reasonable cause to believe that there exists ~n or upon any premises a code violation, such officer may approach and enter upon or into such premises m an unforced manner at all reasonable times to inspect such premises or perform any duty imposed upon the enforcement officer by state or local law or regulation, by first presenting his or her credentials and request access or entry. If the subject premises are unoccupied, the enforcement officer shall make a raasonable effort to locate the owner or other appropriate person having control or charge of the premises and request entry or access. If entry or access is refused, the P71 enforcement officer shall leave the subject premises and consfilt with the City Attorney concerning the necessity of obtaining a search warrant. All questions or doubts concerning the propriety of any inspection or investigation to be conducted on private property shall be resolved in favor of delaying such inspection or investigation until after full consultation with the City Attorney. (e) Response ~o Complaints. Code enforcement personnel shall respond to a complaint or information concerning an alleged code violation within a reasonable period of time taking into consideration available resources and current caseload. Normally, a response should be rendered within ten (I0) days from receipt of a complaint Response time will vary depending on the nature of the alleged violation or the frequency of sam~. Enforcement personnel shall document all response activity and shall be brought to resolution or closure within a reasonable time period. No complaint or enforcement action shall be left 9pen or unresolved. (f) Discretionary,vowers. Ln accordance with Section 1-14 of the Municipal Code, whenever any law or regulation vests in an enforcement officer authority to direct, approve, or permit any act, such authority shall encompass only such discretion as to determine whether the law or regulation is applicable and whether it has been complied with. No ordinance, law or regulation shall be construed to vest in an enfomement officer discretion to waive, alter or evade any requirements or standard as contained therein, nor shall any ordinance, law or regulation be construed to give an enforcement officer the power or attthority to require conditions or compliance with standards not prescribed by such ordinance, law or regulation. 2.02.130 Violation, removal, and enforcement. (a) No person shall willfi, dly violate the requirements of this chapter. (b) The City Council may remove any City official who willfully violates any provision of this chapter. (c) The City Manager may promulgate personnel policies and procedures not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter to regulate the conduct of employees and establish disciplinary remedies for violations of any provisions of this chapter. Civil and administrative remedies agmnst employees which are in existence on the effective date of this chapter shall not be impaired. (d) If a contract, transaction, or procurement is consummated contrary to any provision of this chapter, the City Council may void the contract, transacnon, or procurement. (e) Any person affected by a City transaction may commence a civil action in the District Court in and for Pitkin County for equitable relief to enforce the prowsions of this chapter ui~on a showing of willful violation of any provision of this chapter. Before filing P72 such an action, the person shall present a claim ro the City Council and ~ve the City Council an opportunity to act thereon. The City Attorney may commence a civil action in the District Co~ in and for Pitkin County for equitable relief to enforce the provisions of this chapter, or ro recover anything of value fi:om an employee or third parry, upon a showing of willful violation of any provision of this chapter. Section 2. That Chapter 4.20 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended by the deletion of Sections 4.20.080(a) and (b) and the renumbering of Section 4.20.080(c) to Section 4.20.080(a). Section 3. That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional m a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall nor affect the validity of the remain/ng portions thereof. Section 5. That this ordinance shall nor have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordimances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. A public hear/ng on the ordinance shall be held on the day of ,2003, in the City Council Chambers. Aspen City HalI, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the · day of ,2003. 18 P73 Helen Kalin Klandemd, Mayor ATTEST: I<2athryn S. Koch· City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of · 2003. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk JPW-06/03/2003-G: ]okn\word\ords =onflict-of-interest.doc 19 P74 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klandemd and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director ~)-~'-''~ FROM: Scott Woodford, City Plarm~-D~/ ]RE: ST. REGIS [z][OTEL: (2~ READING)~ PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT~ G.~QS EXEMPTIONS, SuBDMsIoN, AND TIMESHARE; ORDINANCE NO. 2.~ , SEINES OF 2003; DATE: June 9, 2003 Regis Hotel and Building A off of South M/il Street. Building B is located up South Mill Street toward the ski mountain and Building C is located Building A and is connected via a bridged walkway (see the site plan on the following page for the site). All three buildings of the St. Regis Hotel are proposed for various interior renovations with this application. REQUEST GMQS Exemptions, Planned Unit Development (pUD)Amendment, Tkaeshar~, and SUM3M. kRy: Subdivision approvals to convert 98'existing hotel rooms into 24 fimeshare lodge units and one residential unit in Building B, to convert a portion of the existing meeting room, hotel office, and accessory space on the Balkoom Level of BuilcFmg A into an approximately 15,300 square foot spa amenity, to relocate the hotel offices into the existing spa facility on the Second Level of Building B} and t? convert 22 approved (but un-built) hotel rooms in Building C'into 20 hotel rooms. P&Z VOTE: Approval with conditions (Vote: 3-2) LOCATION: 315 East Dean Street STAFF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS RECOMMENDATION: ST. I~.EGIS HOTEL STAFF I~.EPORT PAGE 1 P76 PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant, SLT Aspen Dean Street, LLC, an affiliate of Starwood Hotels and Resorts. has submitted an application requesting the appropriate land use approvals to make a number of interior improvements ro the St. Regis Hotel. According ro the application submitted for the proposal, the applicant proposes to make over $30 million in upgrades to the hotel, citing that the changes are necessary ro help the St. Regis keep pace with other luxury hotels in competing resort communities, ro recover lost business and to meet changing consumer expectations. The proposed changes to the hotel include the foIlowing requests (see Floor Plans in the Application on pages 16-24 for additional help in understanding the proposal): I .) Conversion of 98 of the existing hotel rooms located on the 2~d through the 6~ floors kn Building B into 24. two and three bedroom timeshare units and 1 whole residential unit. The applicant proposes to sell the timeshare units in 1/1 lt~ incremems. 2.) Conversion of a portion of existing meeting room and pre-function space, the business center and hotel sales and accounting offices on the Ballroom Level under Building A into an approximately 15.300 square foot spa for the use of guests~ 3.) Relocation of the hotel sales and accounting offices from the Ballroom Level into the renovated 4,800 square foot spa space on the 2nd floor of Building B. 43 Reduction of the number of un-built, but approved hotel rooms on the 2~ and 3~d floors of Building C (Blue Spruce Building) from 22 to 20 hotel rooms (resulting in a total of I6 hotel rooms and 4-one bedroom stores). The 22 un/ts were parr of the original approval, but were never constructed. This application seeks an Amendment to the original PUD to reduce the number of units from 22 to 20. Looking fi.om South Mill Street towards Building B, which is proposed ro house the 24 proposed timeshare lodge units and one whole residential unit on the 2~" th.rough 6~ floors. With this application, no changes are proposed m the exterior of any par~ of the hotel. ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 2 P77 If all of the changes are approved, a decrease in the number of units will result - from an existing total of 279 (257 built hotel rooms and 22 un-built, but approved hotel rooms in Building C) to 212 (187 hotel rooms, 24 fimeshare lodge units and 1 whole residential condominium). PROPOSED SPA: The new 15,300 square foot spa facility is proposed to consist of 3 fitness rooms, 8 treatment rooms, 8 spa/fac/al/therapy rooms, 4 waiting lounges, a salon, boutique, reception area, separate women's and men's changang areas, each with private steam, sauna, cold plunge, Jacuzzi, and several staff/attendant/reservafi6ns stations located on-site. In addition, there will be a small juice bar located in the spa. According to material the applicant will make in their presentation to Council, the proposed size of the new spa will be more commensurate with St. Regis competitors in Vail, Beaver Creek, Telluride, and Whistler. British Columbia, however, it will still be on the smaller side. The spas ar facilities in those communities vary between 20,000 and 58,000 square feet. CONFERENCE SPACE CHANGES: As a result of the conversion of a portion of the meeting space on the Ballroom Level to the new spa~ four meeting mom spaces will be lost. This will leave the hotel with the existing ballroom space and three break-out, meeting rooms. Square footage-Wise, the total meeting space will be reduced from 25,763 square feet to 20,813 square feet. According to the applicant's calculations, however, the hotel will continue to be able to accommodate ali of the conferences they have hosted in the past even with the change. In fact, the largest group they serve utilizes 20,263 square feet, while most of the approximately 200 other groups using the facility require less space. To help replace the lost meeting space capacity, the applicant proposes to install two operable partition wails in half of the ballroom, which Will p~ovide the option of creating three, 1,500 square foot meeting spaces (out Of the total 4,500 square foot space). By doing so, the hotel wiI1 increase its efficiency in handling large groups because the large ballroom is used only once during conferences for the opening and closing sessions, but not for any sessions between those times on account of the lack of the partition walls to create separate spaces. T/MESHARE PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to timeshare 24 of the twenty-five new units into ar least [/11;' fractional interests, or Club Interests as the applicant refers to thern. With sale of optional biennial interests (biennial interests give the owner the right to occupy a unit every other year), the fractional interests may be as high as 1/15t~. As each fractional interest is proposed to be sold in minimum increments of four (with each increment representing seven days) and each unit is divided into I1 different interests, a total of 44 our of the 52 weeks of the year will be sold for each unit. The remaining 8 weeks will be rented out to the general public via walk-in or through the central reservation system. In addition, the Club Interest Owners may rent out a portion or all of their Club Interests to the general public. If the Club Interests are not reserved by owners in a timely manner, the timeshare plan operator is permitted to rent them om. Ali changes proposed are to the interior of the building and no exterior changes or site improvements are proposed. ST, REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 3 P78 REVIEW PROCESS: The applicant requests the following land use approvals for the project described above: 1) Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment: An Amendment to the PUD approval for the St. Regis Hotel is necessary ro approve the conversion of the 98 hotel rooms into 24 timeshare lodge units and one residential unit because, according ro Section 26.445.100, it is "a change in the use or character of the development". In addition, an amendment is necessary to convert the 22 un-built lodge units into 20 lodge units in Building C Because ir is "a change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the projects original approval". Prior to submitting the application, the Commmxity Development Director determined that the proposed changes could nor be considered an Insubstantial Amendment and were inconsistent with the approved final development plan, so both Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council approval of the Amendment are required. In addition, the timeshare use also requires PUD approval. Final Review Authority: City Council A view lookLng towards Building C of the St. Regis, which is connected to the main part of the hotel by the enclosed bridge over Dean Avenue. Although 22 hotel rooms were originally approved for Building C, the ov, mers never constructed them and the building is only a shell with two floors. As part of this application, the applicant would 1/ke to convert them into 20 hotel rooms and construct them simultaneous ro the other changes. 2) Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions: The following GMQS Exemptions are requested: · Remodeling, restoration, or reconstruction of existing buildines (Section 26.470.070.A.): In order to allow the proposed remodel of the existing hotel units into timeshare lodge units, the above exemption is requested. Staff has determined that the proposal is a remodel per the Code. as the Code defines a remodel as "a construction project comprising revisions within or ro elements of an existing sr, rucmre, as distinct fi:om additions to an existing structure." According to the Code, this exemption is allowed provided it does nor add additional lodge units (notb: timeshare units, like hotel units, are considered to be "lodge" uses in the Code) and does nor involve a change of use. Exemption review is by the Community Development Director (see note below on review authority). · Chance of Use rSection 26.470.070.F): Th'rs exemption is requested in order ro allow the proposed conversion of hotel units into one, non-timeshared residential unit. The change of use exemption is not required for the conversion of hotel units into ST. i~EGIS HOTEL STAFF P,.EPORT PAGE 4 P79 timeshare lodge units because both Uses are considered tourist.accommodations, roi the purposes of the Code, and therefore is not a change of use. Final Review Authority: Planning and Zonin~ Cornmission (see note below on review authority) · Accessory Uses in a Mixed Use Develol~ment (Section 27.470.070.K): In order to allow for the reconfiguration of accessory space within the hotel, specifically the spa, meeting space, and hotel office, this exemption is requested. Final Review Authority: City Council 3) Timeshare: The applicant proposes to sell the converted hotel rooms as timeshare lodge units in I/11~ incrernents. To qualify as a timeshare, the proposal must comply with the Review Standards for Timeshare Lodge Development (contained in Exhibit C). Final Review Authority: City Council 4) Subdivision: Subdivision is required for Creating multi-family units, for condominiumization, and for timeshare approval. The process, act, or result of dividing land into two or more separate legal interests for the pUrpose of transfer of ownership constitutes a subdivision. According to Section 26.480.090, a condominium plat must be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval as a subdivision and handled administratively. This step is usually done aiSer the construction is significantly complete; however, as subdivision approval is technically required to approve a condominium plat (subdivision would require another City Council approval), the applicant is requesting subdivismn approval for the condominiumizatinn at this stage so that Subdivision approval will not be necessary again at the time the applicant wishes to file the condominium plat. Final Review Authority: City Council Note on Final Review Authority: Per Seat/on 26.304.060, when more than one development approval is being sought simultaneously, the applicant may choose to combine them in order to eliminate or reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense and clarity. This means that, although some land use approvals require only staff approval or P&Z approval, while others reqmre Council approval, ali requestec2 approvals may be combined and presented for review by one body. For clarity purposes, all of the above land use requests for the St. Regis will be reviewed by P&Z first, then finally by Council. BACKGROUND/EXISTING CONDITIONS: The St. Regis Hotel (formerly known as the Ritz Carlton) fin/shed construction in December of 1992. The property was purchased by the current owner in January of 1998. For information about the history of Lot 1 of the Aspen Mountain Subdivision PUD, and the St. Regis Hotel, see Page 1 of'the Application. ASPEN / PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD P~CTION: The Housmg Authority Board reviewed the application at their March 5, 2003 meeting and approved the application with the condition that the applicant be subject to an mnployee audit to be conducted one full fiscal year afler completion of the changes. In their memo, ~he Housing staff indicated to the Board that they agreed with the applicant with regard to there being it reduction in the number of employees generated for the lodge ST. P.EGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE P80 and hotel because of a reduction in the number of those units, but they felt that there would be an increase of 23.3 new employees associated with the expanded spa. Of those new employees generated, the applicant would be required to provide housing for 60%, or for 13.98 employees. In arriving at th/s reqniremenr, the Housing staff used the figure of 12.8 employees per 1.000 square feet, which is the figure used in determining the employee generation for food and beverage space. The applicant contends that the -food and beverage generation figure is too high for spa uses because of different employee needs and that the increase m employees generated by the spa would be more than offset by the reduction in employees required from the net loss of overall lodge units and partial reduction of conference space. According to the application, the applicant believes that there will be a net loss of 3.59 employees. Ultimately, the Housing Board was uncomfortable with requiring a factor of 12.8 employees per 1,000 square feet for the spa and, because there are no employee generation numbers for spas in the Code, the Board decided to instead require the audit within one year. The applicant agreed to the provision. In their approval, the Housing Board added a condition reqninng the audit, as noted below: 1. The applicant shall conduct an audit immediately after one full fiscal year follow/ng the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the proposed new spa facility, hotel rooms, timeshare units, and residence under the following terms: a. The applicant shall retain an auditor and shall ga/n prior approval from the Housing Office Operations Manager for the selection of the auditor. b. The applicant shall be fully responsible for all fees associated with retaining an auditor. 2. Should the audit show an increase in the number of employees, the applicant shall remm to the Housing Authority under the following terms: a. The applicant shall provide deed restricted, affordable housing for any additional employees of the new facilities. b. The applicant shall abide by the Asper~/Pitldn County Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at the time of the audit. STAFF COMM]~NTS ON HOUS/NG BOARD ACTION: The Community Development Deparwnent staff proposes a few amendments to the Housing Board's conditions of approval (specific wording of changes is in the City Council ordinance at the end of the staff report). First, staff believes that the City should hire the auditor that the applicant pays for, rather than the applicant as the Housing Board condition states, so that objectivity of the audit is ensured. Secondly, the staff is concerned with the above conditions requiring the audit one year after issuance of a C.O., which may occur during the off-season when employee numbers are reduced. An audit conducted during peak operating times in the summer or winter would result in a more accurate assessment. Finally, staff would propose that the definition of employees in the audit include both payroll and non-payroll employees so that it accurately identifies all employees associated with the operation of the hotel, including contract employees. ST. ?,J~GiS HOTEL STAFF I~.EPOR.T PAGE 6 P81 STAFF COMMENTS: PUD AMt;NDMENT: Any request for an Amendment to a PUD must comply with the review criteria for a PUD. Staff has reviewed the proposal against the criteria and finds that the request for PUD Amendment meets all of the applicable criteria, especially that it is in conformance with the Aspen Area Community Plan (See Exhibit A for a full analysis of Staff Findings for PUD). GROWTIt MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQS) EXEMPTIONS: The applicant requests three different exemptions from the City's GMQS, as listed below. Staff comments on the proposal's compliance w/th the criteria follows: (For full review, see Staff Findings in Exhibit B) REMODELING, RESTORATION, OR RECONSTRUCTION OF ~X~STTNG BUILDINGS: A GMQS Exemption is requested to allow for the remodeling of 98 of the existing hotel rooms into 24 timeshare lodge units and one condominium unit. The Code states that such remodeling shall be exempt from the growth management competition and scoring procedures, provided that it does not create additional dwelling, hotel or lodge units or involve a change of use. In this instance, the number of units is being reduced and, because the Code defines both hotel and timeshare units as.tourist accommodation, there is no change of use, so staff finds the request to comply with the criteria. CHANGE OF USE: A GMQS Exemption is also requested to allow for the change of use from hotel, or tourist accommodation, to residential for the proposed conversion of several hoteI rooms into one whole condominium unit. There are seven criteria a request must comply with to get the exemption (all of them can be found in Exh/bit B), but the two most significant criteria are that: a./ a mznirnal number of additional emflloyees will be generated by the change in use and that em~vloyee housing will be provided for the additional eml2loyees generated. The applicant contends that the proposal wiI1 result in a reduction of 3.59 employees generated because of the ability of the hotel management to consolidate employees and because of the reduction in employees from the conversion to less lodge units' and eliminating a portion of meeting space (a letter from Joseph Wells, representing the applicant, is attached detailing the anticipated employee needs of the St. Regis Hotel after the changes, Ex/'fibit H). The Housing staff felt that the changes would generate 23.3 employees and be required to mitigate for 13.98 of them. The Hous/ng Board decided to require an audit one year after the changes are complete. If the audit determines that there were more employees generated than are contemplated with this application, then the applicant shall be required to provide additional affordable housing. Based on this safeguard, staffbelieves that the project complies with the above criteria. For the purposes ofbackgrotmd informatiQn, a short recount of the numbers of employees the hotel has already mitigated is provided. With the original approval for the hotel, the applicant was. required to provide affordable housing. In the First Amended and Restated Planned Unit Development/Subdivision Agreement recorded in 1988, the hotel was ST. P~EGIS HOTEL STAFF P,.EPORT PAGE 7 P82 required to house 161.5 employees, which was based solely on lodge operations, accessory food and beverage space and accessory retail space. Employee generation for the spa was not considered as it was apparently agreed at the time, between the owner and the City, that the hotel did not generate employees beyond those generated by these three factors. The owner, however, eventually agreed to provide housing for I98.5 employees in exchange for City Council approval of a revised plan and is credited with housing 182 employees in the Alpina House, Copper Horse Lodge, Ute City, and the Hunter Longhouse. An audit, which was required of the original PUD and conducted by the Ritz Carlton (now the St. Regis) in 1998, concluded that the 198.5 employees mitigated was reasonable in accordance with the 1993-1994 payroll records. b.) a minimal amount of additional parking spaces will be demanded by the change in use and that parking will be provided. According to the application, the parking demand will be reduced by 10.33 spaces as a result of the timeshare conversion. This difference was calculated by companng the parking demand of the net loss of the units (98 existing units - 25 proposed units = 78 net loss of units) with the number of proposed units. When the Aspen Mountain Subdivision PUD was originally approved, a parking demand study was clone for the whole subdivision by TDA, Inc. and used to determine parking reqmremems for the hotel. The study was used to determine parking requirements rather than by the Code requirement because it was agreed by all parties that the study would provide a more accurate, site specific analysis of the parking demand. The study concluded that the peak parking demand for the hotel is in the summer and estimated that .66' spaces per lodge bedroom was sufficient during times of an average 90% occupancy rate. Parking for residential uses, similar to the proposed timeshare use, was also predicted in the report, assuming one space per 2 bedroom unit and two spaces per 3 bedroom unit. The applicant proposes to use those ratios to determine the parking demand for the 25 proposed timeshare units. The reduction of 10.33 spaces with the conversion was calculated as follows: net loss of rooms' x .66 x 90% = 46.33 spaces 14 2BR units x I space = 14 + 11 3BR units x 2 spaces = 22_ -~ 36 spaces Staff belie,2es that existing parking [s more than adequate to meet the demand generated by the hotel with the proposed changes. Currently, the hotel is over-parked to the point that employees are allowed to park in the underground parking garage. In addition, it can be expected that the majority of the owners of timeshare units will arrive by air and will - get around town without the need for a car because of the close proximity of the hotel to downtown and the bus station and the hotel shuttles which transport guests all around the area. ACCESSORY USES LN MIXED USE DEVELOPIv[ENT: A GMQS Exemption is requested to allow for the relocation of the spa, business center, and hotel office, which are all considered to be accessory uses of the hotel. There are five criteria for review (found in Exhibit B). The most notable criter/a is that negative impacts of accessory use on public facilities and' affordable housing shall be mitigated by an agreement to provide those facilities. ST. I~GIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 8 P83 According to the Development Review Committee (DRC) review of the propbsal, there w/Il be no adve/:se impact ro any public facility, although additional tap fees may be assessed due ro the change in use (which is addressed in a condition of approval). A condition of approval has been added requiring an audit of employees one year after operation to determine exactly how many employees work for the hotel and, therefore, how many employees are required to be mitigated for w/th regard to affordable housing. If the audit determines that there is no increase m the number of employees over what they have prior to the remodel, then there would be no reqmrement for additional housing. If the audit determines that there is an increase in the number of employees, then the applicant will be required to mitigate for them. TIMESltARE: The applicant is proposing to comply with ali of the applicable review criteria for timeshare and is not requesting any variances (See Exhibit C for Staff Findings). PRESERVATION Ot: EXISTING LODGING INrVENTORY: While staff concurs that the application will comply with the requirements of the timeshare ordinance, one provision of the ordinance warrants a closer examination, which is the following reqmrement: Preservation of Existing Lodging Inventory (Section 26.590.070 (C)). An express purpose of these reo~ulations is to preserve and enhance Aspen's existing lodging inventory. Therefore, any.proposal to convert an existing lodge or other properry that provides short term accommodations to a timeshare lodge should, ar a minimum. replace the existing number of units on the property in the planned timeshare lodge. If the applicant is unable to replace the existing number of units, then the timeshare lodge development shall replace the existing number of bedrooms on the property, or the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposal complies with the purposes of these regulations, even though the planned timeshare lodge will not replace either the existing number of units or bedrooms. The applicants proposal will reduce the number of existing lodge units and bedrooms in the St. Regis Hotel. As stated in the ordinance above, there should not be a reduction of the existing lodging ~nventory with a conversmn, in terms of units and bedrooms. If these provisions cannot be met, then the ordinance goes on further to state that the applicant must demonstrate how their proposal complies with the "purposes" of the regulation. The proposed conversion will result in a reduction of the number of units in the St. Regis Hotel. from 257 hotel units to 192~ hotel, timeshare, and residential units. The conversion will also reduce the number of bedrooms, from 257 to 248. Despite the obwous reduction in both the number of units and bedrooms, the applicant contends that the hotel will actually be able to accommodate more guests with the ~ It is Lmpormm to note that the figure of 192 total units after the conversion includes the twenty hotel rooms in Building C that were part of the origthaI hotel approval. While the case could be made that the 20 units should be included in the figure that represents the total number of units prior to the conversion. thereby increasing the reduction in number of units as part of this proposal, staff concluded that the ordinance requires replacement of the "existing' units. ~mce these u/tits have never been constructed, they are not considered to be existing units. As the 20 units are proposed to be finished with this proposal, staffhas included them in the number of replacement units. ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF P~EPORT PAGE 9 P84 conversion. On top of the number of post-conversion bedrooms, the applicant also proposes counting sleeper sofas in each of the 24 timeshare suites towards what they refer to as the overall number of "sleeping facilities". With the addition of the sleeper sofas, the number of sleeping facilities will increase from the existing, 257 to 272 after the conversion. While staff~vould prefer that the applicant replace the number of units proposed to be lost with the conversion, we find that because the timeshare units will likely replace at least the number of visitors to the hotel lost with the conversion, as well as the inclusion of the sleeper sofas in the overall equation (wkich do provide valuable extra sleeping space, especially for children' that the proposal complies with the "purposes" of the regulation. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION: According ro the timeshare ordinance, any applicant proposmg to convert an existing lodge ro a timeshare lodge development shall be required to demonstrate that the proposed conversion will not have a negative tax consequence for the City. On pages 38-46 of the Application, the applicant makes the case that there will be a shortfall during the years 2003 and 2004 due to construction activity converting the hotel rooms to timeshare and the spa. but after thaf the property, sales and bed tax would exceed the amount the City collected from the property in the past. The City Finance Department Director has been in consultation with the applicant regarding this issue and a report with his findings will be distributed to City Council under a separate cover prior to the meeting. SUBDIVISION: Subdivision approval is necessary ro approve the creation of separate legal interests so that the timeshare lodge units may be conveyed separately. Given that the subdivismn review, in tl-ds instance, is related to the creation of the timeshare lodge units and the changes are ail interior to the existing building, much of the subdivision rewew criteha is not applicable. The development does comply with the criteria that is applicable, such as whether the proposed subdiv/sion is consistent with the Aspen Area Commurdty Plan and whether it is consistent with the character of the surrounding area (See full Staff Findings for Subdivision in Exhibit D). DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE CDRC) REFERRAL COMMENTS: The DRC meeting was held on February 19, 2003. The minutes from that meeting are contained in Exhibit I. No significant issues were raised by the DRC. STAFF SUWIM_A~Y AND RECOMM~ENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a PUD Amendment_ Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision for the St. Regis Hotel. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. , Series of 2003, for a PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemptions, Timesl~are, and Subdivision for the St. Regis HoteI." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: PUD Amendment - Staff Findings Exhibit B: Growth Management Quota System - Staff Findings ST. RJEGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE t 0 P85 Exhibit C: Timeshare - Staff Findings Exhibit D: Subdivision - Staff Findings Exhibit E: Approved P&Z Resolution Exhibit F: P&Z Minutes Exhibit G: Housing Authority Memorandum Exhibit H: Letter from Joseph Wells (Re: Employee Housing) Exhibit I: Development Review Committee (DRC) Minutes Exhibit J: Application ST. P-.EGIS HOTEL STAFF RJEPORT PAGE P86 ORDINANCE NO. , (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT, GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQS) EXEMPTIONS, TIMESHARE. AND SUBDIVISION FOR THE ST. REGIS HOTEL, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 273 7-1828-5001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the SLT Aspen Dean Street, LLC (Applicant), requesting a PUD Amendment, Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision to convert 98 of the existing 257 hotel rooms into 24 timeshare lodge units and one residential unit; to convert a portion of the existing meeting room, hotel office, and accessory space on the Ballroom Level into an approximately 15,300 square foot spa amen/fy; to convert the ex/sting spa facility on the Second Level of Building B to the relocated hotel offices; and to modify the 22 approved, but un-built hotel rooms in Building C into 20 hotel rooms: and, WHEREAS, the 24 timeshare lodge units are proposed to be sold in a minimum of I/11~" fractional interests: and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Deparrmem received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Waste District_ City Engir/eering, Building, Fire, Streets, Parks, Housing, Environmental Health, and Water Deparunents as a result of the Development Review Comnaittee meeting; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has chosen to consolidate all ~fthe land use approvals, in accordance with Section 26.304.060, so that City Council will be the final reviewing body on all land use reqi~ests; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral comments, and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval, with conditions, for the proposed [and use requests for the St. Regis Hotel; and, WHEREAS, ar its meeting on March 5, 2003, the City of Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Authority ~'orwarded a recommendation of approval to City Council at its meeting to approve the proposed employee mitigation through an audit program; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary, for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval via Resolution No. 10, Series of 2003. by a vote of three to two (3 - 2), to ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 12 P87 City Council to approve a PUD Amendment, Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision; and, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY TI:rE. ASPEN CITY COUNCIL TItAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council approves the PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemptions, TimesJaare, and Subdivision, subject to the following conditions: I. The building penmt application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A traffic management plan that addresses ~ssues such as construction worker parking and hauling routes. 2. Prior ro issuance of a building perrmt: a. The primary contractor shall submi! a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval l~ave been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. c. A complete set of sprinkler and alarm plans shall be submitted to the Aspen Fire Marshal in order to determine if the fire sprinkler system and alarm system is adequate. d. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's mles and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation-related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pump:ng station. The conversion from lodge units may rest~lt m additional tap fees due to the additional kitchens and other sources of wastewater. e. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Mu~cipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Based on' the sprinkler requirements of the F/re Department, a new and larger water tap may be needed. An additional tap fee may be assessed due to the change in use. f. The applicant shall consult the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) to determine the required number of type A and type B units as it pertains to food/beverage service areas. American With Disabilities Act (ADA~ Accessibility shall be provided to all timeshare units and to the juice bar and spa. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) may be issued subject to safety and Fire Department concerns being addressed to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal and the Aspen Building Department. g. The applicant shall be subject to the soon to be adopted International Fire Code. The applicant shal: submit a complete set of fire sprinkler and alarm plans to the F/re Department, Water Department and Sanitation District prior to sign-off of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall comply with new regulations ST. ?-JEGIS HOTEL STAFF ?,.EPORT PAGE 13 P88 requiring sprinkler heads that provide a larger flow that may impact the plumbing design, the size of the water tap, and water service fees. h. At the time of building permit, Environmental Health shall review the plans for the juice bar set-up and operations. 3. Per the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Board approval of the application on March 5. 2003, the applicant shall conduct an audit, based on the standards of the previous audit (of Section B-4G of the 1s~ Amended and Restated Subdivision Agreement, recorded in Book 574, Page 792 of the Pit. kin County Clerk and Recorder), aider one full fiscal year from the date of issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the proposed new spa facility, hotel rooms, timeshare units, and residence under the following terms: a. The Housing Office Operations Manager shall select and retain the auditor. b. The applicant shali be fully responsible for all fees associated with retaining an auditor. c. The audit shall occur during the peak season for the hotel (e.g. July or late December) 2. Should the housing audit show an increase in the number of employees over those mitigated for in the original PUD approval (33I employees, or 60% of 331 which equals 198.5 employees), the applicant shall return to the Housing Authority under the following terms: a. The applicant shall provide deed restricted, affordable housing for any additional employees of the nexv facilities. b. The applicant shall abide by the AsperJ/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at the time of the audit. c. The term employee shall include ail payroll and non-payroll employees. 5. Final Condominium Declarations shall be submitted to the City concurrent with the submission of the Condominium Subdivision Plat and shall include the following language regarding timeshare: a. Timeshare estates shall be made available for short-term rental when the estate is not in use by the owner of the unit, the owner's guests, or persons occupying the unit under an exchange program. Units that are available for rental Shall be listed at competitive rates in a central reservation system. b. The covenants of the homeowners association shall permit walk-in rental of units. The association shall not limit rental of units ro such arrangements as only weekly rentals or Saturday-to-Saturday rentals; instead the association shall permit shorter stays, split-week rentals, and similar flexible arrangements. c. Owners oftimeshare estates shall be required to reserve their unit/time sufficiently far enough in advance to enable the public to obtain access to those units that are nor so reserved. The term "sufficiently" shall be specifically defined, in terms of mirdmum number of days notice required. d. The*owner of a timeshare estate shall not be permitted ro occupy that estate for any period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days. ST. P,~EGIS HOTEL STAFF PdEpoP,,T PAGE 14 P89 e. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from .storing a veh/cle in a parking space on-site when that owner is not using the estate. 6. The timeshare lodge units that remain in the developer's inventory shall be made available for rental to the public while the esunes are being sold, except for models and other units that are needed for marketing or promotional purposes. The Applicant shall pay the City of Aspen school land dedication fees for the additional residentio] unit. These fees shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for the development. 8. A PUD Agreement and Amended PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 9. The applicant shall file a Notice of PUD in the Clerk and Recorders office of Pitldn County subsequem to receipt of a development order, or prior to issuance of a building permit. I0. With this approval, the applicant shall commit to having the St. Regis Hotel open for business year around. Section 2: Ail material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to this application, whether in public hearings or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council. are hereby incorporated in such plan approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded Under such prior ordinances. Section 4: 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISI=IED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 6TM day of May, 2003. ATTEST: ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE I5 Pg0 Kathryn Koch. City Clerk Hel~n K~ilin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, ADOPTED, PASSED, AND APPROVED th/s 27~ day of May, 2003. ATTEST: Kathrya S. Koch. City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcesror, City Attorney ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 16 P91 EXtlYBIT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FINDINGS Planned Unit Development, A development application for PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be conststent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The proposal complies with the applicable aspects of the AACP, specifically with regard to creating a sustainable economy. The conversion of a portion of the St. Regis hotel units into timeshare units, the expansion of the spa, and the construction of the additional hotel units that were originally approved will make the project more attractive m visitors and therefore increase the number of. visitors to the property. With increased visitors, especially during the off-season, the City will receive additional revenue, which will contribute to sustaining and increasing the local economy. This type of land use is consistent with the AACP in locating tourist accoramodations close to the ski area and close to the commercial core. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? ] NOT APPLICABLE As an existing tourist oriented use, the proposed timeshare use in the St. Regis Hotel will continue [o be consistent with other tourist oriented accommodations and proposed timeshare projects (Grand Aspen Hotel) in close vicinity. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I ]NOT APPLICABLE Since all proposed changes are interior, the proposed development will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan rewew. ST.&FF FII~DING: L DOES IT COMPLY? I YES Ail of the requested land use approvals are eligible for GMQS exemphons. B. Establishr. aent of Dimensional Reqmrements: The PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone ST. iq. EGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 17 P92 district shall be used as a guide in determimng the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. The proposed dimensional requirements are listed below: STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I NOT J~PPLICABLE No exterior changes are proposed, therefore no changes to dimensional standards 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropnate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. STAFF FINDING: j DOES IT COMPLY.9 ] YES No exterior changes are proposed, therefore, no changes are proposed to the lawfully established dimensional standards. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMt'LY.9 [ YES No exterior changes are proposed, therefore, no changes are proposed to the lawfully established dimensional standards. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed developmem including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use. whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. I STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES ST. REGIS J~OTEL STA~FF REPOR.T PAGE 18 P93 Staff finds that the proposed off-street parking is adequate .given the number of spaces provided compared to the number of units and the proximity of the building to mass transit and the downtown core. In addition, many guests arrive to the hotel, especially in the winter, without vehicles and Use the buses, taxis, or walk to get around, so the parking demand is reduced. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.' a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed developmem. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development STAFF [ DOES COMPLY? I NOT PL CABLE The density, in terms of how the Land Use Code is concerned, is being increased by one residential unit. Adequate infrastructure capabilities exist to accommodate the additional unit. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.' a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock fails or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed developmem are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a permmous effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the ten:mn or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. STAFF FINDLNG: ] DOES IT COMPLY? ] NOT APPLICABLE The density, in terms of the Land Use Code, is being increased by one residential unit. No expansion is proposed to the building footprint, therefore, there will be no impacts to natural site features or encroachment into areas of natural hazard. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a mgniflcant community goal ro be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD maybe increased if: ST. REG1S HOTEL STAFF I~EPORT PAGE 19 P94 a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagaphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development par;em, land uses, and characteristics. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The density, in terms of how the Land Use Code is concerned, is being increased by one residential unit. but not beyond the maximum allowable density. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary, to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference [o the past. or contribute ro the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2 Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented ro public streets, contribute ro the urban or rural context where appropriate, and. provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses. spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. STAFF FINDING: ] DOES IT COMPLY.9 I Y'ES When the hotel was originally approved as a PUD, it was deemed to comply with ail of the above provisions. Since no exterior changes are proposed, staff finds the pro.iecr to still be in compI[ance with the above provisions. C. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city. with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 20 P95 i. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing aatural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES When the hotel was originally approved as a PUD, it was deemed to comply with all of the above provisions. Since no ~xterior changes are proposed, staff finds the project to still be in compliance with the above provisions. D. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as parr of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate mariner that does not require significant maintenance. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES When the hotel was originally approved as a PUD, it was deemed to comply with all of the above prowsions. Since no exterior changes are proposed, staff finds the project to still be in compliance with the above provisions. E. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both p{ablic safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shalI be accomplished: ST. P~EGiS HOTEL STAFF P~EPORT PAGE 21 P96 1. Ail lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind ro adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exter/or lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting ro call inordinate attention to the property is prokibited for residential development. STAFF FIN'DING: I DOES IT COMPLY? ] YES When the hotel was originally approved as a PUD, it was deemed to comply with all of the above provismns. Since no exterior changes are proposed, staff finds the project to still be in compliance with the above provisions. F. Common Park. Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of ali development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all corm-non park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (nor for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling un/t owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. S:rAFF F~N~>~r~C: [ DOES ~T Com'L¥? [ YEs When the hotel was originally approved as a PUD, it was deemed to comply with ali of the above provxsions. Since no exterior changes are proposed, staff finds the project to stiI1 be in compliance with the above provisions. G. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of thi§ standard is to ensure the development does nor impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does nor incur an un3ustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated ~vith the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accormmodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements ar the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site zmprovemenrs are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. ST. P~GIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 22 P97 STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES When the hotel was originally approved as a PUD, it was deemed to comply with ail of the above provisions. Per the review by the DRC, adequate public facilities exist to accommodate the proposed changes. - H. Access and Circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: I Each lot. structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access potnts, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed ro be improved ro acconnnodate the development. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? YES No changes are proposed ro exterior access and circulation of the building. At the time the hotel was approved, it was deemed to be in compliance with the criteria. I. Phasing of Development Plan. The purpose of this criteria is ro ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the developmem plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: I. Ali phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents Of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated w/th the phase. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I NOT APPLICABLE No phasing is proposed for the proposed improvements. ST. P,~EGIS HOTEL STAFF I~PORT PAGE 23 P98 EXltIBIT B GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM Section 26.470.070.A. of the Land Use Code regarding remodeling, restoranon or reconstruction of existing commercial, lodge 'or multi-famil¥ buildings, requires that the followma criteria be met for an exemption: A. The remodeling, restoration or reconstruction Of an existing lodge or multi-family building shall be exempt from the growth management competition and scoring procedures, provided that it does not create additional dwelling, hotel or lodge units or involve a change of use. STAFF FINDING: t DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The applicant proposes convernng 98 existing hotel rooms into 24 timeshare lodge units and one residential unit. The conversion ro the timeshare lodge units is exempt from GMQS because it does not create additional units and does not involve a change of use (both hotel and timeshare are considered to be tourist accommodations in the Code). The exemption for the one residential unit is addressed below. Section 26.470.070.A of the Land Use Code re~ardin~ Change in use requires that the followin~ criteria be met for an exemption: A. A minimal number of additional employees will be generated by the change in use and that employee housing will be provided for the additional employees generated; STAFF FINDING: ] DOES IT COMPLY? I YES A condition of approval has been added requinng an audit of the hotel one year after a certificate of occupancy for the changes ro the hotel. The applicant feels that there will be a net loss of employees with the proposal. If the audit determines an mcrease, then the applicant will be required to provide affordable housing. B. A minimal amount of additional parking spaces will be demanded by the change in use and that parldng will be provided;' STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The parking requirement is reduced with the proposed conversion of units and the addition of the spa. C. There will be minimal visual impact on the neighborhood from the change in use: STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY.'? [ YES Since there are no plans to alter the exterior of the building, nor expand the footprint, there will be no additional visual impact from the change in use. D. Minimal demand will be placed on the City's public facilities from the change in use; STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES [ ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 24 P99 According to responses from the Development Rev/ew Committee review of the proposal, there will be increased demand from the conversion from hotel units ro timeshare, but no upgrades of public infrastructure are required to accommodate it, other than new water and sewer taps. E. No zone change is required; STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES No zone change is required. F. No more than one residential unit will be created; and STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? t YES Only one residential unit will be created. G. The proposed use is consistent in all respects with the AACP. - STAFF FINDING: [ DOES 1T COMPLY? [ YES The proposed use is consistent in all respect~ with the A.ACP. Section 26.470.070.A. of the Land Use Code re~arding Accessory uses in mixed use developmenr, requires that the following criteria be met for an exemption: A. The proposed developmem consists of a building or buildings designed as an integrated whole that comams uses requiring the submission of developmem applications for an alIotrnenI m more than one of the categories of Section 26.470.040. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COIVI~LY? YES The project complies with the above criteria. B. There is one use of the property that is the pnncipal use and any other uses are accessory to, ~n support of and necessary for the principal use. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IX CO~PLY? [ YES The principal use is the hotel and the spa, retail, Meeting space, offices, etc. are all accessory uses to the hotel. C. In conjunction with the application for exemption, an application Is submitted pursuant to Section 26.470.080 that receives a development allotment for the principal use. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ NOT APPLICABLE The principal use is already constructed with development allotments received at the time of approval. ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 25 PlO0 D. The impacts of the accessory use on public facilities and affordable housing are mitigated by an agreement ro provide the necessary public facilities and affordable housing ar a level that would meet the threshold required in Section 26.470.380(C)(5) for the accessory use. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ Ygs A condition of approval has been added requiring an audit of the hotel one year after a certificate of occupancy for the changes to the hotel. The applicant feels that there will be a net loss of employees with the proposal. If the audit determines an increase, then the applicant will be required ro provide affordable housing. No adverse impacts on public facilities are anticipated, so no agreement is necessary. E. The site design and architecture of the accessory use is evaluated in conjunction with the review of the development application for the principal use pursuant ro Section 26.470.080 STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? ] NOT APPLICABLE There are no changes proposed to the site design nor the architecture. Also the principal use is already constructed, so there is no need for an additional development application. ST. P,.EGiS HOTEL STAJFF I~PORT PAGE 26 P101 EXItlBIT C TIMESHARE FINDINGS A. Mandatory Physical Elements. l. All tLmeshare lodge developments shall have a staffed on-site front desk, located within a lobby that is sized to meet the needs of the project. If the timeshare lodge [s parr of a multi-site development, there may be a single front desk for these sites. The staffed front desk shall be open at least during regular business hours, and shall be managed ~to provide full-time registration and reservation services, including provision for late check-in and for other off-hours guest needs. The front desk shall accommodate walk-in rentals. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES There will be a common front desk for the timeshare lodge and hotel guests, wkich will accommodate walk-in rentals at any time. Additionally, there will be a concierge staff dedicated to the timeshare units. St. Regis will manage a fulI time registration and reservation system. 2. A t/meshare lodge development shall contain a sufficient level of recreationaI facilities (such as exercise equipment, a pool or spa, or similar facilifiesl and other men/ties (such as a lobby, meeting spaces, and similar facilities) to serve the occupants, including facilities that can be used in the winter and the summer seasons. The extent of the facilities provided should be proportional to the size of the timeshare lodge development. The types of facilities should be consistent with the planned method and style of operating the development. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMt'LY? YES Timeshare owners wiI1 have access to the pool, hot tabs, exercise 'facility, as well as the proposed expanded spa m all times of the year. In addition, each un/t will contain steam showers, hot tabs and an audio and video system as well as complete furnishings. 3. A timeshare lodge in the Commercial Core (CC) zone d/strict shall not have any lodge rooms located on the ground floor. Instead, a timeshare lodge in the CC zone district shall contain at least one of the following elements: a bar, restaurant, or retail facilities. The element(s) provided shall be located along the street front, shall be accessible from the street, and shall be designed to serve the public, not just the occupants of the timeshare lodge. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY.9 NOT APPLICABLE The proposed timeshare project is not located in the CC zone district. B. Mandatory Operational Practices. The City wants to ensure that the units in a timeshare lodge developmem are available for rental to the public when they are not being_occupied by the owner, the owner's guests, or persons occupy/rig the un/t under an exchange program. The City has identified certain operational practices that wiI1 accomplish this intent, wkich are listed in th/s section. An applicant who ST. P. JEGIS HOTEL STAFF tV~PORT PAGE 27 P102 agrees to include all of the practices listed below in the operation of the timeshare development shall be deemed to have complied with the requirements of this sub- section B and need not address any of the optional operational practices of sub- section C. The City recogmzes, however, that there may be other ways to comply with this intent, and will consider these and other operational practices. Applicants may propose to substitute one or more of the optional practices listed in Section C.. below, for one or more of the mandatory practices listed in this Section B. Applicants may also propose other operational practices not listed Ln Section ~. as a means of demonstrating compliance with this standard. Acceptance o£the proposed Optional practices as a substitute for one or more of thc mandatory practices shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.. I. Timeshare estates shall be made available for short-term rental when the estate is not in use by the owner of the unit, the owner's guests, or persons occupying the milt under an exchange program. Units that are available for rental shall be listed at competitive rates m a central reservation system. Listing of the unit with a recognized central reservation system in Aspen. or through the central reservation system of the company that will manage the timeshare development, is preferred. STAFF FINDING: / DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The St. Regis Residence Club will permit owners ro rent all or a part of their Club interest and will make their central reservation system available to its owners as parr of a rental program (a condition of approval requires this compliance). The Developer will also use a variety of marketing programs, which will result in occupancy ofunsold Developer inventory by the public on a short term basis. 2. The covenams of the homeowners association shall permit walk-in rental ofurdts. The association shall not limit rental of units to such arrangements as only weekly rentals or Saturday-to-Saturday rentals; instead the association shall permit shorter stays, split-week rentals, and similar flexible arrangements. ST.a~FF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The covenants of the Condominium Association will permit daily and walk in rental of the avaiiable Club Units (a condition of approval requires this compliance). 3. Owners of timeshare estates shall be required to reserve their unit/time sufficiently far enough in advance to enable the public to obtain access to those units that are not so reserved. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY.'? [ YES A specific timeframe was not given by the applicant, but they did state that they will require owners to secure or confirm a reservation of a Club Unit within certain established time periods and that the tlmeshare plan operator may rent out Club units that are riot reserved as required under the Plan. ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 28 P1 O3 4, The owner of a timeshare estate shall nst be perm/tted to occupy that estate for any period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days. STAFF FINDING: ] DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES An owner will not be permitted to occupy the unit for more than 28 consecutive calendar days. 5. The units that remain in the developer's inv6ntory shall be made available for rental to the public while the estates are being sold, except for models and other units that are needed for marketing or promotional purposes. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY.9 I YES The Developer will also use a variety of marketing programs, which will result in occupancy of unsold Developer inventory by the public on a short term basis while the units are being sold. C. Optional Operational Features. 1. Timeshare lodge developments that subdivide each mt into a larger number of estates (more than 10 estates per unit) are preferred to those which subdivide each unit into a smaller number of estates (less than 10 estates per unit). STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The applicant'proposes a minimum of 11 Chib int~egts, or estates per unit. 2. Applicants may formulate their timeshare use plan such that the purchaser would not expect ro occupy the same unit each visit; instead the purchaser would purchase the right to occupy a certain type of unit for a certain period of thne. Applicants may also include provisions in the homeowners association documents prohibiting owners fi.om personalizing the unit they have purchased. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? I YES Both floating and fixed unit rights will be available The Condominium Ass0ciatior will prohibit any owner of a Club Interest fi.om using their urJt as a permanen residence ar permanently altering the furnishings or interior of a Club Unit. 3. Applicants may design their development as a mixed project, which includes not only timeshare units, but also some un/ts that would continue to be owned and operated by the applicant and his successors or assigns as traditional lodge units. Another type of use plan that is encouraged would be for the applicant to agree not to sell all of the shares in every unit, but to instead keep some time reserved for rental to the public at market rates during both the high seasons and the off-seasons. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The property will be operated as both the St. Regis Hotel and the St. Regis Residenc. e Club. Eight weeks within each Club Unit will not be conveyed as part of a Club Interest and will therefore be available as part ora rental program. ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF I:(EPORT PAGE 29 P104 4. Applicants may decide to sell on and off-season estates as a package. STAFF FINDINC: [ DOES IT COMELY? I YES Each Club Interest will contain a combination of winter, summer and spring/fall season use rights. 5. Applicants may include in their use plan provisions that allow for a wide range of exchange opportunities for owners, which will promote new Aspen trials. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES It is expected that an internal exchange program operated by Starwood. or its affiliate, will be created for its St. Regis Residence Club Project, including the · Aspen St. Regis Residence Club. 26.590.070 Review Standards for Timeshare Lodge Development. An applicant for timeshare lodge development shall demonstrate compliance with each of the following standards, as applicable to the proposed development. These standards are in addition to those standards applicable to the review of the PUD and Subdivision applications. A. Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation. Any applicant proposing to convert an existing lodge ro a timeshare lodge development shall be required to demonstrate that the proposed conversion will nor have a negative tax consequence for the City. In order to demonstrate the tax consequences of the proposed conversion, the applicant shall prepare a detailed fiscal impact study as parr of the final PUD application. The fiscal impact study shall contain at Ieast the following comparisons between the existing lodge operation and the proposed timeshare lodge development: 1. A summary of the sales taxes paid to the City for rental of lodge rooms during the pr/or five years of its operation. If the lodge has stopped renting rooms prior to the time of submission of the application, then the summary shall reflect the final five years the lodge was in operation. The summary of past taxes paid shall be compared ro a projection of the sales taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first five years of its operation. As pan of this projection, the applicant shall specify the number of n/ghts the applicant antic/pates each timeshare lodge unit will be available for daily rental to visitors (that is, the annual number of nights when the unit will not be occupied by the owner or the o~vner's guests), the expected visitor occupancy rate for these units, the expected average daily cost to rent the unit, and the resulting amount of sales tax that will be paid to the :City. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY.9 [ YES The requested information has been provided by the applicant and the information has been reviewed by the Director of the Department of Finance and his findings will be presented to the City Council at the public hearing. ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 30 71 O5 2. An estimation of the real estate transfer taxes that would be paid to the City if the ex/sting lodge were tc be sold. If an actual sale of the property has occurred with/n the last 12 months, then the real estate taxes paid for that Sale shall be used. This estimation shall be compared to a projection of the real estate transfer taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay to the City over the first five years of its operation. This projection shall include a statement of the expected sales prices for the timeshare estates, and the applicable tax rate that will be applied to each sale. STAFF FINmNG: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The requested information has been provided by the applicant and the information has been reviewed by the Director of the Department of Finance and his findings will be presented to the City Council at the public hearing. 3. A summary of the City-portion of the property taxes paid for the Iodge for the prior five years of its operation, and a projection of the property taxes the proposed timeshare lodge development will pay .to the City over the first five years of its operation. This projection shall include a statement of the expected value that will be assigned to the property by the Tax Assessor, and the applicable tax rate. The fiscal impact study may also contain such other information that the applicant believes is relevant to understanding the tax consequences of the proposed development. For example, the applicant may provide information demonstrating there will be "secondary", or "indirect" tax benefits to the City from the occupancy of the timeshare units, in terms of increased retail sales and other economic activity in the community as compared to the existing lodge development. The applicant shall be expected to prove definitively whs/ the timeshare units would cause such economic advantages that would nor be achieved by a traditional lodge development. Any such additional information provided shall compare the taxes paid during the prior five years of the lodge's operation to the first five years of the proposed timeshare lodge's operation. If the fisbal impact study demonstrates there will be an annual tax loss to the City from the conversion of an existing lodge to a timeshare lodge, then the applicant shalI be required to propose a mitigation program that resolves the problem, to the satisfaction of the Aspen City Council. The accepted mitigation program shall be documented in the PUD Agreement for the project that is entered into between the applicant and the Aspen City Council STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The requested information has been prov/ded by the applicant and the information has been reviewed by the Director of the Department of Finance and his findings will be presented to the City Council at the public hearing. Upgrading of Existing Projects. Any existing project that is proposed to be conveked to a timeshare lodge development shall be physically upgraded and modem/zed. The extent of the upgrading that is ro be accomplished shall be - ST. P~EGIS HOTEL STAFF P-.EPORT PAGE 31 P106 determined as pan of the PUD review, considering the condition of the e~sting facilities, with the intent being ro make the development compatible in character with surrounding properties and to extend the useful life of the building. 1. To the extent that it would be practibal and reasonable, existing structures shall be brought into compliance with the City's adopted fire, health, and building codes. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The applicant ~s unaware of any existing deficiencies, however, if any are brought to light, the applicant states that they will be brought into compliance. 2. No sale of any interest in a t£meshare lodge development shall be closed until a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the upgrading. STA~'F FINDING: I DOES Il' COMPLY? I Y£S The applicant acknowledges that no sale of any interest will be closed until a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the upgrading. C. Preservation of Existing Lodging Inventory. An express purpose of these regulations zs ro preserve and enhance Aspen's existing lodging inventory. Therefore, any proposal to convert an existing lodge or other property that provides short term accommodations to a timeshare lodge should, ar a mimmurn, replace the existing number of units on the property in the planned timeshare lodge. If the applicant is unable to replace the existing number ofurdts, then the timeshare lodge development shall replace the existing number of bedrooms on the property, or the applicant shall demonstrate how the proposal complies with the purposes of these regulations, even though the planned timeshare lodge will not replace either the existing number of units or bedrooms. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The proposed conversion will result in a reduction of the number of units in the St. Regis Hotel. from 257 hotel units to 192 hotel, timeshare, and residential units. In addition, the conversion will reduce the number of bedrooms, from 257 to 248. The applicant contends, however, that the number of"sIeeping facilities", which includes bedrooms and sleeper sofas, will be increased with the conversion. The increase in sleeping facilities will be from the existing, 257, to 272 after the conversion. Staff finds that because the drop in number of actual bedrooms is relatively slight, that the applicants proposal ro include the sleeper sofas in the overall equation is sufficient to comply with this provision. D. Affordable [arousing Requirements. I Whenever a timeshare Iodge development is required to provide affordable housing, mitigation for the development shall be calculated by applying the standards of the City's housing designee for lodge uses. The affordable housing requirement shall be calculhted based on the max/mum number of proposed lock out rooms in the ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 32 P107 devYtopmenr, and shall also take imo account any retail, restaurant, conference, or other functions proposed in the lodge. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES With the overall reduction in the number of ~lodging units from the existing 257 down to the proposed 187, the applicant contends that there will be a reduction in the number of employees generated. The Housing staff recommended that there would be additional ernployees generated. A condition of approval has been added by the Housing Board, however, requiring an audit of the hotel one year after a certificate of occupancy for the changes to the hotel If the audit determines an increase in employees over what they currently mitigate, then the applicant will be required to provide affordable housing. There is no change proposed to the existing retail and restaurant and bar space, so there is no increase in their affordable housing requirement. 2. The conversion of any multi-fam/ly dwelling unit that meets the definition of residential multi-family housing to timesharing shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 26.530, Resident Multi-Family Replacement Program, even when there is no demolition of the existing multi-family dwelling unit. STAFF FINDING: ] DOES IT COMPLY? I NOT APPLICABLE There are no existing multi-family dwelling un/ts in the hdieI, so this provision is not applicable. E. Parkz'ng Requirements I. The parking reqmremem for thneshare lodge development shall be calculated by applying the parking standard for the underlying zone district for lodge uses. The parking requirement shall be calculated based on the max/mum number of proposed lock out rooms in the development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The existing amount of parking provided is adequate to m4et the demand, which is actually reduced with the proposal due to the reduction in the number of overall units. 2. The timeshare lodge development shall also provide an appropriate level of guest transportation services, such as vans or other shuttle vehicles, to offer an alternative to having owners and guests using their own vehicles in Aspen. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The hotel provides vans and Shuttle vehicles as an transportation alternative for their guests. 3. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in a parkir~,g space on-site when the owner is not using that estate. [ ST~F FINDINC: [ DOES ~T COMPLY? ~ YeS ST. RBGiS HOTEL STAFF P,.EPORT PAGE 33 P108 The applicant did not address this provision in the application. A condition of approval will be added prohibiting an owner fi.orr, storing a vehicle in a parking space when not using the estate. Appropriateness of Marketing and Sales Practices. The marketing and sale of timeshare estates shall be governed by the real estate laws set forth in Title I2, Article 61, C.R.S., as may be amended fi'om time to time. The applicant and licensed marketing entity shall present to the City a plan for marketing the timeshare development. 1. The followmg marketing and sales practices for a timeshare development shall not be permitted: a. The solicitation of prospective purchasers oftimeshare units on any street, mall, or other public property or facility; and b. Any unethical sales and marketing practi'ces which would tend to mislead potential purchasers. 2. Giving of gifts to encourage potential purchasers to attend a sales presentation or to v/sir a tLmeshare development ~s permitted, provided the gift reflects the local Aspen economy. For example, gifts for travel to or accommodations in Aspen, restaurants tn Aspen, and local attractions (sk/ passes, concert tickets, rafting trips, etc.) are permitted. Gifts that have no relationship to the local Aspen economy are not permitted. The following gifts are also not permitted: a. Any g/ft for which an accurate description is not given; b. Any gif~ package for which notice is not given to the prospective purchaser that the purchaser will be required to attend a sales presentauon as a condition of receiving the gifts; and c. Any gift package for which the printed announcement of the requ/remem to attend a sales presentation is in smaller type face than the information on the gift being offered. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The applicant has committed to not engage in any of the above, prohibited marketing practices. G. Adequacy of Maintenance and Management Plan. The applicant shall provide documentation and guarantees that the timeshare lodge development will be appropriately managed and maintained in an manner that will be both stable and continuous. This shall include an identification of when and how maintenance will be provided, and shall also address the following requirements: 1. A fair' procedure shall be established for the estate owners to review and approve any fee increases which may be made throughout the life of the timeshare ST. [REGIS HOTEL STA~FF P-.EPORT PAGE 34 P109 development, to provide assurance and protection ro timeshare owners that management/assessment fees will be applied and used appropriately. 2. The applicant shall also demonstrate that there will be a reserve fund to ensure that the proposed timeshare development will be properly maintained throughout its lifetime. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The managemem contract between the Association an~d the Manager Wilt reqmre that the project be maintained at a level sufficient to ensure compliance with St. Regis brand standards. The documents creating the Association will require preparation of an annual budget and will require the establishment of a reserve fund. The Association will be required to comply with the annual budget notice requirement of the Colorado Real Estate Commission and the Colorado statutes. I-I. Compliance with State Statutes. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed timeshare lodge development will comply with all applicable requirements of Title 12. Article 61, C.R.S.; Title 38, Article 33, C.K.S.; and Tide 38, Article 33.3, C.R.S.; including the requirements concerning the five (5) day period fol' resmssion of a sales contract, and the procedures for holding deposits or down payments in escrow. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMELY? I YES The applicant shall comply with ail applidable requirements of Tide 12, Article 6I, C.R.S.; Tide 38. Article 33, C.R.S.; and Title 38, Article 33.3. C.R.S.: I. Approval By Condomimum Owners. If the development that is proposed to be timeshared is a condom/mum, the applicant shall submit written proof that the condorrfmium declaration allows timesharing, that one hundred (100) percent of the owners of the condomin/um units have approved the timeshare development, including any improvements m the common elements that the applicant may propose, that all mortgagees of the condominium have approved the proposed dmeshare developmem, and that all condom/n/mn units in the timeshare development will be included in the same Sales and marketing program. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ NOT APPLICABLE The existing project is not currently a condominium. J. Prohibited Practices and Uses. Without in any way limiting any requirement contained in this Chapter. it is unlawful for any person to knowingly engage m any of the following practices: 1 The creation, operation or sale of a right-to-use interest or any other fimeshare concept which is not specifically allowed and approved pursuant ro the requirements of this section. Right-to-use timeshare concepts (e.g. lease-holds and vacation clubs) are considered inappropr/ate in Aspen and are not permitted. ST. tV-EGIS HOTEL STAFF R~PORT PAGE 35 Pl10 2. Misrepresentation of the facts contained in any application for timeshare approval, timeshare development instruments, or disclosure statement. 3. Failure re comply with any representations contained in any application for timeshahng or misrepresenting the substance of any such application to another who may be a prospective purchaser of a timeshare interest. 4. Manage, operate, use, offer for sale or sell a tkneshare estate or interest therein in violation of any requirement of this Chapter or any approval granted pursuan~ hereto, or cause or aid and abet another to violate any requirement of this Chapter, or an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? J YES The applicant cQmmits to not engaging in any marketing practice which are prohibited above, or by local or State regulations. 26.590.080 Business License and Sales Tax Payments. A. Business License. It shall be unlawful for any timeshare development to operate in the City of Aspen without f~rst obtaining a business license in accordance with the standard procedures of the City of Aspen. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The applicant presently has a current business license. B. Sales Tax Paymems. Occupancy of any timeshare urdt by anyone who pays a rental fee for the use of the trait (other than the owner thereof) shall be subject to the City's sales tax the same as if such occupancy were of a hotel er lodge unit. Any timesbare development, as a condition of its approval, shall be required to obtain an Aspen Sales Tax/LodgLng Tax License, which shall establish how this tax shall be collected and paid to the City. The manager of the association shall be responsible for the timely collection of the City sales tax for the City of Aspen for rentals made through the association or a reservation system. The manager shall notify individual estate owners that they are responsible for the payment of sales tax to the City for units rented on a private basis. STAFF FI2"qDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY,'? [ YES [ The applicant commits to compl~ing with the above procedures, ST. REGIS ~OTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 3 6 Plll EXIIIBIT D SUBDMSION --'STAFF FINDINGS The Definitions section (26.104. I00) of the Land Use Code explains that subdivision approval is required whenever leasehold interests will be transferred. Section 26.480.050 states that a development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: A. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan (AACP). STAFF FIr, mING: I DOES IT COYreLY? I Y~s The proposal complies with the applicable aspects of the AAC?, specifically with regard to creating a sustainable economy. The conversion of a portion of the St. Regis hoZel units into timeshare units, the expansion of the spa, and the construction of the additional hotel units that were originally approved will making the project more atU-active to visitors and therefore contribute to sustaining and increasing the local economy. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. STAFF FINDING: { DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES The primary uses of the property - hotel units and timeshare lodge units are ail consistent with the same uses that are currently found in surrounding area, or will be uses that wiI1 be part of soon to be constructed projects in the neighborhood (Aspen Grand Hotel). c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. STAFF FINDING: [ DOtS IT COM?LY? I Yas of The proposed subdivision will not adversely affect the future development surrounding areas, as this subdivision only involves interior remodel. d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with ail applicable requirements of this Title. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES All applicable requirements, including with the zoning requirements of the L/TR zone district, are being met. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision. a. Land 'Suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, ST. P-EGIS HOTEL STAFF PxJEPOI~T PAGE 37 Pl12 mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other conditioa that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I NOT APPLICABLE No exterior changes are proposed with the remodel and there will be no increase ro the existing building footprint. b. Spatial Pattern Efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I NOT APPLICABLE No exter/or changes are proposed with the remodel and there will be no increase ro the existing building footprint. C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430, if the following conditions have been met: I. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the commumry. fSTAFFFINDING: IDOESITCOMPLY? 'NOTAPPLICABL~ No variations are proposed to the standards. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recon'kmendations by professional engineers as necessary. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I NOT APPLICABLE No variations are proposed to the standards. D. Affordable Housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling un/rs shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the reqmrements of Chapter 26.520. Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling un/ts shall be required to provide affordable housing m compliance with the requir~nents of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota Sysrern. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMI~LY? I NOT APPLICABLE The standards of Chapter 26.520. Replacement Housing Program, are not applicable because there is no replacement housing involved. With the conversmn of a portion of the hqtel rooms to timeshare and the expansion of the spa, the project is reducing their employee generation, so no additional affordable housing mitigation is necessary. ST. P~EGIS HOTEL STAFF I~EPORT PAGE 38 Pl13 E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth ar Chapter 26.630. Applicability. School land dedication standards shall be assessed upon all new subdivisions within the City of Aspen which contain residential units. An applicant may make a cash payment in-lieu of dedicating land to the City, or may make a cash payment in combination with a l~nd dedication, m comply with the standards of this Section. This section of the subdivision, regulations requires the dedication of land or the payment of an in-iieu fee f({;J ~ach neW residential unit in a subdivision. STAFF FINDING: J DOES IT COMP]~Y? j YES compliance With the School Lknd Dedication Standards will be required for the one residential dwelling unit proposed. The applicant will pay cash in lieu of a land dedication and will be required to make the payment at time of building porn-mr. ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF I~PORT PAGE 39 Pl14 EXHI~rT I DRC MINUTES I. Building Department · Code Review: It is probable that in June 2003 the Building DeparUnent will adopt the International Building Codes (IBC) and the International Residential Codes IRC). The architect will also need to reference the 1998 ANSI Standards. · Change in Use: The Applicant will need to consult Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) ro determine the required number of type A and type B units. · ADA Accessibility: Not only individual timeshare units but also the juice bar and spa. · Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO): Temporary COs can be issued if safety and Fire Department concerns are 'addressed. · Energy Code: New energy code will apply [o portions of building never completed. 2. Parks Department · Parks Dept. notes that several of the tree grates are broken or too small for the growing ~rees. Parks Dept. asks that St. Reg/s address this problem. 3. Fire Department · International Fire Code: Soon ro be adopted by the Fire Department. The Fire Chief is unaware of the impact the new code will have on the St. Regis. · Sprinkler and Alarm Plans: The Fire Department would like to see a complete set of sprinkler and alarm plans as soon as possible. These plans are also needed by the Water Department and Sanitation District. · Sprinkler Heads: New regulations require sprinkler heads that prov/de a larger flow. The large flow requirements may impact plumbing design, the size of the water rap, and the water service fees. · Diesel Back-up: The Fire Department wants ro know that the diesel ge'neraror is m rurming order and if a larger generator is needed due to the changes. 4. Water Department · Tap Fees: Based on the sprinkler requirements of the Fire Department, a new and larger water rap may be needed. An additional tap fee may be accessed due to the change in use. · Utility Plans: The Water Deparrmem needs ro see ex/sting (as-built) and proposed utility plans. 5. Sanitation District · Sanitation District Fees: The conversion from lodge units may result in additional rap fees due ro the additional kitchens and other sources of wasrewater. (Fee are based not only on quantity but also on organic loading.) ST. R~GiS HOTEL STAJeF P~PORT PAGE 40 Pl15 · _Special Concerns: The sanitation district will determine if oil and grease separators exist wh~re needed and that requirements for laundry and dry cleaners are met. · Utili.ry Plans: The Sanitation District needs to see e~pt}~ng (as-built) and proposed utility plans. 6, Environmental Health · Water Leak in Kitchen: Environmental Health wonid like, to learn if the leak in the kitchen (from roof or sprinlders~ has been corrected> · Juice Bar: At the time of building permit, Enviroranental Health will review the plans for the juice bar. · Trip Mitigation: With the exception of the hair salon, the services in the building are not' available ~'t0 the general public. No Additional trip mitigation measures appear to be necessary. However, Environmental Health would like the Owners to confirm that the mitigation measures, required as parr of the PUD, have been/mpleme~ted. ((This is a 'TO ITEM' for the Applicant but it will not be included in any resolution or ordinance.)) ST. REGIS HOTEL STAFF REPORT PAGE 41 Pl16 ORDINANCE NO. 25 (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CiTY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL'APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT,' GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQS) EXEMPTIONS, TIMESHARE, AND SUBDIVISION FOR THE ST. REGIS HOTEL, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2 737-1828-500J WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the SLT Aspen Dean Street, LLC (Applicant), requesting a PUD Amendment, Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision to convert 98 of the existing 257 hotel rooms into 24 timeshare lodge units and one residential unit; to convert a portion of the existing meeting room, hotel office, and accessory space on the Ballroom Level into an approximately 15,300 square foot spa amenity; m convert the existing spa facility on the Second Level of Building B to the relocated hotel offices: and to modify the 22 approved, but un-built hotel rooms in Building C into 20 hotel rooms; and, WHEREAS. the 24 timeshare lodge units are proposed to be sold in a minimum of I/11th fractional interests: and_ WHEREAS, the Conmaunity Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Waste District, City Engineering, Building, Fire, Streets. Parks, Housing, Environmental Health. and Water Departments as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has chosen to consolidate all of the land use approvals, in accordance with Section 26.304.060, so 'that City Council will be the final revtewmg body on all land use requests; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referraI comments, and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval for the proposed land use requests for the St. Regis Hotel; and, WHEREAS, at its meeting on March 5. 2003, the City of Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Authority for~varded a recommendation of approval to City Council at its meeting to approve the proposed employee mitigation through an audit progam; and, WHEREAS, the Plarming and Zoning Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval via Resolution No. I0, Series of 2003. by a vote of three to two (3 - 2), to City Council to approve a PUD Amendment_ Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, ,Timeshare. and Subdivision; and, Pl17 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLAdNNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. COLO~0 DN'~-tE 27th DAY OF MAY 2003, THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set ~orth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. the Aspen City Council approves the PUD Amendment, GMQS Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision, subject to the following conditions: 1. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolu:tion. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c A traffic management plan that addresses issues such as construction worker parking and hauling routes. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Commtmity Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All rap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. c. A complete set of sprinkler and alarm plans shall be submitted to the Aspen Fire Marshal in order to determine ii' the fire sprinkler system and alarm system is adequate. d. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's roles and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation-related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The converslnn from lodge units may result in additional tap fees due to the additional kitchens and other sources of wastewa[er. e. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Based on the sprinkler requirements of the Fire Department, a new and larger water tap may be needed. An additional tap fee maybe assessed due to the change in.use. f. The applicant shall consult the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) to determine the required number of type A and type B units as it pertains to food/beverage service areas. American With Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility shall be provident to all timeshare units and to the juice bar and spa. A Temporary Cer6ficate of Occupancy (TC0) may be issued subject to safety and Fire Deparmaent concerns being addressed to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal and the Aspen Building Department. g. The applicant shall be subject to the soon to be adopted International Fire Code. The applicant shall submit a complete set of fire sprinkler and alarm plans to the Fire Department, Water Department and Sanitation District prior to sign-off of building permit. In addition, the applicant shall comply with new regulations Pl18 reqmring sprinkler heads that provide a larger flow that may impact the plumbing design, the size of the water rap, and water service fees. h. At the time of building permit, Environmental Health shall review the plans for the juice bar set-up and operations. 3. Per the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Board approvaI of the application on March 5. 2003, the applicant shall conduct an audit, based on the standards of.the previous audit (of Section B-4G of the 1s~ Amended and Restated Subdivision Agreement, recorded in Book 574, Page 792 of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder), immediately after one full fiscal year following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the proposed new spa facility, hoteI rooms, timeshare units, and residence under the following ~errns: a. The applicant shall retain an auditor and shall gain prior approval from the Housing Office Operations Manager for the Selection of the auditor. b. The applicant shall be fully responsible for ail fees associated with retaining an auditor. 4. Should the housing audit show an increase in the number of employees over those mzrigated for in the original PUD approval (331 employees), the applicant shall return to the Housing Authority under the following terms: a. Ttze applicant shall provide deed restricted, affordable housing for any additionaI employees of the new facilities. b. The applicant shall abide by the Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at the time of the audit. 5. Final Condominium Declarations shai1 be submitted to the City concurrent with the submission of the Condominium Subdivision Plat and shall include the following language regarding timeshare: a. Timeshare estates shall.be made available for short-term rental when the estate is nor in use by the owner of the unit. the owner's guests, or persons occupying the umr under an exchange program. Units that are available for rental shall be listed ar competitive rares in a central reservation system. b. The covenants of the homeowners association shalI permit walk-in rentaI of units. The association shall ~ot limit rental of units to such arrangements as only weekly rentals or Saturday-to-Saturday rentals; instead the association shall permit shorter stays, split-week rentals, and similar flexible arrangemems. c Owners of timeshare estates shall be required to reserve their un/t/thne sufficiently far enough in advance to enable the public to obtain access to those units that are nor so reserved. d. The owner of a timeshare estate shall not be permitted to occupy that estate for any period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days. e The dwner of a timeshare esta[e shall be prohibited from storing a vehicle in a parking space on-site when the owner ~s nor using that estate. Pl19 6. The tkneshare lodge units that remain in the developer's inventory shall be made available for rental to the public while the estates are being sold, except for models and other units that are needed for marketing or promotional purposes. 7. The Applicant shall pay the City of Aspen school land dedication fees for the additional residential unit. These fees shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for the development. 8. A PUD Agreement and Amended PUD Plan shall be recorded within 130 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 9. The applicant shall file a Notice of PUD in the Clerk and Recorders affice of Pitkin County subsequent to receipt of a developmem order, or pr/or to issuance of a building permit. 10. With this approval, the applicant shall commit to having the St. Regis Hotel open for business year around. Section 2: Ail material representations and comnT~tments made by the applicant pursuant to this application, whether in public hearings or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceed'rog now pending under 9r by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4:, if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jm-isdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall nor affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: A Public hearing wiI1 be held on the 27th day of May 2003 at 5:00 p.m. m the City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, CO. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of May, 2003. P120 ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klandemd, Mayor P121 To: Steve Barwick, City Manager Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director John Worcester, City Attorney Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Community Development Director /] Scott Woodford,' City Planner II From: Paul Menter, Director of Finance and Administrative S~ Date: June 3, 2003 // Re: UPDATED St. Regis Timeshare application draft financial analysis per AMC 26.590.070 Attached please find an updated tax impact analysis of the St. Regis timeshare application for your rewew. Tiffs fiscal impact analysis has been completed according to the provisions of the above referenced chapter of the Aspen Municipal Code, and its associated land use code interpretation dated March 17, 2003. The remainder of this memorandum provides a description of the tax impact analysis performed. Summary: The application by the St. Regis calls for development of 24 fractiofial ownership units, to be sold in 1/11 fractions, and one full ownership unit. These units are to replace 98 existing hotel rooms. Additionally, the St. Regis has an existing approval for development of 20 new hotel rooms in "building C", and conversion of 15,~00 square feet of meeting room and other space into a spa facility. Aspen Municipal code 26.590.070 requires the applicant to determine the impact of this timeshare development on the City of Aspen tax base, and to mitigate for any negative tax impact that may occur. AMC 26.590.070 and the above referenced land use code interpretation provide the basis for determining the tax impact of this development. As this application is one of the first reviewed by the City under the ten'ns of this new section of the municipal code, City Finance staff are taking due care~to review and evaluate the applicant's analysis to ensure compliance with the prowsions of the code. June 3. 2003 P122 In sm2mary, the analysis indicates a fee due to the City of $449,552. Analysis: The attached spreadsheet analysis uses available data from the St. Regis application to apply a net presem value analysis of past and projected tax collections ro art/ye ar a fee amount by tax source. The analysis uses the Denver Metropolitan area CPI as the index against which to calculate the net present value of the St.' Re~s's tax collections in l)rior years. The 20-year average of this index is applied to projected tax collections ro perform the riel present value calculation of projected collections. The average annual collections from the most recent 5 years of operations adjusted to net present value, is then compared to the average annual projected collections as provided by the applicant, again adjusted to net present value. If the result indicates that average annual future collections will be less than they have been in the past for an individual tax, the amoum of the reduction is multiplied by 27.5 years (MACRS straight line depreciation method for residential property), representing the estimated life expectancy of the project, to arrive at a current year estimated fee amount {see Attachment A). Additionally, the applicant has included a calculation of the amount of tax revenue ro be generated by the existing approval for 20 additional hotel rooms as an element of this calculation. This estimate of pr/or approvals as a component of past tax revenue collections is author/zed under the code interpretation requested by the Finance Department and approved by the Community Development Director of March 17, 2003 (see Attachment B). In the case of the St. Regis, the analysis indicates a fee due for reductions in sales, lodging and property tax collections, and no fee due for real estate transfer taxes. Recommendation: As noted above, this analysis is developed in accordance with Aspen Mnnicipal Code section 26.590.070, and the land use code interpretation approved by Community Development Director Julie Ann Woods on March 17. 2003 A tax impact mitigation fee of $449,552 is recommended for application to this PUD amendment. The code is silent on the riming of payment of this fee. The applicant has stipulated ro payment of the entire fee within 12 months of initiation of construction, m quarterly installments. ~ P123 P124 ~ _ CiTY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LAND USE CODE INTERPP~ETATI ON APPLICABLE CODE SECTIOS: Section 26.590.070 A) [Timeshczre/ Fiscal Impact Analysis and Mitigation EFFECTIVE DATE: lViarch 17. 2003 APPLICANT: Paul Menter, Finance Director WRITTEN BY: Joyce Allga~er Ohlson. Dep~ry D~recror APPROVED BY: Ic~iie A~xa Woods. ~on~aaunity Development Director COPIES TO: Jol~x 5Vorc~ster. Steve Barwick S Uix~MAR¥ rl~.is :ooze interpretation sero forth staten:enrs as to l:ow the 2ity of Aspen will approach and evttluate fiscal ~mpacr studieg ti:at ate submined as parr of a tin:eslxare deveI% menr proposal. Tl:c sp~ciflc statements are ibtmd below. P'U~OSE The purpose of tI~is :ode iarer[rer~tion is rc ~a~l:er :lari~ rne [anguage ~n I:md Use l'ode Section 26.590.070 (A), _-Fime,slqc~re] Fiscal I~pacr Anal ~s~s e, nd P~ifig ~tfon ~br the purposes of ea:alyzzng ~d objectively evalOating the financiaI analys~s re~ttired of the ~tp?licant. and applying a recoml~ended ~nitigariol: program as }ro"vided by rne code, b~sed t~pon rne provis~c ns of tlxis section BACKGROUND Section 26.590.070 = >~'me Sand Use Code requires that any cteve~oper proposing to convert a~2 existing [oclge rca tinaesl:are lodge :levetcpmenr slxali be requirec~ ro c~et~onstrate rnal the proposed conversion will not lxave [~ n%arive tax conseqttence for tlxe ~ity In order [c iemonsrrs~re tl~e tax consequences of' tl:e proposed conversion, rne apl: lic~nr snail prepa~re a detailed fiscal in,pact study as parr of tl~e fi~al PUD app[ic[~tion. if tine a~a~)sis c[emonstrares a negative ran ~mpacr ro the City of Aspen. then the applicant shall se recruited to propose a l~rigarion program St~ch l~itigar~on progr=nxs must meet w~rn rne appi'c ual of the Aspen City Council. If tl~e ~lscal impac~ study :lemonstrates a p(os~ve impact ro tl:e City of Aspen. u~en nc m~rigar~on program ~s reqttired. In order to P125 and objectiveb evaluate fiscal impact~ caused by lodge ro umeshare conversions, the following statements will serve as guidelines in this process i The code req.fires that the applicant compile a mx an~ivs~s that comoares fi~e pric r L year and projee~ec~ S-Fear t~x colleetion~ for the projecz These 5-year totals should be converted cc cu;~em day c[oi[ar vame ibr comparison. The average im~uaI diFi~rence bet~veen the previous 5-years and the future 5 years is the am~ua~ amoun~ ma~ needs tc be paid ~br the life ~f the pro.~ec~. Th~s eglcuhticn becomes the basis foz determining me appropriate ~e dute from the appncanu if gay. 2. Th~ code requires that the applicant eompne ~ zax m~p~ct gna!ysis for sales ~nd bdging ~axes. property rexes and ~'eal estate xmns~ ;axes. This mx impgc~ gnglysis should be completed on a mx-~u-rax basis, as opposed ~o an overall basis. In other words, dramatic increases m Real Estate Transfer Taxes in comparison ~c prior yea~ collections :~o no~ serve ~o ~ff~et a reduction in sa~es mx ~ollections tbr pu~oses of calculatiny a~y l~e that migh~ o~ :,wed. The miffgafio~ program authorized by this section sh ~uld be calcuhted ~br each individual mx. no~ as a whole of the idanti~ed mx~s identified in me secUon. The reason fors%~e=c~'-~un~ the fee cah:uhtion is because the taxing sources are ao~ in~erchgngeab!e in [em~s of their applicability [o providing City services 3 The :ode r~quires tna~ projects should be evaluated ty :omF.u-u~g fl~e mx impac~ of exisun~ faciliti~[ plus existing approvals m )ombination, the -toted project" ~c the total projec~ ~[us u~e proposed timesha/e. ~Vhere any previons approvals have been granted but not )et developed, the ex~stm= facilities" should include wna~ has been approved thus ~tr. So ~br example, in the rase of an applicahom which has an existing approval f~r 20 new h>teI rooms mat ~s independent off their new timeshare proposal, the comparison would be between what exists phts what ts approved but no~ yet built and the ~. The 5-)ear comparison mos~ recent previous 5 years ~ projecte~ first 5 years of operauon wnn rne rm~esliare or fl-actional ownership element operafiona0 rec_un'eo by this secz~oa of the code zs for determining an average annt~rLl t&x impact of the projecu anct is for ;ompanson purpose~ only ro provide a basis for deternxlmn~ an approprxa[e fee. which shall be based ttpon the estimated fife ~f the ~rojecr. and is nor intended ro mean mat me total tax m~pacr provkled b5 the ordinance is Ih~ited to 5 7.ears APPEAL OF DECISION As w:m any interpremuon of the Land t[se :ode by the ~on~tumt. Development Director an applicant has the ability to appeal this decision ro the Aspen City _ouncfl This can be xone in conotmcuon with a tanc~ use re ~uesr before City Council or as a separate agencta 26.316.03~ A APPEAL PROCEDU~S An' person yvtm a right ~o ippem as adverse decision o~- detem:ination snan mniare ~m appeal b7 i.hh= ~ notice of appel! on a lbma prescribed by the Commumt, Develc proem Director. The aodce of agseal shall be filed with the Community Develc ~ mere Director P126 and with m~ City of:~ce D~' depa~'~men~ ~'endering the decision or detemmma~zon within fo u t-teen 14) cia) s of tke date of the ~:cision or eetermmadon ~emg appealed. Failure tc ~[ie such ~ot~ce of appeal within ~he p~'~scribec] time shall do~stitu~e a wa~ve~- of any r~gh~ under' this Title ~o appea~ any decision or deter'ruination ORDINANCE NO. , ,J \ ~'~?ff ~-~,~ '~& ./ (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT, GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQS) EXEMPTIONS, TIMESHARE, AND SUBDIVISION FOR THE ST. REGIS HOTEL, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 273 7-1828-5001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Deparnnem received an application from the SLT Aspen Dean Street. LLC (Appiicant), requesting a PUD Amendment, Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision to conver~ 98 of the existing 257 hotel rooms into 24 timeshare lodge units and one residential unit; to convert a portion of the existing meeting room, hotel office, and accessory space on the Ballroom Level into an approximately 15,300 square foot spa oanenity; to convert the existing spa facility on the Second Level of Building B to the relocated hotel offices; and to modify the 22 approved, but un-built hotel rooms in Building C into 20 hotel rooms; mid, WHEREAS, the 24 timeshare lodge units are proposed to be sold in a minimum of 1/11tl~ fractional interests: and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Waste District, City Engineering, Building, Fire, Streets, Parks, Housing, Environmental Health, and Water.Departments as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has chosen to consolidate all of the land use approvals, in accordance with Section 26.304.060, so that City Council will be the final reviewing body on all land use requests; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral comments, and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval, with conditions, for the proposed land use requests for the St. Regis Hotel; and, WHEREAS, at its meeting on March 5, 2003, the City of Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Authority forwarded a recommendation of approval to City Council at its meeting to approve the proposed employee mitigation through an audit program; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and ts necessary, for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval via Resolution No. 10, Series of 2003, by a vote of three to two ~3 - 2), to City Council to approve a PUD Amendment, Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision; and, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIl. THAT: Section 1: Pursuzmt to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council approves the PUD Amendment. GMQS Exemptions, Timeshare, and Subdivision, subject to the following conditions: 1. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the bnilding permit set. c. A traffic management plan that addresses issues such as construction worker parking and hauling routes. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submlt a letter m the Community Developmen~ Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. c. A complete set of sprinkler and alarm plans shall be submitted to the Aspen Fire Marshal in order to determine if the fire sprinkler system and alarm system is adequate. d. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections ~roof, foundation, perimeter drains) Shall be allowed. All sanitation-related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The conversion from lodge units may result in additional tap fees due to the additional kitchens and other sources of wastewater. e. The applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25. and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code. as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Based on the sprinkler requirements of the Fire Department, a new and larger water tap may be needed. An additional tap fee may be assessed due to the change in use. f. The applicant shall consult the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) to determine the required number of type A and type B units as it pertains to food/beverage service areas. American With Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility shall be provided to all timeshare units and to the juice bar and spa. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) may be issued subject to safety and Fire Department concerns being addressed to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal and the Aspen Building Department. g. The applicant shall be subject to the soon to be adopted IntemationaI Fire Code/_/ adopted at time of building permit The applicant shall submit a complete set of fire sprinkler and alarm plm~s to the Fire Department, Water Department and Sanitation District prior to sign-off of building permit. In addition} tee applicant shall comply with new regulations requiring sprinkler heads that provide a larger flow that may impact the plumbing design, the size of the water rap, and water service fees. h. At the time of building permit, Environmental Health shall review the plans for the juice bar set-up and operations. 3. Per the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Board approval of the application on March 5, 2003, the applicant shall conduct an audit, based on the standards of the previous audit (of Section B-4G of the 1st Amended and Restated Subdivision Agreement, recorded in Book 574. Page 792 of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder), after one full fiscal year from the date of issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the proposed new spa facility, hotel rooms, timeshare units, and residence under the following terms: a. The Housing Office Operations Manager shall select and retain the auditor. b. The applicant shall be fully responsible for all fees associated with retaining an auditor. Th audit shall occur ~"~ *~ ...... ~ ....... ~ ,~ ~,^,~ r^, T,.~ ..... ~,^ ~--~-~r~ ..... ~'~ a. ter one ull ~scal ear o. o eration. 4. Should the housing audit show an increase in the number of employees over those mitigated for in the original PUD approval (331 employees, or 60% of 331 which equals 198.5 employees), the applicant shall return to the Housing Authority under the following terms: a. The applicant shall provide deed restricted, affordable housing for 60% o£ any additional employees of the new facilities. b. The applicant shall abide by the AsperffPitl~n County Affordable Housing Guidelines in effect at the time of the audit. c. The term employee shall include all payroll and non-payroll employees .generated bF the application. 5. Final Condominium Declarations shall be submitted to the City concurrent with the submission of the Condominium Subdivision Plat and shall include the following language regarding timeshare: a. Timeshare estates shall be made available for short-term rental when the estate is not in use by the owner of the unit, the owner's guests, or persons occupying the unit under an exchange program. Units that are available for rental shall be listed at competitive rates in a central reservation system. b. The covenants of the homeowners association shall permit walk-in rental of units. The association shall not limit rental of units to such arrangements as only weekly rentals or Saturday-m-Saturday rentals; instead the association shall permit shorter stays, split-week rentals, and similar flexible arrangements. c. Owners of timeshare estates shall be required to reserve their unit/time sufficiently far enough in advance to enable the public to obm'm access to those units that are not so reserved. The term "sufficiently" shall be specifically defined, in terms of minimum number of days notice required. d. the owner of a timeshare estate shall not be permitted to occupy that estate for any period in excess of thirty (30) consecutive calendar days. e. The owner of a timeshare estate shall be prohibited from star/rig a vehicle in a parking space on-site when that owner is not using the estate. 6. The timeshare lodge m~its that remain m the developer's inventory shall be made available for rental to the public while the estates are being sold. except for models and other units that are needed for mm'keting or promotional purposes. 7. The Applicant shall pay the City of Aspen school land dedication fees for the additional residential un/t. These fees shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit for the development. 8. A PUD Agreement and Amended PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the information required to be included in a PUD Agreement. pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 9. The applicant shall file a Notice of PUD in the Clerk and Recorders office of Pitkin County subsequent to receipt of a development order, or prior to ~ssuance of a building permk. 10. With this approval, the applicant shall commit to having the St. Regis Hotel open for business year around. 11. The applicant shall pay a tax impact mitigation fee of $449,552 to the City of Aspen. The fee may be paid in quarterly installments, but the tota! amount Shall be paid within twelve (J2) months of the issuance of a building permit for the timeshare units. Section 2: All material representations and comrmrments made by the applicant pursuant m this application, whether in public hearings or documentation presented before the Plmming and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an author/zed entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, plu:ase, or portion of tiffs 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 prowsion and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 6th day of May, 2003. ATTEST: Kathryn KOch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, ADOPTED. PASSED, AND APPROVED this 9i~ day of June, 2003. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch. City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcestor, City Attorney MEMORANDUM VI ~ P127 TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council FROM: Michelle Bonfils, City Project Manager THRU: Ed Sadler. Assistant City Manager DATE: June 3, 2003 RE: Burtingame Ranch COWOP & use of former AVLT parcel SUMMARY: **This item was presented to you previously, however it was later determined that the noticing requirements were not met by one day. Therefore, this item is before the City Council a second time with a resolution to be adopted.** Staffhas revised a resolution for City Council to approve that authorizes the Burlingame Ranch COWOP task force team to consider development of affordable housing on the recently acquired AVLT parcel. This resolution also sets additional parameters for the COWOP task force team to make a recommendation regarding the number, type and income categories of new Units to be constructed ar Burlingame Ranch. Similarly, Council will need to reappoint a representative, s) to the COWOP to fill the seat vacated by the former mayor. At the April 14, 2003 Council meeting, Council discussed excusing existing member Councilmember McCabe and appointing Mayor Klanderud and Councilmember Semaru. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On April 14, 2003 Council requested Staffrevise a resolution to clarify the potential use of the former AVLT property. Council also request Staffrevise its' recorrmaendation of appointing Mayor Klanderud to the empty COWOP seat and instead excuse Councilmember McCabe and appoint both Mayor Klanderud and Councilmember Semaru. On March 25, 2003 City Council held a'work session to discuss the Burlingame Ranch COWOP process. At that work session, Council directed staffto continue the COWOP process. The COWOP task force team will be asked to specifically address the number of units to be constructed on the site, the income category mlx, and the possibility of building the recently acquired AVLT property. BACKGROUND: In May 2001. the Burlingame Ranch COWOP task force team presented City Council a document of recommendations regarding the development of affordable housing on the s~te. This recommendation was based on the original Pre-Annexation Agreement that outlined a maximum of 225 affordable housing u~its on 25 acres. The May 2001 recommendations were made before the AVLT parcel was acquired by the Cit,-of Aspen and before the amendment to the Pre- Annexation Agreement that allows for up to 330 affordable housing units. - DISCUSSION: At the March 25, 2003 City Council work session, Council agreed to reconvene the COWOP task force under certain parameters. These parameters were for the COWOP to discuss only the number,'type and income category mix of units as well as the potential for developing on the AVLT parcel. P128 MEMORANDUM The purpose of the parameters is to modify the existing set of recomn~endations created by the task force team in May 2001 as well as to complete the COWOP process in a timely manner. Modification should be based on new circumstances related to the project such as the amended Pre- Annexation Agreement allowing up to 330 units and the recently acquired AVLT parcel. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There could be financial implications depending on the number and income category mix the COWOP task force team recommends. Recently, City Council has been working from a proforma based on development of 220 units in phases. The budget and schedule may change depending on the COWOP's recommendations. RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends City Council adopt Resolution [Series of 2003) to allow the COWOP task force team to contemplate development on the AVLT parcel. Staff also recommends Mayor Klanderud and Cmmcilmember Semaru be appointed as a Council representatives on the COWOP task force team and Councilmember McCabe be excused. ALTERNATIVES: Council may end the COWOP process and make land use approvals based on work previously completed the by task force team. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution __~f_ (Series of 2003 and to excuse Councilmember Tom McCabe and appoint Mayor Klanderu'd knd Councilmember Semaru as council representatives on the Burlingame Ranch COWOP task force team." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: P129 RESOLUTION NO. ~ (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL INCLUDING ADDITIONAL LANDS IN THE BURLINGAME RANCH COWOP LAND USE REVIEW PROCESS KNOWN AS THE AVLT PROPERTY (PARCEL NO. 273502200802), PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, on September 6, 2000, the Community Development Department received a completed application from the Director of the AsperffPitkin County Housing Authority on behalf of the City of Aspen and Bar/X Ranch LLC, for a determination of eli~bility for development reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public (COWOP) for an affordable housing, free m~rket housing project (70/30%) on land owned by the City of Aspen, Bar/X Ranch LLC, iocated contiguous to Highway 82 and currently accessed by New Stage Road., located in both the City of Aspen and Pitkin County (a.k.a. "Burlingarne Ranch"); and WHEREAS, [he Aspen City Council deternfined the need to include the AVLT property as a part of the Burlingame Ranch affordable housing proj ecl; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen has negotiated ;vith the Aspen Valley Land Trust to purchase a parcel of land adjacent to Burlingame Ranch on the northerly side of Deer Hill (parcel no. 273502200802) and the purchase of said parcel is for the development of affordable housing and potential open space; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen purchase of the Aspen Valley Land Trust parcel no 273502200802 precludes the City of Aspen from developing in the "Back Bowl" of Deer Hill located at the southerly end of Deer Hill; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.500.050 hr'the Land Use Code, the City Council may amend a determination whether a proposed development is reasonably necessary for the convemence and welfare of the public by apply/ng the standards of Section 26.500.040 during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and a recommendation from the Community Development Director: and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable prowsmns of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public commen; at a public heahng; and, WHEREAS. the Aspen City Council finds that the inclusion of the additional described lands to the Burlingame Ranch COWOP project meets or exceeds the Standards for Determination, Section 26.500.040, for the following reasons: Reso No. , Series of 2003 Page 1 C:khome\attach\Reso COWOP PH 2 v5).doc P~ 30 Development and or improvement of the lands support the same basic project goals as the Iands described in Resolution No. 21, Series of 200 I. 2. The additional properzy could allow for development of additional affordable housing units not to exceed 330 total units for the total project, with or without the development on the AVLT property and could provide significant community benefit. 3. Through inclusion of the additional land. the project stands to be of higher quality through improvements ro the context of the project and use of an interactive and multidisciplinary approach with a diverse COWOP task team, including neighbors of the project and persons with special interest in the property and its development, in recommending a development plan for the additional land. YVI-IEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section One:. Pursuant to Section 26 500,040 of the Land Use Code, the proposed City of Aspen and Bar/X Ranch LLC. Burlingame Ranch affordable housing/free market housing project on Highway 82 and Old Stage Road including the property commonly referred to as the "AVLT parcel" as described herein is determined to be maintain eligibility as a development necessary for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public. Section Two: Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(b), the procedure and standards for review of the affordable housing project shall be: Process: 1. Task Force Team and Staffrevise the May 2001 Affordable Housing Land Use & Development Plan, specifically the Program Description (property to build on including parcel no. 273502200802 and excluding the back bowl area, = of units, density, housing types, qualitative features of the development project). 2. Community Developmem and Interdepartmental Technical Staff Review. 3. Task Force Team and Staff to revise the Affordable Housing Land Use & Development Plan within approximately four (4) months from the date of this resolution. 4. Formal review and action taken by City Council through ordinance adoption. Reso No. __, Series of 2003 Page 2 C:\home\attach~Reso COWOP PH 2 v5).doc P131 FINALLY, adopted, passed and appr6ved this 23rd day of June. 2003. AttesT: Helen Kalin Klanderud Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk - Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Reso No. , Series of 2003 Page 3 C:\homexattachk~.eso COWOP PH 2 (v5 .doc P132 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Koch. City Clerk RE: Mascotte Lode Annexation DATE: June 4. 2003 Council adopted Resolution #38, Series of 2003. at the April 28, 2003 meeting. This resolution was the first step in the annexation process. The resolution was noticed for a public hear/ng June 9, 2003; however, letters were not sent to other local officials in the required time. This has been done and noticed for June 23, 2003; please continue the Mascotte Lodge annexation to June 23, 2003. P134 [he GiLT ofllsizen Memorandum c,t~ lllmrne'/'~ Omce TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: John P. Worcester DATE: June 6, 2003 RE: Resolution No ~,, Series of 2003 - ARC Operations Committee and First Amendment of Agreement with SPARC Attached for your consideration and rewew ~s a resolution that, if approved, would create an Aspen Recreation Center Operations Committee and approve a First Amendment to the Agreement between the City of Aspen and the SPARC group relating to the operation of the ARC. Both of these documents have been discussed with the SPARC group. Council may wish to review both documents To ensure that they reflect Council's desires in ti'tis regard. There are a number of policy issues that Council may wish to discuss before the documents are approved. For example: Resolution I. - The. current proposal would create an advisory committee composed of seven members, four of whom ~vould be appointed by SPARC, one member by the Aspen Youth Center Board, one member appointed by Council to represent the interests of the users of the swimming facilities at the ARC, and one member appointed by Council to represent the general interests and concerns of users of the entire ARC facility. 2. All members of the committee must be residents of Pitkin County. At least two of the members appointed by the SPARC Board of Directors must be residents of the City of Aspen. 3. The powers and duties of the committee are spelled out ar section 3 of the resolution. Council may wish to discuss these relatively broad powers to ensure they comply with Council policy. P136 First Amendment to Agreement This document proposes to amend and clarify the terms and conditions of the Agreement entered into between the City and SPARC at the start of the fund raising activities of SPARC. In some respects, the First Amendment expands the City's obligations to the SPARC group as originally described in the ori~nal Agreement. The operative Terms of the original agreement are set forth in full in the proposed resolution. Council may wish to discuss the following provisions afthe First Amendment: 1. Section I states that the City agrees that SPARC has fulfilled their obligation ro rinse $8,000,000.00 in cash and pledges. 2. Section 2 would obligate the City to continue ro operate and maintain the Lewis Ice Arena and the Aspen Ice Garden in accordance with the terms of the various sub-sections of the First Amendment. 3. Section 3 would require the City to grant ro SPARC the use of the entire ARC facility texclusive of the Youth Center space) one day a year in perpetuity. It also obligates the City ro grant to SPARC up to 20 hours of free use of the Lewis Ice Arena and the Aspen Ice Garden for fundraising activities. 4. Section 5 expands the naming fi~hts that SPAR_C would continue to have to permit them to continue fund-rinsing activities. If you have any questions regarding either document, please let me know. ACTION REQUIRED: A motion to approve Resolution No. Series of 2003. JPW-06/04/2003 -G:\j ohn\word\memosXsparc-resolul~on.doc P137 REso vT ON NO. Series of 2003 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. ESTABLISHING AN ASPEN RECREATION CENTER OPERATIONS COMMITTEE. DESCRIBING ITS DUTIES, DESCRIBING THE CO1VhMITTEE'S COMPOSITION, TERMS AND QUALIFICATIONS FOR ITS MEMBERS, AND ESTABLISHING RIFLES OF PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, the citizens of Aspen have caused to be constructed a modem Yecreation facility known as the Aspen Recreation Center ("ARC") for the benefit of its residents and guests; and WHEREAS, Friends for the Aspen Sports and Recreation Complex, a Colorado nonprofit corporation commonly known as SPA]lC, was formed by prominent members of the communi .W cream, maintain, and enhance quality recreational opportunities for the youth, citizens, and visitors of Aspen and the Roaring Fork Valley; and WHEREAS, SPAKC raised $$,000,000 in cash and pledges fi.om private donations for the construction of the ice arena facility portion of the ARC. including ihe ice'arena's allocated share of the common costs associated with the ARC; and WI-IEREAS, the City Council recognizes that SPARC and other user groups have a particular interest in the efficient and economical operation of programs and services offered at the Aspen Recreation Center~ and have a desire to participate in the formulation and implementation of operating guidelines, policies and procedure for said programs and services: and ; and WI-IEREAS. as an inducement to SPARC and its private donors to raise funds sufficient to complete the construction of the ARC, the City Council, upon the adoption of Resolution No. 95. Series of 2000, and Resolution No. 68, Series of 2001, made certain comminnems to SPARC with respect to the creation o£ an advisory board; to wit: P138 '?he City recogmzes that most if not ail of the capital c6sts of constructing the ice arena facility will be raised from private donations, and appreciates that such donors have the right [o expect that their contributions will be spent in support of a high quality facility in both function and appearance, as well as a facility that operates economically and efficiently, la order to ensure that City operates the ice arena facility and the remainder of the Recreation Center in the best possible manner, consistent with any budgetary conszraints that City may encotmter in the future, from and after the date of this Agreement City agrees ro consult in advance and on a continuing basis with SPARC and/or with an Advisory Board established by SPARC (individually and collectively the "Advisory Board" on all matters relating to the.use and operation of the ice arena facility and of the Recreation complex tincluding the associated parking areas and other amenities), including without limitation the following matters: (I) The formulation and implementation of operating guidelines, policies and procedures; (ii) the program-ming and scheduling of all uses of the ice arena facility, and any related fee schedule, and the coordination of such programming and scheduling with the uses of the Aspen Ice Garden: (iii) the hiring,'performance review and termination of employees of the ice arena facility and of the remainder of the Recreation Center complex: and (iv) the annual operating budgets for both the ice arena facility and the remainder of the Recreation Center complex, appropriate reserves, and the capital improvement maimenance programs. Before making any decisions or adopting any policies with respect to any such matters. City agrees to give full and careful consideration ro the views and recommendations of the Advisory Board. It is the mutual intention and understanding of the parties that the Advisory Board shall be an independent, functional and influential entity, and City agrees no to do anything that impairs or diminishes the role or authority of the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board shall be appointed and removed from nme to time by the Board of Directors of SPAR_C, for such terms and pursuant to such procedures as may be adopked from time ro time by the SPARC Board. In the event of the dissolution or other termination of the existence of SPARC, the final Board of Directors of SPARC shall establish an on-going procedure for the appointment and removal of the members of the Advisory Board.": and WHEREAS, the City Council desires ro establish an Operations Committee composed of mtizens of the City of Aspen to assist the City Council and its professional staff in the use, operation and maintenance of the physical plant, and the efficient operation of programs and servmes offered within the Aspen Recreation Center and the coordination thereof with the existing City of Aspen Ice Garden; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to execute an Agreement, in substantially the form as appended hereto 'as Exhibit A, with SPARC that clarifies and incorporates prior commitments to SPARC and its private donors. ' P139 NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT Section 1 Establishment of Aspen Recreation Center Operations Committee. There is hereby established the Aspen Recreation Center Operations Committee ( the "ARC Operations Committee") as hereinafter set forth. Section 2. Composition; Term; Oualifications of M~mbers The' ARC Operations Committee shall be constituted as follows: (a) The ARC Operations Committee shall consist of seven (7) members. (i) Four (4) members shall be appointed by Friends for the Aspen Spor~s and Recreation Complex ("SPARC") (ii) One member shall be appointed by the Aspen Youth Center Board of Directors to represent the interests and concerns of the Aspen Youth Center facilities at the ARC. (iii) One member shall be appointed by the Cky Council to represent the interests of the users of the swimming facilities at the ARC. (iv) One member shall be appointed by the City Council to represent the general public interests and concerns relative to the entire ARC facilities, including the ice skating fink, swimming facilities, youth center operations within the ARC. climbing wall and other recreational amen/ties within the ARC and immediate surrounding areas, concession facilities, and ail common areas of the ARC. (b) All members of the ARC Operations Committee shall be appointed for a period of two (2) years, provided that with respect to the four members initially appointed by SPARC, 2 members shall serve I year terms and 2 members shall serve 2 year 40 terms, as designated by SPARC, in order to stagger such terms. Thereafter, all SPARC - appointed members shall serve 2-year terms. Members appointed by SPARC shall serve at the pleasure of the SPARC Board of Directors. The member appointed by the Youth Center shall serve at the pleasure of the Youth Center Board of Directors. The two members appointed by the City Council shall serve m the pleasure of the City Council. There shall be no restraint on the number of terms that members may serve on the ARC Operations Committee. (c) All members of the ARC Operations Committee, at the t/me of their appmntment, shall be residents of Pitkin County for a period of no less than one (1) year. At least two (2) members appointed by the SPARC Board of Directors shall be residents of the City of Aspen at the time of their appointment and during their term as members of the ARC Operations Committee. Members shall continue ro be residents of Pitkin County during their term as members of the ARC Operations Committee. Residence for purposes of this section shall mean having a pnnc~pal residence in the City of Aspen or Pitldn County, as appropriate, with only occasional absences fi.om'the City of Aspen or Pitkin County not exceeding 3 months in any calendar year. (d) No member of the City Council. Mayor, city employee, or any appointed officials shalI be eligible to serve on the ARC Operations Committee. Section 3. Powem and Duties. The ARC Operations 7orrunittee shall have the following powers and duties, all of which shall be exercised subiect to the laws of the state of Colorado, including, but not limited to, the Open Meetings Laws, (Sections 24-6-401, er seq.), and in accordance with the public interest: (a) To consider, advise and recommend to the City Council and the City's professional staffon matters relating to the following: P14~ The formulation and implementation of guidelin~s, policies and procedures relating to the use and operation of the Lewis Ice Arena, the ARC, and associated parking areas and amenities. The programming and scheduling of all uses of the ice arena facility, the aquatic facilities, the climbing wall and other amenities within the ARC, the space occupied by the Youth Center and all areas surrouncFmg the ARC, and the coordination of such ice arena programming and scheduling with the uses of the Aspen Ide Garden It is the City Council's philosophy w/th respect to scheduling at the ARC to prioritize usage as follows: (1) youth activities and youth sports events (e.g. Aspen Junior Hockey), (2) public usage, (3) adult programs, and (4) special events. Adult club sports and ice only parties should be primarily scheduled ar the Aspen Ice Garden. Sabject [o demand at the Lewis Ice Arena, rocker areas should be primarily made available to youth club sports starting no later than 6:00 a.m. Ali fee schedules for the public use of facilities within the ARC and Aspen Ice should be adopted by the City Council as part of its annual budgeting process and incorporated in the City's annual fee ordinance, following consideration and advice and recommendation of the ARC Operations Committee. The fee schedules adopted should be properly allocated between youth activities, persons' abilities to pay, availability of facilities, and fi:equency of uses of the facilities. In addition, the fee schedule should reflect usage by local residents and non-residents. Bulk wholesale rates for usage ar the two ice skating facilities should be discussed by the City's professional staff and the ARC Operating Committee as parr of the process of recommending fee structures. Coordination of ail scheduled acti~-ities within the City of Aspen that may ~mpact the efficient and economic use of the ARC; The hiring, performance and termination of the City's professional staff employed to operate and m£mtain the ARC; The annual budgets of ail programs, facilities and offered services within the ARC, including appropriate reserves and appropriate capital improvement/ maintenance programs; The rental of space within the ARC for concessionaires and special events, including the use of space by non-profit organizations; and Any other issues, concerns, suggestions or recommendations determined by the ARC Operations Committee to be related ro efficient and economical use, operation and maintenance of the physical plant or programming within the ARC and Aspen Ice Garden, or any other matters referred to the ARC Operations Committee by the City Council or professional staff. P142 (b) Recognizing that the Youth Center Board is a separate nob-profit organization and a lessee of the space occupied by them within the ARC, and not'~vithstanding the expansive list of matters set forth above upon which the ARC Operations Committee shall consider, advise and make recommendations to the City Council and professional stall; nothing in this resoiution is intended to permit or shall be construed to permit or authorize the ARC ©perations Committee to interfere in the internal affairs of the Youth Center Board. including such matters as the user fees they may collect, their budget, hours of operation, personnel matters, etc. It is the intention of this resolution, however, that all users and providers of servzces will be able to discuss matters of mutual concern for the efficient and economical use of the ARC. Section 4. Rules of Procedure. The ARC Operations Committee shall establish such rules of procedure as it deems necessary and appropriate not inconsistent with this resolution. including the following: (a) A quorum for the transaction of business shall consist of no less than four (4) members, at least one of whom must be a member not appointed by SPARC. If a quorum is present the af£u-mative act of a majority of the members present shalI be the act of the ARC Operations Committee. (b) The ARC Operations Committee shalI establish regular meetings and special meetings may be called by the Chair of the ARC Operations Committee on at least twenty four (24) hours notice ro all members, provided, however, that special meetings may be held on shorter notice if all members of the ARC Operations Committee are present or have waived notice thereof. (c) Ail regular meetings of the ARC Operations Committee shall be publicly noticed by posting a notice in a prominent location within the ARC at least 5 days prior to the date of the meeting. Special meetings shall be noticed as soon as is practicable. (d) The City's professional staff shall be notified of all regular and special meetings. Notice to the City's professional staff shall be accomplished by providing written notice ro the City's Director of Recreational Services. P 143 (e) Ali special and regular meetings of the ARC Operations Committee shall be open to the public except duly author/zed executive sessions called in accordance with the State of Colorado Open Meetings Law (Sections 24-6-401. er seq.) Citizens shalI be ~ven a reasonable opportunity to be heard during a portion of ail public meetings. (f) To assist the ARC Operations Committee and the City'S professional staffestablish operational policies, and other matters consistent with this resolution, the following decision making process shall be followed: (i) The City's professional staff shall adopt operating policies and procedures for all activities offered at the ARC and Aspen Ice Garden. Said policies and procedures shall include, but nor necessarily be limited to, persormel policies and procedures, operational policies and procedures, fee schedules, and event scheduling. Before any such operating policies and procedures are ~mplemented or amended, the City's professional staff shall forward the same to the ARC Operations Committee for its review and approval. (ii) In the evem that the ARC Operations Committee does no~ approve a particular policy or procedure, in whole or m part, il shall meet with the City's professional staff in an effott to reach consensus on the particular policy or procedure not approved by the ARC operations Committee. (iii) In the event that the ARC Operations Committee and the City's professional staff are not able to reach agreement on a particular policy or procedure, the dispute shall be forwarded to the City Council for resolution at the earliesl oppommity. Both the ARC Operations Committee and the City's staff shall have an oppommity ro address the matter in front of City Council. City Council's decision in such disputes shall be £mal. (g) /'he City shall provide a meeting space for all duIy noticed meetings of the ARC Operations Committee, and shall provide al/ reasonably related administrative services for the proper function of the Committee. If and to the extent requested by the ARC Operations Committee, a member of the City's professional staff shall attend duly noticed meetings of the ARC Operations Committee. and shall keep records and minutes of the meetings so attended. Section 5. The City Manager is hereby author/zed, on behalf of the City of Aspen, to execute an Agreemem with SPARC in substantially the form as the Agreement appended hereto as Exhibit A. Dated: ,2003. P144 Helen Kalin Kland&ud, Mayor I, Katba-yn S. Koch, 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, ar a meeting held ,2003. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk JPW-0~ )4/2003-G:\john\word\agr\sparc-arc-advisory-bd-6-4-03.doc P145 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT rthe "First Amendment"), made and entered into this day of , 2003, by and between THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation ("City"), and FRIENDS FOR THE ASPEN SPORTS AND RECREATION COMPLEX, a Colorado nonprofit corporation ("S?ARC"), WlTNESSETI-I: WHEREAS, City and SPARC are all of the parties to that certain Agreement dated June 1 I, 200I, as approved by the City Council by Resolution No. 68, Series of 2001, relating to the funding and construction of the ice arena facility portion of the Aspen Recreation Center (the "ARC") that the City is in the process of completing at Iselin Park in Aspen, Colorado (the "Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the parties desire to update the Agreement in certain respects, as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and for other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree that from and after the execution hereof by the parties, the Agreement shall be deemed amended as follows: 1. Funding by SPARC. SPARC has raised $8,000,000 in cash and pledges for the construction of the ice arena facility, including the ice arena's allocated share of the common costs associated with the ARC. All of such funds have been contributed by private donors, in the form of cash or pledges, as more specifically set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference. City hereby agrees that the cash and pledges described in Exhibit A satisfy in full SPARC's funding responsibilities under the Agreement, and that SPARC has no further obligation to raise monies for the ARC or any portion thereof and will not be responsible for any pledges listed on Exhibit A that are not honored by 'the donors. SPARC shall, however, take ali reasonable steps necessary [o assist the City in collecting said pledges, including, but nor necessarily limited, to assigning to the City all rights that SPARC may have to collect pledged funds from donors City further agrees that SPARC is not at present in violation or default of any term or provision of the A~eement. City further acknowledges and agrees that funds raised to date by SPARC in excess of the $8,000,000 described above have been or may be used to cover SPARC operating costs, or other costs or contributions as SPARC may deem appropriate in its sole discretion. P146 2. Operation and Maintenance of Two Ice Skatifi~ Arenas. The City acknowledges that SPARC's successful fundraising effort as set forth in Section I above. was achieved in great parz as a result of a recognition by the commtmity for the immediate need for two full sized indoor ice finks in Aspen. It is further recognized that the need for two full sized ice skating rinks (the Lewis Ice Arena located within the ARC and the Aspen Ice Garden) will continue for the indefinite future to meet the demand for such facilities from user groups and individuals in Aspen and visitors to Aspen: and, that the construction of the Lewis Ice Arena was not intended m replace the Aspen Ice Garden, but To supplement it to continue to meet the expected future needs of the community. Accordingly, the City agrees as follows: a. The City shall continue ro own, operate and maintain no less than two full- sized indoor ice rinks in Aspen. to wit. the Lewis Ice Arena within the ARC and the Aspen Ice Garden, and shall not sell or change the use of said facilities, for a period of no less than thirty (30) years from and after April 15, 2003; provided, however, that the City may replace the Lewis Ice Arena or the Aspen Ice Garden at any time with an ice fink/arena of equal or greater size, quality, finish standard and amenities to the facility being replaced. If the Lewis Ice Arena is replaced, the new ice rink shall also be named the Lewis Ice Arena unless the Jonathan Lewis family Wishes to give it another name. In the event such a replacement facility is planned, City shall give SPARC an opportunity (but SPARC shall have no obligation) to raise additional funds to further enhance the size and/or quality of the replacement facility." b. The Lewis Ice Arena shall be available for full operation as an ice skating rink twelve months of the year. For the period ending September 2005 the Aspen Ice Garden shall be available for full operation as an ice skating rink 12 months of the year. Thereafter, if City determines iT is no longer economically feasible To operate the Ice Garden during the summer months in addition to operating the Le~vis Ice Arena, the City shall have the fight, in its sole discretion and following consultation with the ARC Operations Committee, to close the Aspen Ice Garden from no longer than mid April to September 30 of each year Any such decision shall be reviewed annually in advance by the City and the ARC Operations Committee. c. Notwithstanding any language ro the contrary contained herein, the City, with the prior consem of SPARC, may discontinue or sxgnificantly reduce the level of hours of operation of either the Lewis Ice Arena or the Aspen Ice Garden, or both, I including the sale of one or both facilities) whenever the parties hereto agree that such discontinuance of service is in the best interests of the City of Aspen and the Aspen commumty, including, but not limited To, unfavorable economic conditions or such other situations that cause the demand 'for ice skating facilities ro be significantly reduced from currem expected levels. In the event SPARC ceases to exisl the ARC Operations Committee shall fill its role under this sub-paragraph. P147 d. Notwithstanding any language to the contrary contained herein, m the event that the City desires to discontinue or significantly reduce the leveI of hours of operation of either the Lewis Ice Arena or the Aspen Ice Garden, or both, (including the sale of one or both facilities) and SPARC tor if SPARC no longer exists, the ARC Operations Con'm~ittee) has not consented to such a discontinuance or reduction in accofdance with subsection (c) above, the City may nevertheless discontinue or reduce the level of operations (including the sale of one or both facilities) upon the prior approval of the electors of the City of Aspen. Provided that no such discontinuance or reduction shalI take place during the period ending August 30, 2005. Provided further that no such discontinuance or reduction shall take place except upon at least 6 months prior written notice to SPARC of City's intent to take such action. 3. SPARC user rights. In consideration for SPARC's raiiing the funds for the construction of the /ce arena facility portion of the ARC, including the ice Arena's allocated share of the common costs associated with the ARC, City agrees that SPARC shall have use of the ARC facility ~exclusive of the Youth Center) for one day each year, free of charge, for fund raising purposes, such dayto be determined by mutual agreement of SPARC and City. City further agrees that SPARC shall have in each calendar year up to 20 hours of flee ice time tn both the Lewis Ice Arena and the Aspen Ice Garden for fund raising purposes, such hours to be mutually agreed upon by SPARC and City. 4. Creation of an Operations Committee. Section 8 of the June 11, 2001, Agreement recognizes that most. if not ail, of the capital costs of constructing the Lewis Ice Arena were raised from private donations. As part of that recognition, the City agreed to create an advisory board "in order to ensure that the City operates the/ce arena facility and the remainder of the Recreation Center in the best possible manner, consistent with any budgetary constraints that the City may encounter in the future." The City further agreed to consult in advance and on a continuing basis with SPARC on all matters relating to the use and operation of the ice arena facility and of the Recreation Center complex. The parties hereto agree that the ARC Operations Committee established by the City Council by the adoption of Resolution No. , Series of 2003, meets the requirements of Section 8 of the June 11,200 I, Agreement. 5. Naming Rights. The City understands and agrees that SPARC shall have the right to offer naming rights for certain facilities, amenities or fixtures associated with the ARC, the ice arena facility, or the neighboring City-owned ball fields, bridges, tennis courrs, and related amenities, as an inducement to potential donors for ongoing fund raising associated ~vith an endowment fund and possible capital campaigns focused on athletics and recreation (primarily youth-oriented) in the greater Aspen area. City covenants and agrees with SPARC that City will honor such naming rights provided the following procedures are followed: (a) The facility, amenity or fixture is listed on the City-approved Schedule of Naming Opportunities attached hereto as Exhibit B and made a parr P148 hereof t)y this reference_ as such Schedule may be ~imended from time to time by the parties. (b) The particular donor has exercised its naming rights within three (3) years foliowing the date of the donor's contribution or pledge, whichever occurs first. (c) City ~s given an opportunity to approve the name chosen for a facility, amemry or fixture to ensure good taste and compatibility with the overall design of the ARC and neighboring facilities, provided, however, that City shall not unreasonably withhold or delay its approval of names chosen by donors. (d) City approves in writing any portion of a facility, amenity or fixture that is not listed on attached Exhibit B for which an offer has been made by a potential donor, which approval shall include the chosen name and. eventualIy, the design of the sign that ~s proposed to be placed on or near the portion of facility, amenity or fixture chosen to be named. (e) The design of all signs proposed to be placed on or near a facility, amenity or fixture identified on attached Exhibit B shall be approved in advance by City, and shall be in compliance with the sign regulations of the City of Aspen. City shall not nnreasonably withhold or delay its approval of a proposed sign, but shall determine the appropriateness of the design and text thereof in the context of good taste and the overall desi~.cm of the ARC and neighboring facilities. (f) The cost of all signs shall be borne by SPARC or the donor. SPARC's naming fights hereunder shall expire ten (10) years from the date of this First Amendment or upon the expiration of the term identified on attached Exhibit B for a particular naming right, whichever term is longer. 6. Effect of Amendments. In all other respects, the June 1I, 2001, Ageement shall remain unmodified hereby and in full force and effect IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written. CITY: THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLOR_ADO, a Colorado mumcipal corporation By: Helen Klanderud, Mayor Attest: P149 Kathryn Koch, City C Jerk Approved as to Form: John Worcester, City Attorney SPARC: FRIENDS FOR THE ASPEN SPORTS AND RECREATION COMPLEX, a Colorado nonprofit corporation By: Scott Writer, President Attest: Beth I-loft Blackmer, Secretary YPW-05/30/2003-G:\john\wordkagrksparc - first amendment - 5-30-03.doc PI 50 EMO X_NDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Steve Barwick- City Manager ~ SUBJECT: Wildfire Mitigation Memorandum of Understanding DATE: 6-4-03 SUMMARY: Please find attached a proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Aspen and various other local, State, and Federal jurisdictiorfs. By emering into this MOU the City of As?eh is agreeing ro mumaI consultation, with these Other jurisdictions regarding wildfire mitigation and response. DISCUSSION: The primary advantages to Aspen £rom entering into this MOU will be · Better coordination of wildfire mitigation and response eff(~rts, and · Greater likelihood of Aspen qualifying for wildfire mitigation grant f~mding. FINANCIAL IMPLICATION: There is no direct cost to the City of Aspen due to this MOU. However, the City will have a much greater opportunity ro receive grant funding if we participate in this MOU RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecorru2ends approval of this Memorandum of Understanding. P152 RESOLUTION = 50 (Series of 2003) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND PARTICIPATING GOVERNMENTAL JURISDICTIONS AND AGENCIES SETTING FORTH THE TEtLMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING WILDFIRE MITIGATION AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING YVHEREAS, there has been submitted ro the City Council a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and various governmental agencies, a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and various governmental agencies regarding wildfire mitigation, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to. execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, 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 June 9, 2003. Kathryn S. Koch, City Cleric DRAFT Pitkin County Fire MitJga~:lon MOU .... April 30, 2003 P153 Memorandum of Understanding For Multi-jurisdictional Cooperation Regarding Wildfire Mitigation - *This Memorandum of Understanding: (~ is for the sale benefit of the Participating Parties and shall not be deemed ~o benefit any other person or entity, and ~21 does not grant or confer uoon any third par~y any right to claim damages or to bring any action or other proceeding against any par[y (o this Memorandum of Understanding. Nothing in this Memorandum of Understanding will be construed as limiting or affecting in any way the authority or legal responsibility of any of the Participating Parties or as binding on any of the Parties to perform beyond the respective authority of each, or as requinng any Party to assume to expend any sum in excess of appropriations available. Each of the Parties shall use its best efforts to comply with the intent of this Memorandum of Understanding through the procedures contained here w/thin. However failure of a Party to exercise the procedures of this Memorandum of Understanding shaft not be the basis for chafteng/ng, invalidating or modifying any decision made by any Party. A. Participating governmental jurisdictions and agencies together deemed the "Parties" The following governmen[a] jurisdictions and agencies, ~re s~gnatories of this Memorandum of Understanding: · Pitkin County · White River National Fores~ Forest · City of Asoen Service United States Department of · Aspen Fire Protection District Agriculture · Glenwood Springs Field Office Bureau · Colorado State Forest Service. of Land Management. United States · Colorado Division of Wildlife Department of the Interior · Northwest Colorado Council of Governments* *Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCCOG), although not a governmental jurisdiction or agency is also a 3articipating entity and will serve in me capacity of coordinator of information until such time an entity within Pitkin County shall be mutually designated by the Parties to fulfill such coordinating 'esl:ohs/b/l/ties B. Introduction All participating governmental jurisdictions and agencies have resoonsibilities for developing and implementing land use management 31ans and/or orotection of 3ubiic heal[n and safety and have the ability to authorize actions under their respective jurisdictions The municipalities and counties nave aooDted Glans and other land-use control regulations to guide development of private lands within their respective jurisdictions. The USDA Forest Service (FS) and the USDI Bureau of Land Management (BLM~ have bodies of legislation regulations, and orocedures for land-use planning and management on designated federal lands. The fire orotection districts have adootee fire codes and regulations and are responsible for fire mitigation and response planning and imoIementatior P154 DRAFT PEkin County Fire Hittgation NOU .... ~ 3rii 30, 2003 The Colorado State Forest Service nas responsibility for Drovidin9 technical assistance To public and private cocperators regarding fire wildfire mibgation and other forbstry related toPICS, The Colorado Division of Wildlife nas statutory resDonsibilit, for the management of the wildlife and fisheries resources of the State of Colorado The Parties recognize that wilofires often cross jurisdictional boundaries and as a result effective wildfire "mt]gation ano resoonse reouire cross-Dounoary mult~-junsdictional coooeration. The Parties also recognize that policy oec~s~ons related to wildfire by one Party may affect decisions by the other or create 'mpacts for another Party. The Parties further recognize the need to involve as a m~nlmum 8c.acent or nearby proper~y owners land managers. 8no residents of the area in wildfire res 3onse and mitigation planning. The Parties believe therefore that it is in ~ne best interest of the Participating Parties [o WOrK together to establish an effective mechanism for meaningful cooperation in wildfire mitigation and response planning. C. Purl~ose The purpose of this Memorandum s to establish a mechanism for mutual consultation of any or all jurisdictions regarding the development, in' plementauon and revision of respective plans pertaining tc wildfire mitigation and response Furthermore. it is the purpose of this Memorandum to more efficiently, utilize the existing review and decision processes of eacn participating Party through COoberation and coordination, not to create new review and decision orooesses. D. Objectives In 'ecognition of the preceding conditions rne Parties agree to coordinate their resoective planning and decision making activities in a manner consistent with the respective responsibilities and authorities asslgneo to each. The Parties agree to work together to achieve maximum benefits from available resources to reouce auDtication of effort and ength of process time and to attain better overall coordination througnout ~ne area of mutual concern regarding wildfire mitigauon and response. E. Authorities The folIowin~c taws. 'egulations or authorities supporting or reduinng tins course of action are cited below. The 3rincioai* Federal authorities oertaining to this Memoranoum of Understanding are: The Federa Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. 2. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 3. The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act as amenoeo by the National Forest Management Act of 1976 4. The Alaska Nationa Lands Conservation Act 5. Organic Act 6. Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act DRAFT Pitkin Count~ Fire Mitigation MOU .... ADh 30 2003 P15§ The Statutory Counties and MuniciPalities have the authority to enter into this Memoranoum of Understanding Dy the following principal* aws: Ar[icle XIV Section 18 of the Colorado State Constitution ano ~egislation pursuant thereto name% C.R.S.. § 29-1-20'~ et. seo 2. The Local Government Land Use Enabling Act C.R.S.. § 29-20-105 et. seq. 3. C.R.S.. §-30-11-10' (1)(d), County Powers and Functions. 4. C.R.S. §-24-65.1-101et se~: Areas and Activities of Statewide Interest. The fire orotection districts have authority to enter into this Memorandum of Understanding by the following principal* laws and/or regulations: The Colorado State Forest Service has tne autnonty to enter into this Memorandum of Understanding by the following principal* laws and/or regulations: The Colorado Division of Wildlife has the authority to enter into this Memorandum of Understanding by the following pnnclpaF laws and/or regulations: *Together with amenomen~s and supplements tnere(o. F. Definitions "Federal Lands" means any land and interest in land owned by the United States. administered by the Secretaries of Agriculture (National Forest System lands' or Interior (Bureau of Land Management lands) throu~c q their appropriate agencies. "Wildfire Mitigation"means specific olans and actions to reduce the threats of negative impacts of potential wildfire on identified community values "Wildfire Response" means sDecifib plans and acuons to protect identified commun ty values when ,wildfire events occur. "Participating Parties'or "Parties" means the signatories to this Memorandum of Understanding. "Adjacent Jurisdictions"means any federal state, county munic oal. or specia district j Jrisdictions sharing a contiguous boundary with any other jurisdictions who are s~gnatories this Memorandum of Understanding. P156 DRAFt PJtkin County Fire Hitigation HOU ....ADriI 30, 2003 G. Coordinating Entity For the purposes of this Memorandum of Understanding the Parties agree that NWCCOG shall be the coordinating entity of this Memorandum of Understanding until such time an entit., withir Pitkin County snail [}e mutually designated by the Parties to fulfill such coordinating responsibilities H. Roles of Participating Parties Now therefore it is agreed that: Ali Parties will: a. Ccc 3erate in wildfire mitigation aha response planning with the Participating Parties. b Inform eacn other as far in aovance as possible of antic 3ateo wildfire mitigation decisions and, or actions that m~gn~ affect another Party. c CooBerate in t~e devetocment and im 31ementation of any supplements to this Memorandum of Understanding I. Effect on Prior Agreements This Memorandum of Understanding is intended to work ~n concert with odor agreements. It s not intended to preempt or supercede prior agreements. J. Funding The primary funding regarding the implementation of this Memorandum of Understanding will be oorne by the Participating Parties. However NWCCOG wil continue to searcn for and secure additional funding from public and private grants to st. 3DOrt coordination aha implementation activities. K. Administration The following representatives or their designees nave me authority to soeaK for their respective jurisdictions and agencies for the purposes of this Memorandum of Understanding and regarding actions unoer~aKen under this Memorandum of Understanding. Board of County Commissioners 970~ 925-5532 Pitkin County 530 E. Main 3ra Floor Forest Supervisor Asoen. CO 81611 White River Nationa Forest (970 920-5200 P.O. Box 948 Glenwood Springs CO 81602 Mayor 970) 945-3200 City of Asoen 130 S. Galen~ Field Manager Asoen CO 81611 U.S. Deo~ of Interior (970 920-5000 Bureau of L~ qd Management PO Box 1009 Chief G enwooa Springs, CO 81602 Aspen Fire Protection District (970) 262-947-2802 420 E. Hopkins Ave. Aspen. CD 81'611 DRAFT Pit:kin County Fire 1'4itiga~:lon HOU .... ADrit 30, 2003 P157 District Forester Executive Director Colora(]o State Forest Service Northwest Co 3rado Council of Grand Junctior CO Governments Box 2308 Colorado Division of Wildlife Silverthorne CO 80498 50633 Hwy 6 & 24 970 468-0295 Aspen CO 1. All Parties recognize that time is of the essence q ~erformance under this Memorandum of Understanding. In general. ~ne reoresentatives their designees, or appropriate staff specialists will contact one anotner as necessary, subject to this Memorandum of Understanding and any supplemental Agreements. 2. Nothing in this Memorandum of Understanding will be construed as limiting or affecting in any way the authority or legal resuonsibility of any of the Participating Parties or as binding on any of the Parties ~o oerform beyond the respective authority of each. or as reouiring any Party to assume to exBend any sum ~n excess of aB~ropriations available. 3. Failure by any Party To exercise the orowslons within this Memorandum of Understanding will not be considered cause to invalidate, oostpone, or delay prescribed review oermitting planning or decision orocesses governing ~ne res~onsible jurisdiction. This Memorandum of Understanding: ¢1~ is for the sole benefit of the participating parties ano shall not be deemed to benefit any otner person or entity, and (2 does not grant or confer ldon any third par~y any right to claim damages or to bring any action or other droceeding against any par~y to this Memorandum of Understanding 5. Amendments or supplements to this Memorandum of Understanding may be proposeo by any Party and shal oecome effective upon written approva~ Dy all Parties of SUCh amendments or supplements. 6. This Memorandum of Understanding shall become effective when s'gned by the Parties nereto ano is intended to remain in effect without terminatior However, any Party may formally terminate their ~articiBation in this Memorandum of Understanding after 30 days notice in writing to the o~ner Parties of the qtention to dO SO. 7. Each and every provision of this Memorandum of Understanding s subject to the laws of the United States the State of Colorado. Barticipating Local Governments and the regulations of the Secretaries of the deoar[ments of Agriculture and the Interior. 5 DRAFT Pitkin Count,' Fire Mitigation HOU .... Aodl 30, 2003 P158 In Witness Whereof. the Parties herein have caused this document to be executed as ~f Ihe date of the last signature shown below: Board of County Commissioners Date :itkin County, Colorado Mayor Date City of Aspen. Colorado Chief Date Asoen Fire Protection District Forest Suoervisor Date White River National Forest Glenwood Springs Field Manager Date Bureau of Land Management District Forester Date Colorado State Forest Service Area Manager Date Colorado Division of Wildlife bxecut[ve L)~rector Uate Northwest Colorado Council of Governments 6 TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director ~ / FROM: Scott Woodford, City Plann~ / RE: SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS~ (1sT READING); PL.A.NNED UN'IT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) _A/VD AMENDMYENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTraCT iVIxP; OROI~A~CZ NO. ~ { , SEmis 2003 DATE: June 9, 2003 The south elevation of the Sagewood CondomLniums with US Highway 82/Hallam Street in the foreground. REQUEST SUiVI?srtARy: PUD overlay to establish the existing non-conforming setbacks, height, floor area, and minimum lot area per dwelling unit for the condominium as conforming and to allow enclosure of twelve balconies and construction of a roof structure over the entrance to the east side of the building into the setback, and to rezone the parcel from K-6 to R/MF to legalize the multi-family use. P&Z ACTION: Approval with conditions (Vote: 4-0) on May 6, 2003 APPLICANT: Sagewood Condominium Association LOCATION: 910 West Hailam Street STAFF ~ APPROVAL OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AND A/VIENDMENT TO RECOMMENDATION: THE OFFICIAL 2~ONE DISTRICT ~P, WITH COI~2)ITIONS SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF REPORT PAGE 1 P160 REQUEST SUMMARY: The Sagewood Condominium Association, represented by its Secretary, Scott A. Gallagher, has submitted this land use application requesting the following: 1.) PUD overlay of the proper~y to establish the existing, non-conforming dimensional standards for the structure as conforming; and 23 PUD to approve the expansmn of the floor area of the structure by 660 square feet by enclosing twelve balconies (55 square feet each and a roof structure over the entrance to the east side of the building (setback encroachment); and 3. Rezone of the proper~y from R-6 to R/MF to make the existing, non-conforming multi-family use a conforming use. 4.~ Waiver of the fees related to the rezone of the property ksee discussion below). BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Sagewood Condominiums, known originally as the Sagewood Apar;mems, were constructed in 1970. At the time, it was constructed legally in the AR-1 ,Accommodations/Recreationl Zone District, which included multi-family dwelIings as an allowed use. In 1973. the City approved the apar~mems to be condominiumized. On April 28, 1975, the City rezoned the property from AR-1 to R-6 as part of amendments to the land use code. As the R-6 zone district does not allow multi-family uses and has different dimensional standards than the previous AR-1 zone district, the Sagewood Condominiums became a legal, non-conforming use and structure twith respect to allowed floor area, height, off-street parking, and mimmum Icl area per dwelling unit) after those amendments were approved. Subsequently, no land use actions have occurred on the site. Based on review of the City Council minutes during the code amendment in I975_ it is not clear why this property was rezoned; however, it appears as though the rezoning was part of' a series of broad changes to all of the zone districts in the city and perhaps the fact that such action made this property non-conforming was not recognized by the City or the owners at the time and only recently discovered. There are also six balconies on the structure that have been illegally enclosed over time (mostly by previous owners of tmits~. This means that they were constructed without first receiving a City of Aspen Building Department permit for the enclosures, or approval for expanding their floor area. One owner was recently red-tagged bT~ the Building Department during illegal construction of one of the enclosures and was required to remove their work. The other enclosures were built over ten years ago and are more integrated into the unit, so their removal would be more involved. The Building Department is requiring that the owners of units contact the Department to schedule inspections to determine whether or not they are in compliance with the current Building SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF REPORT PAGE 2 P161 Code. This must be done prior to the Deparrmen~ ~ignlng off on any permits for exterior improvements to the building. PROPOSAL: The Association's ultimate desire is to make exterior improvements ro the thirty-three year old structure, as its existing siding ~s outdated and in disrepair. To that end, the Association has been recently approved for a construction loan for the improvements, however they are unable to obtain the necessary permits from the City to do the work because of the non-conforming use and structure status and because of the presence of the illegally constructed balcony enclosures. If the currently proposed PUD to legalize the non-conforming dimensional standards and the rezone to legalize the existing non-conforming use is approved and if building permits are obtained for the illegal balcony enclosures, then the Association can apply for the permits for exterior siding improvements. In addition, if the PUD is approved to expand the existing floor area, then the remaining balconies may be enclosed should the owners choose to do so taccording to the application, however, none of the owners have made this their cttrrenr intention-they simply want the aption). Finally, the Association would like to construct a small roof over the entrance to the east side of the structure for protection from the weather There are two slightly different proposals for the design of the structure, with one being cantilevered and the other being supported by columns tsee application~. Both structures would encroach to the east property line. According to the Section 26 312.020 and 26.312.030 of the Code. non-conforming uses and structures may continue to operate as they are, but only normal maintenance procedures can be conducted and no extensions or expansions are allowed. According to the definition of "normal maintenance", only maintenance necessary to preserve the safety and structural integrity of the building are allowed. The exterior improvements that the Association wishes to do are not necessary for structural integrity, however, it has been past City practice to approve such activity on a building despite its non-conforming status. However. the presence of the illegal balcony enclosures would preclude that possibility because that additional floor area has never been approved. As parr of this application, the applicant is also requesting that the City waive the land use application fees for the rezoning becanse they contend that the rezoning of the property in 1975 that created the non-conformity was not their fault. As noted below', the City has the ability ro waive or reduce land use review fees. REVIEW PROCESS: The applicant requests the following land use approvals for the project described above: 1) Planned Unit Development (PUD); According to Section 26.445.040 of the Land Use Code_ establishment of dimensiona] requiremems and density may be approved with the, adoption of a Final PUD development plan. In this case, the applicant proposes a PUD to establish the existing floor area, height, off-street parking, and SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF lqSEPOR'I PAGE 3 P162 minimum lot area per dwelling unit as the allowed standards and then to increase the allowed floor area to allow the enclosures ro twelve balconies and to allow a setback encroachment from the east property line for a small roof structure over the entrance to the east side of the building; Final Review Authority: CiW Council 2) Amendment to the Official Zone District Map; According ro Section 26.310.020. an application for amendment to the official zone district map may be initiated by a group of people who o~vn more than 50% of the property subject ro the development application and proposed development (the applicant has received approval from over 50% of the affected property owners). A public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission followed by a public hearing with City Council is required in order to approve such amendmem; Final Review Authority: City Council 3) Partial Waiver of Fees: Per Section 26.104.070, land use review fees may be waived or reduced in the discretion of the Community Development Director 'for projects serving a public pttrpose, proposed by a non-profit organization, or in which the fee may be excessive for the xvork proposed. The Director feels that the request is too significant for her ro waive the fee and is requesting that the City Council make the determination of whether the portion of the land use review fee dedicated to the rezone should be waived in entirety or in some sum thereo£ Final Review Authority: City Council STAFF COMMENTS: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: Staff finds that the proposed PUD complies with the applicable criteria (see Exhibit A for full Staff Findings). The following are the dimensional standards that the applicant is requesting to establish as part of the PUD and staff response: FLOOR AREA: The structure cttrrently exceeds the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) for the proposed R/MF zone district and proposes, through this application, ro increase it by 660 square feet with the 12 balcony enclosures (55 square feet each). Inclnding the twelve balcony enclosures, the FAR will be 1.3:1, vvhereas the R/MF only allo~vs 1:1 twithout including the balcony enclosures in the calculation, the FAR would be 1.25:1). In terms of square footage, the total xvith all of the balconies enclosed would be 10,860 square feet. as opposed ro the existing 10,473 square feet ,'which includes 6 of the balconies already enclosed',. SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF I~.EPORT PAGE 4 P163 The north side of the buildthg where three of the six balconies have been illegally enclosed. If approved to enclose all of the balconies on thc structure ~a total of 12) in a legal manner, the Association will use the design of the balcony in the upper right as the preferred design for future enclosures. Staff believes that because the existing building (nor including the proposed balcony enclosures) was constructed legally and made non-conforming later during a blanket rezoning of the entire community, that it should be allowed ro become conforming through the PUD. Rather than dwell on what the existing floor area is (as it's already there), staff believes it is more pertinent to discuss whether it is appropriate to increase the allowed floor area to accomnaodate the proposed balcony enclosures. It is staff's opinion that the enclosures will nor be too visually obtrusive and will be beneficial ro the occupams of the small units. Despite the structure being located on Highway 82 at the entrance to the community, the building itself is not very visible due ro the existence of very mature evergreen trees and other landscaping including a row of shrubs along the south property line. When viewed dhving west on US 82, there is no clear v/ew iht6 the property and when driving the opposite direction, the glimpse of the structure is very brief and only conspicuous if you are purposely looking for it. Because the pr/mary landscaping is in the form of evergreer3s, it can be expected that the screening will exist year around. The other s~x enclosed balconies will be located on the north elevation, which is essentially an alley view and out of public view. Additionally, the enclosures will provide valuable additional space for these small units (mostly in the 600-800 square foot range and one 1,300 sq. ft. unit) which function primarily as housing for locally employed residents. Enclosing the balconies is one way for the owners ro improve their units while nor requiting any expansion of the building footprint or increasing the height. SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF i~PORT PAGE P 164 View of the property as if you were travel/rig west on Hallam Street. Note the obscured view into the building from ttds angle. Staff believes that the mature, evergreen trees and other vegetation screens most of the view of the build/rog. The addition of balcony enclosures, while not the preferred choice for the structures, would appear to not greatly detract from the aesthetics of the building. HEIGHT: The height limit of the proposed RfMF zone distr/ct is 25'. At 30' (as the Code measures height: from natural or finished grade, whichever is lower, to a point halfway between the eave and the ridge of the roof), the Sagewood Condominiums exceeds that limit by 5'. The building is not proposed to become any taller as part of this' application. When the structure was bnilt in 1970, the AR-1 zone district that it was located in also had a 25' height limitation. How the structure was built over this limitation is unclear. Regardless, staff supports the PUD to establish the existing height as legal because the height is nor conspicuous from the street due to the existence of the even taller evergreen trees and it is not too incompatible with its immediate single fancily neighbor to the west. In addition, it is uurealistic to expect that the 5' of additional height is going to be removed from the structure anytime soon because it would require a major redevelopment project. Building a new building and replacing the locals housing would likely make the project not cost effective. So it is relatively safe to assume that the structure will continue in its currem form well into the future. If the non-conforming stares is removed from the property, the applicant will be able to make much needed improvements to the exterior of the property., which will help mitigate the impacts of the higher-than-allowed height. OFF-STREET PARK!NG: According ro the Code, two off-street parking spaces are required per each dwelling unit. so 22 spaces are required for the existing 11 units. Only 9 off-street spaces are actually provided. Or/ginally, there were 11 parking spaces, even though the Code at the time required 1.5 spaces per unit for multi-family dwellings (for a total of 16.5 spaces). Again, its unclear from the available City records why the required amount of spaces were not built. Two of the 11 parking spaces originally provided were located directly off of Hallam Street. When the structure converted from apartments to condomirdums, the City required that those two spaces be removed due to the danger of vehicles backing up onto a highway. According to the applicant, there is an informal agreement among the residents that allows the seven owners who live on-site to use seven of the spaces ,and the other two are rotated among the renters of the other five units. The other remers apparently park on the srree~ when they don't have access to the on-site spaces. SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF I~PORT PAGE 6 P165 Although this situation is clearly not optimum, it is physically impossible to rectify the deficiency on-site as there is no room to accommodate two more spaces. Possibly, the Association can lease the use of some spaces on an adjacent site. If not, the current situation will have to be endured. Staff does not see, however, how the parking problem will be ameliorated by maintaining the non-conforming stares and supports making the nine spaces provided the legal dimensional reqmrement. MINIMUM LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNIT: In the proposed P/MF zone district, the minimum lot area per dwelling unit is determined by the number of bedrooms in a structure. In this case, 19,800 square feet oflot area would be necessary to accommodate the combination of bedrooms in units of the Sagewood Condominiums. The site only contains 8,344 square feet, so it is non-conforming with respect to this requirement. Staff supports the establishment of the existing site square footage as the minimum lot area to support the 1 ] dwelling units because it met the requirement for minimum lot area when it was constructed (at the time, 750 square feel per dwelling unit was required, or 8,250 sq. ft., in this case). The only reason it is non-conforming with respect to this'is due to the rezoning in I975. AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP: Staff finds that the proposal for rezoning from R-6 to R/MF complies with the applicable review standards (see Exhibit B for full staffFindings). COMPLIANCE WI'I-H THE REVIEW CRITERIA: Staff finds that the proposed rezonmg complies with the review criteria because it is in compliance with the applicable sections of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP)~ is compatible with the surrounding land uses and the community character of Aspen, will not create traffic congestion, and has been subject to a changed condition which supports the rezoning. The area in which the subject parcel is located is characterized by a mix of different uses where no single useis predominant. Because of this existing character and because the proposed zoning amendment will only reinforce this mix by legalizing this multi-family use, staff believes that it will be compatible with its surroundings. The changed condition that supports the rezoning is the blanket rezoning of the property by the City in 1975 which made the Sagewood Condominiums a non-conforming use. It is Staff's opinion that this was done without consideration of the impact that the rezoning would have on this property and that it should be rectified with this proposal. A rezoning to P/MF will nor create spot zoning because there is a large swath of IL MF directly across the street from this project, at the Aspen Villas. PARTIAL WAIVER OF FEES: AS parr of this application, the applicant is requesting that the City waive the land use application fees for the rezoning. According to their application, they believe that the rezoning that made the prope3'ry non-conforming in I975 was done in error and that they shouldn't have to bear the cost m correct it. To date, the applicant has incurred approximately $3,500 in land use review fees, of which, approximately 40% has been devoted to the review of the rezoning. This equates to about $1,400 that could be waived (Note: this amount is as of the writing of this report and may increase due to additional work). Section 26.104 states that: SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STA2FF REPORT PAGE7 P166 'Land use review fees may be waived or reduced in the discretion of the Community Development Director for projects serving a public purpose, proposed by a non-profit organization, or in which the fee may be excessive for the work proposed. - The Comm~mity Development Director has recommended that the decisio.n of whether to waive the fee for the rezone be made by City Cotmcil. Based on incomplete documentation, it is difficult to discern what the rationale was when the City took the rezoning action in the mid-1970's. It is possible that the rezoning of the property to a single-family zone district was done consciously by the City in order to make the property non-conforming so the multi-family use would go away someday and the area could be redeveloped with single family residences. However, when you consider that the City approved the Sagewood compIex to be condominiumized in 1973 - two years prior to the rezoning - it is difficult to imagine the City would want the multi- family use to go away. For this reason, it is quite possible that the rezonJng was part of widespread changes ro the zone districts of the entire community and it was not recognized by either the City or the owners at the time that it would make this property non-conforming. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE (DRC] REFERRAL COMMENTS: The DRC meeting was held on February 12, 2003. The minutes from that meeting are contained in Exhibit C. No major issues were raised at the meeting. STAFF SUMMARY AND R_ECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map tbr the Sagewood Condominiums RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move ro approve Ordinance No. '~t , Series of 2003, for a Plarmed Unit Development and Amendment to the Officia!~ Zone District Map to R/MF for the Sagewood Condominiums." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Planned Unit Development (PUD) - Staff Findings Exhibit B: Amendment to the Official Zone District Map - Staff Findings Exhibit C: Development Review Committee (DRC) Minutes Exhibit D: Approved P&Z Resolution Exhibit E: P&Z Minutes Exhibit F: Application City Manager Comments: SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF P~EPORT PAGE P167 ORDINANCE (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO LEGALIZE THE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, TO EXPAND THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA FOR ENCLOSURES OF TWELVE (12) BALCONIES. AND FOR A SETBACK ENCOR-gCHMENT TO THE EAST PROPERTY LINE FOR A ROOF STRUCTURE OVER AN ENTRANCE AND AMENDMENT TO TIlE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP REZONING THE SUBJECT PARCEL FROM R-6 TO RAVIF FOR THE PROPERTY FULLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED EXItlBIT A, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2 73 7-182~29221 WHEREAS. the Commumry Development Deparrmem received an application from the Sagewood Condominium Association (Applicant), requesting approval of a Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Deparrmem received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, and Building, as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, V¥ttEREAS, upon review of the application, re£efral comments, and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map for the Sagewood Condominiums; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds ail applicable developmenr standards and that the approvals of the development proposal are consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and. WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on May 6, 2003, the Planaing and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and by a vote of four ro zero (4 - 0) recommended City Council approve the Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map, with the findkngs and conditions listed hereinafter; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Commtinity Developmenr Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the applicable referral agencies and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that the application for a Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map meets or SAGEWOOD CONDOMINpurMS STAFFREPOR. T PAGE 9 P168 exceeds all applicable standards and ~s consistent with the goals, and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WtlEREAS. the City of Aspen City Council, by a vote of m (_.-_), approves a Planned Unit Development and Amendmem to the Official Zone District Map for the Sagewood Condominiums; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Ord'mance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY TI=rF, ASPEN CITY COUNCIJ~ THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council approves the Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map to R/MF, subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD Agreement and Amended PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant.to Section 26.445.070(C). 2 Prior ro issuance of any building permit for any improvement to the building, the applicant shall submit building elevations and desig'n details showing the design of all future balcony enclosures as approved by the Sagewood Condominium Association. The design shall be approved by the Community Development Director. Building permit applications shalI conform to the approved design. 3. The applicant shall file a Notice of PUD in the Clerk and Recorders office of Pitkin County subsequent to receipt of a development order, or prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. Prior to sign-off on any future building permits, the owners of illegal balcony enclosures shall be required to submit the necessary permits to the Aspen Building Department to authorize the deck enclosures to ensure compliance with life, health and safety requirements. 5. The existing dumpster shall be moved out of the Right-of-Way (ROW) and onto the applicant's property and noted on the Final PUD Plan. If no adequate on-site dumpster location can be found, then an encroachment license from the City of Aspen Engineenng Deparrmem shall be necessary to allow the dumpster to be stored in the ROW. This shall be completed prior ro sign-off of any building permits for improvements to the building reqninng a building permit. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall contact the customer service representative for the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to schedule a site visit/walk-through. SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIIJMS STAFF REPORT PAGE 10 P169 7. Pr/or ro issuance of a building permit; the applicant shall contact the Community Development Department ro review the outdoor lighting. Any outdoor lighting that is determined by the Department to be our of compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance of the City of Aspen, such lighting will be required ro brought into compliance at that time. Section 2: Ail material representations and commi~nents made by the applicant pursuant to this application, whether in public hearings or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan approvals and the same shall be-complied with as if fully set forth here/n, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding no~v pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such pr/or ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is ~r any reason held invalid or unconstitutional m 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISI-P~D as provided by Iaw, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 9m day of June, 2003. ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, ADOPTED, PASSED, AND APPROVED this I4~' day ofJu~, 2003. ATTEST: SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF REPORT PAGE P170 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderad, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcestor, City Attorney SAGEWOOD CONDOMff41UMS STAFF i~EPOR. T PAGE 12 P171 EXtlIBIT A PLAzNNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. A developmem application for PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements (staff findings follow each reqmrement): A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. [ STAFF FINDING: [ DOESIT COMPLY.9 [ YES [ The proposed development is consistem with ail applicable elements of the AACP, specifically with regard to housing. The units in the condominium, while not deed restricted to meet the AspergPitkin CounW Housing Guidelines, do provide housing for Iocai workers. The AACP emphasizes the need for a "critical mass" of local working residents to help sustain our community and a "healthy mix" of: people with different economic conditions to keep Aspen a vibrant place. The PUD will legaiize the existing non-conforming dimensional requirements and allow the owners to modestly increase the size of their units with the balcony enclosures and improve the exterior of the structure, thereby making their units more livable, which may help play a role in retaining a segment of local employees who serve a critical need in the functioning of the commumty. 2. The proposed development shail be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY.'? I YES The character of the existing land uses m the area ts a mix of single-family and multi~ family residences interspersed with a restaurant and government offices. As a multi~ family residence, the Sagewood is consistent with this character of mixed land uses. 3. The proposed developmem shall nor adversely affect the furore development of the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES This proposai, which proposes to make the condominium a conforming use and structure and allow for balcony space to be enclosed, should not have an adverse impact on the furore development of the surrounding area. Parcels on all four sides of the structure have been developed and should be able to expand in the furore without being inhibited by this building. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotmenrs are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES I SAGEWOOD CONDOMrN1LrMS STAFF REPORT PAGE I3 P172 The expansion of overall floor area with the proposed balcony .enclosures is exempt from GMQS~ in accordance with Section 26.470.070.A.I. of the Code. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The PUD developmem plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropr/are dimensions for the PUD. The proposed dimensional requirements are listed below: Dimensional Requirements Comparison (units measured in feet or square feet) Min/mum Lot Size (square feet) 6,000 6,000 8,344 Maximum ~lowable Density N/A Varies~ 11 u~ts M~mum Lot Width 60' 60' 84' M~imum Front Y~d Setback 10' 10' 21' M~um West Side Yard Setback 5' 5' 5'6" M~um East Side Y~d Setback 5' 5' 6'6" Min~um Re~ Yard Setback 10' I0' 20' MiYata Distance b/w Buildings 5' 10' I N/A Mi~mum Percent of Open Space ~o 35% 40% Requirement Shading indicatex are~ of non-confo~iW. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements Dr the subject proper~ are appropriate and compatible with the foQo~g ~fluences on the prope~: Required amount of lot area to support the existing 1 t unit condominium development of 4-1BP. units, 1- 3BK unit. and' 6-2BR units. The allowed density depends on whether the units are studio or one, two, three, or more bedrooms. The 11 existiug units, however, would exceed the allowed density in this zone district. SAGEWOOD CONDOMiNiUMS STAFF I~,EPORT PAGE 14 P173 a) T'ne character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The structure has existed in this location for thirty years and is located m an area of mixed types of residential uses, including single-family and multi-family. It appears that this use has been and will continue to be compatible with the surrounding land uses and natural and man-made characteristi:s with the proposed PUD. 2. The proposed dimensional requiremems permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriafe and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. STAFF FINDING: I DOESIT COMPLY? I YES The proposed dimensional requirements seek to establish the existing dimensions as the legal standards for the property and expand that allowance slightly for the balcony enclosures. There will be no appreciable change in the size or character of the structure. Although the existing height exceeds the allowable height in the zone district by 7' and has more floor area than is allowed, this is an existing structure built legally under rules in effect thirty years ago. Despite the increased height and floor area, the structure exceeds the minimum front and rear setback (of the proposed R/MF zone district) by twice the required amount, which lessens the impact of the structure from the highway. The R/MF requires 20' of total side yard setback with a minimum of 5' on either side, whereas the structure provides about 13' total, but maintains a minimum of 5'6" on both sides. This places some impact on the neighbor to the west, but does not effect any structure to the east as it is on a comer. Mature landscaping on the west property line somewhat helps to mitigate the closeness of the condominium to the neighboring single- family residence, which was just constructed last year. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying t/me periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability ofpublic transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and~or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. [ STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY.9 ] YES j SAGEWOOD CONDOMiNIUMS STAFF ]REPORT PAGE 15 P174 There are currently 9 parking spaces for 11 units, xvhich means that some units do not have access to an off-street parking space. While this ~s somewhat of an untenable situation_ it is the reality that the owners and the City have to work with. Unfortunately, there is nor enough room on the site to fit an additional two spaces and it is not realistic to expect that two units can be eliminated from the site to make the parking comply. However, given that the structure is located on the bus line and is a short walk or bike ride into town. there are options for tenants who don't own cars or who don't need them very often and have an alternate place to park their vehicle. Staff does not want to have this unfortunate situation continue to be considered non-conforming and have it be a barrier to other improvements to the structure. Staff supports legalizing the situation and encourages the Association ro continue exploring parking alternatives. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is nor sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed developmenr. b) There are nor adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT CO1VII>LY? I YES According rc the review by the Development Review Committee, there exists adequate infrastructure capabilities to the structure. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because ofgrotmd instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed developmem are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequem water pollution. c; The proposed developmenr will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed strucrare, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is nor compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES There are no natural hazards or critical site features impacted with this structure or with I the?roposed balcony enclosures. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns SAGEWOOD CONDOMiNIUMS STAFFR.EPORT PAGE I6 P175 and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase m density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the propcm-y is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the si{e, as identified in subpara~aphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The density is not proposed to be increased. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man~made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past. or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate mariner. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COM]PLY? I YES No changes are proposed which would impact any natural or man'made features. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. STAFF]FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES There is only one structure on the site. so clustehng.has already been achieved. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. STAFF FINDING: ] DOES IT COMPLY? YES The structure is oriented parallel to the public street and is setback farther than what the zone district requires with mature vegetation, which softens the appearance and size of the structure. J 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle aqcess. SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF REPORT PAGE 17 P176 STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES .Fire and emergency service vehicle access is adequate to serve their needs. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES/NO There are sidewalks along the south, east and west sides of the property providing good pedestrian access, but there is no specific handicap access. The structure was approved and constructed au a time when handicap access was not a requirement. To make the upper umts handicap accessible an elevator would be required, which would only be feasible as part of a larger redevelopment request when there would be more of a nexus between the proposal and the request for such improvements. 6. Site drainage ~s accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY.'? I YES Site drainage appears to be accommodated properly and does not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-resident/al land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. ] STAFF FINDING: DOES IT CO~V-2LY? I NOT APPLICABLE D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing s~gnificant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed metfiod of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. ST~aVF FINDING: [ DOES IT COm'L¥? ] YES The existing vegetation on the site is mature and ample. E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and SAGEWOOD CONDOMI~qlUMS STAFF I~EPORT PAGE 18 P177 other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shah be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shaH: 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical md cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not reqmre significant maintenance. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? { YES Although the design of the building is starting ro become outdated, it was likely appropriate when it was approved Still, there are many condomimum and lodge structures of the same era in Aspen that all contribute to the local architectural character and are appropriate for the enviromment in which they are located. If the PUD application is approved, then the Association will undertake faCade upgrades. The Association has already applied and received a construction loan for such improvements. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted tn an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic, concerns. The following standards shah be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any k/nd to adjoining streets or [ands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. Ail exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless other~vise approved and noted in the ting_ PUD documents. Up-Iightlng of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential deveiopmem. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY.'? [ YES [ Staff has not yet reviewed the outdoor lighting for the building. Consequently, a condition of approval has been added requinng inspection of the lighting prior ro sign off on any building permit and the bringing of any non-compliant lighting into compliance. G. Common Park~ Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park~ open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall, be met: SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF REPORT PAGE 19 P178 1. The proposed amount, location, and. design of the common .park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property use'rs of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance tlxrough a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against furore residential, commercial, or industrial development. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ YES Open space is provided between the Hallam Street property line and the structure which provides a buffer for the residents from the heavily traveled street and provides visual relief for those on the street back towards the structure. it. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified f'mancial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY.9 I YES This development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities. I. Access and Circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access m a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The structur~ has direct access from a public street, 8m Street offof Hallam Street. SAGEWOOD CONDOMfNIUMS STAFF REPORT[ PAGE 20 P179 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? YES No traff~c congestion is created by this development on surrounding roads. J. Phasing of Development Plan. The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. Ail phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated ~vith the phase. STAFf' FI~DIr~C:: [ DOES IT COMPLY? [ Nor AP~L~C~L~ No phasing is proposed. SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF~P~EPORT PAGE 2I P180 EXItlBIT B AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP Section 26.310.040 - Standards for Review ora Rezone: In rev/ewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Counc/I and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in confiict with any applicable portions of this Title. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES Ir COMPLY? [ YES Staffis unaware of any portions of the Title that the application is in conflict with. B Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? I YES The proposed amendment is consistent with all applicable elements of the AACP, specifically with regard to housing. The units in the condominium, while not deed restricted ro meet the AsperdPitkin County Housing Guidelines_ do provide housing for local workers. The AACP emphasizes the need for a "critical mass" of local working residents to help sustain our community and a "healthy mix" of people with different economic conditions to keep Aspen a vibrant place. The PUD w/Il legalize the existing non-conforming dimensional requirements and allow the owners to modestly increase the size of their units with the balcony enclosures and improve the exterior of the structure, thereby making their units more livable, which may help play a role in reta/ning a segment of locaI employees who serve a critical need in the functioning of the community. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone distr4cts and laud uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? I 'YES The area m wkich the Sagewood Condomimums are located is a mix of single- family and multi-family residences with a resrauran~ and the US Forest Service offices nearby. Because of this mix of uses has existed for many years in a seemingly compatible manner and because this amendment will not alter that character, staff finds that the continuation of this use in the area would maintain and reinforce the neighborhood character. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. [ STAFF FINDING: ~ DOES IT COMPLY? l YES $AGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF PxEPORT PAGE 22 P181 The proposed amendment will have no impact on traffic generation or road safety as the use of this PUD only seeks to legalize the conditions that have existed relatively unchanged for thirty years. Additionally, no new units are proposed to be added. While each unit will have the option of enclosing their balconies with this proposal, it will only add 55 square feet to each unit. It is unlikely that this extra square footage would add additional traff~c as the space is generally too small for an extra bedroom. In addition, there are not any extra parking spaces on sire with which to park an extra vekicle. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to wtfich the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but nor limited ro transportation facilities, sev<age facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. STAFF FINmNG: I DO~;S IT COMVLY? I YES Based on the feedback from the Development Review Committee (DRC), which reviews issues related to public facilities, there is nor anticipated to be any additional demands on public facilities as a result of this PUD Amendment. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMTLY? [ YES This proposal will not expand the size of the footprint of the building, therefore it will not result in any additional adverse impacts on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the commurdry character in the City of Aspen. I STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? I YES For the most part, the community character of Aspen includes a mixing of different types of uses, including residential (both single-family and multi-family), retail, office, and. in some cases, industrial type uses. In the wcmiry of the Sagewood Condominiums, this character is evident, with other multi-family structures and single family residences co-existing side by side, as well as coramercial and office uses close by. This amendment will serve to legitimize the existing multi-family use on the property and to continue the community pattern of mixed uses. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. STAFF FINDING: [ DOES IT COMPLY? j YES ~ SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STA.FF I~EPOR. T PAGE 23 P182 The Sagewood Condominiums were constructed in [970 as a.lega] use in the ARI (Accommodations/Recreation) zone district in use ar the time. In April 28, 1975, the property was rezoned to R-6, as parr of a change to a new land use code. The rezoning had the effect of changing the Sagewood Condominiums from a conforming use imo a non-conforming use because the R-6 zone district does not allow multi-family residences as an allowed use. Apparently, the multi-family uses on the south side of Hallam Street were rezoned from ARI ro R/MF ar the time, but the Sagewood and another condomimum structure in existence ar the time, the Aspen West End. were allowed ro be rezoned ro the R-6, leaving both as non- conforming uses. It is unclear as ro why these two properties were rezoned as they were. Possibly, it was an oversight on the parr of the City or maybe it was a conscious decision ro have these types of uses removed over time. Staff would submit that the changed condition was the rezoning of the subject parcel which made the use non-conforming. The use did not go away and does not appear to be going away anytime soon. In fact, the owners wish to establish the use as conforming again so that they can make improCemems to the exterior of the structure and to their individual units, both of which lend permanence ro the use. Because this area of town includes mixed uses and because the units house locally worldng residents, staff believes that it is in the best imeresr of the community to legalize the use and allow it to continue. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? I YES To staff's knowledge, the multi-family use of the Sagewood Condominiums has existed in harmony with its surrounding for the thirty years it has existed. Rezoning the parcel to R/MF so that the multi-family use can be legalized again will allow the use ro continue as well as allow the owners ro make improvements ro the property and structure. Staff believes that because this structure houses many local working residents and is located on a prominem site at the entrance to town, it is in the public interest to allow th/s use to continue and for the residents to be able ro improve the outward appearance of the structure. Staff believes that the proposed amendment is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Title, which is to "protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens." Allowing the locals who live here to continue to improve their units and the exterior of the structure, which is very visible at the entrance ro the cormmuniry, is helping ro protect the safety and welfare of the cidzens. SAGEWOOD CONDOMENIUMS STAFFP,~EPORT PAGE 24 P183 EXHIBIT C DRC MINUTES DRC COMMENTS: 1. Engineering Department · Existinv~ Dumpster: Existing dumpster is to be moved out of the ROW. If no onsite dumpster location, as a last resort the Engmeering Department may issue an encroachment license to enable the dumpster to be stored in the ROW. 2. Building Department · Bufldin~o Permits: A building permit will be needed for existing illegaI construction. 3. Aspen Sanitation District · Inspection: The applicant must contact our customer service representative ro schedule a site visit/walk-through prior ro issuance of a building permit. We wiI] need to verify our records prior ro the legalization of the changes proposed. Service is contingent upon the District's roles, regulations, and specifications that are on file at the district office. 4. Zoning The Sagewood is an existing multi-family non-conforming use and structure located m the R-6 zone d/strict. The complex, which consists of 11 condominiumized units, does not comply with the use, height requirements, parking or density of the underlying zone district. Outlined below are the non-conformities. Dimensional requirements: Dimension Required (R-oD Required (RMF) Proposed Floor Area NCU* 1:1 I8344.5 sq. ft.) 10860 sq. ft Height 25' 25' 32' Parking NCU* 18 9 (exist/ag) Density NCU* 19,800 sq. ft 8344 sq. ft. *Non-conform/ag Use The applicant ts proposmg to remedy these non-conformities by rezoning ro RFM. which will grant relief from the non-conforming use status, and by go/ag through the PUD process to establish the dimensional requirements proposed above. Residential Design Standards: SAG EWOOD CON DOMINI brivl S STAFF t~EPORT PAGE 25 P184 Since there will be no substantial change to the exterior, of the building the residential design standards do nor apply at this time. Impact fees: There are no applicable impact fees with the project. Lighting Code: All exterior lighting must comply with Section 26.575.150 of the Land Use code. Illegal Construction: The enclosure of seven of the balconies to date has been done without proper permits, inspections and approvals. The applicant(s) will be required to submit the necessary perm/rs to "formalize" the enclosures and ensure compliance with life, health and safety requirements. SAGEWOOD CONDOMINIUMS STAFF I~EPOR'I - PAGE 26 EXlCIIBIT D APPrOVeD P&Z R~SO~N RESOLUTION NO. , (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO LEGALIZE THE EXISTING NON- CONFORMING DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS AND TO EXPAND THF ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA AND AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP REZONING THE SUBJECT PARCEL FROM R-6 TO R/MF FOR THE PROPERTY FULLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED EXHIBIT ~. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2 73 7-182-29121 WHEREAS, the Comm~mity Development Department received an application from the Sagewood Condominium Association (Applicant), requesting approval of a Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map as described in attached Exhibit Al: and, WHEREAS. the Community Development Deparrmem received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, and Building, as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral 'comments, and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Department recormnends approval of the Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map for the Sagewood Condominiums; and, WltEREAS. the City of Aspen Planfrfing and Zbning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approvals of the development proposal are consistent ~vith the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of pnblic health, safety, and welfare; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommends City Council approve the Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map, by a vote of to (_ - _); and, NOW. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THE 8m DAY OF APRIL 2003, THAT: P186 Section 1 P~trsuant to the procedm:es and standards set forth in Tide 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Sagewood Condomini~uras, parcel identification of 2737-182-29121, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the proposed Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map, subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD Agreement and Amended PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 2. Prior to issuance of any building permit for any improvement to the building, the applicant shall submit building elevations and design details showing the design of all f~tture balcony enclosures as approved by the Sagewood Condomimum Association. The design shall be approved by the Community Development Director. Building permit applications shall conform to the approved design. 3. The applicant shall file a Notice of PUD in the Clerk and Recorders office of Pitkin Cotmty subsequent to receipt of a development order, or prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. Prior to sign-off on any future building permns, the owners of ilIegal balcony enclosures shall be required ro submit the necessary permits to the Aspen Building Department to anthorize the deck enclosures to ensure compliance with life. health and safety requirements 5 The existing dumpster shall be moved ont of the Right-of-Way (ROW) and onto the applicant's property and shown on the Final PUD Plan. If no adequate on-site dumpster location can be found, then an encroachment license from the City of Aspen Engineering Department shall be necessary to allow the dumpster to be stored m the ROW. This shall be completed prior to sign-off of any building permits for improvements to the building requiting a building permit. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall contact the customer serwce representative for the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to schedule a site visit/walk-through. 7. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall, contact the Community Developmem Department to review the outdoor lighting. Any outdoor lighting that is determined by the Department to be mn of compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance of the City of Aspen, such lighting will be required to brought unto compliance at that time. Section 2: All material, representations and commkmems made by the applicant prursuant m this application, whether in.public heatings or doctumentation presented before the Planning and P187 Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such-plan approvals Md the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an anthorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceed'rog now pending trader or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded trader such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jmdsdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separme, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AT ITS REGULAR MEETING ON THIS 8TM DAY OF APRIL, 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jaclde Lothian, Deputy City Clerk P188 EXHIBIT E P&Z MINUTES P&Z Minutes had not been completed yet at the time of the printing of this report. Once they are available, staff will forward them by email. Sorry for the inconvenience. P189 City of Aspen -' New Council Orientation 6/7/01 Noon - 4:00 Steve's office Agenda Topics 12:00- 12:10 City Charter JW 12:10 - 12:20 Council Rules and Regulations JW 12:20 - 12:45 Liability and Litigation Issues JW 12:45 - 12:55 Hearing Procedures JW 12:55 - 1:05 Conflict of Interest JW 1:05 - 1:15 Council Badgers SB 1:15 - 1:25 Council Board Appointments KK 1:25 - 1:35 City Boards and Commissions KK 1:35 - 1:45 Meeting Schedu/e and Agenda Review KK/SB 1:45 - 1:55 Outcome Measures SB 1:55 -2:05 Communication with City Staff SB 2:05 - 2:15 City Business - Travel, Reimbursement, SB Phones, CompuTers, Office, etc. 2:15 - 4:00 Tour of City Facilities SB G/Council/councilorientation P 190 P191 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Phil Overeynder. Utility Director~Q~~' THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager THRU: John Worcester. City Attorney DATE: June 3. 2003 RE: Water Shortage Declaration SUMMARY: A drought emergency declaration remains in effect on a statewide basis despite improvements in precipitation, snowpack runoff, and reservoh' storage over the preceding year. Although water supply for 2003 is anticipated ro be adequate ro meet the needs of City water customers, staff recommends a voluntary water conservation program (Stage [ Water Shortage) similar to 2002, A number of improvements are recommended ro the voluntary program ro improve performance and close loopholes for raw water deliveries. Since adequate supplies are expected locally, it is a maner of policy for Council to decide whether to support statewide water conservation efforts through the recommended voluntary program. A water conservation target of 10 % from pre-drought levels is proposed. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council declared a Stage I tvoluntary) drought during the 2002 irrigation season. Also during 2002. Council reviewed and revised the Municipal Code sections dealing with water shortages adding specific water conservation targets and revising the list of acceptable methods to achieve a 10% water use reduction As parr of the Stage I drought declaration. Council adopted a temporary water rare surcharge on excess water use. The charges on excess water use generated an est/mated $200,000 in unplanned revenue. During 2002 Council authorized a water refund program for those customers that met targeted water use levels, awarded approximately 1365 customers with either $60 or $90 refunds and appropriated the use of $188.000 for the refund program, Council held a work session on April 29 to consider direction for water restrictions during the 2003 irrigation season and directed staff ro proceed with a program similar to that used in 2002, with certain modifications, BACKGROLrND: The Governor declared a statewide drought emergency in 2002 and asked for the cooperation of all local governments in reducing water use. While 2002-2003 water supplies have n'nproved water supply for the upcoming summer, reservoir storage statewide remains low fo/lowing four dryer than average years The Governor's drought emergency designation is expected to remain in place through the summer irrigation season. P192 DISCUSSION: 2003 Water Supply Outlook - Snowpack levels measured in inches of "snow water equivalent" typically reach the max/mum level in the Upper Roaring Fork at the end of second week of April. On that date this year. the Independence Pass site was 98 % of the 31-year average for that same date. The City bases water supply plarming on a worse case year. such as 1977 Runoff for 2002 approximated conditions for the worse case year, yet surface supplies available to the City from Castle and maroon Creeks were more than adequate to meet water demand. Close to average streamfiow conditions are expected for 2003. Statewide. the situation is different_ because most communities rely on reservoir storage from wetter that average years to provide their supply during dry cycles. Four years of below average runoff has depleted reservoir storage to the point that an average runoff year will not erase the storage deficit Therefore. most communities are continuing with mandatory water conservation plans. The largest suppliers are limiting landscape irrigation to twice per week. with strict limits on watering times. System Improvements - In addition to unprovements in the water supply outlook, Aspen has constructed an additionai well that is capable of supplying approximately 25 % of the summer water demand without directly tapping area streams. Statewide Considerations - Colorado's system of administration of water rights sets up a system which would allow downstream irrigators in the Grand Valley to benefit from reduced water demand in the Upper Roaring Fork during the latter portion of the irrigation season. Indirectly, this would also benefit Front Range communkies who could then maintain reservoir storage ar a higher level. Communities acting collectively to reduce demand would make a difference m the statewide water supply, although there is no mandate: for such actions under Colorado Law. However. Council should consider that future reqnests for water transfers. such as the Salvation Ditch transfer requested in 2002. may be dependent on the extent of coopei'ation on statewide water shortage xssues Effectiveness of 2002 Water Conservation Program - The water conservation program implemented in 2002 received widespread community support and was effective in reaching the goal of a 10% overall reduction in water usage. A high percentage of water users kept water use at or below target levels and received refunds for participation in the conservation effort The message did not reach some customer groups and there are still significant portions of water users that would prefer ro pay the surcharge rather than cut back consumption, or are simply indifferent to the need to conserve water. A public perception that the drought is over because we received average snowfall and a solid spring runoff will make getting the conservation message across more difficult. Some communities with water supply conditions simiiar to Aspen are opting m eliminate even voluntary restrictions. This includes some valley jurisdictions such as Glenwood Springs. There were uneven results for conservation measures used ar City facilities, parks, and open areas. Users of the Thomas Raw Water System were not responsive to repeated requests for voluntary conservation {every other day watering). The price structure for the current delivery imposes no incentive for water conservation. P193 Time of Use Restrictions - During 2002. the City encouraged 'an "odd/even" watering schedule based on street address. Many residents felt that a fixed schedule specifying the day of the week by address would be more easily managed using commonly available sprinkler control systems, rather than the "odd/even" system. Options Presented - Options presented for Council for 2003 included no acnon, replicating the controls in effect during 2002, and adding a number of additional water use restrictions to the program in place during 2002. After consideration, Council agreed with staff's recommendation to implement a program similar to last year's with a number of refinements. The suggested water conservation target is a 10% reduction over pre-drought water usage. The major impetus for conservation is reduced statewide reservoir storage and the contribution communities acting together can make towards improving water storage. CURRENT ISSUES: Staff has approached CORE with a proposal that they operate a water conservation program. They are receptive to carrying out a program analogous to "REMP (Renewable Energy Mitigation Program) oriented to water rather than energy. Suggested elements of this program are included in Attachment 2. The CORE Board is scheduled to meet in early June and will be considering this request from the City provided Council enacts a Stage I water shortage. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The excess water use charges in 'effect during the 2002 irrigation season generated nearly $200,000 in unanticipated revenue, despite a ~rop m water sold. Actual refunds amounted to approximately $100,000, leaving nearly 50% of the added funding available for other conservanon efforts proposed. If similar results are achieved in 2003. carry over funds, together with unplanned 2003 revenue would allow for approximately $100,000 in water refunds and $150.000 in water conservation projects/rebates. These increased revenues and expenditures would require a supplemental budget approval by Council. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends declaration of a Stage 1 Water Shortage. Staff believes it ~s appropriate to support statewide conservation efforts and that experience with the 2002 program should be used [o improve the performance of water conservation efforts. It also belleves that using a valley wide organization such as CORE to administer rebate programs would improve performance and the long term potential for measurable results. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution ~ I . enacting a Stage I Water Shortage CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ~ ~-;?r-~ Attachments: 1 - Recommended 2003 Water Conservation Program 2 - Potential Water Efficiency Rebates/Projects 3 - Excess Water Rate Charges ?194 ATTACI~EVIENT 1 2003 WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM Objective Reduce water consumption over the summer irrigation season by 10% when compared to pre-drought consumption levels. General Description This option would use same program that was in effect during the 2002 irrigation season with a number of modifications designed to improve program performance and close loopholes that have been noted with experience from the first year ir was in effect. Program Elements Existing Stage I Drought Provisions Temporary rate surcharge on excess water use (individualized water budget) · Voluntary odd/even watering schedule · Excess revenue from surcharges to pa~ for water refunds for customers meeting individualized water use targets · City facilities - 10% reduction in water use through administrative order o Golf Course - 10 % reduction in krigated area (priority areas preservedl o Street washing at 50% of normal frequency City Parks reduce consumption by 10% · Public education through advertisements, notices/press releases Proposed Elements (new) · Portion of drought surcharge revenue to water efficiency rebates projects administered through CORE ,'see list of potential rebates/projects> · City Facilities Pay for excess water use in similar manner re other customers ,most City water use is not billed- only excessive use is proposed to be billed · Impose excess water use charges on raw water customers on basis similar to potable water customers · Implement soil preparation, landscaping criteria (species selectionJ contained in section 8.40 of building code for new construction · Enforce limkations imposed through PUD requirements for maximum lot area to be irrigated (new development~ · Construct "filler stations" using access codes to limit use of water for construction sites, etc. . [eliminate unauthorized usage) P195 ATTACHMENT 2 POTENTIAL WATER EFFICIENCY REBATES/PROJECTS Proposal This program element is intended to operate in a similar manner to the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program, which is currently administered by CORE. The focus would be to implement projects which will reduce water consumption and improve water use efficiency. Both public and private projects will be considered for implementation. Those projects achieving greater returns in terms of water conservation will be considered for early implementation. The funding source for these projects or rebate programs ~vill be water rate surcharges imposed during drought conditions or at other times determined appropria/e by the Aspen City Council. Other jurisdictions would be encouraged to join the program to gain economies of scale and efficient use of time in semng up and administering water conservation efforts. Potential Projects* · Rebate program for water efficient appliances (added to existing energy efficiency rebates) · Rebate program for Iow flush toilets · Acceleration of Golf Course xeriscaping project (increased funding would reduce the time frame to retrofit g01f course · Rebate prografn for removal of turf and replacement with xeriscape materials · Rebate for expanded use of "E-T" computerized control equipment used in irrigation · Automated lock-out filler stations for construction uses *Note: Water conservation projects qualifying for City financial participation do not include any required elements of land use or building permit approvals. P196' ATTACI-~¥IENT 3 EXCESS WATER RATE CHARGES SUMMER 2003 STAGE ONE WATER SHORTAGE Objective: Reduce water usage through a combination of voluntary limits on lawn irrigation (odd- even watering), public education, and temporary water rates which encourage efficient use of water. The temporary wa~er rares are structured in an inverted block scheduled and are detailed as follows: Pre-Drought Rates Monthly Small Single Median Single Large Single (Summer Months) Usage Per Family Family Family ECU~ (1.7 ECU) (2.2 ECU) (3.5 ECU) $1,1682 per 1,000 gal. I~ 30,000 gal. 1*t 51,000 gal. 1~ 66,000 gal. 1~ 105,000 gal. $1.7527 per 1,000 gal. > 30,000 gal. >51,000 gal. > 66,000 gal. > 105,000 gal. Proposed Temporary Excess Water Use Rates (Sta ge 1 Drought-Summer 2003) Monthly Small Single Median Single Large Single Proposed Rates Usage Per Family Family Family ECU (1.7 ECU) (2.2 ECU) (3.5 ECU) $1.1682 per 1,000 gal. 1s~ 7,500 gal. Is~ 12,750 gal. 1st 16,500 gal. 1~ 26,250 gal. $1 per 1,000 gal. 15,000 gal. 22,500 gal. 33,000 gal. 52,52,500 gal. $2.3364 per 1,000 gal. > 15,000 gal. > 22,501 gal. > 33,000 gal. > 52,500 gal.i Comparison to Pre-Drought Rates-Median SF Residence Consisting of 2.2 ECUs Consumption Regular Aspen Rates" Proposed Temporary Rates2 15,000 ~gal. $29.67 $29.67 30,000 gal. $47.20 $55.08 60,000 gal. $82.24 $123.42 - 90,000 gal. $117.29 $193.51 120,000 gal. $152.33 $263.60 ECU = capacity unit measuremem Total water.bill incl. uding service charge. Aspen rares, assumes customers in Billing Area 1 (original townsite~ P197 RESOLUTION # 5/ (Series of 2003) A RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT A STAGE ONE WATER SHORTAGE CONDITION EXISTS IN ASPEN. COLORADO. AND SETTING FORTH WATER USE CONTROLS TO REMAIN IN EFFECT DURING THIS CONDITION AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT ADMINSTRATIVE ORDERS TO LIMIT WATER USE IN CITY FACILITIES. WHEREAS. the Governor has declared a statewide drought emergency condition and solicited the cooperation of local governments to limit water use: and WHEREAS. the Statewide Drought declaration is based upon the advise and input of the Colorado Water Conservation Board and the Colorado State Engineers office; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen has established procedures to guard against potential shortages m ~ts water supplies pursuant to Municipal Code Section 25.28.020; and . WHEREAS. the City of Aspen wishes to encourage its residents and water customers to conserve available water supplies through temporary adjustment in water rates. NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby declares that a Stage One water shortage condition exists in City of Aspen. Colorado. It is further resolved by the City Council that the temporary water rates contained in Section 25.28.40 of the Municipal Code will be in effect for the duration of the water shortage declaration, beginning from the June meter read. starting with water consumed after June 10. 2003. through the October 2003 meter read. Dated: Helen Kalin Klanderud. Mayor P198 I, Kathryn S. Koch. 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. June 10, 2002. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council FROM: Michelle Bonfils, City Project Manager TI-LRU: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE: June 4, 2003 RE: Burlingame Ranch - Access Road Options SUMMARY: Staff has pursued negotiations with the Soldner family regarding a west access road through their properzy. Whereas the preliminary estimate for a westerly access route through Soldner property is approximately $300,000 less than the easterly alignment, this preliminary estimate does not account for the specific requests of the SoIdner's for a landscaped buffer. Whereas specifics on acceptable types of trees have not been negotiated, a rough estimated cost for the landscape buffer could be approximately $4.000 or more plus labor. PREVIOUS COLrNCIL ACTION: May 2003 Co~mcil directed Staff to initiate negotiations with the Soldner family regarding a possible land swap allowing the proposed Burlingame Ranch access road to cross the north westerly section of their property. Staff met with the Soldner family, and found that they were amenable ro a land trade and alignment of tl~e access road through the northwest corner of their property. Of major concmm to the Soldner's is development of a landscape buffer between their property and the access road - the exact design and cost of which is to be determined. BACKGROUND: In January 2003, Council informally decided to pursue aligning the access road to the eas~ of the Soldner property. This informal decision was based on the cost estimate completed by Turner, Collie & Braden that stated that the westerly alignment (without acqmrmg any portion' of the Soldner property) might cost upwards of $iM more than aligning the access road and associated path to the east. In follo~ving months, John Lifton [representing the Bar/X Ranch', stated his disagreement w/th the cost estimate and urged Council co revisit the issue. In April 2003. Staff distributed a memo to Council descr/bing the findings of additional estimating and design issues on the westerly alignment compared to previous estimates and design issues on both the westerly and easterly alignments. DISCUSSION: Two access road solutions remain -(1.~ east of SoIdner's, and (2.) west of Soldner's through Soldner property. The pricing for each option could be equitable dependent on design features, i.e. landscape bu~'fe~iqng, additi6nal engineenng fees. Following are the opportunities and constraints of each option: 1. Easterly Alignment (through the Bar/X Ranch Meadow) $930.120 a. Requires a gate or similar mechanism to restr/ct affordable housing traffic from traveling on New Stage Road in front of the Maroon Creek Club. b. Requires a golf maintenance vehicle path to be created along Stage Road. c. Requires landscaping treatment along easemem. d. Keeps traffic away from Back Bowl of Deer Hill e. Relatively straight and simple access from Stage Road f. Allows ex~sting neighbors of development option of gated intersection or new intersection. P200 MEMORANDUM 2. Westerly Alignment (including Soldner property} $620.863 + Btndscaping ($4,000-$8,000) ~- Engineering ($30,000-$60,000) a. ]Eliminates need for gate or similar traffic controlling mechanism at New Stage Road in front of' the Maroon Creek Club b. Clearly separates traffic atlowed to access New Stage Road. -~ c. May or may not reduce light pollution from traffic omo Soldner property. d. The Maroon Creek Club may challenge based on concerns of light pollution impacts e. Creates a more ~meresnng trail from the affordable housing to Highway 82. f. Introduces traffic near the back bowl area and greater opportunity for "bandit trails" in or around the back bowl. g. Requires property acquisition from the Soldner's. h. Propervd acquisition from Soldier's will delay schedule. i. Design documents for this alignment will cause a minimum 45~day delay. j. Associated costs ofadditionaI design documems. k. Potentially requires a limited amount of retaining wails. L This alignment is a modification of Lifton's proposal that split the path and the road. m. Soldner's have requested extensive landscaping of mature trees to segregate road from property. Specific financial impacts unkno;vn at this time FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The design documents for the easterly alignmem are completed. Council's original schedule was to b/,d the infrastructure design documents for construction in June 2003. However, design documents of a westerly alignment will require additional engineering consultant fees, possibly between $30.000 - $60,000 and will retard the schedule an additional 45 da5 s or more. Similarly, if the road is aligned to the west, the Soldner family ~s imerested in screening the road from view of their proper~y with landscaping. Rough estimates for mature caliper trees ~ measuring 2.5 inches in diameter, 8 to 15 feet tail) are approximately $350 per tree. or $4.000 ptus labor to landscape 120 feet along the Soldner property. It has not been negotiated if this is an acceptable amount of landscaping and/or an acceptable tree type. Lastly additional title work will be required. RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests direction from City Council. ALTER_NATIVES: A detail of the alternatives was described in the April 2003 memorandum. PROPOSED MOTION: No motion is required, only direction for Staff for work within. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ~e es'drooled cost to pave a parking lot for 55-60 tars was $41,380..Hines gave this money :o the City. in Yanuary 2002 and it ~vas deposited with the Park~ Depar~men;. The parking lot is now larger as is the facility and the projected cost is now $54,330, for an increase of $1 :,2.0. We have made changes to the parking lot .in order to keep this amo~m~ To a mImmum. For example, car traffic will predominate at this lot. with some bus drop-off. The City of Aspen Streets Department has recommended malntainLug a asphak thicianess at the turn end, with 3" ali other areas. This approach will save approximately $7,000.00 versus the using 4" theoughou~. Option~: Two options Wo~uld be to either fund the entke cost of~e parkin~ lot from ?ark~ ~nc}in~ sources, or to merely gravel the parking lo~ and not us~ asphalt. The later option would require more long ~erm maintenance. Xecotnme~clatio~: Grand P,.iver has been able to maintain ~e ~u-~it pricin~ provided last year. They are fa.miliar with the project and general con~ractor, and have a~eed to set aside a place in their spring (early ~une) constructinn schedule for this prolect The R. ecreation' Depanmen~ will manage off-site poi'king for the 1-2 day perio'd of work. Staff is recommending that Council approve the conzrac~ as presented, and approve the additional funds for the Parking lot ~om the excess property rexes dedicated to this projec~.