Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20010320 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2001 4:15 PM PUBLIC DISCUSSION WITH STAFF 4:30 PM SISTER CITIES ROOM I. ROLL CALL II. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Public II. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST III. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING A. BAVARIAN FINAL PUD, JOYCE OItLSON, CONTINUED FROM 3/6 HI. OTHER BUSINESS A. UPDATE REPORT RE. BURLINGAME HOUSING COWOP PROJECT V. ADJOURN EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT 26.84.030.B.1 Review Standards: Final PUD The proposed development must comply with the following general requirements: A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed development is consistent with the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) . The 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan calls for increased density within the community growth boundary. Specifically, it states: "To conserve resources, an Aspen Community Growth Boundary has been identified. The City agrees to accept greater density within the boundary in exchange for preservation of important open space in outlying County and key parcels in the City, maintaining the separation between communities, and prevention of sprawl." This parcel is clearly inside the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and has not been identified as a key preservation parcel in the City. In addition, the Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan calls for developing citizen housing within the metro area, near available public mass transit, in an area that will not promote additional development or sprawl, and in a location with available public facilities and urban services. This site meets all of these criteria. The Plan also calls for the development of citizen housing to be compatible with the existing neighborhood character and environment. Staff believes the density and size of the buildings are compatible with the existing neighborhood and environment considering the mixed densities of housing found throughout the neighborhood. Staff believes this criterion is met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposed development for multi -family housing on this site would be consistent with the character of existing land use in the surrounding area. Staff finds the proposal to be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Surrounding developments include: the Klein duplex on the southeast corner of 8th and Bleeker (adjacent and contiguous to Parcel 1); the Villas at Aspen across 8th Street to the west and northwest; Bleeker Place condominiums across Bleeker Street to the north; single-family residences across 7th and Bleeker Streets to the northeast and east; the Christian Science Reading Room then the Hickory House restaurant across 7th Street to the east; the West Hopkins Affordable Housing to the southeast; and, single-family residences across Main Street to the south. There is also an FEW EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE MOUSING PROJECT existing single-family residence (the Long residence) on the northwest corner of 7th and Main, adjacent and contiguous to Parcel 2. (See Vicinity Map attached as Exhibit C . ) The Villas at Aspen and Bleeker Place are both multi -family condominium complexes, while the other surrounding uses include single-family homes and duplexes, as well as commercial/ office uses. The proposal includes four multi- family residential structures of various sizes to be consistent and compatible with the existing single-family, duplex, and multi -family residences located on the adjacent properties. With staffs recommended changes to the site plan, the units would all be oriented and designed to have front porches face adjacent streets and contribute to the streetscape in a positive way. Each facade would be modulated in plan and elevation to create interest, scale, and massing which is compatible with the character of the surrounding residential uses. The site design would preserve significant tree clusters, maintain view corridors from some of the neighboring developments, and enhance the pedestrian experience along streets adjacent to the property. Staff believes this criterion is met. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development of the surrounding area. The surrounding area is mostly built out. Staff believes this criterion is met. 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. Staff Finding This project does not require a GMQS allocation. The proposed affordable housing units are exempt from the City's growth management quota system subject to compliance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority's guidelines. City Council must grant the exemption for the affordable housing units. Staff believes this criterion has been met. B. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Staff Finding A sub -section of the above -cited standard requires that the density of a PUD be reduced if the site contains areas with slopes in excess of 20%; however, no such reduction is required as both Parcel 1 and 2 are essentially flat. Thus, the entire square footage of Parcels 1 and 2 is available for density calculation A-2 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT purposes. Under the R-MF zoning, the proposed development program for Parcel 1 requires a minimum lot area of 6,800 square feet while the Parcel 2 development would require a minimum lot area of 9,200 square feet. Both of these figures are significantly less than each parcel's available lot area of 18,050 square feet, meaning sufficient land area is available to accommodate the project's proposed density. Staff believes this criterion is met. C. The land uses permitted shall be those of the underlying zone district. Detached residential units may be authorized to be clustered in a zero lot line or row house configuration, but multi- family dwelling units shall only be allowed when permitted by the underlying zone district. Staff Finding The R-MF zone district lists multi -family units as a permitted use. Again, multi -family residential uses are not permitted under the existing R-15 zoning of Parcel 2; consequently, the PUD approval is fully contingent/conditioned upon approval of the rezoning request. Staff believes this criterion is met. D. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district; provided, that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including view planes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash area access; i. Internal floor area ratio; and, j. Minimum percent open space. Staff Finding The proposed development complies with all of the dimensional requirements of the R-MF zone district with the exceptions of minimum rear, front and side yard setbacks. Savanah is requesting the following setback variances: 1) A 4-foot variance in the 10-foot rear yard setback to accommodate a small portion of the existing Bavarian Inn. This variance would remove the structure's nonconforming status. 2) A 7-foot variance in the 10-foot rear yard setback to accommodate the proposed duplex building to preserve two (2) large existing trees. 3) A 2-foot and 4-foot variance in the required 10-foot front yard setback of the proposed Main Street and Eighth Street multi- family structures. A-3 E=BIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT 4) A 2-foot variance in the 5-foot side yard setback on the west side. Staff believes the proposed setback variances are appropriate for this site and project. E. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on . . . [six enumerated] considerations. Staff Finding The Applicant is not proposing any variances for off-street parking for this project. Savanah would provide 31 spaces for the 19 affordable housing units, satisfying the Land Use Code requirements for this project. This requirement also complies with the Special Review Criteria for establishing affordable housing parking. Staff believes this criterion is met. F. The open space requirement shall be that of the underlying zone district. However, a variation in minimum open space may be permitted if such variation would not be detrimental to the character of the proposed planned unit development (PUD), and if the proposed development shall include open space for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD through a common park or recreation area. Staff Finding The Applicant is not proposing any variation in the required open space provision for Parcels 1 and 2. The Land Use Code requires the provision of 6,320 square feet of open space for each parcel. Savanah is proposing 6,840 square feet of open space on Parcel 1 and 8,640 square feet of open space on Parcel 2. Staff believes this criterion is met. G. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which. exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces. It shall provide an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species that are regarded as suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding The proposed conceptual landscape plan has been revised pursuant to condition number of the approving resolution to better address this standard. The City's Parks Department is supportive of the proposed final landscape plan with several conditions of approval listed in the draft resolution and referral agency comments. Staff believes this criterion is met'. A-4 ExHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT H. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency in the proposed development, architectural character, building design, and the preservation of the visual character of the city. It is not the purpose of this review that control of architectural character be so rigidly enforced that individual initiative is stifled in the design of a particular building, or substantial additional expense is required. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, upon the appropriate use of materials, and upon the principles of harmony and proportion of the buildings with each other and surrounding land uses. Building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion. Staff Finding The application package includes a site plan as well as architectural elevations and perspectives (see Attachment 1). The proposed architecture complies with all provisions of the City's Residential Design Standards, Section 26.58.040. No changes to the exterior of the existing Bavarian Inn structure are proposed with the exception of new paint and finishes. Some people would like to see the exterior of the Bavarian Inn remodeled and made to be more compatible with the architecture of the proposed structures, but others feel that the existing architecture adds to the eclectic nature of Aspen's architectural tradition and should be retained. The proposed structures have been designed to be compatible with one another, but not identical or repetitive. The town homes have principal windows facing the street and have been broken into primary and secondary masses by varying their textures and wall planes, and by employing dormers to vary the roof forms in an effort to maximize consistency and compatibility with existing residential structures on adjacent parcels. In general, the designs are of a contemporary nature yet compatible with each other and the visual character of the city. They use flat roofs as proposed by the neighbors while providing windows, decks and front porches. Staff believes the materials, colors, textures, and patterns are appropriate for the alpine environment and consistent with those typically used throughout the City's history. This criterion states that "building design should minimize disturbances to the natural terrain and maximize the preservation of existing vegetation, as well as enhance drainage and reduce soil erosion." Staff believes this specific criterion will be met with the proposed conditions of approval. Staff believes this criterion is met. I. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding A-5 ExHIBIT A► THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT According to the application, all exterior lighting within the proposed development has been designed to minimize adverse impacts on neighboring development and the adjacent public street system. In addition, the projects exterior lighting has been limited to such fixtures as are reasonably required to provide safe pedestrian and vehicular access to the site. The Lighting Plan submitted in the application appears to meet this standard. Staff recommends a more detailed lighting plan be approved by the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of building permits. Staff believes this criterion is met with the condition of approval. J. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding Given that this criterion does not mandate clustering, but instead encourages it, staff feels that the spirit of the criterion is met with the proposed development plan. K. The proposed development shall be designed so that adequate public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development at the time development is constructed, and that there will be no net public cost for the provision of these public facilities. Further, buildings shall not be arranged such that any structure is inaccessible to emergency vehicles. Staff Finding All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. Existing utilities in the immediate site area include water, sewer, electric, telephone, natural gas and cable television. Emergency vehicle access to the site would be provided via the adjacent public street system and the private access driveway on Parcel 2. The submitted application represents that all costs associated with the installation or upgrading of required public facilities and utilities will be borne by Savanah, and that all utility extensions will be located underground with appropriate easements dedicated to the various public and private utilities, as required. Existing utility pedestals will be relocated from the alley right-of-way as will be required, and potential locations for new and/or relocated utility pedestals and electric transformers are identified on the proposed site development plan. Fire hydrants are conveniently located at the northwest corner of Seventh and West Bleeker Streets, on the west side of Eighth Street near its intersection with West Main Street, and at the northwest corner of West Main and Seventh Streets. Staff recommends a condition of approval be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. Staff believes this criterion is met. EXHIBIT A THE BAVA22IAK INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT L. Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation. U. Every dwelling unit, or other land use permitted in the planned unit development (PUD) shall have 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 Vehicular access to each dwelling unit would be available from the alley, West Main Street, Bleeker Street, Seventh Street, and Eighth Street. Pedestrian access is also provided from these rights -of -way. The existing Bavarian Inn would continue to be served from 7th Street. Turning movements at the east end of the alley would be restricted to right -in and right -out. Left turn movements into and out of the alley from 7th Street and ten 7th Street/ Main Street intersection is signalized. According to the application, Savanah is committed to the installation of traffic signs to regulate traffic circulation in the immediate site area, as discussed in the proposed Bavarian Inn Subdivision/PUD Agreement, Article 2, paragraph 2.2. Staff believes this criterion is met. L2. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the planned unit development (PUD) shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. Staff Finding There are no minor streets within the PUD. As discussed in Ll above, Staff believes this criterion is met. L3. The proposed development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding collector or arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed development has been designed to mini=* e traffic congestion on the adjacent roads. The City's Environmental Health Director submitted the following referral comments concerning traffic: "There will be a fairly small increase in traffic from this proposal, since this is not an application for a new development, but is a redevelopment project, and the uses are similar in terms of traffic generation. To mitigate the increase in trips that will be caused by the project, the applicant has committed to installation of sidewalks for easier pedestrian access throughout the neighborhood, and to paving of access alleys. These measures will offset the PM-10 increases that would otherwise be generated by the project." A-7 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT Staff believes this criterion is met. L4. Every residential building shall be not farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing vehicular access to a public street. Staff Finding As proposed, the development would comply with this standard. L5. All nonresidential land uses within the planned unit development (PUD) shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. Staff Finding There are no nonresidential uses proposed within this PUD. L6. Streets in the planned unit development (PUD) may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent City regulations and ordinances. Staff Finding All relevant streets are already public rights -of -way, and comply with all pertinent City regulations and ordinances. Section 26.04.100 Subdivision Review Standards A. General Requirements a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed development is consistent with the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) . The 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan calls for increased density within the community growth boundary. Specifically, it states: "To conserve resources, an Aspen Community Growth Boundary has been identified. The City agrees to accept greater density within the boundary in exchange for preservation of important open space in outlying County and key parcels. in the City, maintaining the separation between communities, and prevention of sprawl." This parcel is clearly inside the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and has not been identified as a key preservation parcel in the City. In addition, the Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan calls for developing citizen housing within the metro area, near available public mass transit, in an area that will not promote additional development or sprawl, and in a location with available public facilities and urban services. This site meets all of these criteria. A-s EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT The Plan also calls for the development of citizen housing to be compatible with the existing neighborhood character and environment. Staff believes the density and size of the buildings are compatible with the existing neighborhood and environment considering the mixed densities of housing found throughout the neighborhood. Staff believes this criterion is met. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Staff Finding The proposed development for multi -family housing on this site would be consistent with the character of existing land use in the surrounding area. Staff finds the proposal to be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Surrounding developments include: the Klein duplex on the southeast corner of 8th and Bleeker (adjacent and contiguous to Parcel 1); the Villas at Aspen across 8th Street to the west and northwest; Bleeker Place condominiums across Bleeker Street to the north; single-family residences across r7th and Bleeker Streets to the northeast and east; the Christian Science Reading Room then the Hickory House restaurant across 7th Street to the east; the West Hopkins Affordable Housing to the southeast; and, single-family residences across Main Street to the south. There is also an existing single-family residence (the Long residence) on the northwest corner of 7th and Main, adjacent and contiguous to Parcel 2. (See Vicinity Map attached as Exhibit C.) The Villas at Aspen and Bleeker Place are both multi -family condominium complexes, while the other surrounding uses include single-family homes and duplexes, as well as commercial/office uses. The proposal includes four multi- family residential structures of various sizes to be consistent and compatible with the existing single-family, duplex, and multi -family residences located on the adjacent properties. With staffs recommended changes to the site plan, the units would all be oriented and designed to have front porches face adjacent streets and contribute to the streetscape in a positive way. Each facade would be modulated in plan and elevation to create interest, scale, and massing which is compatible with the character of the surrounding residential uses. The site design would preserve significant tree clusters, maintain view corridors from some of the neighboring developments, and enhance the pedestrian experience along streets adjacent to the property. Staff believes this criterion is met. c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development of the surrounding area. The surrounding area is mostly built out. A-9 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HousING PROJECT Staff believes this criterion is met. d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed subdivision is in compliance with all applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. Staff believes this criterion is 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, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snow slide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff Findin:; All appropriate city agencies, including the Parks Department and the City Engineer, were referenced on this application and none reported that the land was unsuitable for development for any reason. Therefore, Staff believes that no natural hazard or other condition on the site would be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. Staff believes this criterion is met. 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 Staff does not believe the proposed subdivision would create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. The required utilities are available to the site, and Savanah is committed to pay for all costs associated with the installation of public improvements to serve the project. Staff believes this criterion is met. C. Improvements. The improvements set forth at Chapter 26.S80 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: A-10 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARuN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT a. 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 community. Staff Finding The Applicant is proposing a development in compliance with the subdivision design standards as demonstrated on pages 44-49 of the application. The referral agencies did not identify any proposed variations from these standards. Staff believes this criterion is met. b. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding The Applicant is proposing a development in compliance with the subdivision design standards as demonstrated on pages 44-49 of the application. Staff believes this criterion is met. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Staff Finding The Applicant is proposing 19 affordable housing units, 40 bedrooms, and 31 parking spaces, w -ich will comply with the requirements of the Replacement Housing Program and Growth Management Quota System. City Council approved the number of units and bedrooms pursuant to Resolution No. 99-94, on December 6, 1999. The Housing Board, at their meeting on March 7, 2001, approved and is recommending to City Council to approve the project as submitted, with the conditions in the draft resolution. Staff believes this criterion is met. E. School Land Dedication. Complia-ace with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. A-11 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE MOUSING PROJECT Staff Finding The Applicant has committed to making a cash -in -lieu payment of school land dedication as required prior to the issuance of building permits; Staff has included this provision as a condition of approval. The Applicant is requesting a waiver from the park development impact fee requirement because this is a 100% affordable housing project. Staff believes this criterion is met. Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Official Zone District Map In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe the initial zoning of this parcel to Residential Multi - Family with a PUD Overlay would be in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. As part of the PUD, the Applicant is requesting several setback variances. Staff believes the appropriate review criteria for those variances has been met. Staff believes this criterion is met. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed development is consistent with the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) . The 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan calls for increased density within the community growth boundary. Specifically, it states: "To conserve resources, an Aspen Community Growth Boundary has been identified. The City agrees to accept greater density within the boundary in exchange for preservation of important open space in outlying County and key parcels in the City, maintaining the separation between communities, and prevention of sprawl." This parcel is clearly inside the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and has not been identified as a key preservation parcel in the City. In addition, the Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan calls for developing citizen housing within the metro area, near available public mass transit, in an area that will not promote additional development or sprawl, and in a location with available public facilities and urban services. This site meets all of these criteria. A-12 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT The Plan also calls for the development of citizen housing to be compatible with the existing neighborhood character and environment. Staff believes the density and size of the buildings are compatible with the existing neighborhood and environment considering the mixed densities of housing found throughout the neighborhood. Staff believes this criterion is met. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The proposed development for multi -family housing on this site would be consistent -with the character of existing land use in the surrounding area. Staff finds the proposal to be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Surrounding developments include: the Klein duplex on the southeast corner of 8th and Bleeker (adjacent and contiguous to Parcel 1); the Villas at Aspen across 8th Street to the west and northwest; Bleeker Place condominiums across Bleeker Street to the north; single-family residences across 7th and Bleeker Streets to the northeast and east; the Christian Science Reading Room then the Hickory House restaurant across 7th Street to the east; the West Hopkins Affordable Housing to the southeast; and, single-family residences across Main Street to the south. There is also an existing single-family residence (the Long residence) on the northwest corner of 7th and Main, adjacent and contiguous to Parcel 2. (See Vicinity Map attached as Exhibit C.) The Villas at Aspen and Bleeker Place are both multi -family condominium complexes, while the other surrounding uses include single-family homes and duplexes, as well as commercial/office uses. The proposal includes four multi- family residential structures of various sizes to be consistent and compatible with the existing single-family, duplex, and multi -family residences located on the adjacent properties. With staffs recommended changes to the site plan, the units would all be oriented and designed to have front porches face a�:'i acent streets and contribute to the streetscape in a positive way. Each facade would be modulated in plan and elevation to create interest, scale, and massing which is .compatible with the character of the surrounding residential uses. The site design would preserve significant tree clusters, maintain view corridors from some of the neighboring developments, and enhance the pedestrian experience along streets adjacent to the property. In addition, existing zoning in the immediate area includes R-6, Medium - Density Residential; R-15, Moderate Density Residential; R/MF, Residential Multi -Family; and O, Office. Staff believes this criterion is met. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. A-13 ExHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE MOUSING PROJECT Staff Finding: Rezoning the property should only have minimal impacts on traffic generation and road safety. The site plan shows adequate parking on -site for the 19 residences, and the proposed access is appropriate for maintaining road safety in the area. Staff believes the proposed development has been designed to minimize traffic congestion on the adjacent roads. The City's Environmental Health Director submitted the following referral comments concerning traffic: "There will be a fairly small increase in traffic from this proposal, since this is not an application for a new development, but is a redevelopment project, and the uses are similar in terms of traffic generation. To mitigate the increase in trips that will be caused by the project, the applicant has committed to installation of sidewalks for easier pedestrian access throughout the neighborhood, and to paving of access alleys. These measures will offset the PM-10 increases that would otherwise be generated by the project." Staff believes this criterion is met. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. Existing utilities in the immediate site area include water, sewer, electric, telephone, natural gas and cable television. The submitted application represents that all costs associated with the installation or upgrading of required public facilities and utilities will be borne by Savanah, and that all utility extensions will be located underground with appropriate easements dedicated to the various public and private utilities, as required. Existing utility pedestals will be relocated from the alley right-of-way as will be required, and potential locations for new and/or relocated utility pedestals and electric transformers are identified on the proposed site development plan. Fire hydrants are conveniently located at the northwest corner of Seventh and West Bleeker Streets, on the west side of Eighth Street near its intersection with West Main Street, and at the northwest corner of West Main and Seventh Streets. The Applicant will be required to mitigate any public impacts that this change causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. A-14 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT School, park (if required), water, sanitation, and other impact fees will be due prior to the issuance of building permits. Staff believes this criterion is met. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe that rezoning the property or the proposed multi -family residential development will create adverse impacts on the natural environment. Although several trees must be removed for the proposed project to be constructed, the removal of the trees will be mitigated. Staff believes this criterion is met. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed rezoning to R/ MF with a PUD Overlay is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen, particularly because rezoning the parcel will allow for affordable housing units to be built in town on a site near mass transit, public facilities and services, etc. The proposed rezoning is consistent with surrounding zoning and existing land uses in the immediate area. Staff believes this criterion is met. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: Two changed conditions have affected the subject parcel which support the proposed rezoning. First, in 1990, Aspen voters were asked to choose between two alternatives for the Aspen Mountain PUD, which included the Ritz Hotel. The option approved by voters included the requirement that the "Developer shall, in good faith, process a land use application for affordable housing suitable for 8 / 1 Oths of an acre known as the Bavarian Inn property." This application is a direct result of that vote, and is a changed condition supporting the proposed rezoning. Second, a condition of Savanah's May, 1998, Section M. Amendment to the Aspen Mountain Subdivision/PUD included a condition that Applicant request a rezoning for this property to develop a suitable affordable housing project. These two actions have affected the subject parcel, which support the proposed rezoning. A-15 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT Staff believes this criterion is met. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe the proposed zoning would be in conflict with the public interest and believes it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Staff believes the rezoning is in the public interest by providing 19 affordable housing units in town. Staff believes this criterion is met. Section 26.64.040.B. Special Review to establish off-street parking for affordable housing. Off-street parking for affordable housing is established pursuant to Special Review. An applicant is required to demonstrate that the parking needs of the prof ect have been met, taking into account: 1. The potential use of the property; 2. Projected traffic generation; 3. Its impact on neighboring on -street parking; and, 4. The project's proximity to mass transit and the City's downtown area. Staff Finding As discussed under the PUD, Subdivision, and Rezoning criteria above, Staff believes the applicant's proposal. to provide 31 off-street parking spaces for the 19 units is appropriate considering the project's location, projected traffic generation, and impact on neighboring on -street parking. The 31 parking spaces is the same amount that would be required under the Land Use Code if the project were free-market residential. No variances from the parking standards are proposed. Staff believes the Special Review criteria have been met. Section 26.470.070 Growth Management Quota System Exemptions. The following types of development are exempt from the growth management competition and scoring provisions of this Title. This exemption is deducted from the respective annual development allotment established pursuant to Section 26.470.040 and from the Aspen Metro Area development ceilings established pursuant to Section 26.470.030. Review is by City Council. J. Affordable housing. All affordable housing deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing designee shall A-16 EXHIBIT A THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT be exempt from the competition and scoring procedures. The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this Section shall include: 1. A determination of the City' s need for affordable housing. 2. The proposed development's compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan, housing sections, and addendum of said plan. 3. The proposed location, number, type, size, rental/sale mix, and price/income restrictions of the affordable housing units. 4. The phasing of affordable housing unit production in relation to impacts being mitigated through such provision. Staff Finding The Applicant is proposing 19 affordable housing units, 40 bedrooms, and 31 parking spaces, which will comply with the requirements of the Growth Management Quota System. City Council approved the number of units and bedrooms pursuant to Resolution No. 99-94, on December 6, 1999. The Housing Board, at their meeting on March 7, 2001, approved and is recommending to City Council to approve the project as submitted, finding that the above criteria have been met subject to conditions in the draft resolution. Staff believes this criterion is met to grant the exemption and granting of 19 affordable housing unit allotments. Section 26.52.080 Vested Property Rights Savanah requests Vested Property Rights for the land use approvals granted by City Council for the site known as the Bavarian Inn property. No specific submission requirements or review criteria are required to apply for or evaluate such a request. Staff Finding Staff believes the Application should be granted Vested Property Rights status for the land use approvals for this property for a period of three years from the date of City Council approval. A-17 MEMORANDUM TO: The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director DATE: March 20, 2001 RE: Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Final Planned Unit Development Public Hearing, Resolution No. , Series of 2001 SUMMARY: The Community Development Department has received a final PUD application from Savanah Limited Partnership to redevelop the site of the Bavarian Inn with for sale deed restricted housing consisting of nineteen (19) affordable housing units, 40 bedrooms and 31 parking spaces on two parcels located between W. Main Street, Seventh Street, Eighth Street and W. Bleeker Street.. More specifically, the Parcel 1 (area north of the alley, see Site Development Plan, Sheet C2 in application) portion of the proposal involves renovating the existing Bavarian Inn structure to include eight (8) units. To the west of the Bavarian Inn structure but still on Parcel 1, the existing cabins would be replaced with a two (2) unit duplex structure. On Parcel 2 (the portion of the property south of the alley,) a four (4) unit townhouse structure would be built to front on Eighth Street (at the intersection of Eighth and Main in place of the existing single-family residence). The other proposed building on Parcel 2 would consist of five (5) townhouse units along the W. Main Street frontage. Specific unit sizes and category types are found on pages 11 through 13 of the application. Currently, Parcel 1 is zoned Residential Multi -Family with a Planned Unit Development overlay (R-MF/PUD) while Parcel 2 is zoned Moderate -Density Residential (R-15). The applicant's Final PUD application includes a request to rezone Parcel 2 in a manner that would be consistent with the R-MF/PUD zoning of Parcel 1 and that would accommodate multi -family residential development. Similarly, the Final PUD application includes requests for Subdivision, Special Review of off-street parking requirements (AH/one space less than required), and a GMQS Exemption approval for AH. The proposed PUD includes variance requests regarding the R-MF zone district's minimum front and rear yard setbacks along 8" St., W. Main St., and the alley. Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Final Planned Unit Development (PUD), Subdivison, Rezoning, Special Review (parking), and the GMQS exemption for affordable housing application with conditions. APPLICANT: Savanah Limited Partnership, represented by Vann Associates, LLC. LOCATION: (See page 4 in application) Parcel 1 of the subject site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Seventh Street and West Bleeker Street, and is legally described as Lots D through I, Block 11, City and Townsite of Aspen. Parcel 2 is located at the northeast corner of Eighth Street and West Main Street, and is legally described as Lots K through P, Block 12, City and Townsite of Aspen. Surrounding developments include the Klein duplex on the southeast corner of 8th and Bleeker (adjacent and contiguous to Parcel 1), the Villas at Aspen across 8th Street to the west and northwest, Bleeker Place condominiums across Bleeker Street to the north, single-family residences across 7th and Bleeker Streets to the northeast and east, the Christian Science Reading Room then the Hickory House restaurant across 7th Street to the east, the West Hopkins Affordable Housing to the southeast, and single-family residences across Main Street to the south. The 7th and Main affordable housing complex is located to the. southeast, in the neighborhood. EXISTING ZONING: • Parcel 1: Residential Multi -Family with a Planned Unit Development overlay. • Parcel 2: Moderate -Density Residential (R-15). PROPOSED ZONING: • Parcel 1: Residential Multi -Family with a Planned Unit Development overlay (no change). • Parcel 2: Residential Multi -Family with a Planned Unit Development overlay. LOT SIZE: The combined property contains a gross area of 36,100 square feet (0.829 acres), where Parcels 1 and 2 each contain 18,050 square feet. The property does not include any access easements, areas below high water line, or slopes in excess of twenty percent; therefore, there are no applicable lot area or density reductions. FLOOR AREA: In the R-MF zone district, the maximum allowable external floor area ratio (FAR) for multi -family structures is 1: 1, which may be increased to 1.1:1 by Special Review (but no such request has been made). Since Parcel 1 is zoned R-MF/PUD and the proposed development consist only of multi -family structures, its maximum allowable external floor area is 18,050 square feet by right (1:1 FAR). Under the proposed development (with the rezoning), both Parcels 1 and Parcel 2 floor areas do not exceed the maximum allowed. BACKGROUND: In the February of 1990 elections, the City of Aspen voters approved Savanah's construction of the Ritz -Carlton Hotel with the understanding (based on ballot language and campaign literature) that Savanah would submit a development application for the construction of an amount of affordable housing "suitable" to the Bavarian Inn 2 property. Submission of an application "suitable to the site" was also a condition of Savanah's May, 1998, Section M. Amendment to the Aspen Mountain Subdivision/PUD. This development proposal gained a recommendation of conceptual approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission and was then granted conceptual approval by the City Council on December 6, 1999. Resolution No. 94, Series of 1999 was adopted by the Council an is found in the application packet as Appendix B. Staff will reference this resolution throughout this report in analyzing how the conditions of approval (as applicable) have been met and how the final plan is in keeping with the conceptual plan. PROCEDURE: As a Final Planned Unit Development application, a two-step process is required with public hearings before, first, the Planning and Zoning Commission and, second, City Council. The Planning and Zoning Commission acts in an advisory nature to the City Council with regard to the PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, and GMQS applications. MAIN ISSUES: Based on the lengthy reviews carried out by Community Development Department Staff (going back to the conceptual stage of this development proposal) and the various referral agencies, Staff s key issues have been addressed through iterations of the conceptual plan. Staffs intent is to focus on the conditions of conceptual approval and how those conditions have been addressed in the final submittal. All review criteria are explained in the PUD/Subdivision/Rezoning review (Exhibit A). 1. Rezoning and Site Suitability As mentioned in the "Background" section of this memorandum (above), in the February of 1990 elections, the City of Aspen voters approved Savanah's construction of the Ritz - Carlton Hotel with the understanding (based on ballot language and campaign literature) that Savanah would submit a development application for the construction of an amount of affordable housing suitable to the Bavarian Inn property. Submission of an application suitable to the site was also a condition of Savanah's May, 1998, Section M. Amendment to the Aspen Mountain Subdivision/PUD. Given that the development of affordable housing is required on the Bavarian site, and that said development is to occur in a manner "suitable to the site," a density greater than that allowed under the R-15 zoning has been anticipated by the voters and the Aspen City Council. The applicant proposes to develop Parcel 1 in a manner consistent with its existing zoning. which is considered "suitable" to the site. On the other hand, a rezoning request is proposed for Parcel 2 in order to accommodate the development of multi- family dwellings. Staff feels comfortable with the rezoning in that other properties, both adjoining and in the vicinity, are developed to a density allowed in the R-MF. The R-MF/PUD zoning is 3 assigned to property adjoining Parcel two and the rezoning does not constitute spot zoning. (Addresses Condition No. l of Reso. No. 99-94) 2. Proposed Site Plan and Layout A great deal of focus was given to the layout of the development especially given the high level of neighborhood involvement attained at the conceptual hearings and the Commission's desire to ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood while gaining as many AH units as possible. It was found desirable to have as much play area/open yard space as possible behind the Bavarian Inn, visible from Bleeker St. The final plan achieves this goal in that building NI and N2 are moved back as far as possible to the setback line (west side) and requiring a setback variance on the alley (south) side. The building placement also allows for another goal of conceptual approval to be met; that of preserving as many trees on the site as possible. By utilizing the footprint of the existing cabin for the N2 unit this can be achieved. Building N2 is still a 2 bedroom unit as required by conceptual approval. There was also a desire to have the building facades maintain an urban form where streets are lined by buildings, not parking lots. This is particularly important at the subject site due to its location as an integral part of the Entrance to Aspen, and since it is located across the street from the start of an Historic District (Main Street Historic District) that epitomizes the type of streetscape desired. This is accomplished by small front yards and units fronting the streets. Parking is located internally within the development with access from the alley. (Addresses Condition No.2 a & b, of Reso. No. 99-94) 3. Parking & Vehicular Access As the proposed development consists solely of deed -restricted affordable housing units, its off-street parking requirements are established by Special Review. Savanah proposes to provide a total of 31 spaces where 32 would be required. This minimum number of 31 spaces was required as a condition of conceptual approval. This parking standard is met in the final submittal. A sign plan is proposed which allows for the management of vehicles at the alley & 7"' St. intersection. Signs allow only right -in only from 7"' and right -out only from the alley. Access to the development from the 8"' St./alley intersection is discouraged by a "Service and Emergecy Vehicle Access Only" (Addresses Condition No.2 c, d & e, of Reso. No. 99-94) 4 4. Bavarian Inn Remodeling A remodeling plan for the Bavarian Inn was requested at conceptual approval. It includes structural power washing of the stucco walls and "the existing roof, windows and wood trim repaired and repainted as necessary". Staff feels this plan falls short of the expectation put forth and requested by the neighborhood; however, the Commission has little authority to require a certain set of tasks (such as new facade materials, new windows, new roof, etc.) to be undertaken to change the appearance of the existing building. Cleaning and painting will definitely improve the buildings looks by making it look fresher and newer. Additional landscaping is slated for the area around the Inn. (Addresses Condition No.2 f, of Reso. No. 99-94) S. Building Height and Roof Type All buildings have flat roofs and the heights comply with the R-MF zone district's twenty-five (25) foot limitation and specifically. The N 1 /N2 building complex and S 1-S 5 building complex shall not exceed 20 feet in height to the top of the roof, and the W2-W5 complex shall not exceed 25 feet in height to the top of the roof. The architecture of the buildings are similar to what was reviewed at the conceptual review stage. The applicant met with the Historic Preservation Commission (in an advisory capacity) to review the architectural design of the proposed structures and to discuss compatibility with the 8"' Street and Main Street neighborhoods and streetscape. Please see the memorandum (Referral Comments) from Fred Jarman, City Planner, summarizing the HPC's thoughts. Staff does not recommend any changes to the architectural design of the buildings. (Addresses Condition No.3 of Reso. No. 99-94) Cabin Relocation Plan The application includes a plan that basically provides for the advertisement of the availability of the cabins. The City's Historic Preservation Officer has accepted this plan as suitable. The cabins are not on the City's landmark list, nor are they within an historic district. (Addresses Condition No.4 of Reso. No. 99-94) Landscape Plan The City's Natural Resource Manager (and forester) has reviewed the proposed landscaping plan and accepts the stock placement and vegetation type. Stephen Ellsperman was very involved at the conceptual stage of review and finds that the relocation and tree protection mechanism proposed should accomplish the tree preservation goals that were put forth by the Commission. 5 (Addresses Condition No.5 of Reso. No. 99-94) Lighting Plan A lighting plan is provided in the application that shows a minimum amount of building - mounted lighting on the site itself. Attached is a cut sheet of the light source that meets the requirements of the lighting code. It should also be noted that public street lighting will be installed along the 8" and W. Main St. frontages as is required. (Addresses Condition No.6 of Reso. No. 99-94) Referral Comments Recommended conditions of the referral agencies are either incorporated into the draft resolution or have been achieved through the Subdivision/PUD agreement or the application itself. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning from R-15 to R-MF/PUD for Parcel 2 and Exemption from GMQS for an affordable housing development. Conditions are contained within the draft resolution. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend that the City Council approve of the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Application for Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning from R-15 to R-MF/PUD for Parcel 2 and Exemption from GMQS for an affordable housing development, with the conditions outlined in Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No._, Series of 2001." EXHIBITS: A - Staff analysis of the proposal relative to the Review Standards B - Memos from referral agencies ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 — Application Attachment 2 — Lighting Cut Sheet 6 a 0 m I I D z co 0 .-4 o z i p i U�0 0 �j p 3 z�w ocn Z' a o • WO�C) co ~ z O Cnaa �- � Incandescent Lamps M J.L.� 1 7, w MasterLine e MasterLine MasterLine" PAR- I6/H PAR-20M (WISO) PAR-30S (WISO) Tungsten Halogen Lamps Class Approximate Product ' and M.Q.L. Hours Number I Ordering Pkg. Watts Bulb Base 046677- Code Volts Qty. Description Filament (in.) Life MBCP' Lumens Masterl-ineTM PAR-16 Halogen Lamps 45 PAR-16 Med. 'SS 26335-0 45PAR16/HAL/NSP10 120 15 FNt 10 Deg. 42 82 86 C, CC-8 3'/5 2000 5000 450 2G338-4 45PAR16/HAL/NSP10 130 15 t 10 Deg.(42)(82 86) C, CC-8 3,!5 2000 5000 450'SJJ 26345-9 45PAR16/HAL/NFL27 120 15 d 27 Dey_ 82 86 C, CC-8 3'/.5 2000 1400 450 SSS 26348-3 45PAR16/HALMFL27 130 15 N. Flood 27 Dey. 42 82 86 C, CC-8 3'�5 2000 1400 450 F SSS 26577-7 BC45PAR161HAL/ 120 6 N. Spot 10 Deg.(42)(82)(86) C, CC-8 3'/5 2000 5000 450 NSP 6/1 S ; 26580-1 BC45PAR16/HAL/ 6/1 120 6 N. Flood 27 Deg.(42)(82)(86) C, CC-8 3�'S 2000 1400 450 NFL 60 PAR-16 Med. ; SSS 33004-3 60PAR16/-lAL/NSP10 120 15 N. Spot 10 Deg. 42 82 8G C, CC-8 3'/5 2000 7500 580 SSS 33005-0 60PAR1fi/HALMSPIO 130 15 N. Spot 10 Deg. 42 82 86 C, CC-8 3'/s 2000 7500 580 n •r^ 33006-8 60PAR16/HALMFL27 120 15 N. Flood 27 Dey.(42 82 86 C, CC-8 3'/, 2000 2000 580 SSS 33007-6 60PAR16/HAL/NFL27 130 15 N. Flood 27 Deg.(42)(82)(86) C, CC-8 3'/s 2000 2000 580 C SSS 21388-4 BC60PAR16/HAL/ fi/1 120 6 N. Spot 10 Deg.(42)(82)(86) C, CC-8 3'/5 2000 7500 580 NSP r;SS 21390-0 BC60PAR16/HAL/ 120 6 N. Flood 27 Deg.(42)(82)(86) C, CC-8 3'/5 2000 2000 580 NFL 6/1 MasterLine PAR-20 alogen Lamps (WISO Reflector) A t Product Pkg. Class and M.O.L. pproxrma e =LifeMBCP- Numer b Nur" 7 - Ordering Code Volts Qhj.'o Description Filament (In.) Lumens Watts Bulb Base 50 PAR-20 Med SSS 50PAR20/HAL/NSP9 120 15 N. Spot 9 Deg. (82)(8G C, CC-8 3'a 2000 6200 32U0 55U 550 22906-2 JJJ 15 82 (8G C, CC-8 C. CC-8 3'/s 3?'s 2000 2000 1400 550 22908-8 50PAR201HAL/SP16 120 22911-2 50PAR20/HAL/NFL30 120 15 15 N. Flood 30 Deg. 82 86, N. Flood 30 82 861 C, CC-8 3'�8 2000 1400 550 S 22921-1 50PAR20/HAL/NFL30 50PAR20MAL/SP 6/1 130 320U 550 24954-0 120 6 po Deg. (82)(86) C, CC-8 33/a 2000 Ike - _I- it,_�_...... r .,....,� nAnQn Rnfiactnrl MasterLine t-Ars-%3v%-j 511y Ordering Code Volts Pkg. Qbj.'o Description - Class and Filament f�1.0.L. (In.) Approximate Lumens Watts Bulb Base Product Number 046677- Hours Life MBCP' 50PAR30S/HALMSP10 120 15 15 15 15 15 N. Spot 10 Deg. 82 86) N. Spot 10 Deg. 82)(86). N. Flood 30 Deg.(82)(86).C, N. Flood 30 Deg. 82 86 Flood 40 Deg. 82 86 Flood 40 Deg. (82)(86) N. Spot 10 Deg. 82 86 N. Spot 10 Deg. 82 8G N. Flood 30 Deg.(82)(86)_C,CC-8 N. Flood 30 Deg. 82 86 Flood 40 Deg. 82 86 Flood 40 Deg. 82 86 N. Spot 10 Deg. 82 86 N. Flood 30 Deg. 82 86 Flood 40 Deg. 82 8G Flood 40 Deg. (82)(86) C, CC-8 C, CC-8 CC-8 C, CC-8 C, CC-8 C, CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 C,CC-8 3' 8 35% T/� 35/e 35/a 35/a 35/a 35/a 3A 35/9 35/s 35/s 35/s 35/a 3a/a 35/s 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2000 2000 2000 2000 8250 8250 1950 1950 1500 1500 10,000 1 U,000 3300 3300 1850 1850 20,000 3900 1900 1900 630 630 630 630 630 630 800 800 800 800 800 800 965 965 965 965 50 PAR-30S Med. ' E S-S E ♦ , E S; S 'EJ ♦ SSS E SSS E'♦ ;5ti 26349-1 26357-4 26358-2 26362-4 26364-0 50PAR30S/HAL/NSP10 50PAR30S/HALMFL30 50PAR30S/HAL/NFL30 50PAR30S/HAL/FL40 130 120 130 120 26384-8 50PAR30S/HAL/FL40 60PAR30S/HAL/NSP10 60PAR30S/HALMSP1 130 120 130 15 15 15 15 15 60 PAR-30S Med. E`S E; ♦ -. c, ' Ei r'SSS E; ♦' ;SSS E� DSSS E , ♦ C'SSS 35751-7 35752-5 35753-3 35788-9 60PAR30S/HAL/NFL30 60PAR30S/HALMFL30 120 130 35758-2 60PAR30S/HAL/FL40 �1215 15 15 15 35762-4 60PAR30S/ItAL/FL40 75PAR30S/HAL/NSP10 75PAR30SMAL/NFL30 120 120 75 PAR-30S Med. 'E , tS (E; tSSS E%tJJS E ♦S;S 28479-4 28488-5 28491-9 75PAR30S/HAL/FL40 120 15 28492-7 75PAR30SMAL/FL40 130 15 Exclusive Philips Product (— SSS —Energy Saving Product 'Maximum Beam Candlepower t New Since Last Printing ♦ For more information when operated at 120V see pages 43-45 i E Means This Bulb Meets US Federal Minimum Efficiency Standard Footnotes located on page 45 38 C' RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FOR THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION TO CREATE NINETEEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, REZONING TO RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT, c29-rr T ALIEW VOu A RVORU A nLr uol Is=Nr. A GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS, W ON LOTS D THROUGH I, BLOCK 11, AND LOTS K THROUGH P, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735.123.08.004 Resolution # 11 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from _14wiwd 1'Q;4ngr.sh}p owner, as represented by Vann Associates, LLC, for a Final Planned Unit Development Plan, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, Growth Management Quota System Exemption and Vested Property Rights approval of a for sale, deed restricted, residential affordable housing development of 19 units, 40 bedrooms and 31 parking spaces on two (2) parcels located between W. Main Street, Seventh Street, Eighth Street, and W. Bleeker Street; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.84.030 of the 1998 Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding requests for Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.04.100 of the 1998 Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding requests for Subdivision approval receipt of recommendations from staff, and after taking and hearing public comment regarding the proposal; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.92.030 of the 1998 Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding requests for an amendment to the zone district map upon receipt of recommendations from staff, and after taking and hearing public comment regarding the proposal; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.32 of the 1998 Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or deny a request for Special Review to establish off-street parking requirements for affordable housing upon receipt of recommendations from staff, and, WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City Water Department, City Engineering, Parks Department, Environmental Health Department, the City Transportation Planner, the City Zoning Officer, the Roaring Fork Transit Agency, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, and the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the above referenced application was legally noticed for a public hearing held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 61h and continued to March 20, 2001, and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a duly noticed public hearing on March 20, 2001, voted _ to _ (_-� to recommend City Council approve the Final PUD Plan, Subdivision, and Rezoning to R/MF PUD, with conditions, and to approve the Special Review to establish 31 off-street parking spaces for the affordable housing units; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission: Section 1: To recommend City Council approve the Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing PUD with the following conditions: 1. If the requested rezoning of Parcel 2 from R-15 to R-MF/PUD is not approved, this PUD approval shall be rendered null and void. 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: 2 a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements, and location of utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character. NWithin 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision/PUD Agreement and �;,,�1 UT TTl Ala„r With the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to � this development approval Inct .=.drK,.ny_Ty-?.xa�^.'�.. rz�r,.:� �.i`zx,m �:.-,..§'�:%r>. ,,.x.:..✓�...:w a,:. �^�.,w..�e're.. � ta,.:�as� �,.,,>yu5.� w.�.�m .o- v:,. _-a°`5 °�� _:, _., a. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary. b. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights -of -way. 4. The dimensional requirements of the PUD shall be the Residential/Multi-Family Zone District's dimensional requirements at the time of City Council's approval of this application, except for the setback variances requested by the Applicant and approved as part of the PUD. These setback variances are for the following: 1) A 4-foot variance in the 10-foot rear yard setback tiei e xis �g bpi cart P�rcef � 2) A 7-foot variance in the 10-foot rear yard setbackxherpra�sed�pe on �a�cel 1 3) A 2-foot and 4-foot variance in the required 10-foot front yard setback of the proposed Main Street and Eighth Street multi -family structures, resp,�cri�re�y, � Pa�rcel�, 4) A 2-foot variance in the 5-foot side yard setback on the west side .,.., .. � ..... ,sr2'ir. ......:..,v...a ....«e.,�.:z.., .5.�..h�k w�s�.s;_z.:. -. w.��..nyz,..u�x;�ama€G as -fir' ate. .�......."..,.� .�:r.�r,.�:�3. �.r �.s.�„ss..�vz,3.z.�.,N•. r,r�"=�.,wz �,�. t.a .-� 54 The Applicant shall 44 gggd faith, aue 1pt w CQQS'=S L=SR'TOC C . 6. The category mix and the size of the units fall within the priorities and Guidelines of the Housing Program, as long as 16% of the Category 3 units are priced at the lower range between Category 2 maximum and Category 3 maximum as stated by the applicant. The prices shall be derived from those stated in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Guidelines in effect at the time the final PUD is approved. 7. Any existing structure that will not be demolished shall fall under the requirements of Part VII, Section 14, Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units, as stated below. The Housing Office shall walk-through the units prior to Certificate of Occupancy. A. If accepted by the City or County, existing units must be upgraded in accordance with the following criteria (unless a variance from these requirements is approved by the applicable governing body upon the recommendation of the APCHA): 1. The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. 2. The interior appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good working condition. 3. Carpet must be less than five years old and be in good condition and repair, or be replaced. 4. the exterior walls shall be freshly painted within one year of dedication. 5. A general level of upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. 6. Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures, and equipment shall be in good and working order. 7. The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten (10) years. 8. All units shall meet Uniform Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequate code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. 9. All units shall be approved by the APCHA and verified by a qualified Building Inspector accepted and approved by the APCHA. 10. Applicant shall bear the costs and expenses of any required upgrades to meet the above standards as well as any structural/engineering reports required by the APCHA to assess the suitability for occupancy and compliance with the APCHA standards of the proposed units. 8. The Applicant, or the applicant's representative, must meet with the Housing Office prior to listing the units for sale to identify the units that would amount to 13 FTE's. These units 0# s be used to house fully qualified employees chosen by the applicant for the initial sale only of the unit. Any sale after the initial sale of these units would be required to be listed with the Housing Office and sold under the lottery process. The employees must qualify as to income, assets, at least four years of full- time employment in Pitkin County, and other requirements stated in the Guidelines defining a "qualified employee." 9. A deed restriction shall be placed on all of the units at the time of Final Plat approval. The deed restriction shall be provided by the Housing Office. 10. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office��tests right to inspect all units for compliance. The five (5) large spruce trees at the corner of the alley and 81h Street must be fenced prior to construction and approved by the City Forester or his designee. The transformer and utility box located on Parcel 2 appears to be very close to the dripline of the eastern most spruce. Any excavation within the dripline of this tree must be hand dug. In addition, the water service lines for the units that face Main Street also appear to have potential conflicts with existing trees. The water service line for unit N2 also appears to be in the path of the trees to be preserved in the lawn area of Parcel W-r-emt- 4 12. The landscape plan show three (3) Cottonwoods for the right-of-way along Main Street. There should be four (4) Cottonwood trees for this area and the City Forester must be contacted prior their planting for exact location and spacing. A gravel pad. appears to be located underneath the 12" Cottonwood at the south east corner of Parcel 2. It is unclear what the need or intention is for this gravel pad. No excavation should occur on that side of the tree due to the excavation that may impact the tree on the other side for the sidewalk construction. A final landscape plan must be submitted with the official tree removal permit with the required adjustments in this approval for the proposed plantings. 13. The sidewalk along Main Street is currently shown to be offset from the property line by approximately one to two feet. The sidewalk should abut the property line to allow for the maximum space for trees and a buffer zone for the new Main Street/Highway 82 entrance to town. The sidewalk may have to curve slightly around the 12-inch cottonwood proposed to be saved. +� 4�.r) ♦ k > 4x .^ "a`Yas. a s "3 3 K "�Y1a.'?wh ik°1,.1 '� ds'M`" .+�£ %� 14. Any irrigation design reposed scar utaatzQheuat� must be approved by the Parks Department prior to installation and should be included as part of a right-of-way permit. 15. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commission having authority to do so. 16. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off -site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. 17. The building permit plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the new buildings, in the event required by the Aspen Fire Marshal. 18. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development 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. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. 19. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. 20. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on -site and not within public rights -of -way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 21. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 22. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 23. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 24. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 25. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. Section 2-- To recommend City Council approve the rezoning to Residential/Multi-Family with a Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone District. Section 3: To recommend City Council approve the Subdivision of nineteen (19) affordable housing units, with the following condition: 1. If the requested rezoning of Parcel 2 from R-15 to R-MF/PUD is not approved, this Subdivision approval shall be rendered null and void. Section 4: To approve the Special Review for affordable housing parking to establish 31 off-street parking spaces, with the following condition: 1. If the requested rezoning of Parcel 2 from R-15 to R-MF/PUD is not approved, this Special Review for affordable housing parking approval shall be rendered null and void. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. This Resolution 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. QPp+inn 7- If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on March 20,2001. APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Robert Blaich, Chair 7 q06 !� V�-- )7tt County of Pitkin I AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT I SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado I SECTION 26.52.060(E) �77 � , being or representing an I, Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following rnanner: By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the day of ,199 (which is days prior to the public hearing date of 2. B posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from Y that the said sin was posted and visible continuously from theG'5 day the nearest public way) sign � 2� f of to the � day of (Must be posted for at least ten 00) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. ignature Signed before me this 11day of 4 by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL IVIy Commission expires: 0/31 /2004 Notary lic , �Cj,•.• • • • . Oil • • C • • too •'co County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado } SECTION 26.52.060(E) I ///,/ , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the 2G day of ,-1 99-. (which is//days prior to the public hearing date of By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the day of )199 , to the day of , 199 . (Must be posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. Si (Attach photograph here) Signed bore me this 15 day of 114 by c�i — WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL MY Commission Expires My Commission expires: 10/31/2004 Notary Public PUBLIC NOTICE RE: BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), SPECIAL REVIEW, REZONING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 6, 2001 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Savanah Limited Partnership (represented by Vann Associates, LLC) requesting Final PUD approval to develop 19 for sale units of affordable housing on the property. The application also includes subdivision, special review (parking) and rezoning of a portion of the property Parcel 1 of the subject site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Seventh Street and West Bleeker Street (legally described as Lots D through I, Block 12, City and Townsite of Aspen). Parcel 2 is located at the northeast corner of Eight Street and West Main Street (legally described as Lots K through P, Block 12, City and Townsite of Aspen). For further information, contact Joyce Ohlson at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5062, or by email at j oyceo@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Bob Blaich, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on February 17, 2001 '. City of Aspen Account g:/planning/aspen/notices/bavinnpz. doc 715 W MAIN LLC 715 W MAIN ST STE #201 AS'' CO 81611 ANZALONE GRACE E PO BOX 3808 ASPEN, CO 81612 BLOMQUIST LINDA LEE 724 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 BREIDENBACH WARREN C #4 WOLF PEN LN PROSPECT, KY 40059 BRUNT FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP PO BOX 304937 ST THOMAS, VI 00803 C 'IAN SCIENCE SOCIETY A;-. 4/SNOWMASS INC 344 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 COULTER G LYNNIE PO BOX L3 ASPEN, CO 81612 DOYLE R & G 10% SEARIGHT P 30% DOYLE R. T III 30% GRIST F 30% 3711 EASTLEDGE DR AUSTIN, TX 78731 EIDSON JOY REVOCABLE TRUST-1/2 EIDSON ARVIN WAYNE REVOCABLE TRUST-1/2 PO BOX 271 SULPHUR, OK 73086 ABBOTT DANNY 138 S SEVENTH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN SQUARE CONDOMINIUM ASSOC 617 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 BONE RANDALL 5526 N LAKE BLVD CARNELIAN BAY, CA 96140 BROWN ALBERT L JR ASPEN QUAL TRUST 50% 1767 E MCMILLAN ST CINCINNATI, OH 45206 BUDSEY NIKIFOR II WABISZEWSKI SUSAN AS JOINT TENANTS 728 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 DAILY KIMBERLY DAWN 814 W BLEEKER PL E2 ASPEN, CO 81611 DRAKE LENIR 100 N 8TH ST UNIT 26 ASPEN, CO 81611-3152 EPSTEIN MARC L REVOCABLE TRUST #1 205 N 6TH ST ASPEN, CO 81611-1103 ANDREWS JUDY D 1043 HIGHLANDER DR SEASIDE, CA 93955-6231 BERGER BRUCE NICOLAS PO BOX 482 ASPEN, CO 81612 BOSSART TODD L 814 W BLEEKER ST #E4 ASPEN, CO 81611 BRUFF SHERLYNNE GUEST & HAROLD H 3875 SPRING VALLEY ROAD BOULDER, CO 80304 BUTLER MARIE 814 W BLEEKER #C-4 ASPEN, CO 81611 COHEN RICHARD A & ELIZABETH A PO BOX 1806 ASPEN, CO 81612 DIETRICH JOHN C DIETRICH ANN S 744 E LAKE ST WAYZATA, MN 55391 EICHNER SAMUEL L EICHNER SUSANA STERN DE FUENTE PIRAMIDES 243 TECAMACHALCO MEXICO CITY, FATAHI AMENEH PO BOX 8080 ASPEN, CO 81612 i 1AN BARBARA S & CHESTER GELLER SCOTT GIBANS JONATHAN P.- - JX 8193 29 BARKLEY CIR PO BOX 8098 ASPEN, CO 81612 FORT MYERS, FL 33907-7531 ASPEN, CO 81612 53950 GLATMAN THEMIS ZAMBRZYCKI GOLDRICH MELINDA GLATMAN BRUCE ROY 706 W MAIN ST 20034 CALVERT ST ASPEN, CO 81611 Wr "AND HILLS, CA 91367 HANLE JEFFREY T & KELLEY J HARPER JAMES R 126 S 7TH ST 150 PALMETTO RD ASPEN, CO 81611 BELLEAIR, FL 34616 HINRICHS NANCY R HOGGATT JERRY S 100 N 8TH ST #2 175 14TH STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70124 HUTCHESON RICHARD L KHALAF ALEXANDER R & FAHIMA PO BOX 161930 408 E HYMAN AVE AUSTIN, TX 78716-1930 ASPEN, CO 81611 KNIGHT GLENDA C KUDISH DAVID J REVOCABLE TRUST PO BOX 328 1325 N ASTOR ST SNOWMASS, CO 81654 CHICAGO, IL 60610 L i JAMES H LARNER JACQUELINE L 15u � MAROON CREEK #11 376 DAHLIA ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80220 LEVINSON BERNICE S LICHTENWALTER GARY R LEVINSON NANCY C/O 350 HOUBOLT RD PO BOX 3190 JOLIET, IL 60431-8305 ASPEN, CO 81612 LONG RICHARD E & LOIS N PO BOX 1314 ASPEN, CO 81612 MANGONE PARTNERSHIP LP 12687 W CEDAR DR #100 LAKEWOOD, CO 80228 LUU INVESTMENTS LLC 435 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MATTHEWS DEE R 5137 52ND ST NW WASHINGTON, DC 20016 HADDON HAROLD A & BEVERLY J 409 21 ST ST DENVER, CO 80205 HEISLEY MICHAEL E C/O K J LONG 2004 DIANA DR MENDOTA, IL 61342 HORSEY SUSAN H 815 WEST MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 KLEIN HERBERT S & MARSHA 201 N MILL ST STE 201 ASPEN, CO 81611 KURTZ KENNETH T & KAREN BRAKUR CUSTOM CABINETRY INC C/O 18656 S RT 59 SHOREWOOD, IL 60435 LEPPLA JOHN L LEPPLA JOEN F 4040 DAHL RD MOUND, MN 55364 LONG MONA HAYLES TRUST BOX 3849 ASPEN, CO 81612 LUU TONG KHON TRAN TUYET LE 814 WEST BLEEKER - B4 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCBAY WILBUR & SHARON 17123 CHESTERBROOK VALE CT MCLEAN, VA 22101 3 GRAEME MEYER LAURA MILLER SUSAN SCOTT & RUSSELL J BLEEKER ST 134 S 7TH ST PO BOX 8274 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 MINNESOTA MATERNAL MITTON JOSEPH & PATRICIA 1/2 INT MORRISON SUSAN M REVOCABLE FETEL MEDICINE FRANKLE DAVID 1/2 INT TRUST 2115 DWIGHT LN 1015 VOLTZ RD 3093 FORT CHARLES DR Mi. ONKA, MN 55305 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062-4722 NAPLES, FL 34102-7920 MURRY PAUL J MURRY BONITA J 814 W BLEEKER ST C-5 ASPEN, CO 81611 OVERTON PATRICIA J 65% PO BOX 3075 ASPEN, CO 81612 PEARSON MARK L 732 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 RICCIARDI RIK 100 N 8TH ST #14 ASPEN, CO 81611 FER WILLIAM H 34 oLACK BEAR DR #1111 WALTHAM, MA 02451 SIVART HOLDINGS LTD PARTNERSHIP 21 BREEZY KNOLL AVON, CT 06001 TAYLOR JUDITH & ALF 100 N 8TH ST #11 ASPEN, CO 81611 TRAN HONG HUONG 814 W BLEEKER ST #C1 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEVINS ROBERT M & WENDY S PO BOX 11482 ASPEN, CO 81612 P B HOLDINGS LLC 725 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 POLSE KENNETH A & JOYCE L REVOC 1992 TST 452 SCENIC AVE PIEDMONT, CA 94611 RK ASPEN LLC 4411 W ROOSEVELT PHOENIX, AZ 85043 SHADDOCK CARROLL & DORTHEA SCHULZE 77.27 1715 SOUTH BLVD HOUSTON, TX 77098 SMALL WILLIAM H 814 WEST BLEEKER ASPEN, CO 81611-1185 TERRY TONYA M 744 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611-1664 UHLER FRANCES M 814 W BLEEKER UNIT B2 ASPEN, CO 81611-3115 OBRIEN MERLE JABLIN & THOMAS R PO BOX 778 ASPEN, CO 81612 PARIS JOHN HERNANDO 3200 SANTA MONICA BLVD STE 204 SANTA MONICA, CA 90404 REED BRENT H & GEORGE L II 100 N 8TH ST #6 ASPEN, CO 81611-1124 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BAVARIAN INN 13530 BALI WAY MARINA DEL REY, CA 90292 SIEGEL ELIZABETH N & NEIL B 4706 WARREN ST NW WASHINGTON, DC 20016 STEINBERG EDWARD M 1068 HOLLY ST DENVER, CO 80220 TOPELSON ALEJANDRO TOPELSON REBECA 5300 DTC PKWY #400 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 VALLEY MIA 740 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 THOMAS A & NELL F WEISS CLIFFORD & STACEY LA JOLLA SCENIC DR 100 N 8TH ST VILLA #36 WEST HOPKINS CONDO ASSOCIATION LA JOLLA, CA 92037 ASPEN, CO 81611 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR THE GRAND ASPEN SITE, LOT 5OF THE ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO.2737-782-85005 Resolution #01- WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Top of Mill Investors, LLC, applicant, for an amendment to the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval received for the property from the City Council, as specified in Resolution No. 99-111; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on March 6, 2001, and continued to April 37 2001, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a to vote, - that the City Council approve the amendment to the Conceptual Planned Unit Development for the Grand Aspen (Lot 5) property, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the proposed development is further subject to Final PUD, Subdivision, conditional use, and timeshare approval pursuant to the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the City Council approve the amendment to the Conceptual Planned Unit Development with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant be required to provide a small convenience/gift shop at the corner of the project with both interior and exterior entrances, and that this be included as part of the final PUD application; 2. That the application for final PUD approval will meet all of the conditions set forth in City Council Resolution No. 99-111, except as otherwise modified; 3. The project will provide 124 parking spaces as shown on the revised plans; 4. That the intervals be 1/20 interests; 5. The final PUD application include a revised landscape plan that will address the area where the reconfiguration of the new ramps and the observation area interface with the Silver Circle rink; 6. The final PUD application shall include a request to amend Section 470.070, GMQS Exemptions, of the Land Use Code regulations to permit the conversion of lodge reconstruction credits to residential development units; 7. The final PUD application shall contain a request for conditional use and subdivision approval for the applicant's timeshare development proposal; 8. Revised development data that addresses the dimensional requirements of the L/TR zone District shall be submitted with the final PUD application. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on April 3, 2001. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR THE TOP OF MILL SITE, LOT 30F THE ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2737-782-85003 Resolution #01- WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Top of Mill Investors, LLC, applicant, for an amendment to the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval received for the property from the City Council, as specified in Resolution No. 99-93; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on March 6, 2001, and continued to April 32 2001, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a to vote, that the City Council approve the amendment to the Conceptual Planned Unit Development for the Top of Mill (Lot 3) property, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the proposed development is further subject to Final PUD, Rezoning, Subdivision, and Residential Design approval pursuant to the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the City Council should approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development with the following conditions: 1. The Application for Final approval shall meet all of the conditions set forth in City Council Resolution No. 99-93; 2. The revised lot area, density and floor area calculations for Lot 3 will be provided at Final PUD; 3. The additional lot created will have the appropriate deed restrictions placed on it requiring that the lot remain for parking purposes only as part of the Summit Place project; 4. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 5. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on April 3, 2001. Four Peaks 308 South Galena Street Aspen Colorado 81611 970.925.2114 March 26, 2001 Julie Ann Woods, Director Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen Colorado 81611 Dear Julie Ann: This submission attempts to address the issues raised by Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission since our March 1 submission. First, a note of the contents of this submission. The first portion of this submission is dedicated to those issues best addressed by Four Peaks. • The Restaurant Issue • The Interior hallway issue • The height issue • Quick summary of the Vacation Ownership benefits to the community. After these first four pages the next portion is dedicated to a presentation addressing the questions posed by Planning and Zoning at our March 6 meeting. This material was prepared by Ragatz Associates with input from Hobson Ferrarini, Hyatt and Four Peaks. Following the question and response portion is a revised Executive Summary from Ragatz Associates (starting on page 18) incorporating the minor changes resulting form the directed study of the P & Z. Followed by letters from Telluride Mountain Village Town Manager and Finance Director. Regarding the restaurant issue: Staff says in part• 'Without some sort of accessory retail or food service use, Staff cannot support this requested change from the previous approval. " Four Peaks requests that a restaurant/accessory retail not be a part of the project for the following reasons: From a community perspective: • We've lost a lot of small retailers as national chains have moved in. Restaurants are still largely owned and operated by locals. Why add another restaurant to an already over crowded market? ACRA says there are approximately 80 restaurants in the Aspen area. Many retailers and restaurateurs are complaining about slow seasons and sales. Why make it worse. • The "mom and pop" restaurants are a critical part of Aspen's "messy vitality", we do not want to play a role in the demise another local restaurant, by adding, what in effect is a subsidized competitor. • 2000 A.,A CP: calls to "Reduce the adverse impacts of freight and construction vehicles on Aspen." No full service restaurant helps to this end. From a "vitahn-" perspective• • Redesigned pedestrian friendly streetscape on Dean Street with no parking Nvill encourage vitality and dramatically improve the feel and vitality of the area. • The street will be revitalized by the addition of a project with average occupancies of around 85%. The comings and goings of the Hyatt guests and owners will markedly improve the vitality of the area in off-seasons as well as peak seasons. • The Silver Circle provides vitality, but to date this facility has been managed to survive, not to thrive. We will make it thrive and bring with it vibrancy and activity. From a operations perspective: • The project will provide necessary services for our guests — for example continental breakfast and after ski snacks. An open and inviting lobby will be open to the public and those seeking accommodation and/or information. • Most Vacation Ownership projects do not offer full restaurant services. Owners and guests can conveniently use dozens of in town restaurants within easy walking distance to the facility. • Without a full service restaurant rental rates will be kept lower than they may have otherwise been for two reasons: 1) Full service hotels can demand higher room rates because of the increase in services — these tend to be four and five star facilities, and 2) to offset losses associated with the restaurant room rental rates would likely be increased. A small accessory retail facility will be on site largely to serve guests and owners for immediate needs. Regarding the addition of an interior hallway "segregating" the employees from the guests. Staff says in part.- `Staff would like to point out that the interior of the pr ject now segregates the AH units from the free market units by the addition of a parallel, non -connecting corridor. This is a disappointment and should be eliminated in the final design. " Four Peaks requests to leave the plans as submitted. The proposed scenario far benefits the employees, guests, owners and management because: • This is not an attempt to segregate employees from the community, but an effort to separate naturally conflicting uses. ■ The separation allows the employees more flexibility in dealing with their own "neighborhood" than if they have to keep it "pristine" and managed to accommodate the feelings of hotel guests, owners and management. • Issues associated with "stuff' outside of employee units and the "look" goes away. There won't be an issue with personalized decoration or convenience of employee units, for instance: • Christmas decorations, • Notes on doors for friends, • Leaving something out to be picked up, 11 r Legg kids to If the Tenlporari, loose °ur ° f conic hallw , were storage of item e units to la would ences would hared betlw.ns like skis, o , 3 Id`hng the lost.This i theTvajT and the fltors and res -tside the front dOo °li sts and own mess , �mpjOYee s seehn9 °f liven eats all °f the r of a unit, etc learly the 1 vltah mall c se g r11 e1 )n fra eanagement that wou jd be °nunurnty as n ghborh00 one hand °f nl-ind be t wOuld de lost i fit we nd any chance d 'Od brie jxyou have CC 0 hind the two and u fo re shared j, of their d singing Collegeote j goest roa tee guests'' t drvergent uses twee j flY school HOte nun Own s is c he tel e asht sO gs Is not the ha Own a fter for a week s °ml�letelY cliff a met enJ°Ynien is with kids o Otgreat for th at hOurs,(Oo Or less here to hav ent. Y ma do t of utmaltin °se nee Ong for the' e a COunter r , noise whe ployee s ho g noise m g sleep be rooms 'ee p Oductive to the the hotel g e es BY the lathe halls is not conducive °re ivOrk Ise' guests and e rela st is ine token clash, and fomplOYees• ttonsjnl� rnan �ing to catchlig an en1ploy prOvldes ing the g merit w p on the • or Re ardln no s°cial ben. m together d0 oujd like to c lt sleep is Neig� ildin hel h it. es n0 an ulttvate one fojlo ,properties t. Y good ands m Seale Neigh ts: generauy alo Our The livenrig the Durant Street T °rthell H°tee, eet corridor are he Skis: C°ndOminlu 44-9 8-" °f the rn 3: 45� prop °s4Tat G2� r Grand Aspen: 45'. i aPtiom ' 111 granted `` e ° on con,e c0iit the cur this site, ptual approval sty is looking e believe that °f a pro Os On Apr1131 . for 1n this project t0 r t this height is ed 45, Nei ht the site. Wvillmake avail crlticaj do vide the benefits enwarranteand building is a �e that this affable for revi wn core locati is that the chiscale tecre fjItiate tO its model u' show ew a scale On. and fim, 1'°ss and cation and that th.�Odel Of the co architec�ral 48 be s0 Associates use. We are ale and mans e area around In � °f the Asething that � be ��toud to be usin g °f this Viewe -mean' pen area• add to the ajre e architecture local taken ''presen to fO�O�'ing two ady impressive massing� Projectf the the visual , pages show a fro flo facts Of n Ex0. iparadise B lee did le f tl1eheele the propose Ong View an reVsg Grand ryYard� T and frOrn the opera I�Ousd Project l'ho Pr01,Osed iew.r A he Exis cOrner (we co tOs were can be c{ °wever' we hg View was of Galeul� t see the the general heiaV e enhanced not enhanced Galena and Coo e ght and unpacthe proposed IS th Per that the View Proposal rep that the presents. These "Proposed View" representations exaggerate the actual impacts of the proposal because 1) actual color and finish variations are not represented and those variations will reduce the visual impact, 2) these photos were taken during the winter season and no foliage was present on the numerous deciduous trees, and 3) the proposal contemplates a landscaping plan that will further enhance the visual character of the proposal on the community. Reg;ardina the Vacation Ownership project vs. hotel uroiect: In addition to the quantifiable economic benefits largely generated by significantly higher occupancies and spending habits (demonstrated in the following 20 pages) a series of other benefits also exist — especially when compared to a hotel. These include: Greater year-round stability in employment patterns and consumer expenditure patterns. This type of project is better than any other in generating off-season occupancies. 2. "New Blood". Vacation ownership, through exchange programs and rental opportunities will bring more diversity and visitation than any comparable moderately priced, upscale hotel. 3. Improves the vitality of the downtown core area. 4. Vacation ownership owners feeling more like citizens of Aspen than hotel guests. Due to the feeling of "ownership" and annually spending more days in Aspen than hotel guests, vacation ownership owners probably would better "care" for the community, e.g., more charitable contributions, more concern about its appearance, etc. 5. Vacation Ownership typically requires far less parking than a comparable hotel project with restaurant and meeting facilities. 6. Less traffic and use of public facilities. 7. Higher repeat visitation patterns and customer loyalty. This stability lessens the need to always be attracting more tourist flow. 8. Goodwill. Vacation ownership clients report higher satisfaction rates than those from hotels. 9. General spreading out of the economic benefit across a greater number of providers of goods and services in the community. As visitors stay for longer periods of time and return to Aspen more frequently, they are likely to explore the area and begin to also visit local shops and restaurants more "off the beaten path." iv 10. Practically every destination -resort community in North America now contains several vacation ownership developments. This even includes communities with unique characteristics and a high -end vacation profile such as Aspen. Without such developments, Aspen over the long run could lose a desirable proportion of its tourist -flow to other communities that successful capture this very positive market. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter and please let me know if there is any thing else I can provide for our meeting on the 3rd of April. Sincerely, Four Peaks Scott Writer, Manager ■rc' t qr a -mar Ain rw � ^' _ • 3 __ *rayr �� up �•' .ter ; � i}�, 1• �-`' .`' .. g,� � •�.._�- � �.. �� L �� :�Y� + � 'Y � r_:t_.�i4tY��il ll�!i/�T. r�jc-rlr�Y►.�,- - 1% •' ]]gift J Existing View Grand Aspen Hotel Proposed View Corner of S.Galena St. and E. Cooper Ave. 03 - 21 - 01 RESPONSE TO MOST SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS RAISED BY CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGARDING A VACATION OWNERSHIP OFFERING AT THE GRAND ASPEN A. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this paper is to address the most pertinent questions raised by Planning and Zoning Commission in regard to a possible vacation ownership offering at the proposed Grand Aspen development. The questions were raised by various commissioners during the meeting of March 6, 2001. A revised Executive Summary from Ragatz Associates follows starting on page 18. B. P &Z QUESTIONS / FOUR PEAKS RESPONSES Responses to the questions are addressed via two formats in this document. This section states each question, and a brief response from Richard Ragatz is then provided. The next section (Section Qprovides more lengthy backup, in event the reader desires more information. Some questions do not require/generate additional backup because of their concise wording. Question]: Please provide additional detail on the vacation ownership product to be offered at The Grand Aspen. At this point in the planning process, The Grand Aspen will sell 1/20 shares, allowing owners 17 days of access every year. The 125 rooms will be in two -bedroom, three -bed room, and four -bedroom configurations in a total of 51 units. Owners will have access to one peak season week in either winter or summer, with the other 10 days "floating" on a year-round basis via an equitable points -based system. Prices will vary in accord with timing, size of unit and view, with an overall average price of between $100,000 and $150,000 (subject to further review and market forces). Annual dues will be charged. The project will be affiliated with Interval International for external exchanges. A well -marketed rental program will be available for owners' unused time. The Grand Aspen will be marketed and managed by Hyatt Vacation Club, a leading company in the vacation ownership industry. 1 Question 2: -Please provide additional information on occupancy rates that are more specific to Aspen or other nearby Mountain communities instead of just for the United States as a whole. Year Round Occupancy Rates • Hyatt Grand Aspen / Vacation Ownership / Projected 84.5% • Aspen Hotel Industry / General / 2000 56.8% • Aspen Condos (Aggressive rental)/ Whole Ownership / 2000 48.6% The 84.5 percent reflects a downward adjustment in The Grand Aspen from the 87 percent in our previous report, in order to be more conservative. The adjustment is caused by applying a 48.6 percent occupancy rate for condos in Aspen to the rental space in the Hyatt rather than the previous 56.8 percent — which applied to hotels. Additional details regarding occupancy are provided in Part C (starting at page 5 of this document). Annual Average Occupancy Rate By Location and Property Type 1/ Vail, Sun Valley, Park City, Aspen, Telluride, Snowmass, and Beaver Creek 2/ Park City, Aspen, Beaver Creek, Silverthorne and Keystone 3/ Aspen, Snowmass, Jackson Hole, and Vail SOURCE: Hyatt Vacation Ownership, Smith Travel Research, David Booth, Coates, Reid and Waldron and Hobson Ferrarini Associates 2 Question 3: Please provide additional information on consumer expenditure patterns. The data confirm that consumer spending in vacation ownership projects ranges from 18 percent to 26 percent or more than in comparable hotel prof ects. Information on consumer expenditure patterns was derived from D.K. Schifflet Associates, a leading firm in the hospitality industry. These figures are only available on a national basis, and are not unique to Aspen. The national figure is $119 per person (each family member) per day for the hotel industry. Applying an 18 percent higher spending pattern in vacation ownership yields a very conservative $140 average spending per person per day in Aspen. Additional details regarding consumer expenditures are provided in Part C (starting at page 10 of this document). Question 4: Please provide additional information on the various public taxes to be generated by The Grand Aspen for the City of Aspen. The following taxinLy schedules were assumed in the report: a. Retail Sales Tax: 2.2 % to the City of Aspen, of the total 8.6 %. b. Short -Term Lodging Tax: 3.06 % to the City of Aspen, of the total 9.6%. This includes 2.2% directly to the City and 0.86% rebated back to the City by Pitkin County. c. Real Estate Transfer Tax: 0.5 % of the first $100,0001 and 1.5% thereafter. These tax rates were provided by Larry Thoreson of the City of Aspen Finance Department. Question 5: How much tax will The Grand Aspen generate to the City of Aspen compared to the hypothetical 150-room hotel? Please make the comparison reflect Aspen as much as possible. Over a 10 year period we can conservatively project that the proposed vacation ownership project will generate about $1.8 million more in taxes than a moderately priced upscale hotel. The total would be $7,148,470, compared to $5,358,550, or a 33.4% differential. This information is expanded on below (all projections are in today's dollars). The additional taxes from The Grand Aspen are due to: (1) the greater number of occupant-nights/person-days; (2) higher consumer expenditure patterns; (3) payment of the Real Estate Transfer Tax; and (4) payment of additional Sales Taxes from local expenditures from maintenance fees and marketing costs. Additional details regarding tax benefits are provided in Part C (starting on page 10 of this document). 3 10-year projections The Grand Aspen Hotel Source Sales Tax $6,1861380 $3,826,480 Lodging Tax $ 299,090 $111532,070 Real Estate Transfer Tax $ 663,000 0 . Total $7,1485470 $5,358,550 Question 6: Will The Grand Aspen generate additional new visitors ("New Blood') to Aspen, and if so, how? The Grand Aspen definitely will generate additional new, and a broader base of, visitors to Aspen. Based on 25 years of experience in the vacation ownership industry by Resort Condominiums International (the world's leading exchange company) and on the conduct of hundreds of vacation ownership consumer surveys by Ragatz Associated (including for Hyatt Vacation Club), and applying the information to Aspen, it is assumed that of all the nights available to owners at The Grand Aspen, the following use patterns will result: • 35 percent is used by the owners • 30 percent is used by exchangers • 5 percent is used without a fee by friends and relatives • 30 percent is available for rent Expected Usage Hyatt Grand Aspen: In other words, the 70 percent usage by owners includes their exchanges, rentals and allowing others to use without a fee. This use pattern means 0 that about 65 percent of the space in the 125 rooms at The Grand Aspen will always be used by, or available to, others than the owners. It should also be commonly accepted that the socio-economic profile of exchangers in Interval International is considerably lower than it is for owners in the Hyatt Vacation Club. This means that a much wider disparity of users will have access to The Grand Aspen than just those who can afford, on average, between $100,000 and $150,000 for a 1/20 share. Question 7: How can the City be assured that unused time by the owners will be available for public rentals? It is difficult to assure the City that owners' unused time at The Grand Aspen will actually be available for public rentals. It is illegal to force owners to make this commitment. However, the assumptions used in the report are based on responses to numerous consumer surveys conducted by Ragatz Associates containing questions about how vacation ownership owners would utilize their time if an appropriate rental program were available. More importantly, the assumption is supported by owners' use patterns in other Hyatt Vacation Club resorts. The mind set of the fractional interests owner is to expect their unit to be used by others basically every day they are not there — it is the nature of fractional ownership. There is every reason to believe that each owner would make their units available for rent when they would otherwise be available. C. DETAIL ON THE QUESTIONS Question 2: Please provide additional information on occupancy rates that are more specific to Aspen or other nearby Mountain communities instead of just for the United States as a whole. Year Round Occupancy Rates • Hyatt Grand Aspen / Vacation Ownership / Projected 84.5% • Aspen Hotel Industry / General / 2000 56.8% • Aspen Condos (Aggressive rental)/ Whole Ownership / 2000 48.6% A very significant advantage of vacation ownership over any other type of resort development (including hotels and whole ownership properties) is the very high year- round occupancy rates achieved at properly implemented projects. During the past years 5 we have surveyed thousands of vacation ownership owners and hundreds of vacation ownership projects. We repeatedly find that year-round occupancy rates average around 88 to 95 percent, even though the resort hotel industry in the same community may only be averaging 70 percent or less. Our most recent study, The Community Benefits of Resort Timesharing: 2000 Edition received responses from 2,609 randomly selected vacation ownership owners throughout the United States. One summary paragraph notes: Timeshare owners report a 93.5 percent utilization factor, far exceeding most resort hotels. Timeshare owners report using 93.5 percent of the time available to them in their timeshare, whether personally, by exchanging, by giving away time to friends and relatives, or by renting out time. Surveys confirm that many sold -out timeshare resorts experience occupancy rates of 90 percent -plus, although the average occupancy rate of timeshare resorts is lower than this due to many having unsold inventory. Timeshare occupancy rates far exceed those of resort hotels, which average in the 70 percent range, and second homes, which are used an average of only about eight weeks per year. High timeshare occupancy rates result in strong year-round utilization, which reduces seasonal fluctuations in employment and income in the host community. Annual Average Occupancy Rate By Location and Property Type 120% Upscale Hotels Aspen - Condos Aspen 1000 0 --Hyatt Beaver Creek 80% 1 r � 40% a ♦ \ 0% Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec SOURCE: Hyatt Vacation Ownership, Smith Travel Research, David Booth, Coates, Reid and Waldron, and Hobson Ferrarini Associates So, now let us attempt to estimate what such high occupancy rates mean for The Grand Aspen in terms of annually generated room -nights (upon sell -out). In a conservative estimate, it is assumed that the year-round usage (occupancy) rate by .:e owners at The Grand Aspen will be only 70 percent compared to the aforementioned average of 93.5 percent. Reasons for this include: 1. It is anticipated that ownership at The Grand Aspen will be sold in interests of multiple weeks rather than just one week. It is suspected that the more time in resort accommodations that owners have, the less they will personally use such time. 2. The management of The Grand Aspen will operate a rental program for its owners. Since some of the aforementioned 93.5 percent utilization rates is allocated to rentals, compensation for this is included in the assumed drop to 70 percent. (At the same time, it is noted that the rental portion of the 93.5 percent is only 2.8 percent. For the most part, this low figure is because very few management companies in vacation ownership projects currently offer rental programs to their owners). So, now having assumed a 70 percent owner -utilization rate, the next assumption is that a well -managed rental program for owners will be available at The Grand Aspen. We also will assume: 1. The 30 percent of time not used by the owners will be available for rentals. 2. The year-round occupancy rate for these rentals will be only 48.6 percent — the average for the rental condominium industry in Aspen in 2000, as reported by Smith Travel Research. Most likely, this rate is very conservative for The Grand Aspen due to the location and intended high quality of the development and management. 3. A lock -off feature is available in all 51 units at The Grand Aspen. As noted in Chapter I, this means, for example, an owner of a two -bedroom unit could either: (a) use the whole unit; (b) use the hotel room hotel room lock -off and rent the remainder of the unit; (c) rent the hotel room lock -off unit and use the remainder of the unit; or (d) rent both sides. The two -bedroom units will have one lock -off unit, while the three- and four -bedroom units will have two lock - off units. 4. Although not well -documented by empirical research, reports from developers of vacation ownership projects suggest that owners occupy the full unit about 65 percent of their stays, while using the lock -off option the remaining 35 percent. For purposes of this report, we will assume that these proportions will vary in regard to number of bedrooms in a unit — the more the bedrooms the less the proportion of owner use. This conservative assumption is that owner -use will be 70 percent in the two -bedroom units, 60 percent in the three -bedroom units and 50 percent in the four -bedroom units. Assumptions 3 and 4 mean that The Grand Aspen will actually generate more units available for occupancy than 51 due to the lock -off feature. A 51-unit project by itself would generate 18,615 available room -nights (51 units times 365 7 nights). However, there will be 29,054 room -nights actually available at The Grand Aspen. This is calculated as follows, by using the two -bedroom units as an example. • 26 units times 70 percent utilization rate of the entire unit times 365 nights equals 6,643 available room nights; 26 units times 30 percent utilization of the hotel room lock -off equals 2,847 available room nights; 26 units times 30 percent utilization of the remaining lock -off unit equals 2,847 available room nights; 6,643 plus 2,847 plus 2,847 equals 12,337. • When repeating this same process, we find that the 21 three -bedroom units would generate 13,797 available room -nights and the four four -bedroom units would generate 2,920 available room nights. When adding the three types of units together, the total is 29,054. Of these 29,054 available room -nights, it has been assumed that owners will use between 50 and 70 percent themselves, or 20,337. This leaves 8,717 available for rent. Of these 8,717 nights, it has been assumed they would be occupied 48.6 percent of the time, or 4,237 nights. When adding the 20,337 to the 4,237, it means a total of 24,574 annually occupied room -nights in the 51-unit Grand Aspen. As noted, there would be a total of 29,054 room -nights annually available for occupancy at The Grand Aspen. Of these, 20,337 would be occupied by owners, 4,237 would be occupied by renters, and the remaining 4,480 would be vacant. Thus, the anticipated year-round occupancy rate would be about 84.5 percent. This is a very conservative estimate. The preceding information is detailed in Table IV-1 and summarized in Table IV-2. Occupant -Nights (Person -Days) Because units at The Grand Aspen will be larger than hotel rooms, the average number of occupants actually would be considerably higher. This means that the number of occupant -nights (person -days) would be greater in the vacation ownership project 79,273 compared to 62,196 in a comparable hotel — a difference of 17,077 occupant - nights (person -days), or 27.5 percent. 0 TABLE IV-1 Annual Room -Nights and Occupant -Nights Generated by Vacation Ownership Project Remaining 1 or 2- Whole Bedroom Hotel room Hotel room Unit Lock -Off Unit Lock -Off Lock -Off Total A. 2-Bedroom Units (26) Owner usage 70% 30% 30% - - Total nights available 6,643 2,847 2,847 - 12,337 Owner occupancy rate 70% 70% 70% - 70% Nights occupied by owners 4,650 1,993 1,993 - 8,636 Nights available for rent 1,993 854 854 - 3,701 Renter occupancy rate 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% - 48.6% Nights occupied by renters 969 415 415 - 1,799 Total nights occupied 5,619 2,408 2,408 - 10,435 Occupants per unit 3.5 2.5 2.0 - - Occupant -nights 19,667 6,020 4,816 - 30,503 B. 3-Bedroom Units (21) Owner usage 60% 40% 40% 40% - Total nights available 4,599 3,066 3,066 3,066 13,797 Owner occupancy rate 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% Nights occupied by owners 3,219 2,146 2,146 2,146 9,657 Nights available for rent 1,380 920 920 920 4,140 Renter occupancy rate 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% Nights occupied by renters 671 447 447 447 2,012 Total nights occupied 3,890 2,593 2,593 2,593 11,669 Occupants per unit 5.0 3.5 2.0 2.0 - Occupant -nights 19,450 9,076 5,186 5,186 38,898 C. 4-Bedroom Units (4) Owner usage 50% 50% 50% 50% - Total nights available 730 730 730 730 2,920 Owner occupancy rata 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% Nights occupied by owners 511 511 511 511 2,044 Nights available for rent 219 219 219 219 876 Renter occupancy rate 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% 48.6% Nights occupied by renters 106 106 106 106 424 Total nights occupied 617 617 617 617 2,470 Occupants per unit 7.0 5.0 2.0 2.0 - Occupant -nights 4,319 3,085 1,234 1,234 9,872 9 TABLE IV-2 Summary of Annual Room -Nights and Occupant -Nights (Person -Days) Owner occupied nights Renter occupied nights Total occupied nights Occupant -nights (Person -days) Available nights Occupancy rate Occupied nights Persons per room Occupant -nights (Person -days) 2-Bedroom 3-Bedroom 4-Bedroom Units (26) Units (21) Units (4) Total (51) A. 51-Unit Vacation Ownership Project 8,636 9,657 2,044 20,337 1,799 2,012 436 4,237 10,435 11,669 2,470 24,574 30,503 38,898 B. 150-Room Hotel 54,750 56.8% 31,098 2 62,196 9,872 79,273 These totals were generated by assuming the following average number of persons per unit -type and room. unit -tyke persons per unit whole 2-bedroom 3.5 whole 3-bedroom 5 whole 4-bedroom 7 hotel room unit 2 Remaining 1-bedroom unit 2.5 Remaining 2-bedroom unit 3.5 Remaining 3-bedroom unit 5 hotel room 2 The above averages then were multiplied by the number of occupied room -nights in each type of unit/room. The process is detailed in Table IV-1 and summarized in Table IV-2. Questions 3, 4 and 5. Consumer Expenditures When compared with overall tourist and hotel industries in the same communities, extensive research rinds that vacation ownership occupants typically spend about 18 to 26 percent more per day than all visitors/hotel guests. Expenditure patterns for vacation ownership owners are higher for two basic reasons: 10 �C ►r• (-A N CD X 0 o Q� CDCD ''C3 n 0.p CD . �31I� O j CD �" cD CD O Ca = O a' C�. _ O� 'mod CD E rr-L+ (� n ' } to 0 O O tD A . 'C3 cn Sv O CD cn O O O . ' d ►-3 ,�, `� ti �` O CD v� O pEn Ln�� BBB t�'� O 0 '`� can p U' UR ►O� i� �' ran c� 't� g CD° ~ c�i� O UG N R CD -P p = CD " CDn CD �-* � � �3 CD CD O CD ' d > `� 4 CD `O �j CD En a O (D CAD N ti O a ' Cs �` '�-+r `d C cn C . CD CD m CD �-t •--� ~` ' P CD O ' n ' 'd CD O p ►-r p' CD 0 CD ��v O'' CAD ' `C N �C ►d O cn `-* WCD ° � CAD c�4 (=r 0a p 1,0 CD� a✓ CD CD '' J r--+ 2 En `C C�q cn CD CD �• �, C` DD CD CD cn ►O cn O O �,, CD �' CD CD O `✓ cn '� N C CD CL CD CD CD CD cn CD o En ►� CD Uq CL CD 01 to f�9 O . m CD CD CD 0 CD CD CD r -• E--� N o CA v CAD CAD N ~ ' U� n . `n O �-► " CD CAD o O �o v� oo -P �-+ �-+ O �D �-+� p '�` CD 0 CD , y ,� �p ¢7 '� ' ° CD O W O E W �--•-P O W �I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cD CD CF.L CDAD O o� a, 0 � O CAD CD in ln� CD cn CD W CD En cn CD CA CD CDCDo CP-P� � IID CD 00 CD �t (D CD r+ t cn CD �' O ,.., • CD ' i3 'c� C -h a A.• � be CAD O En v CD w ° En � bF1 69 b9 69 b9 = ~ 0 ` + CD �C O En n i b9 b9 E�9 �-, ►-� w ID > .' CD �, �=y.. CD p v' n O CD o �-+ I'p -,I �O •A F--+ N -+ tJ O cn C) �' ►-� `C cn CD . � -P �O O) N cn cn N -{� �O '� � " O -r `° 00 w oo A. C> W Orn CD 00 Q, n �' cn 0 W O N � CD N r-+ Oo O� �--� O W 00 �, N O, p '� ►� Q-, O W O � O" (D a.• CD �-... BCD CD N .4. to N �.I O �-+ �1 N cn O ¢� CD C-t- CD cn -t o J O J N �I v� -P v� CD o p CD � a CD CL CD O N C CD UQ CD 0 CD 0 o ,CD ('CDC O CD � C �� (D �C ►/) . �► 0 'CD cn a � o C4 En CD CD a CD o CD Cr o CD CD n � C a rL O �• CL CD N CA p w O � ya' t FHA.. � �Ocf,GG O CD n n CD W ~ G ° A. CDo � CD w CD CD ° G 0 �CD u' a+ �.. C e-•r v� CD tCD -1 f--� 4 En p En y � t� CD CD Q• CD S? CDCD CD cn W N .A OC AD �10 'P v� CD w v, CD In, 0000J� En p O . CD *r= (A C/) C be b09� bq w�� o CD � 00�D N CD w JCL ' 00 �10 �D NO cn CD cr' `CD CD In CD CD cn 0 CD � �--] CD k6 �c o 00 Cn CD CD 0w w"w O p a CD CD CDo 00 N o • a ,`o N K n CL �' tl� a'CL a� CD CD ° CD CD Cp \\\ CD CD CD IID H vnaHHH ID � 0 CD CD �S CD a aCDH CD 11 n �. 0 0CD�s O in,CD �" C) cn UD c� pr � W a c�u cu a V cn ° UD .0 �c `;CD ° , o CD CL �! � CD ~ ° cn CD CD CD CD CD ri.' CD cn CD rn .A O rA r� w 4 N Np �O �P 0000 O 0000 N _ \D J D � Z y C �-` CD th cn J CT Q� N 00 r' �-► 0000 J J J O w 0 a CAD (° CD N �O N N w �O NCD CD Q\ A 00 00 N N t -+ •� J 00 w w N �o p . � l 1rA Oo �O �,O ON �D O D ¢' � � O =W CD r0000 w ~ O °�° rn 00 �o o rn p O n En w l ON ° c� w O w 00 N J ON 00 O I 00 o a-, CL O ... ::3 p tj n .b C% N • 0, O � tii p cn CD I h ° Q �- r* o o CD �` ' W 1y O rL p r-* A.. ►-3 'rs CD CD CD CD �cs `c CD ) �'' � o, CD CD r-L CD CD cm CD CD cn ' -+ n O Ar � -P n� CD CD `ry oCD cp W n p, cn CD 0-0 a � CD � ° 6' CD r-L CD CD O ,�� ' O Q• CL n �' CD �-' ' �-t CD CAD CD cn � y ,��'*,.. CAD CD O CD CD a�CD CD �' o'er 0 CD � g CD CD `� CD p CD n � CD r+ 'tt CL vn , p Sy -P t CD W CD r4- 00 CD cn CD fS CD ' C D cn � c N t Clq p `d CD Dv B CD �' �' �-' r-+ o W o �C '-' (-AD A`�'-jam, op O C ttJCD o00cn Qq 01 CD CD d � ,�' � CD� V�D 00 Qom.. O y �. CD CD O P H > crCD 0 CD CD CD n 0 CD En CL CD CD ,� 69 CD ''cj CD �O p w a �, N CAD 0� 0 0. � O CD O O� � cD CD C CD a 00 O y 1-0 O N ,y � � � . 9Z.gyp, v' v n >✓ � Le' O O O O O CD CD CD CD CD `C O CDCD 0 CD CD CD CD �CD W W N N C� kA 69 b'9 b9 b9 (lA w N . �o w 110 c.n 00 00 I'p cA .P IEA b9 --I N -F O •P 00 N O O\ \10 K6 O'\ W �10 -P p F-. J tN 00 w LA 00 -P w 00 <O --A --I rn O y •P O LA � �o O -P.. CT N 00 w --Iw 00 00100 01 kb� O O O O N 00 �1 �-- cr, Can y be N N W W W N bol 0 O� O� 00 00 00 }-+ 01 t �D N N N N , , , , , , N �O N , 0 0 0 O O O 00 00 ONO ONO CC 00 00 �o �o 110 �10 00 00 00 �10 o b9 b9 69 W N b9 b9 b9 b9 bo� I�oq 00 O O �10 •P 69 E� P 00 �o 00 W O\ O*\ 1p 01 C) 00 w 00 .P O �1 \10 00 -P w 00 O �I N 00 N C1 Vl t.A O � CN N 00 W O> (71) O O O O O O 00 N w �o W O 00 O , Ar r+ 0 O O p O CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,� ii N N 0 En CCD N 0 R.CD 0 p N 9 � � p~ 0 R. CD CD CD N _ 9. CDC CD N� _ O 0 ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C+ ci 0 0 0 0 O 0 o o o o o o rn N � O --1 N f-+ 00 •? ON -P -P 110 O O 4P- J 0T ON P J — N Wbol)P W I I N T N N W OHO C 0Q� CD bq N W 61) W I N N N I bq W N W be be be W 60p) 0000 00 �10 W -�P CN 0000 -NP \o -P W �D r-+ 00 00 N 000 0 � O W N C� 00 J to to \10 �o �o �o rn rn o�rno, rno,rn rnrno� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ��N H9Ei3N O\ l W N W W O N 01) 00 W 00 J W -P O W -P �l J v► 00 F--+ J c-A O -P 00 N -P 00 ',O bq W be � P � N N O 00 O .P .A. O C!1 -P W W 000 -P W (.A V�i z o PO CD a eZ tC�D O CD CD CA ti O_ cn Q' Sv ~� o-]��.� CD aCD CD >��N b "0 CD En CD CD CD �.�CD awl o CD ` CAD �-+TQ ) r~n� I CD �O �3 N ►y cn CD CD W �, ►y � CD Q, cn CD CD Cr r, �, . O O ac n Q CL p.NCAD r-r r-+� r-f r+ 4 9 O cn CD CD a N 'y to CD �' p,+ n O r-+ vi, N CD CD CD CD (wn CD CD �� �D.c t 4 CD��+ ` can r►- pcn CD CD CCD n p O 5- 0 O N N " O p CD � CD � r a �' N O O CD CD , CD 07- �' CA oo '-* x' cl "P+ �:r (k !'l. �3 �ID m m ;D. CD a O UG In t" N O kC (D n O cn CD O CD a (D oo In° CD O CD CD CD CD cn CAD ' CD C A. CD t� ,�+ CD C CD CDCA_ a CDcn CD ch CD CD CD CD C CD►�-� CD c � y v' to o ,�� `�-'CD (D CD p r CD r-+ O CD " -+CD aq CD 0 " , CD 0 _ ccn 5 CAD CDa v, � `� CD a CD CD CD CD CD 0 cn CD CA CD nCD Q.• En � cn CD CD CD O� � 0 �-+ r+ CD CD O CD /mod �=- W p cn CD O ��-► be ,... CD r- CD CD CD O �+ �' EEn b CD O O '� N C �. CD cn UOG p O CD p; O O 'TS CD CD �3,��. 00 'd Op ,0�. CD O cn CD CD .-. ~ • N A� CD CD Cn CD CD CD CD CD CD ¢' CD !-N �-t CD F--3 vlcA O F t �' '.Ct O COD (ACA O �-• , r . 0 CD CDCD �,�� L r O R ''� CD ' O O\ CD 0 CD O p CD ' p � W ' --' -0 � b9 a 5 cD �J O tTj N rL `{ r+ O O 0 O COp En O r iEoq CD �1 0 CD r+ �`� � CT � r-] � ��y �C N 0 CD CD cn Uq r+ CD ~h '� N � �-, . CD O r+ CD" CD CD CD O O r+ ao ~ CD " N CD CD O �C a `C � CD Cn f!9 O CD wo<+� CD (D �� �0 CL o� �CD O �' • p r+ (D O� CD O cn CS' CD CL o CD 'bos boo, CD CD n O. O N o o p (D• O t� C)00 �Jo , P+ o a o CD CD °° o CD CD `C CCD �_ O C cn CD � '� n 0 CO, � o Cam, 1-0 Cr CD� 00CD CD ►CD -ft � be CD CD � O `C iv m o`0o ui I-NP P n p (D b9 O v, �-h �:l 3 ar, -t2 cl1 �' (-A 0 cn 00 CDCD O O' �-' '_' • O 609 0� O cn O t j cn Uq ' 00 'f� O N �, I ► r+ CD O o CD N 0 a\ CD O O CD p O .-' . ,y ,� CD (D. C CD AD O O � I— D ► "'3 � ti OCAD cn f-t� O N ru� COD p J P CD 01� W �D C) aCD --4 CD CD ¢' N CAD CAD 00 (Jt� CD p ► s �-. `C Cl. COD in+ O �CL � •J a� rn rn rn � � rp-+y � Q• CD � � � � `C CD CD �3 O n CD ��� yy � o P+ � ° � 00 ►-� o w a a� o 0 CL a CD CD ((D � 0 O O � �- �--• ��. r + H9 Efj CD AD �~-' �p beC UJ N O O O I'O lc1 J ON � CD P�'� o CL O CDCD O CD CD �Q �CD CD v' oCD o o CD crc� w ° C) o���'> (p CD �. C rn kA N CD O GQ o C' CD O CD CD Cr tA O O O W p �3 v► cr O sv �, � , CD � CL be 00 CD �t > W C!1 CD U Vt CD O O a P' CD ° fD CD 1- 0 11-1 o N -3- (") PO ow cn t 0 CD rL CD � CD CD M o ►-i CD n CAD N rr �--� J4 �• CD CD � t- j ^w o � r-L cr a o � a, a o w CD CD CD �d CD o o O + cn k6 be lboq boelbef9e cn 0o �D Ol N CT 69 l!i W N y N N CD N ww o �� 0`000000o `� ~' a'� 00 0 00 �o� p �' 0 0 0 -4 110 00 cA W �„ � ID x v' 69 69 lbqtQ beQ CaD W _N � -+ O IO O VWi W 00 \o N 00tQ 01\�000000 yam. v► J 00 �o �10 • Cep n CD be rD v�rn N �� N�cn a �N W O ul W 001 00 0000 Q n (~D > UCR 4:1,.a�O T � J O O Ch O -P 0 O' p., �3" ¢' .p CD O cn R. 40 C) �k--:� o�drcn n0 p 00 5� CD CD O vim/CD U .p W N .-. i"+ Vw • j..�' M•+ �••t CD' �+ CD CD Q CD CD CD 5 0 ,. ►-s 69 p O CD CD CD CD CD w CD CD CD + CD CD v� c11 C �, W o p CD v� ... �_ C D C-' ►� -� 00 J 'w CD ' O 0-1 CADON CIO > P. I �' G �+ 'C3 �. a � CD CD O Ln C) CD Iv '� CD '. t w O O O OL o fl., h CD W CD C �. CD cr,cn CD r s O ' L� p a �n+ CD CD R. 'rS �, i -0�1 N - O-, O O --i O v, C O p, c� ,�� cD Q; .P a1 �o 00 O v) oo -P -P CD O CD CD ,-�, a P CD 00 w "D O'\ o O O tv -P v, c, A- 'cz'r/� O p '� CAD ��.� a,p.Q,a :P oow 0000�oo� `C c ;' � 0�00 Oo-wo-P CD CD p . �-+ Cn a. p'. 'v CD P-• CAD CD UQCD CD El O CD CD ej v CD O tj— b9 b9 bpi O O Cn pa � '0'o v, w • C',N w cu cry CD pyy O CCD D � w N w� O O p (D Q, , .. CDOCD O O O P O O O� N 00 ��y P� 0 UQ & v� V, > CD CD � bQ O � O O %-C) CD CD0 0 A' n' CL 59 b9 69 69 0000 �.w ��N ��,o. CD • p a CD rnNw o1,o00 CAD n �D. 00 rnwv, OvN-4��� C UQ p- � w N �D 0 C) CD . v, O p cn CD rf t3 � O \O "O O O p �I �I N pr � CD o 000 000000 o' p CD -t C o � o 110 00 CD CD 0 0 o --A I I o 0 00 I o CD CCDD d� � a CD ' o ttq r- d� Q CD o O o � o CD y CD O CD 00 0 0 Cl r-► cn o cn En CL CLcn � CD O's� w C a �+ O CD C1q c;N -4 cn CADCD o o CD w En ~ CD CD r+ CD 0 0 C° CD O_ no P" CD CD p'' � o CD � o `p En —+ �o o CD �.. ,t 0 '=3 o p CD o. o a� r+ CD a� �(D CD 0 O 00 o � CD cn y a CD O CD ° � o• > CD Oho O" CD 0 CL 'C) � � C-D o w CD n�o o'er a a CD to CD CD CD a-' o0 N' w D ° `� cn.CD 4 'En 0 0 o CD En Q � CD 0 CD CD -1 CL �C CLlpCD n � O cr o'n �� O �. CD o q o CD CD CD CD 0 n CD A� O 0O '-" r +- _CD oo ° y CQ CD 0 0 CD o c � ° C CD OCD uqq C o CL o CL CD 0 � o CD 0 Co CD 0 CD En o p � cn O 't3 CD O CD., En CD °� cn CD O r O ao'C 0 O o � O, 0CD �. cn cr `d cn CD O aq CL O 0 0 o� >� o(Dc� °�. CD o CD CD CD CD O CD 0 o Q- � QCD ' o BCD N CD �. O O� CD CD CD' o o CD n � 0 p O cri o CDCD o o cr P � 0 CD O CD .CD P) vq CD �3- CD p CD 0 �o • -&S ON 00 O 0 CD 0 O F-{ CD CD rA I� 0' aq CD 'CD CD O CD O CAD r+ CD CD O CCD 0 CD CD ,tiF CD ° O �o 00 CAD � CD � 0O (;q * , .� o n O ° CD CD CD CD tlj CD EL CD CD 00 O O ° �U C�' ° O 00 Q, r i r , '� (j ►�-t ~�'�`, c�i C7 "0 CD CD CD p qQ CD El P CCD �` �'• �O` CL " � CAD �- CD U4 �, CD CD ram" � `� � � ° CD `C CD cn CD ,_, �'(D O In CD Cr CD 0 0 CD ° p CD o ° c y� � (D � o cc �..4.t �! H� ° G F 3 t„�,� 0 CD p� CD C N �C N w CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD a CD OCD CD a o `'' 00 Op., w CD n CD CCDD CCDD O O '°� O CD N 0 CD CD CAD ¢• O �-h CD �-+ O ^ ,-+ K r+ CD I'd CL 00 CD CD cn CD 00 0 CD CD CD CD CD Cn CD El CD x '�� N J C(D O rL CD ° 2° �C �s (�q~ p O �' C'D CAD 00 D O �` n to �+ ►� CD COD (7 L CD CD ►- 0 `� '�� � � CD o CD CD r-+ jnCD CD r+ W ¢� O O 1 o CD CD p CD CL O i� P o c Cn cn cn i o O C) m Al N C� 0 o a, CD o �I O� to P W N �---� , j O p. o 0 CD o o ►� . C o s CDC�CD O �n S ,��•+, , CD O ... o o ,.� �' ' _. F„ A�CD N CD r* �. cn CD $„ CD O O O CD p , ¢. `-t ¢' vCD, �C '-t ,.., . v' '� N cn CD CD CD CD i-C CD CD o CD �'+ C' O CD O p `,� CD CD (� �. r-I rn A.• CD 0 `C O Cn cn p " P �. ►'"�.. (TQ `� CD CD Cep �1. ¢" o CD n ►-• '�' O CD ��� U' r + O o ,.y cn A� a'' o CD CD Q , �-► O CD P CD " r+ W o CD O CD CD cn a- O p ` O w O CAD CD ' O p 1- j �=' e-+ -� . CD .' n. O cr pL p . CD '� �,i O CD O '� � ' O ''y rZ � o , rf �--� C ,� CD �; CD O n CD �. -' • r+ 0 p to `C3 cn UQ CD r+ CD 0 O O C �-+ �'' CD CAD '-O ' C3 O CD v O COD O `� r-+- v' n CD '—CD En v_' o y cn O UQ CD ��, '-+ O to CD `Cj cn CD to CD N CAD CD CD �• CD a . '-'• O O CD ', .' , �-+ O � C/1 CD � cn r-r ► ' d U� CD p~ CD C1� CQ o CD CD CD Q CD r+ CD 110 CD cn En CD CD, Q. �'-'r' fn- CDC CAD n � O CO ¢' CD ' cn. CD CD cn CD cn CD ~ t O ,.� p, O o p , CD r-+ c` CD �n , CD O CD ° � �-+ CD CAD CD C A. ° C, a CD 0 CD CD CA C) C `n a CD CD CD 0 r-L CD O ¢, r+ O CD CAD `C CD '� '� '_ . D 4 CDO o r , p+ D ''d �-+ ',� 0 En C+ CD A� O ob 5 0 �, e--t CD CD paj �' CD iy �C p '�� CD 0 CAD � � �n � � (DD can C(D a � CD CD�- �� CfC O p O 9- h !� G CD r Cam? �� tD �` '' < O J H �. Q' n Fi t�-r ^� r F '' cD J v. _i O U. 'z3 t'u CO w C ED cs'21 I w CDO p ~ " � ~ 1/) CDCD CD t:V y ►•� a ca ¢` D R� y 0� � �+, �: rt Fes, O Or- cn p Us cn �� c (D WW CD ' CC c) O G w r O R 'n Fit .-+ �- UR � � 'd O� Cp tj Fa • v�V• CL p Q� N' CD Cam+ - co 0 En W o Oro CD (-p Ho �. � p � 0 0 0 0 Cc PL cA � P., a: °, r+ J o G 6`: -�Cl) CD R% , ,_. f?' F- • r'�► , ,� p In O 00 rr ' G+ O CADCp � t/1 cz �' `' Q o wqq o d c ° CD CD l7d O F-t O �v fa � W ° n O� V4 Ci CD� �+ 0' N` �. 00 CAD I-- (� Qq CD O CD n r cc O y � P n {D � h � a a G CD O cn '- ) I �+ En rPIT, p ry `C n o ry CD m lb sz w °° �; � ° ° o ow 0 �, �� G CD CD J-ID 0 -moo o 0.o.•�o fo CD pCDcD ° ° R, �+ -� n OCD CD ta ti • 'L3 '•''� '—` `•� CD O, CD y tD O b' CD < FL J-� (cD . a CD En cn p p o can O co. �—. Ln 0 g c'' o pj 0. o (D cp CL �: n �cD CD O G �•co t�'C to �' a. O 0 0 U4 CD a CD La EA CD 0 0 0 o' 0 rn �d i a I �. d CD IPI+ CD cn cn Cn- CD '� 'S' CD Gcr CCD n p C CD '� CD ,p O p¢UA O(C'� CD N n O,dv� .. cn En cn CD cn CD CD cno O �. ID Cn CD 0 �. CD O n �- • �—. `C CD N 0 r, r-r N CD CD o Q, n' O� CD ° CD a CAD p ��-t E CD C p CD C" CD CAD C' cn E r 0 p "�' CD cn p . �-. O �S CD JaA cn 0 CD cn CD CD Cn z oW o p O CD ''� CAD co CD 00 CD 0 CD CD CD p cn �71 cn CD cn in. O M-tO ' 0� CD a w o UQ CD O � I ~� n CCD is b w p CAD �71 m CDCD C O CD UCD aL CD I '—' � � CD° ,�' �' � ~ � CAD � � � C O C cn O• cn '� CD OCD CD CD N n U4 N CD CD -oj �71 CD n cn O CD CD $aA r+ CD O UQ ` cn ►a �-- CD p CD � cCD an �' ' p CD CD cn O� r- b � o CD n x O o p :+ UI I W (11 p 00 CD CD CA CL CD CD t7' CD O o o'er . (D -' CD O n O C O o �• '''� (D(D Q n O (D CD CD r+ CD CAD UQ C , ((DD (D � ° U4 O 0 O 0 O �p �' CD (D �. n � (D : , r+ o v' �. (D (D (D O ' CD � ►� r+ O C , (D ds:L � CIQ (D ICD, N (D (D Uq (D 0_ �. • O �. O CD (D CD p � � (D coo `C O CD c O° CD S C n p P ° (D �! • BCD � � CD n' O U4 CD '� n r r c`-+ \ ' O (D v (D ~ ' O� vn d (D (D i `, (D cn CD "41 �' n 3' �7' ' � cr CD w n' (D p CD O C!Q CD Ocn ((DD o ¢. ,gin C° y o ' N ' CD (D • O al. � cn $ .cn p cn cr Occupant Nights wj 00 z ;U * -0 < < o 0 % Occupancy G �w 0 3 0 9 m N ba - � 3�ilolc g w :v M .. tit f n 1 F p� • eq DD �MOwp'►— �1 177 41 fu Zi �y O � � . to FA Al OO «-+� �.> O O � v O at CDrr Orb a 1 0 f-► cr c w��cD w 0 c 0 �tor r z O 0 rZ O ow 0 c zt7' r CD IV O� Mw fD V W w �-" 0 ow -9