Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.19990322 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA March 22, 1999 4:15 P.M. I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Joint Meeting With P & Z a) "Ordinance # 4-0rt'999'- Land Use (.;ode IV. Scheduled Public Appearances V. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NO T on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) VI. Special Orders of the Day a) Mayor and Councilmembers' Comments b) City Manager's Comments VII. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #22, 1999 - Extension of Deadline for Filing Plat - 930 King Street b) Request for Funds - City ad in MAA 50th AnniVersary Book c) Request for Funds from Housing/Daycare - Tenant Legal Support Project d) Ordinance #8, 1999 - Water Service Amendment/Auger e) Ordinance #9, 1999 - 303 N. First Lot Split f) Resolution #21, 1999 - Contract - Wagner Equipment Lease g) Resolution #23, 1999 - Contract - Elam Construction Street Improvement Projects h) Resolution #24, 1999 - Contract - M.A. Concrete Smuggler Area Pedestrian Improvements i) Resolution #25, 1999 - Contract - Condon Construction, 1999 Utility Projects Minutes - February 22, 1999 VIII. Public Hearings c) Ordinance #4, 1999 - Water Service Agreement - Porath Amendment(:~ d) Ordinance #5, 1999 - Water Service Agreement - North Forty e) Ordinance #6, 1999 - 930 King Street, Lot Split (Continue to April 12) f) Ordinance #7, 1999 - Code Amendment - Fireplaces ~ IX. Action Items a)'Z:4<j'Golf Course Relocation Consultant b) Snyder Park Affordable Housing Sales Prices ~ c) Ordinance #11, 1999 - Barbee Rezoning, Affordable Housing~ X. Information Items XI. Executive Session - Potential Litigation XII. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting April 12, 1999 COUNCIL MEETS AT NOON FOR AN INFORMAL PUBLIC DISCUSSION, BASEMENT MEETING ROOM TO: Mayor and Council ~// THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Resolution No~q~, Series of 1999, 930 King Street, Extension of Subdivision Exemption Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement Filing Deadline DATE: March22, 1999 APPLICANT: No Problem Joe, LLC, represented by Gibson Reno Architects. LOCATION: 930 King Street, R-15A zone district. SUMMARY: Attached is Resolution No.M, Series of 1999, requesting an extension of the deadline to file a Subdivision Exemption Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement for 930 King Street from March 28, 1999 to April 28, 1999. The reason for the extension request is an error made in Ordinance 20, Series of 1998, which granted approval for the Historic Landmark Lot Split. During the course of the Council review, the applicant was asked to make changes to the proposal, including creating a shared driveway between the two new parcels, and respecting certain setbacks to address neighborhood issues. These changes were reflected on the site plan that ultimately received Council approval. Although the site plan was revised, it was not recognized at the time of approval that the ordinance listed the lot sizes incorrectly, as they had been proposed before amendments were made. In preparing to file their required subdivision exemption plat, the applicant noted that their site plan and ordinance did not coincide and staff determined that a new ordinance would have to be approved. Because this issue has surfaced very close to the 180 day filing deadline for the plat and subdivision exemption agreement (March 28, 1999), staff recommends that an additional 30 days be allowed for the filing deadline. A separate ordinance was approved on first reading by Council on March 8, 1999, which corrects the approved lot sizes and also awards a landmark designation grant. Second reading of this ordinance will be held on April 12, 1999. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council adopt ResOlution No,a1~, Series of 1999. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Resolution No.~, Series of 1999, an Extension of Subdivision Exemption Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement Filing Deadline for 930 King Street." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: Exhibits: Exhibit A- Resolution No,~, Series of 1999.' G; planning/aspentxpe,/ca.ses/Iotsplit/~tendplaI (SERIES OF 1999) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO EXTENDING THE RECORDATION PERIOD FOR FILING THE HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMIrrION PLAT AND SUBDM SION EXEMPTION AGREEMENT FOR NPJ LLC, IN REGARD TO 930 KING STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO WHEREAS, NPJ LLC (Applicant) was granted approval for a Historic Landmark Lot Split by the Aspen'City Council, pursuant to Ordinance Number 20, Series of 1998; and, WHEREAS, said Ordinance required the applicant to record a Subdivision Exemption Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement w/thin 180 days of the final approval, granted September 28, 1998; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.80.040, failure to record a final Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement w/thin the 180 filing deadline shall render the approval invalid; and, WHEREAS, despite the recordation deadline, the applicant has been unable to record the appropriate documents in a timely manner, due to the discovery of an error in Ordinance 20, Series of 1998; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, finding that neither the Municipal Code nor the conditions surrounding the 930 KLug StTeet parcel have changed in a way which would require a reevaluation of the approval, has found good cause to extend the deadline from March 28, 1999 to April 28, 1999. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: NPC LLC is hereby granted an extension of the period in which to record the Subdivision Exemption Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement as required by Ordinance Number 20, Scu'ies of 1998, to April 28, 1999. RESOLVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of March, 1999, by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: City Attorney John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk TO: Mayor and City Cotmc~ FROM: Amy Margerum, City Manager RE: Request For City Council Contingency Funds: Congratulatory Advertisement in.A Tent at the Meadow; Celebrating the 50th .Anniversary of the Aspen Music Festival DATE: March 17, 1999 Please find attached a request for $2300 from Ernie Ashley regarding a congratulatory advertisement in the upcoming book entitled A Tent in the Meadow. City Council's contingency fund currently has $61,200 in the fund balance. February 2,2, 1999 City Malhl~l,~ C~i.nlIR^TINC, rlt~ 5{}TM A~,'qtv~ OF Tlt~ A~t~N MUSIC ~: A T~t h ~ M~ow, C~bm~g ~ ~ ~ve~ o~ ~ ~p~ M~ic Fes~val ~ you ~ ~e oppo~ to ~er ~s ad~g papa~ ~om ~ ~ A T~ ~ ~e ~dow, ee o~nl ~o~ of ~e p~t ~ y~ d ~e ~ Music Festival M~c F~v~ by aw~ mS 1~ au~or Brace ~r~r. ~e ~, wMch ~ ~clude · e ve~ ~t phom~phy ~ ~e F~v~ ~om ~e past 50 ~, w~ m over ~ pa~s, ~d h ~ee book of 160 pagM ~ have v~ ~ adve~ ~ ~e ba~ of ~e ~bHca~. E~toM~/adve~g ra~o will be ~% ~tol ~d ~0% adv~. Meadow. : D~}ufl~ It ~ ~o ~ ~ld by ~e B on 1~ n~M~ds, ~ded ~t to a~dM We ~e happy ~ oHe~ a ~ paSe, f~ ~lor, ~a~at~ adv~t ~ce ~dud~ ~ prluc~on eo a b~u~y ~i~ fv~mat ht~ ~ f~ c~mhm~ adva~n~. h' ~a~g ~ h~e's h~to~, I no~ h~ ~e Festival beS~ i~ septate A T~t ~ ~ Me~ow w~M not ~ y~, ~y, for yo~ h~p ~ h ma~z ~d I look f~d ~ tg to you lair TOTRL P. 82 To: Mayor and City Council From: Dave Tolen, Housing Director Date: 17 March, 1999 Re: Request for Funds from Housing/Daycare Fund - Tenant Legal Support Project Summary: The Housing Office often hears allegations of unfair practices by landlords, from tenants offi'ee market and deed restricted housing. These complaints range from unreturned security deposits to rent overcharges and summary evictions. Some properties have had recurring episodes of complaints that remain largely unresolved. Housing Office staff and board members have talked with members of the Roaring Fork Legal Services, a new legal aid nonprofit in the Roaring Fork Valley, about our interest in getting some legal help on these issues. That organization has agreed to helping us develop a landlord/tenant issues program. This memorandum requests funding for the Aspen/Pitkin County element of that program. I)iseussion: A severe shortage of affordable housing in the upper valley has led to frequent allegations of owner/landlord abuses. Renters are often in a position of accepting unreasi3nable and possibly illegal terms in leases. Security deposits are not always returned when required, or in the amount required. We have heard concerns about discrimination and evictions that are not permitted under State and Federal law. Many of these complaints relate to occupancy of free market rental units, that are subject only to State and Federal law. Other abuses occur in privately owned deed restricted units that are also subject to local regulations. It is difficult for tenants to collect information and maintain a record of these issues in order to make a case against abusive owners or landlords. We do not have the ability on staff to provide this support, nor do we have the legal resources necessary to carry out action on behalf of tenants. A newly formed non profit organization, the Roaring Fork Legal Services, has been established to provide legal aid to individuals and families in the Roaring Fork valley. The program is targeted to those who are unable to afford legal services otherwise available. The Roaring Fork Legal Services Board has agreed to help us establish a program to assist tenants. The program would be operated by staffof the non profit, through support from local governments. The funds requested here would be used for the Aspen/Pitkin County element of the program. We are requesting support for the program, in the amount of $9,000 for 1999. The funds will be used by Roaring Fork Legal Services to set up and run the program on our behalf and under our general direction. Financial Implications: After reviewing the long range plan for the housing program, we believe that there are sufficient funds available to provide this program. We anticipate that the program will benefit tenants and provide better overall management and maintenance of privately owned residential rentals. Recommendation: StaffandtheHousingBoardrecommendapprovaloftheuseof $9,000 to fund a landlord/tenant issues program in 1999 with the cooperation of the Roaring Fork Legal Services. The program will be the most cost effective and appropriate way to deal with the issues that arise in many of these situations. Motion: Imove to approve the use of $9,000 for the establishment ofa landlord/tenant issues program through Roaring Fork Legal Services, under the general direction of the Aspen/Pitldn County Housing Office. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the ASPEN/P1TKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Colorado, "Authority") and the ROARING FORK LEGAL SERVICES program, ("Professional"). For and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional manner civil legal seaices in landlord/tenant matters for persons who work or reside in Pitkin County who are eligible for such services in accordance with income guidelines adopted.by Professional. Crhe income guidelines currently in effect are 200% of the .federal poverty guideline standards. Professional shall advise the Authority in the event that the financial eligibility standards are changed. ) Within two months of the date of this agreement, Professional shall design, print and distribute a "Landlord/Tenant Rights" pamphlet in both English and Spanish which summarizes landlord/tenant laws in the state of Colorado. Professional shall also periodically conduct community outreach activities, including presentations to potentially eligible clients, to explain landlord/tenant rights. Said community outreach activities shall be conducted in both English and Spanish, when appropriate. 2. Term of Agreement. Professional shall commence work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the Authority. The term of this agreement shall be for term commencing on the date of the Notice to Proceed and terminate on December 31, 1999, unless terminated sooner in accordance with Section 5 below 3. Payment. In consideration of the work performed, Authority shall pay Professional $1,000.00 per month for each month this agreement is in effect. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for each month that this agreement is in effect. The Authority shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the Authority shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. 4. . Non-Assimaability. Both parties recognize that this contract is one for personal services and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other. 5. Termination. The Professional or the Authority may terminate this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date' of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the terrm'hation. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, client case " files, reports or other material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of Professional. 1-971 .doc Page I 6. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Professional warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the Professional, to solicit or secure this contract, that s/he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making Of this contract. 7. Indel3endent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the Authority. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the Authority. Authority is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by Authority to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from Authority to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify Authority against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. 8. Completeness of A~reement. It is expressly igreed that this agreement contains the .entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. 9. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered to the respective persons and/or addresses listed below or mailed by certified mall return receipt requested, to: Authority: Professional: Dave Tolen Error*. Not a valid link. Kathy Goudy, Executive Director Aspen/Pitldn County Housing Authority Roaring Fork Legal Services 530 East Main Street 0450 Castle Creek Dr. Aspen, Colorado 81611 Aspen, Co 81611 10. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of the City of Aspen's municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment. ~1-971 .doc Page 2 11. Waiver. The waiver by the Authority of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the Authority, and forbearance or indulgence-by the Authority in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the Authority shall be enti~ed to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence: 12. General Terms. (a) It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. (b) If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of COlorado as from time to time in effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date hereinafter written. ATTESTED BY: ASPEN/P1TKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY: By: Title: Date: ~ I -971 .doc Page 3 ROARING FORK LEGAL SERVICES: Error! Not a valid link. By: Title: Date: JPW-O3/17/99-G:\john\word\agr\rfls.doc PS1-971,doc Page 4 ~EM~O~IND UM TO: MAYOR AND CO UNCIL THROUGH: AMY MARGERUM, CITY MANAGER THROUGH: JOHN WORCESTER, CITYATTORNEY FROM: PHIL OVEREYNDER, WATER DIRECTOJQ~ DATE: MARCH 16, 1999 SUBJECT: SECOND AMENDMENT TO WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT- NORTH SPRUCE STREET WATER LINE EXTENSION ORDINANCE NO. ~ FIRST READING SU~I/IMAR Y: Four existing single family lots located on North Spruce Street, outsi de the current City limits but adjacent to the Williams Ranch and Silver Lode Subdivisions, have been approved for water service via the private water system to which the City delivers water pursuant to a water service agreement approved by Ordinance No. 41 (series of 1997) and amended by Ordinance No. 27 (series of 1998). The lots that may receive water service from the private water system are owned by Dr. Richard C. Phillips, Raymond N. Auger, Donna and Albert G. Timroth, and the Porath Family Trust. Raymond N. Auger owns two lots included within the area served pursuant to the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement, but contends that one of the lots, Lot 3, is not subject to the water service agreement and could be served by a well. However, Mr. Auger wishes to have water service provided to Lot 3 from the private water system, and has agreed to accept terms and conditions required by the City Planning Department in order to obtain such service. Therefore, although staff does not agree with his contention that Lot 3 could have an individual well, the matter appears to be moot. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council approved the original North Spruce water service agreement in December, 1997 by Ordinance No. 41 (series of 1997), and approved the first amendment in August, 1998, by Ordinance No. 27 (series of 1998). Council has thereby approved delivery of City water to the private water system in an amount sufficient to provide service to the four lots, with a total commitment of 13.8 ECUs. The City Council has adopted policies which guide staff in reviewing applications to extend water service outside corporate limits. These adopted policies are summarized in Resolution No. 5, Series 1 of 1993, and are further elaborated in Resolution No. 49, Series of 1993. Council found that extension of water service to a private water system to serve the North Spruce Street lots comports with its policies. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project entails connection of the Auger Lot 3 to the North Spruce private water main, which is connected to an existing private pump station and water distribution system serving the Silver Lode Subdivision. The North Spruce water main extends westerly along Silver Lode Drive to a point of connection on Noah Spruce Street and then extends to the northerly limits of Spruce Street. BACKGROUND: This memo addresses how the proposed second amendment to the North Spruce Water Service Agreement complies with Resolution No. 5. Potable Water Delivery CapaciW and Sen, ice to Existing Customers (Finding 12i of Resolution No. 5): The atready-approved North Spruce water main extension is able to serve four single family lots located on North Spruce Street by use of the existing private water system. This amendment will confirm that the Auger Lot No. 3 will also be served from this main. Application of the other criteria of Resolution No. 5 are discussed in detail in my memo to Council dated November 5, 1997. A copy of that memo is attached. Sufficiency of Water and Water Treatment Capacity (Finding 12ii of Resolution No. 5): Water availability as measured by the capacity of the water treatment facilities and the ability of area streams to support water demand was addressed in the 1994 Raw Water Supply Availability Study (Enaaech Consultants, 1994). This study concluded that with the development of additional well capacity, sufficient raw water and treatment capacity was available to meet the service needs of continued growth within the City, its existing service areas, and all immediately adjoining areas under consideration for expanded service. The study considered the effects of municipal water demands as they relate to maintenance of instream flows as required by adopted City policy. Water deman4 for the proposed North Spruce Street water service extension was not addressed in this study. However, the total demand for additional service to these two lots is small in comparison to the expected growth in water demand at buildout Of the service area. The total water supply commitment for the four lots as measured in Equivalent Capacity Units 0iCU's) is 13.8. With the addition of the Auger Lot No. 3, the total commitment will be 18.6 ECU?s. This compares with a total projected availability of over 200 uncommitted ECU's for extension of service outside of the present service area. Financial Impact and Water Rates (Finding 12iii and 12vi of Resolution No. 5): The project is located in Billing Area No. 2 on the City's water service maps. Staff prepared an analysis of cost recovery for each of the seven billing areas in December, 1995. Staff found that the cost of providing water service to this area was being fully recovered through the existing rate structure. 2 It is not anticipated that it will be necessary to revise the water demand, tap fee and water consumption charges for this area. Aspen Area Comm unitw Plan (AACP) Consistency (Finding 12vi of Resolution No. 5): The City Community Devel0pment staff found that the original proposed extension was consistent with the AACP. The County Community Development staff had no objection to the original proposed North Spruce extension provided that there were additional opportunities for comment in the event that additional subdivision of. the lots to be served is proposed at a later date. Paragraph 1 of the North Spruce Water Service Agreement ensures that there would be an additional review in this event and ensures the owners were advised that the City is making no representations that any future development would be provided with additional water. The City Planning Department has concluded that water service to the Auger Lot 3 will be consistent with the AACP if the property owner agrees to certain conditions. (See letter from Mitch Haas, dated February 22, 1999, aUached as Exhibit B.) The property owner has done so, as can be seen from Exhibit C. Relationship to Environmental Goals and Utilization of Raw Water (Finding 12v and 12viii' of Resolution No. 5): The North Spruce water service agreement provides an extension of service to a developed area which has utilized wells for inside use and for landscape irrigation. Staff believes that the rate of failure of existing wells in the area indicates that the aquifer is not capable of providing a reliable long range supply. There are no other sourues of water. Staff therefore finds that it is appropriate to permit the Auger Lot 3 to connect to the private water system, and that it is not feasible to use raw water for irrigations purposes. The North Spruce water service agreement (Paragraph lb) is structured to allow only those lot owners who have State well permits allowing outside water use to connect to the private water system while maintaining existing wells for irrigation purposes, and only if the property owner elects to do so at the time of signing the water service agreement. Lot owners with existing wells for inside use are permitted to retain the wells until such time as they choose to connect to the private water system, but will be charged a fee for water availability. There is no existing well on Auger Lot 3, so this lot will be connected to the private water system directly. Annexation (Finding xi of Resolution No. 5): By the inclusion Auger Lot 3 within the area covered by the North Spruce water service agreement, Mr. Auger has already agreed to the annexation provision. The Second Amendment clarifies that the annexation provision applies to Lot 3, since Mr. Auger has taken the position that Lot 3 is not within the area presently covered by the North Spruce water service agreement. Ade~luacv of Water Facilities: Water Department staff previously determined that the proposed plans for the private water system conformed to the adopted standards for water system construction, with the exceptions previously noted (see "Current Issues"). Dedication of Water Rights: Mr. Auger has no water rights to offer the City to satisfy this policy. An in-lieu cash payment will be required to satisfy the policy under Paragraph 6 of the Water Service Agreement. In addition, Mr. Auger will be required to pay an in-lieu fee to offset the cost of municipal well developme,nt. CURRENTISSUES: The Noah Spruce water extension extended an existing private water system which serves the highest lots in the Silver Lode Subdivision (adjacent to Williams Ranch). The private water system, including a separate pump station, was created to serve lots located above the "8040-green line" elevation on Smuggler Mountain where no pumped service is available and no existing water storage tanks serve the area. The SilVer Lode Homeowners Association, which operates the private water system, agreed to expand its area of operation to include the lots to be served on North Spruce Street. Water Department staff recommends that the original pumped system serving the upper lots in Silver Lode Subdivision and any subsequent expansions of the system remain as a private system. The reliability of this system without a storage tank is inherently less than the acceptable City service level. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Second Amended Water Service Agreement be introduced for first reading. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Ordinance No. E implementing .the Second Amended Water Service Agreement, which adds one lot to the Noah Spruce Street water main extension. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: C:~home\robint/x~np'wp61xcouncil\spruce_cncrnemwpd 4 In 1997 and 1998, City Council approved a water service agreement to serve certain lots located next to the Willjams Ranch and Silver Load Subdivisions. These lots are owned by Dr. Richard C. Phillips, Raymond N. Auger, Donna and Albert G. Timroth, and the Porath Family Trust. A provision of the water service agreement required the owners to agree not to dig any wells on the property covered by the water service agreement in exchange for City water service. Most recently, the Augers have claimed that a certain lot which they own in the same area is not part of the water service agreement and therefore not subject to the prohibition against drilling wells. City staff disagrees, but for the reasons that follow, the dispute regarding the ability to dig wells is moot. The Augers wish to be connected to city service and have agreed to accept terms and conditions required by the City Planning Department for the development of their lot in order to obtain city service. For this reason, staff recommends amending the previously approved water service agreement to include the Augers lot as further described in Phil's memo. ORDINANCE NO. ~ Series of 1999 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AUTHOR/ZING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH SPRUCE STREET WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH DR. RICHARD C. PHILLIPS, RAYMOND N. AUGER, ALBERT G. TIMROTH AND DONNA M. TIMROTH, AND THE PORATH FAMILY TRUST, FOR PROVISION OF TREATED WATER SERVICE TO SERVE AN ADDITIONAL PROPERTY LOCATED ON NORTH SPRUCE STREET. WHEREAS, the City Council has appmved Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1997, which provides for extension of water service to a private water system to serve the properties on NGrth Spruce Street owned by Dr. RIchard C. Phillips, Raymond N. Auger, Albert G. Timroth and Donna M. Timroth and Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1998, to allow the private water system to serve an additional lot on North Spruce Street owned by the Porath Family Trust; and WHEREAS, the foregoing persons whose lots have been approved for service via the private water system are herein referred to as the Owners; and ~q-IEREAS, one of the Owners, Raymond N. Auger, has asked that the water service agreement be amended a second time so that a second lot owned by him on North Spruce Street, Lot 3 of the Cora Lee Subdivision, will be approVed to receive water service pursuant to the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement, for a total of 4.8 ECUs; and WHEREAS, the North Spruce Street Association, which is empowered to act on behalf of Owners, has requested that the water service agreement be amended a second time to include one additional lot to be connected to the private water system; and WHEREAS, Lot 3 of the Cora Lee Subdivision and all of the properties to be served by the private water system are located in Pitkin County, and not within the City limits of the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 25.12.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code provides that any extension of City water service outside the corporate limits of the City of Aspen shall be made pursuant to an agreement with the City and in accordance with the City of Aspen water main extension policy and, further, that the City may grant water service only upon a determination that no conflict exists between the best interests of the City and the prospective Water use, and that the City may impose such contract, water rights dedication and bond requirements as it deems necessary to safeguard the best interests of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted by Resolution No. 5, Series of 1993, as amended, policies to guide municipal water system development and services beyond the City limits; and WHEREAS, said policies require the City Council to make a determination that the proposed water service extension complies with said policies and is in the best interests of the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the City Council has had an opportunity to review with City staff the proposed Correction to Property Description concerning the requested amendment to the existing North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement to include service to Lot 3, Cora Lee Subdivision; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY C'OUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT Section I. The City Comacil of the City of Aspen hereby determines that the proposed provision of additional City water to the North Spruce Street private water system to serve Lot 3, Cora Lee Subdivision, located on North Spruce Street outside the City limits of the City of Aspen, is in the best interests of the City and substantially complies with the City of Aspen water policy for extra~erritorial services, as set forth in Resolution No. 5, Series of 1993, as amended, and therefore agrees to that said Lot 3 may be connected to the private water system located on North Spruce Street in Pitkin Count3,, and that the City will provide sufficient water to the private water system to serve Lot 3 on the terms and conditions set forth in the Second Amendment to City of Aspen Water Service Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof, Section 4. A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the day of ,199_, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the __. day of ,199_. John S. Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY ADOPTED, PASSED AND APPROVED THIS DAY OF ,199_. John S. Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk SECOND AMENDMENT TO CITY OF ASPEN WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT This Second Amendment is made ,1999, to that certain Water Service Agreement entered into December 15, 1997, in Aspen, Colorado. The parties to this Second Amendment are the City of Aspen, a Colorado municipal corporation and home rule city whose address is 130 South Gai~na Street, Aspen, Colorado 8161 ! (hereafter the "City"), and North Spruce Street Association, an unincorporated entity authorized to act on behalf of those persons identified as "Owners" in the Water Service Agreement and the First Amendment to that Water Service Agreement. In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth below, the parties and the Raymond N. Auger ("Auger") agree as follows: 1. The above-described Water Service Agreement was recorded with the Pilltin County Recorder on May 27, 1998 at Reception No. 417351, and is herein referred to as the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement, The First Amendment to Water Service Agreement and Pretapping Agreement was recorded with the Pitkin County Recorder on March 8, 1999, at Reception No. 428533, and is herein referred to as the "First Amendment." 2. The North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement and the First Amendment set forth the terms and conditions under which the City agreed with Owners to provide municipal water service to a private water system to be constructed, owned, operated, maintained, repaired and replaced by Owners and their successors. The Pretapping Agreement executed in connection therewith authorized certain connections of individual service lines to the water main in advance of connection of the service lines to structures. 3. Paragraph 11 of the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement provides that other interested parties may connect to the private water system upon amendment of the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement and payment by such parties of any recoupmerit charges imposed by Owners in addition to tap fees and other payments to be made to the City pursuant to the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement, Paragraph 8 of the First Amendment authorizes the North Spruce Street Association to approve the connection of any additional lots to the private water system. 4. Auger is owner of the property described on Exhibit A, and referred to herein as "Lot 5. Auger has requested permission from the North Spruce Street Association and the City to connect Lot 3 to the private water system, in order to provide water service of up to 4.8 ECUs to a single family residence to be constructed on Lot 3. Auger has agreed to pay all recoupment fees required by Ow~aers, and has paid to the City the well system development fee and payment in lieu of water rights required by the City. Auger will pay to the City when due all utility hookup charges and water system connection charges (tap fees) required by the City. Lot 3 will not be pretapped. second amendment 031699 6. Auger, by executing this Amendment, agreeS, on behalf of himself, his successors and assigns, to be bound as the Owner of Lot 3 to all of the terms and conditions of the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement, the Pretapping Agreement (to the extent applicable), and the First Amendment. Auger specifically represents that he is familiar with, and agrees to be bound by, those provisions regarding annexation of Lot 3. Auger also agrees that Lot 3 is s, ubject to the requirements set forth in Exhibit B, items A through G (memo dated February 23, 1999, from Mitch Haas to Tamara Pregl). 7. North Spruce Street Association and the City hereby agree that Lot 3 will be subject to the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement and the First Amendment, and that Auger, as Owner of Lot 3, will be subject to all of the terms, conditions, benefits and burdens of the Water Service Agreement and the First Amendment. 8. Auger acknowledges that the North Spruce Street Association, which has organized, managed and advanced funds for the planning, permitting and construction of the private water system infrastructure, has the exclusive fight to grant him the fight to tie in to the private water system and to charge him a ~ecoupment charge in addition to tap fees and other payments to be made to the City. The North Spruce Street Association hereby .grants Auger the fight to tie in upon payment of his agreed upon recoupment charge. 9. The City agrees that by the addition of the Auger Lot 3 as a lot to be served pursuant to the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement, the City shall provide treated water service to the private water system in an additional amount not to exceed 4.8 ECUs, or amaximum of 2.0 acre- feet per year. The total amount of water to be provided in paragraph I of the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement and the Pretapping Agreement is therefore 18.6 ECU's with a maximum of 7.03 acre feet per year. 10. Auger's address for purposes of paragraph 29 of the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement and paragraph 10 of the Pretapping Agreement is as shown in the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement. Said address may be changed for purposes of either agreement as therein provided. 11. This Second Amendment shall be recorded at the expense of the North Spruce Street Association. 12. Except as otherwise herein specifically amended, the North Spruce Street Water Service Agreement, the Pretapping Agreement and the First Amendment remain in full force and effect. Dated: CITY OFASPEN ATTEST: By: second amendment 031699 John Bennett, Mayor City Clerk RaymC'~L~e~ NORTH SPRUCE STREET ASSOCIATION second amendment 031699 '3~ Har~17-99 06:35P Banner Assoc4ates, Znc. 970 243 3810 P.02 EXHIBITP/ t~ DESCRIPTION OF LOT 3. CORA ! .FE SUBDIVISION A tract of land located in that portion ofth~ Mining Claims Cora Lee, M.S. 5304 Amended and Ella Sherwood, M.S. 5304 Amended located in the S i/'2 of the NE 1/4 of Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West, 6th Principal Meridian, Cooally of Pitkin, State of Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly comer oftbe tract of land whence the C-E 1/16 corner, Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West, 6th Principal Meridian, a Bureau of Land Management monumem with bass cap, 1954 bears S 57° :27' 31" E, 540.30 feet and considering the northeasterly boundary of Ella Sherwood MS. 5304 Amended marked by a Bureau of Land Management monument w/th brass cap, 1954 set at each end of said line bears N 46° 17 18" E, 1145.74 feet, with all other bearings contained herein relative thereto; 1. Thence N 45° 44' 0g" E, 63.60 feet; 2. Thence N 44° 13' 06" W, 5.40 feet; 3. Thence N 45° 47 10" E, 140.96 feet; 4. Thence S 63° 3Y 15" E, 222.40 feet; 5. Thence N 45° 4'7' 10" E, 289.23 feet; 6. Thence S 46° 32' 19" E, 197.49 feeV, 7. Thence S 45° 45' 13" W, 575.43 feet; 8. Thence N 44° 13' 06" W, 402.05 feet to the Point of Beginning The tract of land as described above contains 3.746 acres more or less. MEMORANDUM TO: Tamara Pregl, Pitkin County Planner THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Aspen Community Development Director John Worcester, City Attorney FROM: Milch Haas, Planner, City of Aspen Phil Overeynder, Director of the City of Aspen Water Department DATE: February 23, 1999 RE: Auger 1041 Hazard Review and Lot .Line Adjustment Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject application. The parent parcel affected by the proposed lot line adjustment is part of a Water Service Agreement (heroinafter, "WSA") entered into between Raymond Auger and the City of Aspen on December 15, 1997 (adopted by City Council via Ordinance Number 4 I, Series of 1997). The WSA provides for water service to the existing residence, provides for the eventual annexation of the entire fathering parcel (including the subject of the current application), and prohibits the development of any new well serving the property. City planning staff has reviewed the Auger 1041 Review and Lot Line Adjustment application and offers the following comments: BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the terms of Section "26. Annexation" of the WSA, the City could, "at its sole discretion" initiate and complete the annexation of the subject property. However, City staff has decided not to pursue annexation at this time provided the following comments are memorialized as conditions of any approvals granted in the County and/or as plat notes recorded on the Lot Line Adjustment plat. Under sub-section "c." of the ."Purpose of Agreement" (page 4 of the WSA), it is stated that "No new individual wells will be permitted within the Subject Property, whether such wells are to be used for irrigation purpose only, or for all uses, although replacement of existing wells is permitted for those who have elected to receive water service fi'om the private water system for indoor uses only." This exact language is reiterated on page 9 of the WSA (under the "Abandonment of Wells" sub-section). The term "Subject Property" is explained in the WSA to include the properties owned by the Phillips, the Augers, and the Timroths, and therefore, includes the property which is the subject of the pending 1041 Hazard Review and Lot Line Adjustment application. However, the agreement to serve these properties with City water applied only to the existing residences, and was subsequently amended (via Ordinance Number 27, Series of 1998) to include one additional residence on the Porath Family .Trust's parcel. The proposed residence on adjusted Lot 3 of the Cora Lee Subdivision was and is not included under the terms of the existing WSA. The submitted application materials explain that, "in the event that the applicant is unable to successfully amend the existing agreement with the City of Aspen for water service ... acquiring a well permit and drilling a well should be feasibIe." ItistheCity's firm position that drilling a well is prohibited under the terms and conditions set forth and agreed to in the aforementioned WSA, which was signed by Raymond N. Auger and others. Therefore, the only possible way of obtaining water service for the subject lot is through an amendment to the WSA, and the WSA clearly declares that amendments must be applied for and are in no way guaranteed approval (see sub-sections "12. Treated Water Service," on page 9 and "17. Limitations on Provision of Water Service," on page 11 of the WSA). COMMENTS: 1. Since it is the City's position that new wells are prohibited and the proposed residence would require connection to the private water system, which, in turn, requires an amendment to the WSA and such an application is in no xvay guaranteed approval, the City strongly reconunends and respectfully requests that the County make any approvals granted to the Auger Lot Line Adjustment and 1041 Hazard Review application fully contingent upon approval of the necessary amendments to the WSA (i.e., a condition stating that the approvals granted under the terms of the subject Ordinance/Resolution shall be of no effect ~-- and therefore no building permits can be applied for --- unless and until such time as the WSA is successfully mended to allow for water service to Lot 3 of the Cora Lee Subdivision). City staff believes this recommendation to be necessary due to the "Catch-22" created by the terms of the WSA. That is, if the County were to grant an approval and the WSA amendment were to be denied, the approved, new residence would be left with no possible way of obtaining water. Thus, it is incumbent upon the County to ensure that the WSA has been successfully amended prior to acceptance of a building permit application for a new residence. 2. The "Annexation" provisions of the current WSA will be carried over to and included in any amended version of the WSA. If approved, the "Subject Property" of the amended WSA will include the new residence proposed on Lot 3 of the Cora Lee Subdivision. As a side, City staff does not anticipate annexation taking place within the foreseeable future (i.e., the next three to four years). 3. The most recent amendment to the WSA (Ordinance Number 27, Series of 1998) required that, prior to development, the Porath property complete annexation and rezoning to the City's R-30, Low-Density Residential, zone district. From this, staff assumes that if and when the entire "Subject Property" of the WSA annexes into the City, it will likely be rezoned to R-30. Please be advised that in approving the most recent amendment to the WSA, it was City Council's clear intention to ensure that any new construction that is to take place after September 9, 1998 complies with City ordinances regulating allowable floor area and residential design. The objective was to minimize the visual impact and mass of structures in the City's backdrop area, especially since this area will eventually be annexed into the City. Any development that does not comply with the City's standards will jeopardize the WSA and the future extension of a water service line. Consequently, City staff is recommending inclusion of the following ~onditions of approval (Camilia Auger has already consented to inclusion of these conditions, should approval be granted by the County): a. In accordance with the provisions of the City's R-30 zone district, the allowable floor area on Lot 3 shall be limited to 6,400 square feet above-grade, as measured by the City of Aspen Zoning officer using the same inclusions and exclusions as provided for in the City of Aspen Land Use Code definition of "Floor Area," Section 26.04.100, Definitions, as amended. All other aspects of the County's AFR-10 Zone District shall apply and shall be administered by the Pitkin County Zoning Officer. This condition shall be included as a plat note on the recorded Lot Line Adjustment Plat. b. The applicant/owner shall not use reflective materials on the exterior of the structure, including the roof. c.. Any disturbances to the natural terrain and areas of cut and fill shall be revegetated after construction with native species. If any areas are too steep for adequate revegetation and retaining walls or like structures are found to be necessary, such structure(s) shall be of similar color to the surrounding, natural vegetation in order to visually blend into the mountainside. d. The existing vegetation outside the designated building envelope shall be preserved and maintained in its natural state. e. Outdoor/exterior lighting shall be limited to low bollards along the walkways/driveway, and porch/entry lights. Any and all outdoor/exterior lighting shall employ down-directional, sharp cut-off fixtures to screen the lighting source, and in no case will flood lights be installed. f. After completing the 1041 Hazard Review and Lot Line Adjustment approval processes, the applicant shall make a good faith effort to apply for and gain County approval to construct a Caretaker Dwelling Unit (CDU), pursuant to County Land Use Code Section 3-150-130(B), on the site. Development of a CDU on the lot shall be exempt from the Floor Area calculations described above in comment 3(a). (If the City were to have initiated annexation prior to development, the owner would have had to pay cash-in-lieu or build an Accessory Dwelling Unit in order to gain a GMQS Exemption for the new residence.) g. If the secondary electrical line serving the Phillips property is to pass through Lot 3, it should be placed in an easement. 3 4. C!ty staff supports the granting of Vested Property Rights on the terms of the aforementioned conditions. 5. In reviewing the application to amend the Water Service Agreement (WSA), Community Development Department and Water Department staff hereby agree to limit its review and recommendations to water service related issues only, except as described in comment number 2, above. Staffs recommendations with regard to Amendment of the WSA will suggest no further regulation of land use issues and building rights than already addressed by the agreed upon conditions explained in the foregoing, unless otherwise directed by City Council. City Council will maintain authority to use its discretion in broadening the scope of the review, should they choose to do so. 6. The following comment is a recommendation of City planning staff, but has not been agreed to by the Augers. In accordance with the spirit of the City's Residential Design Standards and with City Council's desire to minimize the visual impact and mass of structures in the City' s backdrop area, City staff requests that the County staff recommend a condition of approval. whereby there shall be no facade penetrations (windows), on the town-facing elevations, higher than eleven (11) feet above the level of the dining/living room's finished floor; no facade penetrations (windows), on the town-facing elevations, between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the level of any other (exclusive of the dining/living room) finished floor; and, no circular, semi- circular or non-orthogonal fenestration, on the town-facing elevations, between nine (9) and fifteen (15) feet above the level of any finished floor (inclusive of the dining/living room). CONCLUSION: Although the Augers disagree with the interpretations of the WSA as explained in the "Background" section of this memorandum, please note that the foregoing "Comments" were reviewed by Camilla Auger and Alan Richman, her representative, and they agree to the recommendations provided in comments 1-5, above, becoming conditions of approval. Therefore, City Planning staff respectfully requests that you include the substantive portions of Comments 1-5, and that you also consider including Comment 6, as recommended conditions of any approval granted to the Auger 1041 Hazard Review and Lot Line Adjustment application. If I can be of further assistance in any way, please do not hesitate to contact me at 920-5095. 4 Raymond N. Auger 709 N. Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Mr. Phil Overeynder Water Director The City of Aspen Water Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 March 15, 1999 Dear Phil: As per your request, this letter confirms our application for an Amendment to the Water Service Agreement of December 15, 1997 to include one additional single family residence on Lot #3 of the Cora Lee Subdivision. Attached is the legal description for Lot #3, the Resolution from the Board of County Commissioners stating that Lot #3 is a separate, developable lot with a building right, and the 1041 approval for the house. The City of Aspen Planning Department has requested a number of restrictions and requirements on behalf of all City Departments, in addition to those which normally would have been included in the County's 1041 approval. We have worked with Mitch Haas on these items in detail and have agreed to accept all of these requirements (a-g) as listed in Mitch Haas' letter of February22, attached, on the understanding and condition, noted in the letter, that there will be no further land use or other requirements related to the matters covered in Mitch's letter and further provided that it is understood and agreed that we will undertake on a best efforts basis the application to the County for inclusion of a Caretaker Dwelling Unit in the house. We would very much like to include a CDU, but as you know, we can only do so with special aproval by the Board of County Commissions. We and the Water Department have agreed to disagree with respect to the legal arguments included in Mitch's letter, since we have been advised by our counsel, Charles Brandt, Esq. that Lot #3 is not currently covered by the Water Agreement and we have the right to drill a well, if for some reason the Amendment to the Water Agreement requested herein were not to be approved. Since we and Mitch Haas, on behalf of the City, agree on all the substantive considerations of interest to the City, our disagreement on the legal context does not appear to be an issue of any consequence and I have only addressed it here at your request. Mr. Phil Overeynder March 15, 1999 page 2 Finally, a correct, current legal description for Lot #1 of the Cora Lee Subdivision, refecting the minor Lot Line Adjustment which accompanied our 1041 Application, is also attached. Lot #1 and our existing house was included in and is covered by the original Water Service Agreement. Yours truly, ay ond N. Au r cc: Cindy Coyell, Esq. Charles Brandt, Esq. ,," IllEll I!11[ IIIIII III IllEl IIIII Iff" III !1111 lIE IIII 424~35 fi/84/~998 Z3.:33A RESOLUTZ DAVIS SZLVI :1. of 4 R 9,90 D e.eg N 0.08 PITKIN COUNTI' CO RESOLLrrION OF TTFF. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRA~TIiNG APPROVAL OF LOT 3, CORA LEE SUBDMSION AS A SEPARATE DEVELOPABLE LOT · RESOL~TIOIN'NO. 98 -,~.~ I1F, CITAI ,S 1. Raymond Auger ("Auger") is the owner of unimproved Lot 3, Cora Lee Subdivision, an unrecorded subdivision consisting of five (5) lots, all of which, except Lot 3, have been recognized as separate, developable lots, three ofwl~ch have been developed with single fromSly dwellings and the forth lot is approved for a single family dwelling. 2. On May 3, 1972, the Pitkin County Plm-ming and Zon.in8 Commission recomrnende~i final plat approval of the five lot Cora Lee Subdivision subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions, including obtaining con'ected access and utility easements over adjacent Iand~ to the Subdivision and connection (o the City of Aspen water system and the Metropolitan Sanitation District's sanitary sewer line when the same became available. The condition of approval as to access could not be lirnely satisfied and the subdivision of the property was not completed. 3o Auger had previously conveyed 5.(~ acres (consisting of the real property constit{lting Lots · 3, 4 and 5, as they were described on the unrecorded Cora Lee Subdivision plat approved by the Pitkin COunty PIann{ng and Zoning Commission) to H.E.R.ichey by deed dated August 30, 1971 and recorded in Book 257 at Page 590, Pitkin County records, subject to a promissory note secured by a deed of~.lst from H. E. Richey to Auger encumbering Lots 3 4. In early 1977 H. E. Richey had defaulted on his promissory note to Auger and Auger and Cecil Lewitz ("Lewitz') entered into a written agreement whereby Auger assigned to Lewitz the delinquent promissory note and deed of mist from I-I.E. Richey in consideration of the grant of an option by Lewitz to Auger to acquire Lot 3. 5. On September 29, 1977, a SherifFs Deed was issued to Cecil Lewitz conveying ,~.2 acres of the 5.6 acres p~rcel. The 4.2 acre parcel consisted of Lots 3 and 5 as described on the unrecord~l Con Lee Subdivision Plat. The SherifFs Deed is recorded in Book 335 at page 74(~, Pitl~in County records. (~. Under the terms of the AgTeement entered into in 1977 between Auger and Lewitz, in addition to the gnut of option, Auger was permitted the right "to occupy and exclusively use said Parcel A CLot 3) for any lawful purpose" including the right "...to erect-and maintain on said parcel A CLot 3) outbuildings, greenhouses, tennis courts anal the like..." 7. In reliance upon the Lewitz option agreement and the right to occupy Lot 3, Auger expended substantial sums in order to evenUla]ly develop Lot 3, including the const~'uction of an access road across Lot 3, the installation of City of Aspen water lines, Aspen IIIIIII III1 ' ' 1111 III IIIIII II111 IIIIIII 111 Illtl lilt II 424~.36 11~,,4/1998 lZ:331:1 RE$QLUT! D~VZ$ S:~LV~, 2 of 4 R 8.98 D 9.~ N 6.8~ PZTKZN ¢8UNT'i' CO Consolidated Sanitation District sewer lines and upgraded Holy Cross electric lines across Lot 3. In add/don, Auger obtained corrected access to the Subdivision thereby fulfilling all of the conditions of the 1972 Planning and Zoning Commission approval of the Con Lee Subdivision. 8.Auger, in order to exercise his option to acquire Lot 3 ~om Lewitz and seek clarLfication that Lot 3 is a developable lot, obtained approval of the Auger/Lewitz Lot LIne Adjustment Plat platting Lot 3 (substantially as the lot was described in 1972 wh~n approved by the Pitkin County pJsnt~in~ Commission) as part of Lot 1 as the same is shown and described on the Lot Line Adjustment Plat recorded in Book 44 and page 35. Following the approval of . the Let Line Adjustment Plat, Lewitz conveyed Lot 3 to Auger by Deed recorded January 16, 1998, as Keception No. 412633. NOW, TI:IF. REFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it hereby determines that .Lot 3, Cora Lee Subdivision, as the same is described on Attachment "A" to this Resolution and as shown and dcpictod on Attachment "B" to this P, esolution, as anon-conforming lot of record, is deemed to be and is hereby recognized as a separate lot and no longer merged with Lot I (as the same is shown on the Auger/Lewitz Lot Line Adjustment Plat recorded in Plat Book 44 at Page 35) and, as a separate lot, is hereby approved for developmenf by virtue of the grant of option combined with the right to occupy said property, subject only to the following condition: Auger shall obtain 1041 Hazard and General Submission approval. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 2~TM DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998. ATTEST: BOAP, D OF COUN'FY COMMISSIOEKS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO APPKOV~D AS TO FOP, M: APPKOVED AS TO CONTEN'r: John E~-,-'- Cindy Houben, County Attorney Community Developmgnt Director .,,.,.---=,-=o u~' =...~P, s:sa.r"~er Associates, Inc. 97 243 3810 PoO2 ATTAC/IMENT "A" DESCRIPTION Ol= LOT 3. COBA LEE Sr,.IBDIVI SION Lot 3, Cora Lec Subdivision situated in that portion of the Mining Claims Cora Lc=, M.S. 5304 Amended and Ella Sherv~xl, M.S. 5304 Amcnclccl located in ~ S I/2 of'ffi= NE 1/4 of Section 7, ToWnship I0 South, Range 84 West, 6th Principal Meridian, County of Pitkin, Star= of Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: Bel~nning at the most westerly com,'r of'said Lot 3 whence the C-E 1/16 comer of'said Section 7, bca~s S 57~ 27'31" E, -540.30 feet; .... 1. Thenc~N 45° 44' 08" E, 6:~60 feet; 2. Thence S 44° 13' 06" E, 105.00 feet; 3. Th~:nc~ N 45° 44' 08" E, 179.65 re=t; 4. Thence S 44° 1Y 06" E, 99.61 feet; 5. Thence N 45° 47 10" E, 324.19 feet; 6. Thence S 46~ 32' 19" E, 197,49 feet; 7. Thence S 45° 45' 13" W, 575.43 feet, 8. Thence N 44° 13' 06" W, 402.05 feet m the Point of Beginning. Lot 3 as described above contains 3.300 acres more or less. IIIIIII I!lll Illlit III IllIll IIlil IIIIIII III IIIII IIII II!1 42413S 11/Es4/1998 15:33R RESOLUTZ DAVIS SZLVZ 3 0tr 4 R 8.80 0 8.88 N 8.Be PITKIN COUNTY C0 :.: ~. . . ,.. .,..., .:. .': !;'. ·.: .. ..-, .....~.-.. -..: :,. :,... - ...._~.-~= ~ =:...~.~..; - . .. -, ~. -..~ .......: :. -..' ." . ' "'. .. ~:.~Z~ ~. · .. . . ~,~,~__~ ='. ~'.....: , : .-.:':., . - : '~'~,_~{::','~':::~; IIIIIII IIIII IIIIII III IIIIII IIIII IIIIIII III IIIII IIII IIII 424136 11/84/1998 11:33R RESOLUTZ DRVXS SXLVX 4 of 4 R e,ee U e,ee N e,ee PZTKZN COUNTY CO MEMORANDUM V ~ ~ TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Direct~' Mltch Haas, Interim Deputy Director FROM: Christopher Bendon Planner RE: Nolan Lot Split - 303 North First Street Ordinance No. tgf, Series of 1999. First Reading DATE: March 22, 1999 SUMMARY: William Nolan has applied for a Lot Split to divide his 12,000 square foot parcel into two 6,000 square foot Lots. The property is located at 303 North First Street and is currently developed with one single-family residence. This existing house does exhibit some historic qualities but is not listed on the City Historic Inventory. In fact, the property was removed from the Inventory in the late 1980's after several alterations were made to the house. There are portions of the house which rest on the proposed lot line. These portions of the structure, however, a~e recent additions and are expected to be removed to comply with the new lot line. The Lot Split provisions do not require a house to be demolished prior to application for a Lot Split. Staff has suggested, as a condition of this approval, requiring conformance with the new lot line at the time of actual development. Staff recommends City Council adopt Ordinance No _~k, Series of 1999, upon first reading and schedule the second reading for April 12, 1999. MAIN ISSUES: The existing house exhibits some historic qualities but was removed from the Historic Inventory after some alterations in the 1980s. The applicant has indicated a desire to remove some of these additions, especially as they pertain to the proposed lot line. There are several smaller trees and two large Spruce trees which are located in close proximity to orie another within the development area of proposed Lot #1. The applicant has met with members of the City Parks Department to discuss the opportunities of relocating the trees. The majority of these trees can be moved to other location~ on the property. The two Spruce trees could be moved together, though one would probably not survive the relocation. There are no trees which are of such importance to specifically designate a building envelope or restrict the areas for development further than the · prescribed zoning setbacks. Staff has included a condition requiring development on either lot to comply with the City's tree preservation Ordinance.. APPLICANT: William C. Nolan. Represented by Stan Clauson Associates. I LOCATION: 303 North First Street ZONING: Medium Density Residential (R-5). LOT SIZE: Existing: 12,000 square feet. Proposed: Two lots of 6,000 s.f. each. FAR: Current Allowable: 3,840 s.f. for a single family residence or 4,260 s.f. for a duplex. ProposedAllowable: 3,240 s.f. for each lot (single-family only). CURRENT LAND USE: Single~Family residence on one parcel. PROPOSED LAND USE': Single-Family residence and one vacant single-family lot. PREVIOUS ACTION: City Council has not previously considered this land use application. R~V1EW PROCEDURE: Lot Split. City Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application at a public hearing pursuant to Section 26.88. STAFF COMMENTS: The existing house resides on the proposed property boundary. This is a typical scenario which the land use code recognizes by not requiring the structure to be demolished prior to applying for a Lot Split. To remedy the encroachment, staff typically recommends a condition of approval requiring both Lots, and associated structures, to comply with zoning at the time of acttial development on either Lot. In this ease, at the time of development on either Lot, the existing house would need to rest entirely on proposed Lot #2 and within the new setbacks created by the new lot line. Existing encroachments, such as the existing carriage house, are grandfathered and are not required to be remedied. The portion of the structure which exists where the property boundary is proposed is a recent addition and does not contribute to the historic value of the house. This portion is expected to be removed to comply with the new setbacks and the reduced FAR of the smaller lot. 'Review Criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." The application has been included as Exhibit "B." RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council adopt Ordinance No. ~, Series of 1999, upon first reading. This Ordinance schedules the public hearing for April 12, 1999, and contains the following recommended conditions of approval: 2 1. A Lot Split Plat, meeting the requirements of Section 26.88.040(D)(2)(a)(1), shall be recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this Ordinance. The plat shall indicate all easements of record, property comer monuments, existing structural non-conformities, existing trees including those in the alleyway, a five-foot-wide pedestrian usable space located 7.5 feet from the property line with a 5 foot buffer for snow storage, and note encroachrnents on public rights-of-way and the respective encroachment licenses. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformanee with the R-6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: · Upon development of Lot #1 or redevelopment of Lot #2, both lots, and the associated structures, shall comply with the R-6 Zone District provisions with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Existing non-conforming accessory structures may continue to the extent that the new lot boundaries do not increase the element's non- conformity. · The developer of each Lot shall seek an exemption from GMQS pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2), as amended from time to time. 3. A tree removal permit from the City Parks Department shall be required for the removal or relocation of trees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code, as amended. There shall be no excavation or storage of fill materials within the tree driplines. 4. The building permit plans for each Lot shall indicate conformance with the City Streetscape Guidelines. Conformante with said guidelines shall be accomplished prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall complete a tap permit and shall pay all connection charges due to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 6. A building permit application for each Lot shall contain a drainage report and a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. Ifa ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2 year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. 7. A building permit application for each Lot shall contain a recorded agreement to construct sidewalk, curb, and gutter, and a recorded agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. 8. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Aspen City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by an entity with the authority to do so. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance No.c~) , Series of 1999, upon first reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Site Plan Exhibit C -- Development Application 3 ORDINANCE N0..~ (SERIES OF 1999) AN ORDINANCE .OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE NOLAN LOT SPLIT, LOTS K, L, M, & N, BLOCK 56, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel # 2735-124-21-005 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William C. Nolan, owner, for a Lot Split of a 12,000 square foot parcel &land, described as Lots K, L, M, & N, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, into two 6,000 square foot lots in conformance with the Medium Density CR-6) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the City Council may approve Lot Split applications in c0nformance with Section 26.88.030 after taking and considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director and taking and considering public testimony at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received recommendations from the City Engineer, the City Zoning Officer, the Asp~nfPitkin County Housing Authority, and the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, reviewed the proposal, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, as identified in Sections 26.28, 26.52, and 26.88, has reviewed and considered the recommendations made by the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered pulelie comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council 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 WItEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: The Nolan Lot Split is approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. A Lot Split Plat, meeting the requirements of Section 26.88.040(D)(2)(a)(1), shall be recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of this Ordinance. The plat shall indicate all easements of record, property comer monuments, existing structural non- Ordinance No. , Series of 1999 Page I conformities, existing trees including those in the alleyway, a five-foot-wide pedestrian usable space located 7.5 feet from the property line with a 5 foot buffer for snow storage, and note eneroachrnents on public rights-of-way and the respective encroachment licenses. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R-6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: · Upon development of Lot # 1 or redevelopment of Lot #2, both lots, and the associated structures, shall comply with the R-6 Zone District provisions with respect to the newly created lot boundiries and setbacks. Existing non-conforming accessory structures may continue to the extent that the new lot boundaries do not increase the element's non-conformi~. · The developer of each lot shall seek an exemption from GMQS pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2), as amended from time to time. 3. A tree removal permit from the City Parks Department shall be required for the removal or relocation of trees as per Section 13.20.020 of the Code, as amended. There shall be no excavation or storage of fill materials within the tree driplines. 4. The building permit plans for each Lot shall indicate conformance with the City Streetscape Guidelines. Conformance with said guidelines shall be accomplished prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall complete a tap permit and shall pay all connection charges due to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 6. A building permit application for each Lot shall contain a drainage report and a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. Ifa ground recharge system is required, a soil percolati0n report Will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2 year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. 7. A building permit application for each Lot shall contain a recorded agreement to construct sidewalL curb, and gutter, and a recorded agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. 8. All material represeniations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Aspen City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by an entity with the authority to do so. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Ordinance No. __, Series of 1999 Page 2 Section 3: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 12th day of April, 1999 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22nd day of March, 1999. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk John Bennett, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of ,1999. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk John Bennett, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Ordinance No.. , Series of 1999 Page 3 Exhibit A Nolan Lot Split City Council shall exempt a Lot Split from the provisions of Subdivision if the following conditions are met: A. The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. Staff Finding: The parcel consists of four original townsite lots and was not created by a Subdivision. B. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c). Staff Finding: Both proposed Lots conform tothe R-6 Zone District. The existing house may continue to exist on the newly created lot line until such time as either lot is developed. At such . time, the existing house shall conform to the new setback requirements established by the new lot line and the FAR requirements of the reduced lot size. This shall be noied on the final plat. Both Lots are required to mitigate for affordable housing pttriuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c), as amended. This has been included as a condition of approval and shall be noted on the final plat. C. The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050 (C)(3)(a); and Staff Finding: This property has not previously received a Subdivision Exemption. D. A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100. Staff Finding: A Lot Split Plat shall be recorded within 180 days of the adoption date of the Ordinance. This plat shall depict two Lots in conformance with the R-6 Zone District and shall include the following plat notes: · Upon development of Lot #1 or redevelopment of Lot #2, both Lots, and the associated structures, shall comply with the R-6 Zone District provisions with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Existing non-conforming accessory structures may continue to the extent that the new lot boundaries do not increase the element's non-conformity. · The developer of each lot shall seek an exemption from GMQS pursuant to Section 26.100.050(A)(2), as amended from time to time. E. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part 0fthe applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City . Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. Staff Finding: Staff has included this fume requirement as a condition of approval. F. In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot split. StaffFind'rag: The existing house is not required to be demolished. Staff has included a condition requiring both lots to conform to the R-6 Zone District regulations at the fume of actual development on either lot. G. Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-family home. Staff Finding: Due to the lot area (density) requirements of the R-6 Zone District, the bUild-out potential for each 6,000 square foot lot is a single-family home. OT / .'.,- ~.,.. · ,4ZZ o -- i LOT f ,. / LOT 2 ~ ~ / LOT O MEMORANDUM Vtt ~ To: Mayor and City Council Thru: Amy Margerum From: Jack Reid Date: March 17, 1999 Subject: Contract approval, Wagner Equipment Company SUMMARY Staff recommends approval of the contract the Parks Department to lease specified equipment from Wagner Equipment Co. for use at Snyder Park. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The Asset Planning Committee approved this purchase in the 1999 Asset Management Plan. City Council approved the 1999Asset Management Plan in the 1999 Budget. CURRENT ISSUES: This agreement is a result of the competitive bidding process. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The 1999Asset Management Plan contains the approved budget for this purchase. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution #"~1 of 1999, on the Consent Calendar of Monday, March 2_~2, 1999 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RESOLUTION NO.o~. Series of 1999 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND WAGNER EQUIPEMNT COMPANY , AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID DOCUMENT(S) ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a CONTRACT between the City of Aspen, Colorado and WAGNER EOUIPEMNT COMPANY a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a pan thereof. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section One That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that CONTRACT between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and WAGNER EOUIP~MNT COMPANY a copy of 'which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute' said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: ,1~8. John S. Bennett, Mayor SUPPLY PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT CITY OF ASPEN BID NO, 1999 - 7FM THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into, this day of 1999, by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereinaffer referred to as the "City" and Wac~ner Equipment Comicany, hereinafter referred to as the 'Ven~ . . with the terms and conditions outlined in the Contract Documents and any associated Specifications, and Vendor wishes to sell said UNIT to the City as specified in its Bid. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Vendor, for the considerations hereinaf~er set forffi, agree as follows: 1. Purchase. Vendor agrees to sell and City agrees to purchase the UNIT(S) as described in the Contract Documents and more specifically in Vendors Bid for the sum of Ekihty Thousand, One Hundred Ninety-F~ve Dollars and Thirty-Six Cents ($80, 195.36). 2. Delivery. (FOB 1080 POWER PLANT RD. ASPEN, CO.) 3. Contract Documents. This Agreement shall include all Dontract Documents as the same are listed in the Invitation to Bid and said Contract Documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement as if fully set out at length herein. ~ 4. Warranties. A full description of all warranties associated with this purchase shall accompany ~ contract document 5. Successors and Assiclns. This Agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Vendor respectively and their agents, representatives, employee, successors, assigns and legal representalives. Neither the City nor the Vendor shall have the dght to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obliga~ons hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 6. Third Parlies. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed or cons'rued to confer upon or grant to any third party or parlies, except to pardes to whom Vendor or City may assign this Agreement in accordance with the specific written parmission, any fights to ctaim damages or to bring any suit, ac~on or other proceeding against e'dher the City or Vendor because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or condffions herein contained. 7. Waivers. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 8. AQreement Made in Colorado. The parties agree that this Agreement was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 9. Attorney*s Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attomey's fees. 10j Waiver of Presumption. This Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual efforts of the pardes hereto and the pardes agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall adse for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of the Agreement 11. Certification Reclardincl Debarment, Suspension, Ineliqibilitv, and Voluntary Exclusion. Vendor certifies, by acceptance of this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from pardcipa~on in any transaction wffh a Federal or State department or agency. It further certifies that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all.lower tier transac~ons, solicitations~ proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that vendor or any lower tier parddpant was unable to certify to this statement, an explanation was attached to the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory to the City. 12. Warranties Aqainst Confin.~ent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest Vendor warTants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established cemmerdal or selling agencies maintained by the Vendor for the purpose of secudng business. Vendor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any derision, approval, disapproval, recemmendatlon~ preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, inve~gatlon, audi'dng, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or con'o'oversy, or other particular matter, portaining to this Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. Vendor represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City dudng the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Counci! approved the execution of this AgreemenL In addNon to other remedies it may have for breach of the prehibilions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right te: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending pardes from being a vendor, contractor or sub-contractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or othenvise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Vendor, and 4. Recover such value from the offending pardes. 13. Termination for Default or for Convenience of City. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be cancelled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the C~ shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 14. Fund Availability. Finandal obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. '15. City Council Approval. If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $10,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. 16. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancest~*y, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform under this Agreement. Vendor agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, sec~on 13-98, pertaining to non<liscriminaljon in employment. Vendor further agrees to comply with the letter and the spirit of the Colorado Antidiscrimination ACt of 1957, as amended, and other applicable state and federal laws respecting discrimination and unfair employment prances. 17. Integra~on and Modification. This written Agreement along with all Canl}'act Documents shall constitute the conb'act between the pardes and supersedes or incorporates any pdor written and oral agreements of the pardes. In addition, vendor understands that no City of~dal or employee, other .than the Mayor and City Coundl a~ng as a body at a council meeting, has authority to enter into an Agreement or to modify the terms of the Agreement on behalf of the City. Any such Agreement or mod~ca'don to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the pardes hereto. 18. Authorized Representative. The undersigned representative of Vendor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Agreement, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of Vendor for the purposes of execu~ng this Agreement and that he/she has full and complete audhority to enter into this Agreement for the terms and conditions specified herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City and the Vendor, respectively have caused this Agreement to be duly executed the day and year first herein written in three (3) copies, all of which, to all intents and purposes, shall be considered as the original. FOR THE CITY OE ASPEN: A i | ~-ST: City Clerk VENDOR: 'Rtle. purchagr. bid ijjW,4GNER Equipment Co. 7vIAIN OFFICE DENVER, CO GRAND JUNCTION, CO DURANGO, CO HAYDEN, CO PUEBLO, CO BURLINGTON, CO (Ag Bales) (303) 739-3000 (970) 242-2834 (970) 259-2001 (970) 259-2001 (719) 54~ ~-4~33 (719) 346-7880 SHORT TERM RENTAL AGREEMENT THiS AGREEMENT IS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS BELOW AND ON THE REVERSE SIDE HEREOF, WHICH ARE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT: INVOICE RENTER AGREEMENT NO. ACCOUNT # 3511 DATE: 3/12/99 Equipment Value $190.000 00 City of Aspen AGREED ITEMIZED CHAF~GES 130 S. Galena St. DAY (to 8 HIs) : :!i:'::i::i !ii; :!: Aspen CO. 8 E,-t975 WEBK tO40 .)//Z- _ MONTH (tO ~l; HIS> ;: ;: SHIP TO: ~:)VERTIME 2426hr JOBSITE: Parks PepL DELIVERY [] [] i ;:Es :! S715.00 PROJECI NAMa&AODRES$ :; '; ~: Wagner Cust Fr. Branch Grd. Jct. OWNER/GENERAL RETURN: [] L.J $71500 t wagner oust ~* II REQUESTED To Branch Grd, jct SHIP DATE 4/5/99 HOUR METER READING Sales Tax: .E:~ i~ :Exempt OUT [ IN SMM Tax: :::E:Eji !; :~.empt PHONE NO.: 970-920-5133 Insurance ;:! :: CUStomer ORDERED BY IPURCHASE ORDER DATE SHIPPED DATE RETURNED OTHER PROVISION BILLING SCOtt Mayna. rd Fuel Charge: Gel @ /GeL CONDITION OF ACCEPTABLE NOTACCEPTABLE(EXPLAIN) PARTS: EQUIPMENT LABOR: OUT-iN TOTAL BILLING $5568 00 BY THE ~ENTER ~NCLODING BACH ANG EVERY ONE OF THE COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS BALANCE DOE $0 00 ~AK~ MODEL CAPACITY/DESCRIPTIONSERIALNO. STOCKNO. ARenterei6ClSrOpurc~lasephyslCa:Oama~efia~,llrywawef'rcrnOwneto~Ihe Caterpillar 320BL/thb. 6CR01996 71077'.~achi.e,.~a. va~eol s alara=ecf$ ATTACHMENTS DESCRIPTION SERIAL NO. ~er rnonm fol a to~al of $ OIa m,,,'~ pay,~enl =f 42" B kt./th b, (lin k-style thumb) sl o Do A aeouct~ble of 51000 o0 a~phes (see P~YS~GA., CA MAGE wAIVER RENTAL RATES reta,I value of s 1900oc Dy pr~v!o,'~G ms/net DAY WEEK MONTH OVERTIME all risks insurance coverage (,~'e INS~jRAN;E on reverse 8HR. MAX 40HR.-7DAYMAX 3.~ IHR.-4WEEK x ~'~ 30 DAY MAX 4853 24.2e/hr. RENTER ACCEPTANCE BY: DATE OWNER; WAGNER EQUIPMENT CO. THE UNDERSEGNE~ EMPLOYEE OF LESSEE ACKNO'VLE~GES THE EQUlPM,: CREDIT APPROVED BY: ~ EQUIPMENT AS AUTHORIZE[} AGENT FOR LESSEE SALESMAN J.B."San~y" Lowell .~ REC'D BY DATE / See Page 2 for additional terms and conditions Page 1 initialsJ:B~ i~°aTee: ,~./~f'f Page2of2 ~ eSecl suo!$!puoo pue sLuJal leuo!]!ppe Jo~ ~ e6ed aeS :3J. va Ae O,O'~B ~doo~O//Ile~ol ./~pueS..'e'P NVlAIB~qYB :]~va qONVl~3OOV B~iN~ ~'~ p ;uewAed wnwmu,w e ~o S to I~ e ~q ~ow ~ 'ON lVl~gB NOlldlBOS~O aqlUoJe~J~)~fi~qe~lafe~ so)~4d~eq~nd~le lea'V 'ON NDOIS 'ON IVIB~S NOI~dI~OSgO/~IOVdVO tgao~ 00'~z'g$ DNIlllB lVlOl :~oe~ ~Ng~dIRO9 :S~Vd (N~d~) 9qgV~dgO9V ~ON 9qeV~dgOOV dO NOI~IONO0 'leg/ ~ lee :a6JeqO len~ pJeu~e~ 1~0o8 ONIgqI8 NOISIAO~d B~HIO 09N~13~ 91va agdalHS 91va B~o~o 9SVHO~fidJ AB 03~9a~o :a~x3 xe~ se:os 9NIOVgB Bgl~ B~OH 66/g/~ :~lva dlHg ~ '~f 'PJ9 qou~e ol ~o~n//.,~ 'lsnO JauOeM '~P 'PJO qou~B ~'~ ~ ~ A~gA'~gO 'ldaa s4Jed :311SgOr ~'9~$ ~I~AO :O~ ~IHS S3OBVHO OBZl~gi1099~0V u~sV Jo ~0 00'0~'~S enleA ~ua~d~nb3 ~ ~ :3~VQ ~ ~ ~ ~NROOOV 'ON IN3~99~OV 3OIOANI :IN~99~OV SIHI ~O l~Vd ~BV HOIH~ '~OgBgH 9OIS 3SBgAgB NO ONV MO93B SNOIIIONOO ONV S~Bgl ~Hl Ol IOgFBRB SI IN~39BeV SIHl INg 99BOV qVINgB IBOHB (seleS BV) OO 'NOIeNIg~RB O0 'OgBgRd OO 'NgOAVH OO 'OONV~RO O0 'NOIIONR? 0NVBO OO '~ANgO 30~ddO NI~ uaNer ~ abed suo!l!puoo pue SLUJa1 leuo!l!pPe Jo~ ~ aOecl aaS Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council Members THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager FROM: Nick Adeh, City Engine~;7 DATE: March 16, 1999 Reference: 1999 Street Improvement Projects SUMMARY: We have received two sealed bids fi'om qualified contractors for the 1999 Street Improvement projects at City Clerk's Office on Monday, March 15, 1999. These sealed bids were opened and read publicly and the results are summarized in the following tabular form: CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID BID STATUS Elam Construction, Inc. $699,658.70 Qualified bid was accepted Grand River Construction Co. $832,131.45 .... DISCUSSION: The 1999 Street Improvement plan is an annual street restoration and re-surfacing program that has been identified in the As'set Management Plan. This year's project includes the Golf Course Improvements which has helped us to reduce the overall construction costs by combining several projects and forming a larger bid package that brings together the benefits Of a large quantity bidding process. I recommend award of contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder, Elam Construction, Inc., for a total amount of $699,658.70. This will help us to complete the improvements within acceptable weather conditions. FINANCIAL IMPLICATION: This project is funded in the 1999 Asset Management Plan and no additional ftmds are requested. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: PC: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager Jack Reid, Superintendent of Streets Ed Sadler, Asset Manager Ross Soderstrom Project Engineer Risch Coulombe, Golf Course Operations SO ,UTIONNO. (S~riCs of 1999) A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO ELAM CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR THE CITY'S 1999 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado and Elam Construction Company, Inc., a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section One That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Elam Construction, Inc., regard'rag the 1999 Street Improvement Projects, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: ,1999. John S. Bennett, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held ,1999. Katl'ayn S. Koch, City Clerk 1999 STREETS IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Project / Bid Number 99-003 SCOPE OF WORK The work is to include: re-basing and paving of selected streets; asphalt overlaying of selected streets; Roto-milling and asphalt overlaying of selected streets; sinrry seal of selected streets; cape seal of selected streets; slurry seal of selected streets; removing and replacing selected concrete cross-pans; a limited amount of concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk replacement replacement; crusher fines walk trail to be constructed along Doolittle Dr.; drainage ditch to be constructed on Doolittle Dr. along with cleaning culverts, re-shaping their basins, and reshouldering the road. Also included in the bid package is an alternative bid for the golf course improvements.. The scope of work includes construction of a cart path, building three (3) tees, and constructing a drainage Wench and drainage pit. These streets are not included as a portion of the Koch contract. TO: Mayor and City Council Members THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager FROM: Nick Adeh, City Engine/~ DATE: March 16, 1999 Reference: Smuggler Area Neighborhood Improvements, Final Phase SUMMARY: We have received two sealed bids fi'om qualified contractors for the Smuggler Area Neighborhood Improvements project at City Clerk's Office on Thursday, March 11, 1999. These sealed bids were opened and read publicly and the results are summarized in the following tabular form: CONTRACTOR TOTAL B'ID BID STATUS M.A. Concrete Construction, Inc. $243;700.16 Qualified bid was accepted K.C. Excavating &Sons, Inc. $338,902.33 " " DISCUSSION: The Smuggler Area Neighborhood Improvements were planned to be implemented in two phases in order to minimize inconvenience to the neighborhoods. This plan has been identified in the Asset Management Plan and this year's projects will complete the balance of the improvements designed in the original plan presented to City Council in 1997. I recommend award &contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder, M.A. Concrete Construction, Inc., for a total amount of $243,700.16. This will help us to complete the improvements within acceptable weather conditions. FINANCIAL IMPLICATION: This project is funded in the 1999 Asset Management Plan and no additional funds are requested. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: PC: Ed Sadler, Asset Manager Ross SoderslTom Project Engineer Project File RESOLUTION NO. (Series Of 1999) A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO M.A. CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR THE CITY' S SMUGGLER AREA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS FINAL PLAN PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado and M.A. Construction, Inc., a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section One That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and M.A. Construction, Inc., regarding the Smuggler Area Pedestrian Safety and Transportation Improvements Final Plan Project, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: ,1999. John S. Bennett, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a tree and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held ' ,1999. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 999 14:28 9782439757 N A CONCRETE CONST I PAGE 02 'THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on , by and between the CITY OF ASPEN, .ColoradO,. hereinafter called.the "Cft~, and ~.Ao Conczete Consb:~cr.:Lon, hereinafter called the : .WHEREAS, .the. City. haS: caused to be prepared, in'a~o~ance 'with~the law, ' speCifiCations 'and othe~ Contract 'DoCuments for the wO~ heroin desc~bed, and has approved ·"and adopted said documents; and h~ caused to be published, in ~e manner and for ~e ~me required by' law; an adve~iSement for ~e proje~: Smuaaler ~ea' Pedes~an SafeW & · · Transpodatton Improvements' Prolect - RNAL PHASE, and, · ' WHEREAS, the Contractor, in mspon~ to such adveK~ement, or in response to dlre~ ' invitmion has submittedto the City, in ~e m~ner and at the time specffied accordance with' the terms of ~id Invitation for 'Bids ~d, WHEREAS~ th~ Ci~; in 'ffie m~ner prescribed by. law, has publicly opened, examined, · and canvassed. the. Bids submiRed in response to the published In~a~on for Bids therefore, and as a res~R of such CanVass has dete~ined ~d'.declsred the Contremor ~o be ~e lowest reapone hie and mSponsiye' bidder for ~e.sa~ Wo~ and Ms duly awaffied to the Contrador a Contract FOr Constation .therefore, 'for ~e sum or sums set foffih heroin; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the pa~ents and Contra~ for Construction heroin mentioned: ' ' ' 1. . The ContractOr shall ~Ommen~e and complete the constmdion of ~e.,Wo~ ~. fully described nthe Controd DoCuments. ~ .... ~'.. . , . .. , . ;.:' : ,;,' · . ' ., 2; 'The ContraCtor shall. fUm'~h all of the materials, supplies, too~, equip~e9t, labor "'" other :se~ices .hecesSa~;f0r the conStmc~on .and completion of the Wo~ described .. heroin. .. , .: ,. . . .' ... 3. The Con~aCto~ Shall ~Ommence ~e wo~ mqu~ed by ~e Contm~ D~uments ~hln seven .(7) censeCutNe calendar days after ~e date of ~lce TO" Pmceed" and will ' ' ·. ' Complete ~e.same~ ~e'. date ~d~me indicated In · .: ' time Is e~ended in 'accord~Ce w~h.appmp~te provisions in .ffie Co~mct Document. 4.' . The ContraCtor agrees te peffo~ all of the Wo~ descried b the COntaCt Documents and cOm~ly ~ 'the. te~S fierein for a Sum n~ to ex~ed .,]6 , 03/17/1S'9~J 14:28 9782439757 M A CONCRETE CONST I PAGE: :" .5." The term "Contract: DoCurnent$" means and includes the documents listed in the City of :' :' ASpen General Conditions to Contracts for Construction (version GC97-2) and in the . ~" "SpeCial Condltions~ The Contract Documents are included herein by this reference and · ' · . . made a part hereof as if.fU}ly set forth here. ' 6. .The City sli~.ll pry to the Contractor in the manner and at such time as set f,: :~,h in the General Conditions, unless modified by the' Special Conditions, such an~ounts as · · ." ". required by the Documents,' · .:7: ""This Contract' FOr 'COnstructiOn shall be binCling upon all parties hersto ~nd their ... :respeCtive .heirs,. executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwit!',standing anything to the contra~ .contained heroin or in the Contract Documents, this Co:~tract For .ConstrUCtion .shall be: subject to the City of Aspen Procuremerit Code, Title 4 of the' .Municipal Code,. including' the approval requirements of Section 4-08-0/'.0. This agreement shall not be.binding upon the City unless duly executed by the City Manager .. "or the MayOr of the City .of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his/her absence) following ~ resolution" of the Council of fie City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor'.or City Manager (or aduly autliorized official in his/her absence) to execute the same.' 8. .This. agreement and. 'all of. the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefi~ of and be binding' Upon the City and the Contractor respectively and their agents, representatives, employees. Successors, assigns, and legal representatiVes. Neither the City nor the · .Contractor shall have.the right to assign, transfer or sublet' his or her interest or obligations he~'eunde~ without the. written consent of the other party. 9. This agreement .does .nOt and shall' not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to.any third party or 'partieS, except to parties to whom the Contractor or the City r~ay assign this Contrac!. For Construction in accordance with the specific wdtten consent, any dghts to claim damages Or tO bring suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or' the Contract0r'becabse of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, CovenantS, agreements or conditions heroin contained. ' ' 10~ No waiver of default.. by either party of any terms, covenants or conditions hereof td be performed, kept and 0bservedby the other party shall be construed, or operate .as, a 'waiver of any. st~b,seqUent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. : 11. The parties 'agree. that this Contract For Construction was made in accordGnce with the la~vs of the State Of ColOrado and shall be so construed. Venus is agreed to be kept exc usively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. · 12. In the 'event (hat, legal :action Is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this " Contract .fo.r. ConstrUction, the prevailing party shall be entitled to :its costs and "reasonable attomey's fees. · ' l a." This Cobtract For. ConStrUction was reviewed and accepted through. the mutual efforts of · . 1he .parties hemt0,' .and..the parties agree that no construction)shell be made or presumption shall arls.e for or agains~ either party based on any' alleged unequal status ... the pa~ties..in the. negotiation, review or draffing of this Contract For Construction. 03~17/1999 14:20 9702439757 M 4 CONCRETE CONST I PAGE 04 · 14. The undersigned: representative of the Contractor,. as an inducement 'to ihe City to execute ·this ContraCt. For"Construction, represents that· he/she' 'is an authorized representative 'of. the' Contractor for the purposes of executing' this Contract For Construction and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Contract For Construction .for the terms and conditions specified heroin. IN WITNESS' WHEREOF, the pe. rties agree hereto have executed this 'Cm~{ract For ConstruCtion on the date first above wdttsn. ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO .. By: " .. Title:. RE:COMMENDED FOR ~,PpROVAL; APPROVED AS TO FORM: · By: _ City Engineering Department City Attorney 'ATrESTED BY: CONTRACTOR: "~(~/By: .~"'{~,'.-"~"~-'-'-'.--~',r" Title: ~.,~ ~,~;n ~.d · Nets: Certification of IncOi'pora~ion shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporaiien. I; a partnership, the Contract shall be'signed by a Principal and indicate title. 03/17/i999 14:28 9702439757 ~ ~ CONCRetE CONST Z PAGE 05 CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION ("To be COmpleted if Contractor is a Corporation) 'STAI'E OF ... Colorado : ) ) SS. COUNTY Or: Hesa ,' ) · On this 17th day of · Hatch ,19 S9 . before me .'.tppeared t4ar~.in Azoarraqa , to me personally k, lown, who, being by rne first duly sworn, did .say that s/he is President Of M.A. Concrete Construction, Inc, .and that the seal affixed ...- t~; said instrument is the corporate sea! of said corporation, and that said· instrument was signed .' and sealed in behalf of Said corporat on by authority of its board of directors, and s~J deponent ack~ ~owledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. WI'I NES:3 MY HAND AND NO!ARtAL SEAL the day and year in this certificate first above. . writlen. Address , .' . 'J ' My commission expires:. ~-/2 - c>TZ-CO/ ' ' CCf'971,doc Page4' "'CCf SMUGGLER AREA PEDESTRIAN SAFETY & TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT FINAL PHASE Project / Bid Number 99-001 SCOPE OF WORK This project will complete the Smuggler Neighborhood improvements which have taken place over the past three years. The work is to include: Saw cutting pavement. Removing and disposing of asphalt pavement, concrete, and concrete curb and gutter. Construction of 2 speed humps. Installation of three street lights. Installation of various traffic control signs. Construction of sidewalk, access ramps, curb and gutter, driveway aprons. Construction of storm sewer catch basins and tie-ins to existing inlet. Construction of drywell and drainage swale. Installation of various street pavement marking tape and thermoplastic tape (tape provided by City). Traffic control. Related incidental work. This work is all related to pedestrian safety and transportation improvements in the Smuggler neighborhood. TO: Mayor and City Council Members Amy Margerum, City Manager ' THRU: n~ DATE: .1 Reference: 1999 Utility Projects SUMMARY: We have received six sealed bids from qualified contractors for the 1999 Utility Projects package that included DEPP, North 2"a Street, and North Spring Street projects at City Clerk' s Office on Monday, March 15, 1999. These sealed bids were opened and read publicly and the results are summarized in the following tabular form: CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID BID STATUS Condon Construction~ Inc. $394,304.00 Qualified bid was accepted K.C. Excavating &Sons, Inc. $702,951.21 " ' ..... Gould Construction, Inc. $483,144.50 .... " " Meldor Constraction, Inc. $705,470.65 .... " " Utilticon, Inc. $411,673.81 ...... " M.A. Concrete Construction, Inc. $858,490.50 ........ DISCUSSION: The 1999 Utility project list includes construction drainage improvements and other utility conduits and irrigation lines for Mill Street and Hyman Avenue (DEPP phase-I), construction of drainage improvements for North 2rid Street and North Spring Street. These improvements have been identified in the DEPP plan and the Asset Management plan respectively. This bid package has helped us to reduce the overall construction costs by combining several projects and forming a larger bid package that brings together the benefits of a large quantity bidding process. I recommend award of contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder, Condon Construction, Inc., for a total amount of $394,304.00. This will help us to complete the improvements within designated times, weather permitting. FINANCIAL IMPLICATION: This project is funded in the 1999 Asset Management Plan and no additional funds are requested. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: PC: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager Jack Reid, Superintendent of Streets Ed Sadlet, Asset Manager Scott Duryea, Project Manager Ross Soderstrom, Project Engineer RESOLdION NO. ~5' (Series of 1999) A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO CONDON CONSTRUCTION, INC., FOR THE CITY'S 1999 UTILITY PROJECTS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado and Condon Construction Company, Inc., a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a pan thereof. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section One That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Condon Constraction, Inc., regarding the 1999 Utility Projects, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: ,1999. John S. Bennett, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Asi~en, Colorado, at a meeting held ,1999. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on , by and between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, heroinafter called the "City", and Contractor's Name heroinafter called the "Contractor". C on,=lo,~ WHEREAS, the City has caused to be prepared, in accordance with the law, specffications and other Contract Documents for the work heroin described, and has approved and adopted said documents, and has caused to be published, in the manner and for the time required by. law, an advertisement, for the project: 1999 Utilities Project (Project 99-004) and, WHEREAS, the Contractor, in response to such advertisement, or in response to direct invitation, has submitted to the City, in the manner and at the time specified, a sealed Bid in accordance with the terms of said Invitation for Bids; and, WHEREAS, the City, in the manner prescribed by law, has publicly opened, examined, and canvassed the Bids submitted in response to the published Invitation for Bids therefore, and as a result of such canvass has determined and declared the Contractor to be the lowest '---' responsible and responsive bidder for the said Work and has duly awarded to the Contractor a Contract For Construction therefore, for the sum or sums set forth herein; : ' NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the payments and Contract for ConstruCtion heroin mentioned: 1. The Contractor shall commence and complete the construction of the Work as fully described in the Contract Documents. 2. The Contractor shall furnish all of the materials, supplies, tools, equipment, labor and other services necessary for the construction and completion of the Work described heroin. 3. The Contractor shall commence the work required by .the Contract Documents within seven (7) consecutive calendar days after the date of "Notice To Proceed" and will complete the same by the date and time indicated in the Special Conditions unless the time is extended in accordance with appropriate provisions in the Contract Documents. 4. The Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work described in the Contract Documents and comply with the terms therein for a sum not to exceed ($xxx,xxx.xx DOLLARS) or as shown on the BID proposal. CC2-9903.doc °'CC1 Page 1 5. The term "Contract ·Documents" means and includes the documents listed in the City of Aspen General Conditions to Contracts for Construction (version GC97-2) and in the Special Conditions, The Contract Documents are included herein by this reference and "' made a part hereof as if fully set forth here. 6. The City shall pay to the Contractor in the manner and at such time as set forth in the General Conditions, unless modified by the Special Conditions, such amounts as , required by the Documents. 7. This Contract For Construction shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding · anything to the contrary contained herein or in the Contract Documents, this Contract For Construction shall be subject to the City of Aspen Procurement Code, Title 4 of the Municipal Code, including the approval requirements of Section 4-08-040. This agreement Shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the City Manager or the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his/her absence) following a resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the May'or or City Manager (or a duly authorized official in his/her absence) to execute the same. 8. This agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding, upon the City and the Contractor respectively and their agents, representatives, employees. Successors, assigns, and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Contractor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet his or her interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. ~ 9. This agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom the Contractor o.r the City may assign this Contract For Construction in accordance with the' specific wdtten consent, any rights to claim damages or to bring suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or the Contractor because of an, y breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 10. No waiver of default by either party of any terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall .be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. ;11. The parties agree that this Contract For Construction was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be kept exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 12. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Contract for Construction, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and · reasonable attomey's fees. 13. This Contract For Construction was reviewed and accepted through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto, and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or CC2-9903.doc "CC1 Page 2 presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of this Contract For Construction. 14. The undersigned representative of fie Contractor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Contract For Construction, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of the Contractor for the purposes of executing this Contract For Construction and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Contract For Construction for the terms and conditions specified heroin. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties agree hereto have executed this Contract For Construction on the date first above written. ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By: Title: RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Engineering Department City Attorney ATTESTED BY: CONT~CTOR: '''~ Note: Certification of Incorporation shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporation; If a partnership, the Contract shall be signed by a Principal and indicate title. CC2-9903.doc *'CC1 Page 3 CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION (To be completed if Contractor is a Corporation) STATE OF n 's a 7f ~ ,19~, before me appeared , to m pemonally known, who, to said ins~ment is the co~orate seal of said corporation, and ~at sad inst~ment was s gned and sealed in behalf of said coloration by authod~ of its board of directors, and said deponent ac~owledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. WITNESS MY HAND AND NOTARIAL SEAL the day and year in this certificate first above wdtten. o,"'~ ",~'.~ : ,.¢~ My commission e×pires: /' / ~- ~ ,~ CC2-gg03.doc '*CC1 Page 4 1999 UTILITIES IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Project / Bid Number 99-004 SCOPE OF WORK The work will occur in three (3) locations and will include: S. Mill St./E. Hyman Ave. (DEPP-Phase I): The first phase of the Downtown Enhancement and Pedestrian Project (DEPP), extension and installation of underground utilities. Extension of the storm sewer system in S. Mill St. and E. Hyman Ave. with new laterals stubbed out and capped' (no inlet boxes); new storm drain line from S. Monarch to S. Mill in E. Hopkins Ave.; new manholes over the existing line and on the new line; utility conduits for future utility needs at alley crossings of S. Mill St.; irrigation water distribution piping with conduits for irrigation control, street lighting and communication in a common trench; 2 inch tap of water main in E. Hyman Ave. for the irrigation system with curb box set behind the curb; potholing of the existing utilities; patching of pavement. N. 2rid Street: Extension of a new 15inch storm drain line along the east side of N. 2rid St. from the trunk line in W. Francis St. southward to W. Main St. with laterals to the west at the corners. Potholing of the US West Communications trunk line at the corner of W. Bieeker St. and N. 2nd St.; Pavement patching. N. Spring Street: Installation of a new pre-cast inlet detention basin at the northeast corner of N. Spring St. and Bay St. in the Oklahoma Flats neighborhood. The basin consists of two (2) concrete box culverts placed on end with a traffic rated structural slab over the top. Finish grading and reseeding will restore the disturbed areas. TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager ent Director ~it~ Baas, ~nteri~ Dep~ Director FROM: Christopher Bendon, Pl~er SeNic~Commereia~ndustrial (S/C~ Zone District Code Amendment Second Reading and Public ~eafing Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1999 DA~: March 22, 1999 SUMM~Y: The Se~ice/Co~erci~/Industrial (S/Ca) Zone Dis~ct was Created in 1971 to provide for ce~ain light indus~ ~d co~erci~ ~de l~d uses in to~, ~d to . disco~age ~ese businesses from migrating Do~v~ley. In ~e F~I of 1997, ~e Pl~ng ~d Zo~ng Co~ission, concerned about the possible erosion of ~s zone district, ins~cted ~fff to investigate ~d efforce the zo~ng reg~ations in ~s zone district. Upon identi&ing ~e nmber of businesses w~ch may be ~fected by such s~ict efforcement, smffre~ed to ~e Co~ission to discuss the p~ose ~d specific provisions of~e S/C~ Zone Dis~ct. Stiff reco~ended that ~e Co~ission either reaffim or ~end its p~ose before t~ing ~y efforcement actions, ~d that those actions should be at ~e direction of Ci~ Co~cil. ~e Co~ission reviewed ~e SCI Zone District d~ng a series of six public he~ng ~d made a reco~endation to Ci~ Council in ~e Spring of 1998. Ci~ Co~cil reviewed ~is proposed ~endment to ~e SCI Zone Dis~ct as agenda item ~ June of 1998 and d~ing a work session wi~ ~e Plying ~d Zoning Co~ission in September of 1998. Members of bo~ ~e Council ud the Co~ission provided specific direction reg~d~g ~e zo~ng provisions ~d prefeEed me~ods of implementation. In addition, Co~cil requested ~e proposed definitions ~sociated ~ ~ezo~ng be inco~orated in one Ordin~ce. The suggested ch~ges have been inco~orated along wi~ ~e deflations. In ~e gud view, the proposed zo~ng ~endments allow for a broader r~ge of uses ~n areore flexible set of building dimensions. ~ere ~e more uses, specific provisions for accesso~ retail, a more genero~ building envelope, reduced p~ng requirement, ~d ~e abili~ to double the F~ for ~e p~ose of affordable housing as ~ accesso~ use. ~e proposed Ordinuce ~lows ~3 uses to continue reg~dless of ~e m~er in which ~e use was originally established. D~ng first reading, Co~cil expressed interest in ~o me~ods of ad&essing e~sting ~chitec~al offices: 1) gr~dfa~er all existing users ~fil ~e Use is vacated; 2) gr~dfa~er ~e existing to~ squ~e foomge devoted to ~chitectur~ offices wi~n 1 the zone district. This second option requires Council to choose a definition for the use and include it within the list of permitted uses. Staff has indicated two definitions as options 2a and 2b. Additional detail, as requested by Council, concerning the manner in which these two methods would be implemented has been included in the "Main Issues" portion of this memo. The Community Development Director recommends City Council choose option 1 in addressing this issue. There has also been a request by a few land owners to include flexibility in this Ordinance for future uses not included in this Ordinance, or just plain not yet invented. This i~ a recent issue but one of importance to these land owners. Staff has suggested a manner of incorporating this flexibility, under Main Issues, without derailing the process. The retail provision allows up to 25% of the floor area for retail and customer service area for all uses unless specifically noted in the zoning (such as for building materials). This pementage can be increased through a conditional use review if the applicant can demonstrate the extra allowance is needed and appropriate for the use. Specifically for affordablehousing, the FAR may be increased by an additional 1:1. This provision requires the housing to be above grade, above other uses within a structure, deed restricted to the lower Categories. The use remains conditional to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. One suggestion made during the work session involved a yearly status. report for the zone district. This has been incorporated in the Ordinance as an activity for staff to perform annually for a period of three years, or as extended by Council. The attachments detail the existing and proposed zoning as well as the proposed definitions. Staff has not included many of the attachments from previous memoranda but will be able to address specific concems as they arise. MAiN ISSUES: Architects. The Commission was mixed on this topic. Some Commissioners felt that an architect'S 'studio' was nothing more than an office taking advantage of lower lease rates, and hence belonging in an office or commercial zone district. Others fek that architects have a certain artistic quality to their work and have different space requirements associated with their businesses than do other offices. The Commissioners did all agree, however, that their biggest fear was the potential influx of large architectural firms and that any provision for architects should not allow related fields such as landscape architecture or engineering firms. This sentiment has also been expressed by some Council members. Staff maintains the opinion expressed by the depanmeut when the issue first surfaced a decade ago. That is, "Architectural Offices" are not "Artist Studios" and are a use that belongs in the Office Zone or other zone districts where offrues are permitted. However, the interpretation to allow architects is "water under the bridge" and there exists a certain fairness issue with architects who now occupy space in the zone. As strongly as staff believes the interpretation was misguided, staff feels equally as strong that individual tonants should not bare the bnmt of that realization and should not be made to vacate. 2 The Community Development Director recommends the use be grandfathered but not included within the zoning and all existing architectural offices become non- conforming uses (option 1). However, if Council does include the use within the zoning, with or without an overall square footage cap, staff remains concerned that a distinction between Architects and Landscape Architects may be construed as arbitrary. In this case, the useof the more broad "Design Studio" definition (2b) may be more appropriate than the "Architecture Studio" definition (2a). City Council narrowed the resolution of the architect issue to two scenarios: 1) Crrandfathering the use specific to the location; and, 2) grandfatherhag the amount of use by square footage within the entire zone. Option 1 restricts architectural offices to the current sizes and locations. This would be done by not including the use within the zoning amendments and allowing the more general grandlathering provision to guide their treatment. This option allows current tenants to continue for the life of the business, transfer the business to a new owner, to transfer the space to another architect or design professional, and even to expand or move within the zone to a space currently occupied by an architect. This provision does not allow these non- conforming uses to expand or increase in intensity, and it terminates the use if vacated for more than one year. Option 2 - grandfathering an amount of square footage devoted to architectural offices within the zone - is more flexible. This alternative contains the provisions above with the ability to relocate or expand within an overall square footage cap for the entire zone district with no 1 -year abandonment clause. This second option requires the Council to include either "Architect Studio" or "Design Studio" as a permitted use and limiting the total square footage in the zone. These are referred to as options 2a and 2b. The second definition (2b) is more permissive and allows ' product design, graphic arts, etc. Monitoring. Options 2a and 2b of maintaining an allowance in the SCI Zone for architectural offices requires staff monitoring of the zone district by keeping an accurate record of the square footage devoted to the use at any given time. This can be done by recording building permit applications for existing architectural offices and business license applications for new architectural offices. This is not a complicated task and requires no new staffing or additional skills. It is, however, an additional intricacy of the zoning which could result in a dilemma if not kept current. The 'yearly report' - an idea already incorporated into the proposed Ordinance - becomes very important if the total square footage allowance (option 2) is initiated. 6randfathering & Compliance. Council provided staff with the specific direction to treat businesses regardless of the manner in which they were originally established. Therefore, all existing businesses in the S/C/I Zone District will fall into one of the following three scenarios: a) Each land use established prior to the adoption of this Ordinance which remains or becomes a "permitted Use'' through this amendment shall be unaffected and require no land use action. 3 b) Each land use established prior to adoption of this Ordinance which remains or becomes a conditional use with the Ordinance shall apply for and obtain conditional use approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission Upon expansion or other substantial change in the nature of the use. c) Each land use established prior to the adoption ofthis Ordinance which either remains an unlawful use or is deleted as a permitted or conditional use by this, or a previous, ordinance shall become or remain a legal non-confonrdng use subject to the provisions of Section 26.104 of the Aspen Municipal Code, as mended from time to time. This language is included in the proposed Ordinance and covers all of the possible ways in which the existing business were established or were amended over time to the current use. This provision also allows the use to continue, regardless of the user, until the use is vacated for more than one year. The manner in which Council chooses to treat architectural or design studios should be specified within this compliance section. The options are: d) 1 -* Architectural Offices shall not be considered "Artist Studios." (This option grandfathers the use specific to the location.) 2a - Architect Studios are permitted but the use may not exceed 7,660 total square footage within the SCI Zone District. 2b - Design Studios are permitted but the use may not exceed 9,090 total square footage within the SCI Zone District. The Community DevelOpment Director recommends City Council choose option 1. Manufacturing. There has been some recent confusion surrounding the term manufacturing. This is a broad term describing many actions - all of which include taking unfinished materials and combining, or otherwise altering, them to create a finished product. This includes, for example, producing termis balls from raw materials. It also includes dyeing tennis balls different color or printing the word "Aspen" on blank tennis balls. It is literally impossible to specifically describe all of the actions that can be performed on the wofld's various materials to make finished products, especially considering there are many materials, processes, and products not yet invented. The term "manufacturing" is the most flexible manner in which to describe the act of creating a product from unfinished materials. Other Uses. A few property owners have recently contacted staff questioning the ability of the zoning to accommodate uses not yet defined. There may be types of businesses, not yet invented, which may be appropriate and desirable to include in the SC! Zone District. The normal process for amending the zoning code can be time consuming and costly for a private applicant. There may be value, however, in providing flexibility for the SCI Zone to accommodate new uses. There are a few methods of doing this. There has been an ongoing request from the Planning and Zoning Commission to review all "use determinations." Additional SCI uses could be considered by either the Director or by the Commission and then appealed to the Commission or to Council. Revising this section, however, is a substantive amendment which should . be included in the list of substantive changes to the Land Use Code rewrite. Staff does not recommend a substantive change like this be included in the SCI Ordinance for lack of thorough analysis. As an alternative, there could be included a listed use stating "other similar uses deemed to be appropriate by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.112. Interpretations." The process for interpreting the land use code now requires the Planning Director to make an interpretation which can then be appealed to City Council. This does not address the larger issue of use reviews being handled by the Commission. It does however, allow for the Director to consider a new use and deem it appr6priate as a permitted or condiiional use without the applicant having to prepare an application to amend the land use code. The specific language allowing such flexibility has been included in the Ordinance with highlighted text. If City Council does want to include this type of flexibility for use reviews, staff recommends Council direct staff to develop a use review procedure, as a follow-up item, which allows the Commission and Council the ability to hear appeals and to call up decisions within a certain time period. PRIMARY STAKEHOLDERS: The legal requirement for an amendment to the text of the land use code is a notice in the newspaper. In addition, staff identified as many businesses in the affected area as possible and sent notices prior to each hearing. Also, members of the public were encouraged to add their names to the mailing list to receive notices in the mail. Staff made copies of the Commission memos available to the public prior to each hearing and encouraged interested parties to address letters of concern to the Commission if they could not attend the meetings in person. After first reading of this Ordinance, staff held an informational meeting with business owners to discuss the implications of ~he zoning, proposed compliance methods, and terms such as grandlathering and non-conforming use. APPLICANT: City of Aspen. LOCATION: There are r~vo areas in town zoned S/Ca; The Puppy Smith and Mill Street intersection (Post Office, etc.) and the East Bleeker Street area below the Concept 600 Condominiums. PREVIOUS ACTION: Council previously .considered this zone district amendment during a work session with the Planning and Zoning Commission. First Reading of this Ordinance was completed on February 8, 1999. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Code amendments are recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing and then approved, approved with conditions, or denied by City Council at a public hearing. 5 STAFF COMMENTS: The AACP and land use regulations reflect the community' s desire to protect a sense of place and identity. This code amendment addresses the policies and objectives of the Housing and Commercial/Retail Action plans of the AACP. Much of Aspen' s character rests on being not only a resort, but a functioning town. Critical to that feeling of 'towHess' is the layering of land uses and the way in which they support and enhance each other. Although much of the attention has traditionally been placed upon new growth as the major factor in affecting change, it is also the loss of locally oriented businesses and an inability to retain a "critical mass" of the workforce in town which are maj or concems. Staff is suggesting that, if a service/industrial area of town is desired by the community, the way to encourage those land uses is to provide regulatory incentives and to prohibk land uses which encourage real estate speculation and intense retail uses which may inflate lease rates above reasonable levels for the desired uses. Important to the health and well-being of businesses in this zone is to be able to provide employees with housing opportunities. This area of town, however, will never be all things to all people. The community has long determined that it will not address demand with more supply. The demand for lower lease rates, and the pressure on this area of town to 'up-zone,' may always be present. Staff believes the suggested provisions strike an acceptable balance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council review and consider the proposed Ordinance, make a determination concerning architectural offices, a determination concerning an "other uses" provision; and adopt this Ordinance upon second reading. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1999 ." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B - Proposed Ordinance with a Summary of current land uses Exhibit C - Definition of Home Occupation Exhibit D - Vicinity Map 6 Exhibit A SCI STAFF COMMENTS: Text Amendment Section 26.92.020, Standards Applicable to a Land Use Code Text Amendment In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title, the City Council and the Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed code amendment intends to preserve and enhance the purpose of the zone district by carefully defining those uses that will benefit the entire community, including affordable housing to offset the generation of employees, and hopefully lessen the ambiguity of the current text. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: Staff believes these changes to the zone district are supported by She AACP. The Commercial Section of this document does encourage the preservation and expansion of the S/C/I Zone District as a place for local serving businesses. Preventing the departure oflocal service and light industrial businesses by excluding uses that encourage real estate speculation and higher lease rates is a goal of the greater community. Identifying and encouraging the preservation and development of light industrial and service uses that benefit the community may reduce the necessity to drive downvalley. Encouraging small, private ~ector infill ~levelopment of affqrdable housing accessory to employee generating uses, located on-site, in and near desired activity and employment centers preserves open and rural area~ and sustains the "critical mass" essential to the character of the community. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The SCI zone seems to work well in the current locations. Both areas are centrally located close to downtown where services may be accessed by pedestrians, delivery access is convenient, and accessory housing Will be near employment opportunities, recreational resources, and convenient to shopping. The increased mount of employee housing that can be built on-site can be accommodated within the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. The amount of residential density allowed is not anticipated to create any conflicts with surrounding land uses and densities. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The proposed changes should, if interpreted and enforced correctly, generate the same number or fewer trips. Additional housing opportunities withifi walking distance to employment, recreation, retail, and essential services could reduce the need for everydaydriving. staff comments page 1 E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The types of uses and densities within already established urban areas are not expected to create abnormal demands on public facilities. Development proposals may be evaluated on a individual basis through the growth management review process. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: The areas of the city zoned SCI are within the urban core and have been developed for some time. Preventing downvalley migration of light industrial and service businesses and encouraging the business owners to provide employee housing on*site may actually prevent adverse impacts on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: One of the most profound (tifferences between Aspen and other mountain resort towns is its history as a "real" town. Although there are continual challenges to the original theme, Aspen is not merely a real estate development accessory to a resort economy, it is a town. Characteristic of traditional towns is a layerinS offand uses. Each layer serves an important function in 'supporting other layers but generally cannot survive individually. Extremely important to the residents of this community is the preservation of this town's character as separate and. distinct from a Vail or Snowmass Village character. While it may seem a silly thing to celebrate, the ability to get a vacuum cleaner fixed in town is important. The day that the vacuum cleaner repair shop becomes an upscale boutique or a second home, the town is less Aspen and more Vail. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: It has been brought to the attention of staff that there may be some abuses of this zone district. It has also become obvious to staff that any enfomement action by staff should be directed by City Council. With the amendments, staff has attempted to encourage service and industrial uses through limiting specifically the allowed uses and providing additional flexibility in the dimensional requirements. 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: This proposed amendment does not pose any conflicts with the public interest. Staff has tried to identify uses which are appropriate and desirable in this area of town and further specify those uses which may have potential off-site impacts as conditional. staff comments page 2 REID&WALDRON Real Estate · Rentals ,' Prol~rty Management March 22, 1999 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing in regards to the SCI Zoning question that you will be discussing on second readjng tonight. I have two points to make in regards to this issue: 1. You cannot underestimate the importance of home·own service businesses in this zone to the City of Aspen and its citizens. These businesses allow us all to benefit from nearby, personal service. Hopefully, turning back the zoning to pre-1989 will help keep some of these small businesses in Aspen proper. 2. Allowing our housekeeping and maintenance office to stay in this zoning district helps keep my staff off Highway 82, which is cdtical for ~uffing down on highway travel and congestion. Without this opportunity, we would be forced to relocate this essential office downvalley in order to afford the ever-increasing rent being dictated by the high-inCome architects and professionals allowed by the current zoning. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Michael L. Spalding President MLS/kps ASI~I~ Office: 190 .East ~g'nen Avenue · Aspen. Colorado 81611 , (970} 9'28-1400 ,e P.I~X(9;0)9~0.3765 Snowmass Office PO. Box 6450 · Suite ! 13. Snowmass Center · Snowmass Village. Coke'ado 81615 (970) 993-4700 s FAX (9103 FRSM: NAPA AUTO PARTS ASPEN CO PHONE NO. : 9?0 925 7528 Mar. 22 1999 05:45PM P1 ,iAUTO/3j~~ YOUR PARTS HAUS 113-8 AABC Aspen, CO 81611 970-925-7528 I1=- YOUR PARTS HAUS 64 B Jebel Road PO Box 28340 El Jebel, CO 81628 970-963-0440 March 22, 1999 Re: SCI Zone Changes Aspen City Council, I am writing concerning the proposed SCI zoning changes. The proposed chan~aes will ibrce other businesses, as I have been forced, to move out of the ~ of the city. These businesses service the core of the city, if you introduce architects into this zoning it will raise already very high rental rates that these businesses can not compete with, It will be a very sad day when people will have to drive 35 miles to replace a fuse for theh' car or any other service these companies provide. Remember I serv'ice not only retail customers but also the City of Aspen, Pitkin County and Ski Co. These customers would suffer down time to obtain parts and services. Can the city afford to drive 35 miles for repairs that are ofien emergency situations? Sincerely, Naps Auto Parts Aspen and E1 lebel FRP, M: SUMMIT PAINT FAX NO.: 92? 0444 Ma~. 22 1999 01:02PM P1 T~: As~n Cft~ CounOM SD H~ring From: Sam Tegbr, owner Summit Paint & Decorating 180 South Side Dr. Base~ Co. 81621 n, ~, ~, ~ ~, , 998. t w°s forced to move my paint store out of A~,pen, Downvalley, to ~aea][. Previously, the business was ]oceted at 516 E. 81eeker St. in Aspen. This location was occupied by a paint store since the early 1980's and pos$~bly even sooner. Newever, 8ready inoreaoes in rent, 8long w~th th~ most recent, ~ramatic, jump in rent, he~ forced Summit PBin[ to reiocate. The economic reality ~s that cOmmerci81 service raIota~ businesses can no longer survive in Aspen paying o~erIy-infiated rent prices. In the iast year, my previous landlord wanted 8 rent increase in excess of 20~. These types ef increases wM! effecUvely drive t~e sm~]l . businessman out of A~pen. I betiew that losing bussinesses like my own can only hurt Aspen. Not onl~ are you losing e sense of whole c~mm~,nity with nearby ~vai!~bi]ity of services, you're losing good successful citizen ~ntrepreneur~. In addition, t feel that ~spen is not supporting businesses in the SCI zone, but instead is bowing down [o pressure to gradually move towards residential zoning, further condominiumizing Aspen. At th~s time, rm asking City ~euncil to take a firm stand bahit, d the ~mainlng smal] businesses currently located in the downtown SCt zone, before they are gone~ S~ ncerel y, ..., Summit Paint & DoGerating Friday, Febmaq 20, 1998 · The Aspen Times The As.pen Times: Editorial The SCI debate is more than just The dilemnm of A,slxm's van- of such businesses could not m'c bcin~ I~lt by ~csc k~al-scrv- ishing working class has taken on afl~ml the high rants char~cd in in~ businesses. And ~c city's with cu a new twist -- thc c~sc of the van- Aspcn's commc~'ial corn. But in zoning cnlb~ement m~hanisms, lament ishing l{~al-o~cnlc~ busincss~. the con~ncs of a s~ildly zoned which might have pmvcn~cd the Actually, ibis is not ancw twisi district, Ihc ~lsonjn~ wcnl, rants trend t~m icachjn~ a crisis, invoh'cd al all, it has l~n going on for woukl by ncccssity stay low y~t~, but in ~{~nl months it h~Ls cnoul!h lhal these businesses 'lhc oily P&Z is in the midst of m~y eas, chfimed the a~ntion or' Cily ! lull wouk~ uol I~ tbl~cd out. flying to straighten out {his al, and has lufltcd into a public lx~li- 'I hc conccpl has ~..rkc'd, to unhapl>y situalion, by making hasic cy conRnwrsy. some extent. A number of k~all y changes Io the ~oni.~ c{~c Io pro-. one that d 'l'h~ cit)"s Plmmin~ and ~ning oriented businesses, d~at other- vent the cncnmchmcnt of busi- Co~mnission has for the last c{m- wise would have t~cn ibm~l out nk~sses Ihal can afibrd to oldrate not pie of momhs ~cn wmMling with by risin~ rants long a~o, have thus clscwhcm but ~'ould like I. lake a s~cild catego~' of d~c city's m~nagcd to remain in town, close advantage of the lower rants m soul zo, ing ~c known as ~c Sc~ to their clicnlelc. Ihc SCI zone. We should all wish the people vi~Commemlal/Indusn'ial zone But over Ihe yea~, Ihc jfil¢ll[ of Ihcn~ luck in Ibis laudable hey disWic~ which deals witl~ a snmll ~is higlfiy s~cializcd zoning h~s end~voc {hcir ever' i~ketof scrvicc-oricmtcd busi- I~n undcrrnin~, according to h is unforlunatc thin it nesscs in the vicinity of No~h city bureaucrats aud some of the conic to this .- Ihat kx'al govern-. way to Mill and i~ppy Smith stets. busiuess ownc~ d~cmsclves. A mcnt hlckcd the Ibmsight to ado.. tol): '1~ SC[ zone, cslablishcd kind of "gcntrillcatkm" has mkcn qua~ly adthvss the needs of Ihcsc ~nom Ihafi 25 y~m ago, was place, as businesses not covc~l local-serving commcwial busi- intcnd~ to provide a safe haven by ~c ofigin~ golds of the/onc ncsses as ihey have me afl~rdablc lbr small, k~Idly owne~l business- have moved in. Rents am said to housing crisis. 'l~c two problems cs that attend to the nc~ls of Joc;d have ~hifttxl sky~.mxl. ]andloRIs am obviously linked, and if Ihe Iv owned citizens, n~s such ~s manures- have suggcst~ lhm ce~ain busi- business side of the cquatiot, had luring and rapair ofconsunEr ncsscs mi~tt bc morn stillably I~cn ~'ognized and dealt with, But it g~x~s, sR)t~lgc and shop cr~s, I{~aled out of lowB, arid the same this parljcuhlr cd~js x~ ould have do whnt and other s~cia[i?.~l services. pressures that have caused the b~n avoided. supl~R 'llm idea was that the proprietors ~ighl of working-class citizens But hindsight. (Ifhnr Vn;P_p 9/08/98 1)OF2) LETTER FROM VINCE GALLUCCIO, OWNER OF ASPEN REPAIR CO. A TV REPAIR BUSINESS FOR LAST 20 YEARS IN THE SCI ZONE. TO CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS CONCERNING THE UPCOMING JOINT WORK SESSION ON THE SERVICE/COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL (SCI) ZONE 1) ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF THE SCI ZONE. RECOGNIZING THAT THE ASPEN ECONOMY IS BASED PRIMARILY ON TOURISM, AND THAT BUILDING AND MAINTAINING AND SUPPLYING SERVICE NEEDS FOR THE TOURIST HOUSING IS A VITAL FACTOR IN THE SUCCESS OF THAT ECONOMY, THE SCI ZONE WAS CREATED ABOUT 28 YEARS AGO TO ALLOW BUSINESSES THAT PERFORM ONLY THIS TYPE OF WORK TO COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER FOR THE AVAILABLE SPACE IN THE ZONED AREA. IT WAS OBVIOUS THEN, AND IT SHOULD BE NOW, THAT BLUE COLLAR SERVICE TYPE BUSINESSES SUCH AS PLUMBING, PAINTING, AUTO REPAIR, VACUUM AND TV REPAIR, CARPENTRY SHOP, ELECTRICAL , SIGN MAKERS, DOG GROOMERS, AUTO DETAILERS, PRINTING, AND MANY OTHERS CANNOT SUCCESSFULLY COMPETE FOR SPACE WITH HIGH INCOME PRODUCING BUSINESSES SUCH AS TOURIST RETAIL/RESTAURANT/ETC OR PROFESSIONAL WHITE COLLAR/OFFICE BUSINESSES IF ALLOWED, THESE HIGH INCOME TYPE BUSINESSES WOULD SPREAD OUT FROM THE DOWNTOWN AREA INTO ANY AND ALL AVAILABLE SPACE IN THE CITY/TOWN, FORCING THE SERVICE TYPE BUSINESSES OUT OF TOWN. TODAY, OUT OF TOWN IS THE AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. 28 YEARS AGO, THIS WAS THOUGHT TO BE A BAD IDEA. TODAY, IT STILL SEEMS LIKE A BAD IDEA TO ME. 2)WHAT HAPPENED TO THE SCI ZONE? FROM THE EARLY SEVENTIES TO 1988, THE SCI ZONING ACCOMPLISHED FOR THE MOST PART WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED FOR THIS AREA OF ASPEN. HOWEVER IN 1988, THE CITY COUNCIL, AGAINST THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF BOTH STAFF AND P&Z, DECLARED THAT ARCHITECTS WERE ARTISTS AND THEREFORE ELIGIBLE TO BE IN THE SCI ZONE. DURING THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, MANY OF THE CONDOMINIUMIZED SPACES AT 412 AND 414 N. MILL WHICH ARE IN THE SCI ZONE WERE PURCHASED BY OR RENTED BY ARCHITECTS WHO COULD AFFORD TO PAY FAR MORE FOR SPACE THAN THE FORMER BLUE COLLAR TYPE SERVICE BUSINESSES. ONE ARCHITECT HAS ABOUT 10 TO 2]0F2] 15 EMPLOYEES. THE ZONE HAD BEEN "UPZONED" TO THE ADVANTAGE OF JUST ONE WHITE COLLAR PROFESSIONAL GROUP , ARCHITECTS. 3)WHAT KINDS OF BUSINESSES SHOULD BE SUBSIDIZED BY THE COMMUNITY? IN EFFECT, THE COMMUNITY IS SUBSIDIZING THE SCI ZONE. IF THE AREA IS NOT ZONED SCI AS ORIGINALLY INTENDED, GREATER REVENUES WOULD RESULT FROM SALES TAXES AND PROPERTY TAXES. THE COMMUNITY SUBSIDIZES THE FINE ARTS AND ARTISTS, WITH BOTH DIRECT CONTRIBUTIONS AND REDUCED RENTS AS AT THE RED BRICK SCHOOL. THIS MAKES GOOD SENSE BECAUSE THE ASPEN ECONOMY NEEDS THE FINE ARTS TO BETTER COMPETE WITH OTHER SKI AREAS/RESORTS. THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN SUBSIDIZING THE SERVICE TYPE BUSINESS IN THE SCI ZONE BECAUSE IT NEEDS THE SERVICES PROVIDED TO KEEP THE TOURIST/COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE WORKING. THE COMMUNITY ALSO, THROUGH TAXING DISTRICTS, SUBSIDIZES THE HOSPITAL/DOCTORS/SCHOOLS/FIRE/POLICE AND OTHERS BECAUSE THE TOWN NEEDS THEM TO WORK PROPERLY. THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU IS WHY THE COMMUNITY IS OR SHOULD BE SUBSIDIZING ONE AND ONLY ONE PROFESSION (ARCHITECTS) WHICH IS NOT VITAL OR CENTRAL TO THE ASPEN ECONOMY, A FROFESSION WHICH CAN BE FRACTICED ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD THAT GOOD ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS EXIST, ON STRUCTURES THAT WILL BE BUILT ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD, A PROFESSION WHICH IS ZONED FOR IN 90 % OF THE COMMERCIAL SPACE OF ASPEN, AND IS, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, LEGAL TO PERFORM AS A HOME BUSINESS. MOST ORIGINALLY INTENDED SCI BUSINESSES ARE NOT LEGAL IN THE COMMERCIAL CORE OR THE HOME. THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO READ THIS, AND PERFORMING THE DIFFICULT AND USUALLY THANK'LESS TASKS OF YOUR OFFICES. VINCENT GALLUCCIO ASPEN REPAIR CO. 925-7688 ORDINANCE N0. 2 (SERIES OF 1999) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO AMEND SECTION 26.28.160, THE SERVICE/COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL (S/C/I) ZONE DISTRICT, AND SECTION 26.04.100, DEFINITIONS, OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed concerns about current and potential future land uses in the Service/CommerCial/Industrial (S/Ca) Zone District which may be in conflict with the spirit and intent of the zone district; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department (staff) realized there could potentially be several business and land owners affected by enforcement measures and suggested a thorough review of the S/C/I Zone District by the Commission be done first to allow City Council the opportunity to confirm or amend the zoning before considering the most appropriate enforcement procedures; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission initiated an amendment to the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code, pursuant to Section 26.92, and staff brought forward to the Commission an analysis of the S/C/I Zone district and suggested modifications to said zoning; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.92, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and approve& approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council at a public heating after recommendations from the Planning Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission are considered; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a work session on the topic October 21, 1997, opened a duly noticed public hearing on November 18, 1997, continued to January 6, 1998, continued to January 20, 1998, continued to February 17, 1998, continued to March 10, 1998, and then continued to March 31, 1998, to consider the existing zoning requirements for the S/C/I Zone District along with the recommended amendments brought forward by staff; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, during the public hearing, considered the overall importance of the S/C/I Zone Distfict's function within a traditional town setting and within the entire inventory of zoning classifications in Aspen, considered actual land uses within the zone district, evaluated the intent of the zone district through the "purpose" statement, amended said "purpose" statement to clarify and reflect the goals of the zone district, evaluated the permitted and conditional uses and dimensional requirements of the zone district, amended said uses and dimensional requirements of the zone district to support the "purpose" statement, and finally reviewed the proposed S/C/I Zone District amendments in summation before making a recommendation to the Council; and, Ordinance No. 2, Series 1999 Page 1 WHEREAS, during a public hearing at a meeting on March 31, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a 4 to 2 vote, that City Council approve the amendments to the Service/Commercial/Industrial Zone District, as described in Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution #98-26; and, WHEREAS, City Council reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director and the Planning and. Zoning Commission during a work session with planning staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission and provided staff with a request to include new and amended definitions in the Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing at a regularly scheduled meeting on October 6, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Commission took and considered public testimony and recommended, by a 7 to 0 vote, that City Council approve the amendments to Definitions, Section 26.04.100, as described in Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution #98-28; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the amendments to the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (S/C/I) Zone District and to the Definitions section, as described herein, meet or exceed all applicable standards and that the approval is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Section 26.28.160 of the Aspen Municipal Code, which section defines, authorizes, and regulates uses within the Service/Commereial/Industrial (S/C/I) Zone District, is hereby amended to read as follows: 26.28.160 Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Service/Commereialflndustrial (S/C/I) zone district is to allow for the use of land for the preservation or development of limited commercial and industrial uses which: may not be appropriate in other zone districts; do not require or generate high customer traffic volumes; are primarily oriented to the manufacturing, repair, storage, and servicing of consumer goods and have a limited office, showroom, retail, or customer reception area; and, tO permit artist's studios as well as customary accessory uses, including affordable residential dwelling units accessory to pennitted uses. Ordinance No. 2, Series 1999 Page 2 B, Permitted uses. The following uses are pen-nitted as of right in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) zone district. Except as noted below, each of the permitted uses may have, in combination, no more than 25% of its floor area devoted to retail sales, office, showroom, or customer reception. This floor area percentage may be increased through conditional use review by the Commission. I. Building materials, components, 'and equipment, fabrication, sales, rental, repair, and servicing with up to 100% of the floor area devoted to office, showroom, retail, or customer reception use. 2. Automobile and motorcycle repair, servicing, and detailing. 3. Automobile and motorcycle parts sales with up to 100% of the floor area devoted to office, showroom, retail, or customer reception use. · 4. Fabric and sewing supply with up to 100% of the floor area devoted to office, showroom, retail, or customer reception use. 5. Manufacturing, repair, alteration, tailoring, and servicing of consumer goods such as household appliances, electronic equipment, furniture, clothing, or sporting goods. 6. Building maintenance facility. 7. Typesetting and printing. 8. Commercial kitchen. 9ption.~a ~.Arehitectur~ S'tU..di9; 10. Artist's Studio. 1 I. Rehearsal or teaching studio for the creative, performing, and/or martial arts with no public performances. 12. Locksmith. 13. Post office. 14. Animal grooming establishment. 15. Warehousing and storage. 16. Service yard accessory to a permitted use. 17. Home occupations. 18. Accessory buildings and uses. ~nd~d~ 20. Any use established prior to adoption of Ordinance 2, Series 1999, subject to the non- conforming use provisions of Section 26.104, as amended. C. Conditional Uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/Ca) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.60. Except as noted below, each of the conditional uses may have, in combination, no more than 25% of its floor area devoted to retail sales, office, showroom, or customer reception unless otherwise approved by the Commission. 1, Gas station: Ordinance No, 2; Series 1999 Page 3 · 2. Automobile and motorcycle sales, rental, or washing facility. 3. Sales and remal of consumer goods such as household appliances, electronic equipment, furniture, clothing, or sporting goods. 4. Consignment retail establishment for the second-hand sale of consumer goods such as household appliances, electronic equipment, furniture, clothing, or sporting goods with up to 100% of the floor area devoted to showroom, retail, or customer reception area, 5. Catalogue sales store. 6. Photo processing laboratory with no showroom, retail, or customer reception area. 7. Laundromat. 8. Commercial dry cleaning and laundry. 9. Recycling center· 10. Veterinary clinic. 11. Animal boarding facility. 12. Tattoo parlor. 13. Brewery and brewing supply. 14. Coffee roasting and supply. 15. A permitted or conditional use which demonstrates the need for, and appropriateness of, having, in combination, more than 25% of the floor area deizoted to retail sales, office, showroom, or customer reception· 16. Studio, one (1) bedroom, or two (2) bedroom affordable residential dwelling unit(s) accessory to a permitted or approved conditional use, meeting the current net minimum livable square footage requirements for newly deed restricted affordable housing units (as defined by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority)~ located entirely above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, and entirely above any non-residential use within the structure, deed restricted to affordable housing guidelines for Categories 1, 2, or 3. ' 17.0th~rUses'=O~h~i;iimilfi~-"uses'coniid~r~dappr~priate as aconditional use by the Communiw DevelOpment Director, pursuant to Section 26.112 Interpretations, as D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) zone district. 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): 3,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (square feet): Studio: 625. 1 bedroom: 875. 2 bedroom: 1,125. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): No requirement. 4. Minimum front yard (feet): No requirement. 5. Minimum side yard (feet): No requirement. 6. Minimum rear yard (feet): No requirement. 7. Maximum height (feet): 35. 8. Minimum distance between principle and access0ry buildings (feet): No requirement. 9. Percent of open space required for building site: No requirement~ Ordinance No. 2, Series 1999 Page 4 10. External floor area ratio: 1:1. May be increased to 2:1 provided additional floor area is for affordable housing use only. 11. Internal floor area ratio: No requirement. E. Off-street parking requirement. The following off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each use in the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) zone district, subject to the provisions of Chapter 26.32. 1. Residential uses: Two (2) spaces/dwelling unit. One (1) space/dwelling unit is required if the unit is either a studio or one-bedroom unit. Fewer spaces may be provided pursuant to Chapter 26.60, Conditional Use Review. 2. All other uses: 1.5 spaces/I,000 square feet of net leasable area unless otherwise established through Special Review pursuant to Chapter 25.64. Section 2: Section 26.04.100 of the Aspen Municipal Code, which section contains definitions of terms used in Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended by the addition of the following terms and their definitions: OPtioii~a' ~-'Ai-dh~teet StU di~i .A. ]~r~h OP ~'~iy ~i~iite Ide~ig~~ .b. ui!d.i~g~ .a.n~. s~...t~..~tU~Te~ ~.e. Pre..~e.n~t~t..L°.n .{~f..b:,Wfl..t ~fPr~. !~..nd.s-e.ape~.e-pPs.u.-me.-r Pr..q.d;.,e.t.s~ ".9 ~. grgp!~!C ~rtS2 consignment Retail Establishment: A retail establishment in which the operator sells second-hand goods as a third party agent between the buyer and seller. Animal Boarding Facility: An establishment which houses animals overnight or over an extended period of time. Animal Grooming Establishment: An establishment principally engaged in grooming animals in which overnight boarding is prohibited. Veterinary Clinic: A facility maintained by or for the use of a licensed veterinarian in the care and treatment of animals wherein overnight care is prohibited except when necessary for medical purposes. Recycling Center: A building or facility used for the collection and preparation of recyclable material for efficient shipment. Brewery: A facility forthe production and packaging of alcoholic malt beverages for distribution which does not generally receive the public or engage in retail sales. Ordinance No. 2, Series 1999 Page 5 Coffee Roasting Facility: A facility for the processing and packaging of coffee beans for distribution which does not generally receive the public or engage in retail sales. Commercial Kitchen: means a commercial establishment producing or wholesaling prepared food items in which retail dispensing is prohibited. Section 3: Section 26.04.100 of the .Aspen Municipal Code, which section contains definitions of terms used in Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended by revising the following terms and their definitions, where the new definitions will read as follows: Artist Studio: is a fine arts workshop of a painter, sculptor, potter, weaver, carver, jeweler photographer, or other similar art that requires artistic skill, and not generally utilitarian, related to personal hygiene or adornment, receiving the public, or engaging in retail sales. Section 4: Section 26.04.100 of the Aspen Municipal Code, which section contains definitions of terms used in Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended by deleting the following terms and their definitions: Commercial Bakery: means a bakery in which there is permitted the production and/or wholesating of baked goods, but where over-the-counter or other retail dispensing of baked goods shall be prohibited. Shop Craft Industry: means any establishment producing one-of-a-kind products which are handmade or made with limited mechanical assistance. This includes but is not limited to cloth and basket weaving, pottery making, glass blowing, and ceramics. Veterinary Clinic: means an enclosed facility within a building or portion thereof for the care and treatment of animals, where boarding of healthy animals is prohibited and adequate provisions are made to avoid any and all adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood which might otherwise result from noise, odors, waste, and the like. Section 5: That the Community Development Director is directed, upon adoption of this Ordinance, to enfome compliance with the requirements of this zoning district as follows: a) Each land use established prior to the adoption ofthis Ordinance which remains or becomes a permitted use shall be unaffected and require no land use action. b) Each land use established prior to adoption ofthis Ordinance which remains or becomes a conditional use with the passage of this Ordinance shall apply for and obtain conditional use approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission upon expansion or other substantial change in the nature of the use. Ordinance No. 2, Series 1999 Page 6 c) Each land use established prior to the adoption of this Ordinance which either remains an tinlawful use or is deleted as a permitted or conditional use by this, or a previous, ordinance shall become or remain a legal non-conforming use subject to the provisions of Section 26.104 of the Aspen Municipal Code, as amended from time to time. ~2'~:S~~ ~~(~~' A~ched ~ A~c~ent A of~s Ord~ce is a sa~ of~e lad ~es ~ e~stence on · e ~op~on date of~s Ord~ace. SeeSon 6: ~e Coa~ Development Director is hereby directed to pro~de each pwpe~ o~er in ~e S/C~ Zone Dis~ct ~ffi a copy of~s Ordinace. ~e Coa~ Developmere Director is hereby dkected to provide a ye~ly ~ysis on ~e ~u~ aven~ of ~e Moption of ~s Ordinace, of the SCI Zone Dis~ct to ~e Plaing ~d Zoag Coaission ad ~e Ci~ Co~cil ~ ~ i~o~aion item for a pedod of ~ee yess, or ~ o~e~se e~ended by ~e Ci~ Co~cil. Section 7: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 8: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under Or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 9: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 10: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 22nd day of March, 1999 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Ordinance No. 2, Series 1999 Page 7 INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 8th day of February, 1999. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk John Bennett, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of ,1999. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk John Bennett, Mayor Approved as to form: City. Attorney Attachment A - Summary of land uses on adoption date. Ordinance No. 2, Series 1999 Page 8 MAR-03-99 WED 01:01 Prl f~IRPORT BUSINESS CENTER FfiX NO. 970 925 2104 P, 02 ' WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR PORTION OF NORTH FORTY PROJECT EXHIBIT B a. Installation of the facilities as shown on Exhibit A is anticipated to take place during fie summer and fall of 1999 with completion no latter than May 31, 2001. b. The estimated average gross water flow rate for the extension of 100,908 gallons per day (gpd)for fie month of June (peak irrigation seasons). IN-BUILDING USE Average/n-Building use is estimated to be 30,494 gpd at full development of Block 1 and Block 3. in-Building usage is based on 350 gpd for the 72 residential units, 250 gpd lbr 13 possible ADU, 14.5 gpd forthe 13 CMC employees and 10.6 gpd for 175 FTE CMC students. Existing Uses The existing CMC campus will be moved from the current location to this project's location. Current consumption is estimated to be 2,400 gpd. IRRIGATION The estimated maximum treated water irrigation requirement is 72,543 gpd dudng the peak month of June. This irrigation rate is based on an application rate of 0.603 acre-fee~rrigated acre, The irrigated square footage is estimated to be 482, 400 square feet. Existing Uses 109, 100 square feet of the estimated 482,400 square feet is the existing soccer Reid which is currently being irrigated and will continue upon completion of this project. June consumption at the above rate is 16,400 gpd. c. Fire flows are to be provided by the existing main line capacity connected to the property.. d. General easement descriptions are graphically shown on the attached Exhibit A. e. The amount of the water tap fee deposit by Bidgle is based on the following fixture counts for a three bedroom/2 bath house for 48 lots and the following fixture counts for 12 lots which hav~ a cap of $200,000 on the value of g'L fe~o.l_ /.'1, OT JeLtse~ seq~olC) 0 ~' ~eLtse~LIs!C3 0 I-' JeLISe~LI~!C3 ~;0' 'ds!Ci 'q~e9 g0' 'ds!Q adept9 0~' Jel~u!~dS OC' Jal~fu!JdS 0~' su~pq ~ 0£' su~pq 09' scl~eq ~ 09' SLI)eq S~.O'] O00'gz¢ ~ L 'r103 09095 s! ease s!tl~ ~o,~ rlo:~ ue ~o ~soo etl. I. 'uedW ~to ~.0 eq~ ~o O60'eO'g~ uo!~eS aql tuo~ peApep e~e~ s~uncr~ ~ abed ;uemee~BV eo!~eS ~a;eAR/Cod tl~oN 8 ,LlelHX:} MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager THRU: John Worcester, City Attorney FROM: Lee Cassin, City Environmental Health Director ~' DATE: March 2, 1999 RE: Proposed Minor Revisions to City Fireplace Ordinance SUMMARY: Them are two areas of proposed changes to the City of Aspen fireplace ordinance. The first allows decorative, non-functional antique stoves in a house without being subject to the limit of two woodstoves or gas log fireplaces per building. The second set of changes is intended to simplify the wording of the ordinance to make it easy to understand. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The City of Aspen fireplace ordinance has not been revised since the late 1980's. BACKGROUND: FrOm staff's point of view, this ordinance has been very easy to enforce. However, recently a citizen approached staff with a request to allow him to install three devices in his home, instead of the two that were allowed. However, one of the three was an antique stove that had been in the family for many years. The owner proposes to have it in the house as a decorative device, without a flue. Staff believes the law should be changed to allow this. DISCUSSION: When the city first regulated woodburning devices over ten years ago, due to concerns about health effects of woodsmoke, there was some opposition to the regulation, and significant feeling that some people would attempt to "get around" the regulation. Council was told at that time that there was no way to make a woodstove or fireplace "inoperable", that doors welded shut could later be removed, flues could easily be added, and so on. In the past 20+ years of enforcement of the city and county woodburning regulations, there has been a handful of people who have had to remove a device installed illegally. There has also been a handful who have been told that they could not claim that a device they wanted to install "would not be used" or could be made inoperable, since future owners could modify and use the device. However, the City's woodburning regulations have actually reduced the numbers of woodstoves and fireplaces, as people have converted to cleaner-burning devices or remodeled their houses and removed them. (This was the original intention of the law.) In a given year, vimally all of Page 1 the devices installed in the City are gas log fireplaces: woodstoves are almost never installed. It seems likely that this proposed change would not result in a significant enforcement issue. A woodstove without a flue obviously would not produce any air pollution unless someone illegally installed a flue. While this might happen with a future owner unaware of the prohibition, it is staffs opinion that it would be an extremely rare event. Staff feels it would be so rare that it does not justify restricting a homeowner's ability to have a decorative antique stove. Staff feels that the regulation's credibility would be improved by allowing this change. The other changes are not substantive, but make the regulation easier to understand. We have removed unneeded definitions and simplified the sections. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This change will have no effect on the city' s budget. It will . not pose a financial cost to individuals. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council adopt this ordinance on first reading. ALTERNATIVES: The law could be left as it is. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # Z2~ Series of 1999 allowing installation of inoperable decorative antique woodstoves, and simplifying language in the existing woodburning ordinance." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Page 2 ORDINANCE NO. ~ Series of 1999 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIl, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING CHAFFER 13.08 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN BY AMENDING SECTIONS 13.08,020 - DEFINITIONS, 13.08.070 - SOl.n'~ FUEL BURNING DEVICES, SECTION 13.08.080 - COAL BURNING PROHIBITION, AND SECTION 13.08.090, NON-OWNER 0CCUP/ED DWEI .l ,ING L~T1TS. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Chapter 13.08 of the Aspen Municipal Code relating to Air Quality. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1. That Section 13.08.020 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.08.020 Definitions. (a) Board shall mean the City of Aspen Clean Air Advisory Board. (b) Charbroiler shall mean a cooking device in a commercial food service · establishment, either gas fired or using charcoal or other fuel, upon which grease drips down upon an open flame, charcoal or embers. (c) Commission shall mean the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission. (d) Decorative gas appliance shall mean a device utilizing natural gas as a fuel designed to appear as a real fireplace with a 4 to 5 inch Class B vent, fixed glass doors, and a fire box no deeper than 24 inches. (e) Food Service establishment shall have the same meaning as the definition for the term in Section 12-44-202 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended. (f) High-fat-content meat shall mean any meat and/or the meat portion of any meat product having a precooked fat percentage equal to or greater than fifteen (15) percent by weight according to established laboratory testing procedures as determined by the department, such meat and/or meat products including, without limitation, hamburger, chopped beef, ground beef, beef sausage, beef ribs, pork sausage, pork ribs and sausage made from any form of meat or combinations of meats. Section 2. That Section 13.08.070 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.08.070 Fireplaces and Woodstoves. ' (a) No person shall repair, alter; move, install, or re-install a solid fuel buming device or gas log fireplace without have first obtained a building permit in accordance with Title 8 of this Code. (b) No person shall replace a solid fuel buming device which is substantially destroyed, demolished, or in need of replacement with another solid fuel burning device, unless the replacement is a Department certified device. Solid fuel burning devices lawfully existing and installed as of the date of enactment of this ordinance may be repaired to the extent that such repair, in the reasonable judgment of the chief building inspector, is necessary to prevent the existence .of an unsafe condition, and that such repair will not affect the fire box. (c) No person shall install a solid fuel burning device in any building unless it is a Department certified device. (d) No person shall install more than two (2) Department certified devices in any single building. (e) Each new solid fuel burning device, gas log fireplace or gas appliance shall be registered with the Department upon installation and prior to final approval of such installation by the Department. Such registration shall be obtained by submission of the stove and fireplace registration form provided by the Department and upon payment of the fee prescribed by Section 2.12.050(0 of this Code. (f) Notwithstanding any provision of this section to the contrary, any pre-existing wood burning fireplace which is destroyed or demolished by an act of God or through any manner not willfully accomplished by the owner may be restored as of right with a gas log fireplace; provided, however, that a building permit for reconstruction shall be issued within twelve (12) months of the date of the demolition or destruction Section 3. That Section 13.08.080 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.08~080 Coal Burning Prohibition. No person shall burn coal in a solid fuel buming device. Section 4. That Section 13.08,090 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.08.090 Non-Owner Occupied Dwelling units. No property owner shall rent a building if a fireplace or woodstove is the sole soume of heat. Property. owners, and not tenants, shall be liable for any penalty imposed for a violation of this section. Section 5. This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the 'same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the day of ,1999, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of ,1999. John S. Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathxyn S. Koch, City Clerk FINAl JXadopted, passed and approved this day of ,1999. John S. Bennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk JPW-03/02/99-G:\john\word\ordsLfireplace.doc 4 Proposed changes to Chapter 13~08 - Air Quality 13.08.020 Def'mitions. (a) Board shall mean the City of Aspen Clean Air Advisory Board. · (b) Building shall moan any structure used or intended for supporting or ehcltcring any ucc or occupancy including but not necessarily limited to, boardinghoucoc, bed and broakfacte, attached and detached dwellings, group horace, hoDis, lodges, motels, office buildings, commercial or retail buildings, public buildings, roominghouses, recrcation clubc, resident occupied unite, and restaurants (ac those structures arc doffnod in the Land Uee Rogulatione at Title 26 of thic Code). (.b.s) Charbroiler shall mean a cooking device in a commercial food service establishment, either gas fired or using charcoal or other fuel, upon which grease drips down upon an open flame, charcoal or embers. (c~) Commission shall mean the Colorado Air Quality Control I Commission. (de) Decorative gas appliance shall mean a device utilizing natural gas I as a fuel designed to appear as a real fireplace with a 4 to 5 inch Class B vent, fixed glass doors, and a fire box no deeper than 24 inches. (f) Dcpartment shall moan the Aspon/Pitkin Environmental Health Department. (g) Department certified device shall mean a Colorado Phase III certified device, a Phase II EPA ccrtificd device, or a gas log fircplaco, (h) Director shall moan the director of the Aspon/Pitkin Environmental Health Department. (i) Divieion shall moan the Colorado Department of Health, Air R~a~F.fi~q-Control Division. (9.j) Food Service establishment shall have the same meaning as the definition for the term in Section 12-44-202 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended. (k) Gas log fireplace shall moan a fireplace designed and constructed to bc serviced by natural gac, containing an approvcd gas log cot, and not designed or intended for the combustion of any solid fuel, including wood. (fi) High-fat-content meat shall mean any meat and/or the meat portion of any meat product having a precooked fat pementage equal to or greater than fifteen (15) percent by weight according to established laboratory testing procedures as determined by the department, such meat and/or meat products including, without limitation, hamburger~ chopped beef, ground beef, beef sausage, beef ribs, pork sausage, pork ribs and sausage made from any form of meat or combinations of meats. (m) Phase III ocrtified'device shall moan any wood burning device that moctc the most stringent standards adopted by the Commission purcuant to Section 25 7 106.3, C.R.S. (n) Phase II EPA oertified device shall mean 3n airtight wood buming stove certified by the EPA to have low PM10 omissions cvidenccd by a cortificatc label affixed to the device by the manufacturcr. (o) Solid fuel burning devicC shall mcan a burning device dccigncd for solid fuel combuction so that ucablc heat is derived for the interior of a building, and includes, without limitation, colid fucl fired ctovcs, wood ctoves or any naturc, firoplaccc, pellet stovcs, solid fucl fircd cooking ctovcc, combination fuel furnaccc or boilere which bum solid fuel, or any other device used for thc burning of colid combustiblc matcrial. Solid fucl burning dcvicec do not include gas log fireplaces, dccorativc gac appliancoc or cloctrical applianocc. 13.08.070 Solid fucl burning dcviccsFirenlaces and Woodstoves. (a) No person shall repair, alter, move, install, or re-install a solid fuel buming device or gas log fireplace without have first obtained a building permit in accordance with Title 8 of this Code. (b) No person shall replace a solid fuel burning device which is substantially destroyed, demolished, or in need of replacement with another solid fuel burning device, unless the replacement is a Department certified device. Solid fuel burning devices lawfully existing and installed as of the date of enactment of this ordinance may be repaired to the extent that such repair, in the reasonable judgment of the chief building inspector, is necessary to prevent the existence of an unsafe condition, and that such repair will not affect the fire box. (c) No person shall install a solid fuel burning device in any building unless it is a Department certified device. (d) No person shall install more than two (2) Department certified devices in any single building. (e) Each new solid fuel buming device, gas log fireplace or gas appliance shall be registered with the Department upon installation and prior to final approval of such installation by the Department. Such registration shall be obtained by submission of the stove and fireplace registration form provided by the Department and upon payment of the fee prescribed by Section 2.12.050(f) of this Code. (f) Notwithstanding any provision of this section to the contrary, any pre-existing wood buming fireplace which is destroyed or demolished by an act of God or through any manner not willfully accomplished by the owner may be restored as of right with a gas log fireplace; provided, however, that a building permit for reconstruction shall be issued within twelve (12) months of the date of the demolition or destruction 13.08.080 Coal Burning Prohibition. No person shall bum coal in a solid fuel burning device. 13.08.090 Non-Owner Occupied Dwelling units. No property owner shall rent a building if a colid fuel burning device fireplace or woodstove is the sole source of heat. Property owners, and not tenants, shall be liable for any penalty imposed for a violation of this section. TO: Mayor and City Council · ( FROM: Amy Margem, City Manager RE: Request From Planning and Zoning Commission Re: Studying Housing on the Municipal Golf Course DATE: March 17, 1999 Please find attached a request from the Planning & Zoning Commission for funding to study placing housing on the City of Aspen's municipal golf course. Staff from the City Manager' s Office, the City Attorney's Office, the Parks Office, the Golf Depm'hnent and the Recreation Depa~'tment offer the following comments for your consideration: * We do not own the land the P&Z has discussed as a new location for our municipal golf course (the Zoline Ranch). The owners ofthe property have indicated that they would be vehemently opposed to the use of their land as a golf facility. City Council would need to condenm the property. * The existing municipal golf course (without parking, roads and facilities) is about 133 acres (which is tight for an 18 hole golf course). The Zoline property is 141 acres, however much of this is not useable acreage due to steep slopes. Only about 119 acres would be useable for a golf course which would appear to be inadequate unless City Council was willing to also use the bowl area of the Burlingame Ranch property as a golf course. * The other location for the Municipal Golf Course is the Burlingame Ranch property without the Zoline property...we do not believe this area is large enough to accommodate an 18 hole golf course when you take into account the relocated Owl Creek Road, the new four lane highway, the FAA constrained land, wetlands, steep slopes, the 37 acre parcel subdivided off for a free market lot (and remaining in the County), the US West housing site and the MAA housing site. * It would cost the City between about 10 - 15 million to build a new golf course. The cost of a new course, the land and the subsidy for the new housing, would clearly require a tax increase and would be an extremely expensive way to provide affordable housing. * The request for a study is causing great confusion with our citizenry. People are asking why the City is pursuing a bond measure for a new golf facility and at the same time spending money to move the golf course. There is also substantial public confusion about the expansion of Truscott Place (on the May ballot) with the P&Z proposal. * The Housing Board and the AACP Housing subcommittee recommended against placing City grid housing on the existing golf course. * In short, staff is opposed to spending City funds for a study which would undoubtedly conclude that a golf course could not be economically re- located to the Burlingame ranch parcel, however, if Council elects to study ways to reconfigure the existing golf course to provide for a more efficient layout or reconfigure the golf course to include property across the highway on the Moore Open Space land we recommend the City: - utilize the services of Richard Phelps, our existing golf course architect, to do the work (he already has the expertise and maps to do the work efficiently) instead of the group suggested from Texas; - appoint a planning committee made up of members of the Planning Commission, the Golf Course Advisory Committee, the County Open Space Board and the neighbors (Cemetery Lane area and the Maroon/Castle Creek Caucus ). * The Planning and Zoning Commission also requested that the "Aspen City CounCil ..investigate the possibility of purchasing the Maroon Creek Club golf facility for the purpose of a municipal golf facility." I spoke tothe new owners of the Maroon Creek Club and can report with confidence that they have no interest in selling or converting the golf facility to a municipal golf facility. TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margem, City Manager FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director ~ DATE: March 8, 1999 RE: Planning and Zoning Commission Request for Funds Attached is a resolution of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission requesting funds from City Council in order to further explore options for development on and adjacent to the Aspen golf course. The request is for $7500 which would be used to hire a golf course consultant. The P & Z felt they had been given direction from some council members to further investigate possibilities for more housing, and they therefore passed this resolution requesting that funds be spent. Staff agrees with the P & Z that further investigation of the golf course and adjacent lands for housing oppommities should be looked into. However, staff feels that this study should be done as a follow-up to the AACP, and would recommend that the study be further scoped, and done so in the context of the community plan. Staff would like direction from Council on how you would like to proceed with this funding request. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL CONTRACT A GOLF COURSE CONSULTANT SERVICE, TO PERFORM AN ANALYSIS OF RELOCATING OR REDESIGNING THE MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE FOR A FEE OF NO MORE THAN $7,500. Resolution #99 - 1~ WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission wishes to provide the Aspen community with planning concepts, be a visionary Board in guiding land use decisions, and wishes to do so in a pro-active and positive manner; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Resolution #98-37, recommended the various decision making Boards in Aspen and its environs consider relocating the municipal golf course to allow for the extension of the Townsite grid; and, WHEREAS, during a joint work session with the City Council, the Commission was encouraged to investigate the feasibility of relocating the municipal golf course to the city-owned Burlingame Ranch, redesigning the existing golf course to provide developable lands within the existing golf area, redesigning the existing course to extend to the Moore Open Space parcel, or purchasing the Maroon Creek Club golf facility as a municipal course all with the idea of extending the Townsite grid to provide more affordable housing in a development pattern preferred, by the Commission, over the current Burlingame Ranch proposals; and, WHEREAS, a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission privately .. contacted a golf course consultant with certain expertise'm designing golf courses with specific constraints such as highways, airports, and steep terrain; and, WHEREAS, said golf course consultant has proposed to prepare an analysis of the City' s golf course, relocation, and redesign scenarios for a fee of no more than $7,500, as indicated in the attached memorandum; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has the authority to appropriate public funds to further community goals. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: That the Aspen City Council should contract the professional services of a golf course consulting service, to perform an analysis of the existing municipal golf course for a fee not to exceed $7,500 for the purpose of investigating the following alternatives: 1) relocating the municipal course to the portion of Burlingame Ranch west of State Highway 82; 2) relocating the municipal golfcourse to the east and west portions (a split course) of Burlingame Ranch; 3) reconfiguring the existing gotf course to provide a more efficient layout; and, 4) reconfiguring the existing golfcourse and relocating a portion ofthe existing pins to the Moore Open Space parcel. 5) Any other reasonable scenario not explicitly stated herein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Commission: That the Aspen City Council should investigate the possibility of purchasing the Maroon Creek Club golf facility for the purpose of a municipal golf course. APPROVED unanimously by the Commission at its regular meeting on February 16, 1999, and amended by the Commission at it regular meeting on March 2, 1999. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COM3/IISSION: ATTEST: Attachments: A -- Memorandum describing proposed services A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING BOARD OPPOSING A STUDY TO DEVELOP THE BURLINGAME/ZOLINE PROPERTIES AS A NEW MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE AND EXTENDING THE TOWNSITE GRID TO THE ASPEN GOLF COURSE PARCEL FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING Resolution 98-06 RECITALS WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) has passed a resolution proposing that the City research the development of a municipal golf course on the Burlingame/Zoline property and extending the townsite grid to the golf course for the purpose of providing affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Municipal Golf Course is designated open space; and WHEREAS, the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan identified the Burlingame/Zoline property as appropriate for affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan recommends against a single big project solution to affordable housing except on certain large parcels where micro- community development might be appropriate; and WHEREAS, the 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan identified the Aspen Municipal Golf Course as open space; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Municipal Golf Course has never been identified in any community or long-range plan as appropriate for housing; and WHEREAS, preservation of designated open space and community character is an important community value which exists in tandem with the community goal of providing affordable housing; and WHEREAS, it is the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Board's intent to maintain a high level of community support for the housing program by maintaining credibility among community residents, and that credibility relies on the community's perception that the' affordable housing program is implemented in harmony with other community values, such as open space, character and neighborhood compatibility; and WHEI~EAS, the City of Aspen is working in partnership with the Zoline family to create a development that is consistent with the goals of both property owners, the Zoline family wishes to maintain the existing agricultural operation, and alternate use of the Burlingame/Zoline property is not consistent with this goal and may threaten this partnership; and WHEREAS, a proposal to construct a golf course on the Burlingame/Zoline property and to construct housing on the golf course, while based on rational planning notions to minimize sprawl and concentrate new growth in/or adjacent to existing urban centers, does not take into account community character, the value of urban open space, the trading of impacts, the need for continuity in neighborhoods and is contrary to these and other long established community values; WHEREAS, discussion of this idea as a serious option for affordable housing endangers the entire housing program, could delay specific housing proposals currently under consideration by both the City of Aspen and Pitkin County, and confirms the worst fears of many community members that the Affordable Housing Program does not respect community values, such as open space and community character; and 2 WHEREAS, beyond these intangible considerations of balancing values in the community, the hard costs associated with relocation of the Golf Course to provide sites for affordable housing would impose harsh and impractical economic burdens on both the Housing and Open Space programs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board that the proposal to study the development of a municipal golf course on the Burlingame/Zoline property and to extend the townsite grid to the Aspen Municipal Golf Course for the purpose of providing affordable housing is contrary to the public interest and that research of this idea is neither appropriate nor warranted. APPROVED by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board at a Special Meeting held on November 24, 1998. ASPEN/P]TKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY . APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Frank S. Peters, Chairperson Mary J. Roberts, Assistant Director mx b MEMOI NX)U1VI To: Mayor and City Council Thru: Dave Tolen From: Lee Novak, Housing Office Subject: Snyder Park Affordable Housing Sales Prices Date: March 15, 1999 Summary: At the March 8, 1999 meeting, Council approved the construction budget for the Snyder Park Affordable Housing project and asked staff to remm with modified proposals for unit sale prices at its next meeting. Background: At the March 8m meeting, two pricing scenarios seemed to have the most support from Council members. One involved a significant RO component and the other included some category 2 units. Staff are also proposing a third scenario. All three scenarios are shown below and a more detailed analysis is attached. Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 7 Cat. 4 One Bedrooms 3 Cat. 2 One Bedrooms 6 Cat. 3 One Bedrooms 2 RO One Bedrooms 4 Cat. 3 One Bedrooms 3 Cat. 4 One Bedrooms 5 Cat. 4 Three Bedrooms 2 Cat. 4 One Bedrooms 2 Cat. 3 Three Bedroom 1 RO Three Bedroom 1 Cat. 2 Three Bedroom 4 Cat. 4 Three Bedrooms 2Cat. 3 Three Bedrooms 3 Cat. 4 Three Bedrooms Total Subsidy $2,035,665 $3,495,473 ~ $3,180,011 Per Bedroom Subsidy $75,395 $129,462 ~ $117,778 Scenario 1 includes three RO units. This mix would require a total subsidy of $2,035,665 and a per bedroom subsidy of $75,395. In the past, it has been Council policy not to create RO units with public funds, but to instead concentxate on the creation of category units for which there is a greater public need. The creation of RO units has been left to private developers using the AH zone overlay. In addition, the price for the three bedroom RO unit in this scenario exceeds the RO price limit proposed by the Housing Board. Some have expressed concern that the additional subsidy for scenarios 2 or 3 is too high an opportunity cost. That is, by spending these additional funds on the Snyder project, the Housing Daycare Fund will be unable to pursue other properties. Despite the subsidy cost of the Snyder project, the Housing Daycare Fund has sufficient money to pursue all of the projects outlined in the long range plan and achieve the 500 unit goal. Scenario 2 requires a total subsidy of $3,495,473 and a per bedroom subsidy of $129,462. This scenario includes four category 2 units. The Snyder units are large for category 2. The one bedrooms have approximately 740 square feet of livable space plus 720 square foot basements. The three bedrooms have an average of 1500 livable square feet plus two car garages with storage space. These sizes are even larger than the required minimums set by the Housing Guidelines for category 3 and 4 units. The size and amenities provided by these units make them appropriate for two income households or more affluent single income households. Scenario 3 requires a total subsidy of $3,180,011 and a per bedroom subsidy of $117,778. This scenario results in an all category project. While this scenario does not create lower category units, other projects will meet that need. Attached is a table showing units in past and future projects broken down by type and category. It should be noted that the breakdowns for future projects are based on preliminary planning and are subject to change. Also attached are tables outlining the maximum incomes by category and potential mortgage payments for the proposed prices. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council approve Scenario 3 at this time. Staff believes that it is better to create all category projects and that the sale prices in this scenario are the most appropriate for these units. Staff will return to Council when the project nears completion and before the marketing of the units to update Council on the budget and to request that a final price scenario be set. Motion: I move to approve Scenario 3 with the stipulation that staff will return to Council with final costs before marketing the units. SNYDER PARK AFFORDABLE HOUSING SALES SCENARIOS Scenario I Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Unit Type # units Sale Price Unit Type # units Sale Price Unit Type # units Sale Price Cat4:OneBdrm;i:!!!~:~:~i~::!::~7::;:i!;~$,!:::~!!.196,00Q cat2::one:Bdrm!~:~!~:;:::!:;:!:::::i~3_:i!~:~;~:~:~!~:i~:~:;:78~300 RO One Bdrm 2 $ 350,000 Cat 3 One Bdrm 4 $ 120,800 Cat 4 One Bdrm 3 $ 196,000 RO Throe Bdrm 1 $ 475,000 Cat 2 Throe Bdrm 1 $ 100,300 Cat 4 Throe Bdrm 4 $ 219,500 Cat 4 Three Bdrm 3 $ 219,500 Total Proc~e~ ::: ~,~:~::~ :~'::~:'$~:~644~500 TotalProceeds: :~ ::::::: :~'~::~:;~:$~ :2,154,900 Total:ProCeedS:~::~::~ ~::%:~;~:~:~::$ :2,476,800 Sales Commissions $ 72,890 Sales Commissions $ 43,098 Sales Commissions $ 49,536 Net ProCeedS ::: ~' ~:::: :: '::: $:~ 3;571;610: Net Pr~eeds ;,~:~:~$:= :;:2 111 802 Net ProceedS; ~:::: :~::~::;~:~. : $ ;2,427~264 TotalS~bsid~::~ ~:::~:~:'~:~:~:~::~:C~:~ ~::~:~':~:2,035,665 TotalSUbsidY~~ ~ ~:::~: :: ~:?j,:~$:~:~;~:495:473:Total:SubSidy:::~,:~?2~:~:~:~.~:$~:3~80,011~ PerUnit $ 135,711 PerUnit $ 233,032 PerUnit $ 212,001 perBedr00m'~ :~ ??-::::~'~;~:~;?~::;:~=::$~:~:,:::~:::75,39~ PerBedroom:~::: ~::~:;~:~:~ :::;~: :~$;:~:129,462 Pe[Bedro~m~:;:~;~:~::~::::::~:~ ~:::$:: g117,778 AveragB~S~le Pricd:: :: :: ~ ~:~::::~,;::: $::; :, 242~967: AVerage Sal~ PriCe: :: ~:,:: ,~' ::, $, :: 143~:660 AVp~geSale PriCe'~':~:,~::~: ~: ~:~:::::,;$ ~,: i65~!20 so , ~/j.,/~/. ~6~'~ 'IY.LO..L 90g ~ · '01~ L SJ.INI1 INblO:lOl;id (3NV 9NI.,LSIX~ agNIEtlNO:3 gl %~-~ ~1 ggL ~' La %k %L %a~ agL ~ OL L sl!uR /uoBe;eO S.LINfi V~JHO:tOI:Id to # SJ. INR V~O=lOl:ld 69g- qVJ.OJ. OE · %6~ 93 ~ 66 O1:1 t,a ~ ZJ. g'~ E~O g~g t~ ~.m L Ot:1 g elf, ~ /.0~ L sl!uCI ~oBeieO S,LINrl J.N:gBHRO ,~o # S.L[NN J. NgHblNO I"IV AMOD:gJ.VO A8 AblOJ. N~!ANI 9NISROH 9NI,LSIX9 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney ] FROM: ?ulie Ann Woods, Community Development Directo~f'~L_~,A~; DATE: March 22, 1999 RE: 1st Reading - Barbee Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, Method of providing affordable housing, Vested Rights, Park Development Fee Waiver SUMMARY: The applicant, Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., obtained conceptual PUD approval in January of 1998 pursuant to Ordinance 44, Series of 1997. The development proposed is for 10 new residential units falling within the 70-30 "mix" allowed in the Affordable Housing Zone District. The site is located at the baseof West Aspen or "Shadow" Mountain just south of Koch-Lumber Park (see attached Exhibi~ "D'). The property includes a substantial portion of Shadow Mountain, which is proposed as a conservation parcel to be deeded in fee to the City of Aspen. The following chart summarizes the proposed mix of units: Lot/Unit Type Lot Size FAR Proposed 1 / Free-Market 102,000 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 2 / Free-Market 11,705 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 3 / Free-Market 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 4 / Free-Market 11,440 s.f. 4,500 s.f. 5 /RO 6,318 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 6 / RO 5,887 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 7 / RO 11,736 s.f. 2,575 s.f. 8 / Category 3,017 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 9 / Category 2,259 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 10 / Category 2,211 s.f. 1,400 s.f. 11 / Category 2,255 s.f. 1,400 s.f. The Conceptual approval addressed only the PUD review criteria. This Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) application also includes land use requests for Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing, approval of the method of providing affordable housing, Vested Rights, and Park Development Fee Waiver. The Special Review for parking was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The land use request for growth management exemptions was considered by the Growth Management Commission at a hearing on March I6, 1999, whereby they recommended approval. City Council's review will consider the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Housing Authority, and the Growth Management Commission for each of the requested land use actions. The applicant has addressed most of the concems raised during the conceptual review. Accommodations for architectural and landscape consistency, shared access ways, utility easements, site lighting, legal instruments for the conveyance of the conservation parcel, draft plats, engineering schematics, and a draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement have all been included in the application. The majority of staffs comments are included in Exhibit "A" of this mem6randum. Major points of discussion have been summarized below. Staff recommends City Council adopt Ordinance No. [ [ , Series of 1999 upon first reading and schedule the public hearing for April 12, 1999. APPLICANT: Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitlcin Employee Housing Inc., alI represented by Sunny Vann and Associates. LOCATION: Approximately the comer of Juan and S. Garmisch Streets. Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen, plus additional metes and bounds within City of Aspen and Pitkin County as shown on the Site Improvements Survey (see attached vicinity map, Exhibit "D"). ZONING: The portions of the subject property currently within the City of Aspen are zoned R- 15/PUD/L and Conservation. Portions of the property .in the County are zoned AFR-10 and R-15/PUD. The applicant is seeking annexation into the City for the County portion of the property following land use approval. The applicant is also seeking rezoning to AH1/PUD, R-15/PUD and Conservation as delineated in the PUD portion of the application. The annexation will be accomplished prior to the recordation of a final plat and SIA. LOT SIZE: 17.695 acres, or approximately 770,794 square feet. LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): Most of the subject property consists of slopes of greater than 30%. Subtracting areas of slopes and the proposed access easements, the following lot areas apply for FAR and Density: F~/R shall be based on 761,130 s.f. of Lot Area. Density shall be based on - 109,144 s.f. of Lot Area. These are preliminary figures to be confirmed by the City Zoning Officer during building permit review. ALLOWABLE FAR AND DENSITY (UNDER AH~I/PUD ZONING): FAR - 145,565 square feet by right, can be increased by Special Review. Density- for single family and duplex units: 36 units (109,144 .'- 3,000). PROPOSED FAR AND DENSITY: FAR- 31,325 square feet. Density - 10 new units plus one existing unit = I 1 units. CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence, assorted outbuildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: Same, but with ten (10) additional residences and two carport structures. The majority of the property is proposed to be deeded as a conservation parcel. PREVIOUS ACTION: The City Council considered and recommended approval of the conceptual PUD with the conditions incorporated into Ordinance 44, Series of 1997 (see a~tached Exhibit E). At their meeting on March 16, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission passed by a 4 to 0 vote Resolution 99- __ which recommends City Council approve the application. (This resolution will be distributed at the City Council meeting). At their meeting on March 16, 1999, the Growth Management Commission passed by a 7 to 0 vote Resolution 99- __ which recommends City Council approve the exemption from Growth Management and the method of providing affordable housing. (This resolution will also be distributed at the City Council meeting). REVIEW PROCEDURE: Final planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Gro~vth Management Exemptions, Approval of the method of providing affordable housing, Park Fee Waivers, and Vested Rights. City Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny this land use request at a public hearing after considering recommendations from the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission, and the City's Housing Designee (APCHA). The property is currently in two jurisdictions. The applicant has requested annexation into the City and this action will take place concurrent with or after final land use approval from City Council. The actions taken by the City Council are subject to annexation of the property and become void if the land is not annexed into the City. 3 STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has made great strides to accommodate the concerns of the staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council in this application. The application is complete and includes all additional information requested during the initial review. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Agency referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B ." The application has been included as Exhibit '~C." A vicinity map has been included as Exhibit "D."' The following concerns were issues to be further addressed as part of the final review: 8040 Greenline Review: The conceptual review requested an application for 8040 Greenline Review if the completed survey information determined the proposed development was in the overlay area. After reviewing the completed survey, no proposed development is in the 8040 jurisdiction and no review is required. Affordable Housing Method.' This development is slightly different from typical private sector affordable housing projects in that the 70% affordable portion of the project is proposed to be conveyed to a non-profit affordable housing development group. The Housing Authority Board reviewed his project during Conceptual Review and recommended City Council approve the proposal. The City Council approved the Conceptual PUD with two specific conditi6ns regarding the provision of Affordable Housing on the property. Those were: 1. One of the i~ 0. lots would be provided to a member of the Barbee family, shouM that family member qualify for an R. O. unit. If no member of the Barbee family qualifies, the t~arbee family would be paid $130, O00 for that lot, and the lot wouM be retained by APEHI. 2.The remaining two i~ O. lots, and the land for the Category units, wouM be retained by APEHI. The Housing Office will work with the non-profit to determine the~nal price of the 1~ O. lots and Category units, based on the final costs of the development and the appropriateness at that time of additional subsidy, subject to review by Council. Staff has suggested conditions of this final approval which reflect the intentions of these two conditions, but which better correspond to the language provided in the proposed Subdivision Agreement. Currently, there are 163 allotments available for new affordable housing units. The applicant is requesting seven (7) units be allocated. There are also currently thirty-four (34) AH-Associated Free-market units available. The applicant is requesting three (3) be allocated to this project. The Growth Management Commission recommended that these allocations be exempted from Growth Management competition and scoring, subject to conditions. 4 SharedAccess Ways: The Planning and Zoning Commission raised a concem about the multiple curb cuts on S. Garmisch Street and the affect of garage doors on the facades of both the free-market homes and the RO homes. The applicant has responded by providing a shared access drive between Lots 3 and 4. This was acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Curb, Gutter, andSidewall~: During the conceptual review, planning staff expressed a desire for the edge of this project to be designed in a less urban manner. The Commission agreed and the applicant was required to investigate the design of the curb, gutter, and sidewalk with representatives of the Streets, Parks, Engineering, and Planning Departments. The applicant did discuss this treatment with Engineering and Streets, who requested a more urban approach to the curb, gutter and sidewalk design. The City Planning Department preferred that this standard be met with a less urban treatment and suggested to the Commission that a drainage swale be created in the median, planted with tail native grasses and street trees, with a detached sidewalk. However, after discussions with the City Engineer, staff backed off from this suggestion as it was explained that due to the soil characteristics in this area the best solution is to place curb and gutter along the edge of the street to convey water away from the site. The Commission was als0 comfortable with this recommendation. Preservation of Existing 1Large Shed located nearest to Dean Street: During the conceptual review, .staff urged the developer to find a mechanism to preserve some aspect of the large existing shed on the property. It is important to point out that this shed is not protected by the City's Historic Preservation regulations and the developer is under no obligation to preserve the structure. However, regardless of the shed's technical value as a historic structure, the City Planning Department believes these old sheds are important reminders of the City's history - as a type of visual reference to the Aspen society and culture as it has changed through time. Staff still believes this structure, or some part thereof, could and should be incorporated into the development plans, such as the street-side view of the carport structure. The structure could also be preserved on one of the proposed lots, or moved to another location in town and re-used. The structure is located approximately where the proposed shared driveway between Lots 3 and 4 is located. Concurring with staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that this be included as a condition of approval.. Variances: First, the applicant is requesting approval of smaller lots and zero lot line setbacks to allow for the creation of duplexes on individual lots, rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ownership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. 5 The second variation is for the front yard setback of Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be 25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the I0 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Both of these variances are included in the PUD standards incorporated into the Ordinance. Vested Property Rights: In order to preserve the land use approvals which would be obtained as a result of City Council approvals, the applicant is requesting vested property fights status for this project. Staff supports this request and has incorporated it into the ordinance. Park Development Fee. Waivers: The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land Use Code by way of a conveyance of the Conservation parcel mthe City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080, subject to City Council's approval. This proposal is addressed in the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Staff supports this request. Summary: The applicant has accommodated the concerns expressed by the staff, [he Commission, and the City Council in this application. RECOMMENDATION: Staff, the Plarming and Zoning Commission, and the Growth Management Commission recommend City Council adopt this Ordinance Upon first reading, with the following conditions: 1. The Land Use action is subject to annexation of the property into the City of Aspen. Failure to complete annexation within 180 days of this approval shall render this land use action void, unless the timeframe is extended by City Council. 2. Following annexation, but within 180 days after final land Use approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant shall record a Final PUD/Subdivision development plan. This plan shall include all necessary plat requirements of the City Engineer including site plans, grading plans, utility plans, any physical improvements required to mitigate for additional air quality impacts as determined by the City Environmental Health Department; all utility easements, architectural plans and elevations, and a landscape plan. 3. Within l S0 days after final appmval by City Council and prior to applying for Building Permit, the applicant shall record a PUD/Subdivision Improvements Agreement binding the 6 property, the Barbee Subdivision, to this development approval. The Agreement shall describe all subdivision and PUD improvementS, requirements, and restrictions, and maintenance, and shall provide financial assurance to the City for said improvements and the success of the site landscaping for a period of two (2) years after installation. The agreement shall be reviewed concurrently with the final plat and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. 4. That the following description ofeach Lot's development provisions be included in the final Ordinance: Reauirements Common to Entire l)eveloDment Lot Dimensions: As represented on Final Plat. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet. Maximum height (including viewplanes): 25 Feet. Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the setbacks. Minimum percent open space: No requirement (building ~nvelopes). Lot 1 (existin~ Free-Market) Zone District: R- 15/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (Free-Market) .. Zone District: AH1/PUD AllowabIe Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 60 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 3 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 4 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: ' 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 6 (resident occunied) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: I0 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 7 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO .Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 8 (catef~orv unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 35 feet from southern-most lot line. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 9 feet. Lot 9 (eateaorv unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 27 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 7 feet; 0 feet. Lot I0 (cateEorv unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 14 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet.. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 7 feet. Lot 11 (category unit) Zone District: AH I/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 6 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 14 feet; west 0 feet. Lot 12 (shared access 0areel) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowed Uses: 10 carport parking spaces, Wash, snow storage, uses accessory to use of residential lots. Residential use shall require a substantial PUD amendment. Allowable Floor Area: 10 covered carports in two structures as represented on final plat. Setbacks: As represented on final plat. Trash access area: Minimum I0 feet wide, unobstructed. Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Allowed Development and Uses: Uses allowed in the Conservation Zone District and allowed pursuant to the Deed of Conservation Easement, as amended. Uses and development necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. The City shall accept title to the "conservation parcel" only after the City Attorney has reviewed all aspects of the Bargain Sale Deed, the Deed of Conservation Easement, and is satisfied that no inordinate liability issues exist with respect to prior mining activities on the parcel. To satisfy this concern, the City may require areas of mining activity to be mitigated, or otherwise properly treated, Or a legal instrument indemnifying the City prior to conveyance. In the event that title cannot be conveyed to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, then a trail easement will be conveyed and allowed in the Conservation Area~ 6. RepIacementafterdem~~iti~n~ftheexistingsing~e-fami~yresidence~nL~t#~shaI~require a GMQS Exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050, as amended. 7. The Home Owners' Association, or similar entity responsible for Lot#12, the common access way, shall install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at such time determined ' necessary for public safety by the City Engineer. 8. Access to Lots 3 and 4 shall be via the shared access easement as described on the final plat. The City Engineer shall issue only one curb cut permit between these two lots. 9. All Lots are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards, as amended. Lots 1-4 shall be included in the Amhitectural Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit C of the draft SIA. Lot #1 shall be subject to the provisions of the Landscape Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit B of the draft SIA upon redevelopment of the Lot. AI! other aspects of the. City's Residential Design Standard, as amended~ will apply. 10. For purposes of calculating the fee-in-lieu of school land dedication, the building permit application for each lot shall include an appraisal of the lot's fair market value. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. 9 1 I. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit fur an individual lot, the School Land Dedication Fee shall be paid in full pursuant to the regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 12. Prior to recordation of the final plat, an air quality mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Department for approval. Physical improvements to the site required for mitigation shall be delineated on the final plat. 13. A Building Permit application for any and all lots shall include a fugitive dust mitigation plan for review and approval by the City Environmental Health Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each lot, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the appropriate department for any fireplaces or wood burning devices. 15. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No Sunday construction activity will be permitted. Exceeding the City Noise Ordinance may result in a stop work order. 16. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. All exterior lighting, including street lights, shall be downcast, sharp cut-off, and not used to accentuate landscape or architectural features of the development. No exterior up-lighting is permirted. No exterior floodlights are permitted. 17. The Community Development Dept. shall assign street addresses as follows: Lots'2-4 shall receive numbees with a Garmisch Street address; Lots 5-11 shall receive numbers with a Dean Street address. 18. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately Lot 4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the S. Garmisch Street side of the carport structure. If preserved for storage use, its FAR shall be exempt. 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the duplex units, six (6) street trees shall be planted along the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W or Midland Trail in locations approved by the City Forester considering the storage of plowed snow. These trees shall be three- inches or greater in caliper if deciduous or at least six feet in height if coniferous. 20. Prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant will be required to gain approval for a line extension and a collection system agreement from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. For the duplex units, a shared service agreement may be required. There exists a possibility that gravity service from Lots 5-7 will require a pump system; if so, its design must be approved by ACSD and the City Engineer. 21. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any lot, adequate silt fencing shall be erected to ensure that no sediment-loaded drainage will be leaving the property during construction. This fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the respective lot. 22. Prior to applying for a Building Permit for any lot, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. This agreement can be recorded with the plat and SIA documents. 10 23. Building Permit applications for any and all lots shall include payment of a $50.00 per project fee in lieu of digital submission requirements. 24. Any work within public rights-of-way shall gain approval from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 25. The applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 26. That the final "mix" of categories shall be as follows, and conditioned as follows: a) . The project shall consist often (10) new residential units. Three (3) shall be free-market units of no more than three (3) bedrooms each. Three (3) shall be RO Lots, each for the purpose of a single-family residence of no less than three (3) bedrooms. Four (4) shall be Category 4 three bedroom units constructed and conveyed pursuant to APCHA Guidelines. b) At or near completion ofthe Category duplex units, the applicant shall provide the Asper~Pit!dn County Housing Authority the opportunity to "buy- down" the Category designations of the Category Units and the RO Lots or Units to a lower Category prior to conveyance. 27. That the language of these conditions as finally approved by the appropriate authority be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit set of plans and all other sets made for the purpose of construction. 28. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of all P&Z, GMC, and City Council resolutions and ordinances applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter as part of the building permit application indicating tha~ conditions of approval are known and understood. 29. That a Parking Management Plan be submitted for staffs review and approval prior to the Building permit application which will address the phasing, staging, and construction parking on the site. 30. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission, and the City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by an entity having the authority to do so. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance I l ' Series of 1999, upon first reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Comments from Referral Agencies Exkibit C -- Application Exhibit D -- Vicinity Map EXHIBIT Staff Comments: Barbee Planned Unit Development A development application for a PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements: A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff F indin~: Community Vision: The proposed development increases resident housing opportunities, encourages a balanced permanent community, may provide residents with a transportation alternative if they choose to walk to town, work, etc., and is a relatively sustainable development pattern. Community Vitality: The proposed development is 70% affordable, addressing the community' s desire to provide affordable housing opportunities within a reasonable walking distance to employment and recreation resources. The proposed development is an irafill site within, or approximately within, the original townsite. Increased residential density, especially for local working residents, within the functional town promotes a sense of Community that cannot be achieved by placing that critical mass in a remote location, regardless of where the metro area or extended metro boundaries exist. Open Space and Environment: Providing housing oppommities within walking distance to employment, entertainment, recreation, and other residences reduces the need to use a vehicle for every trip. Also, compact development within the townsite reduces the need to extend services and develop land on the outskirts of town, and preserves those natural open space areas for their wildlife and aesthetic functions. The proposal is preserving areas that are clearly not appropriate for development. The proposal also preserves the bench area above the proposed RO lots, just above the Little Cloud Subdivision. It is important to underscore this preservation because this area could be expensive "view lots" with dramatic affects upon the visual openness of the mountain. Staff believes this approach to development is the most desired for this parcel and is appreciative of the site planning and preservation. 1993 AACP: This project addresses elements of the existing AACP. Specifically, it 'creates a housing environment dispersed appropriately scaled and affordable. ' And, it preserves and enhances the natural beauty of the area.' 1999 AACP: This document has not been adopted. HOwever, the draft document provides substantial support for affordable housing to be located in town where it protects Staff Comments 1 surrounding open spaces outside of town and where the residents can become integral members of the social fabric. The plan also supports the preservation of natural open space areas such as the proposed conservation parcel for Shadow Mountain. Interim Housing Guidelines: The development proposed is consistent with the Interim (Citizen) Housing Guidelines adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions. The development is within the Metro Area, is within walking distance of the community core, preserves a significant amount of natural lands, represents quality design visually appropriate for the neighborhood, integrates different social levels within one project, is an optimum development level for this site, and does not promote 'urban sprawl. In addition, this project is proposed with no public subsidy and is not expected to have a significant negative fiscal impact upon the City or its taxpayers. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: Surrounding development to the northeast consists Of multi-family housing, a park, older lodge conversions, and future potential mini-base development for Lift 1 or 'Town Lift.' There is virtually no development, or potential for development, to the Southeast of the site which is compatible with the open space easement proposed. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding land uses. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The surrounding area's development or redevelopmerit potential will not be affected by this development. Redevelopment of the largely vacant areas to the east have sufficient access from surrounding streets and a platted alleyway2 D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. Staff Finding: Although exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures, the application must receive development allotments for 10 residential units. The Growth Management Commission will consider this case and make a recommendation to City Council. The GMC public heating is also scheduled for March 16, 1999, ~t 5:30 PM. 2. Density: A. The maximum density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district. Furthermore, densities may be reduced if: 1. There is not sufficient water pressure and other utilities to serve the proposed · development; There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development; 3. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of slope, ground instability, and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers; 4. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, chainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution; Staff Comments 2 5. The proposed development will have deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city; or 6. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural.features of the site, Staff Finding: The density proposed on this site is far below that allowed by the gross lot size. There are sufficient utilities and services to accommodate this development. The access to the RO and Category lots has been designed in cooperation with the Fire Marshall and is adequate for fire protection service. The portion of the property where development is proposed is suitable for development. The applicant has not provided an Air Quality Mitigation Plan in the final application. The Environmental Health Department has suggested several recommendations, and the applicant is reviewing final details of the recommended mitigation measures. The location of the proposed development does not appear to be in conflict with the natural terrain and features of the site. B~ Reduction in density for slope consideration. 1. In order to reduce wildfire, mudslide, and avalanche hazards; enhance soil stability; and guarantee adequate fire protection access, the density of a PUD shall also be reduced in areas with slopes in excess of twenty (20) percent in the following manor: a. For lands between zero (0) and twenty (20) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be that permitted in the underlying zone district. b. For lands between twenty-one (21 ) and thirty (30) percent slope, the maximum density allowed shall be reduced to fifty (50) percent of that permitted in the underlying zone district. c. For lands between thirty-one (31) and forty (40) percent slope, the density shall be reduced to twenty-five (25) percent of that allowed in the underlying zone district. d. For lands in excess of forty (40) percent slope, no density credit shall be allowed. 2. Maximum density for the entire parcel on which the development is proposed shall be calculated by each slope classification, and then by dividing the square footage necessary in the underlying zone district per dwelling unit. 3. For parcels resting in more than one (I) zone district, the density reduction calculation shall be performed separately on the lands within each zone district. 4. Density shall be further reduced as specified in Chapter 26.04, Definition of Lot Area. Staff Finding: The application specifies the percentages of the property falling within the described slope classifications. A substantial portion of the property is steep and does not contribute to development potential. As a general guideline, the fiat portion of the property is the only portion which has development potential both in physical location and zoning (derisity and floor area). However, even considering the steep topography, the site has far more development potential than is being proposed. In this case, the community gains the assurance of an appropriate level of development notwithstanding the high level of potential development. 3. Land Uses. 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 in the underlying zone district. Staff Comments 3 Staff Finding: The application includes a request to rezone the property to AH1/PUD. The present zoning, both City and County, allows for residential development in varying densities. The applicant is proposing the duplexes in a clustered, zero lot line configuration. 4. Dimensional Requirements. 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 viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. lfa variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying zone district, provided that the total area of all lots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone district. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final plat development plan. Staff Finding: This PUD will establish the dimensional requirements for Lots 1-12. Two variations to the underlying zone district are proposed. The first is to the minimum lot size for Lots 9, 10, and 11. The minimum lot size for a fathering parcel this large is 3,000 s.f. The minimum lot area per unit in a duplex configuration, however, is 1,500 s.f. This essentially allows for a duplex on a 3,000 s.f. lot but does not allow for the duplexes. to sit on their own fee simple property. Upon completion, the developer usually condominiumizes the shared property to separate ownership to allow each unit to sit on its own land as a limited common element. The smaller lot and a zero lot line setback allows for the creation of duplexes on individual lots rather than with shared ownership. This also saves the applicant from having to amend the plat in the future to condominiumize the duplexes and separate ovaxership. This variation is appropriate and is recommended by staff. The second variation is for the from yard setbackof Lot #1. The R-15 zoning requires this distance be25 feet. However, the existing house is much closer to the street and the back of the proposed lot rises significantly. The applicant has proposed a 10 foot setback and a building envelope. Staff supports this variation for three reasons: 1) the R-15 zoning is the most appropriate for the location of the property; 2) the 10 foot setback will be consistent with the remainder of the development being proposed and with existing development in the area; and, 3) the proposed building envelope and minimized front yard will protect the steep area of the lot from development - a preferred development approach. Staff Comments 4 Staff supports the proposed dimensional requirements as outlined in the main body of this memorandum. 5. Off-street parking. The number of off-street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying zone district based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b. The parking need of any nonresidential units. c. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentiVe techniques in the proposed development. e. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the City shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change Staff Finding: The proposed underlying zone district(AH 1 ), mandates that parking requirements'be established through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The proposal includes at least 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit, which is the minimum for development city-wide. The RO and Free Market lots shall provide two spaces pursuant to the City's parking standards at the time of actual development. The Category units are provided with two spaces per unit with an additional two spaces for guests. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the proposed parking through Special Review. 6. Open Space. 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 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. An area may be approved as a common park or recreation area if it: a. Is to be used and is suitable for scenic, landscaping, or recreation purposes; and b. Is land which is accessible and available to all dwelling units or lots for whom the common area is intended. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas shalI be deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the planned unit development (PUD), together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Any plan for open space shall also be accompanied by a legal instrument which ensures the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and communally owned facilities. Staff Finding: The Conservation parcel will be deeded to the City with the surface easement granted to the Aspen Valley Land Trust. The legal instruments to protecting the area have been provided to and reviewed by the Parks Department who intends to maintain a trail easement. No common area for recreation is required and none is proposed. Thus, no legal apparatus for its maintenance has been provided. The maintenance, repair, and Staff COmments 5 snowplowing of Lot #12 (access parcel) has been defined in the proposed SIA. The responsibility of this will lie with a condominium association, including Lots 5-12. 7. Landscape Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan a landscape plan, which exhibits a well designated 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 Final Development Plan includes a LandsCape Plan for the Category parcels and the access parcel. This plan provides a reasonable amount and variety ofplantings appropriate for the neighborhood and the climate. Landscape guidelines for the remaining parcels have been supplied to ensure some consistency between parcels without significantly restricting personal choice. These guidelines are appropriate and adequately address the concerns about visual consistency between parcels. Adequate areas for snow storage have been delineated. The access drive has been slightly shortened and the snow storage is not expected to encroach on the Midland Trail - a concern raised during conceptual review. 8. Architectural Site Plan. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural site plan, which ensures architectural consistency with 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 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 Findin~: Building envelopes have been placed appropriately considering the natural terrain and surrounding land uses. Architectural plans and elevations for the Category units have been included in this application. The proportions, mussing, and materials are appropriate. During the conceptual review, staff expressed a desire that the free-market and RO buildings be of similar architectural character to the Category structures because of their proximity. This was not an attempt to control style but rather to minimize contrast. The applicant has proposed architectural guidelines to ensure some compatibility with the Category units without being so strict as to limit creativity and personal expression. These are well prepared and more sensitive about materials, colors, and style than the City's more objective standards. The lots not proposed for current construction are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards. Staff recommends that in the case of Staff Comments 6 an appeal of the itandards, that these architectural guidelines for the PUD should also be considered. During the conceptual review, members of the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed a desire for combined vehicular entrances to reduce the street presence of driveways and garage doors. Suggestion for combining lot access way were discussed and the applicant agreed to study those possibilities. The applicant has proposed combining driveways between Lots 3 and 4. Staff is recommending that the shared driveway access easement be placed between Lots 2 and 3, and that Lot 4 use the common driveway with access behind the carports. 9. Lighting. All lighting shall be arranged so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Staff Finding: Lighting shall be downcast. No lighting of landscape elements or architectural features should be allowed. This will be included as a recommended condition in the final Ordinance. 10. Clustering. Clustering of dwelling units is encouraged. Staff Finding: The development has been clustered. The entire site is 17 acres with approximately 13.6 acres set aside for conservation. This leaves less than 4 acres available for development, which is less than 24% of the siie. Therefore, all development would be clustered onto less than one quarter (1/4) of the entire property. 11. Public facilities. 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: The proposed access way and fire suppression has been designed to accommodate the Fire Marshall's requirements as explained evident in Exhibit 4 of Appendix C (in Exhibii "C"). The City Engineer has requested a ten (10) foot strip of land be dedicated to the City R.O.W. in front of Lot #1 upon that lot's redevelopment. This area is required to accommodate the full requirements for the R.O.W. There exist sufficient utilities in the immediate area to accommodate this development. The applicant is obligated to provide for utility upgrades and extensions. An easement to access the existing manhole near the front steps of the existing house has been proposed on the final plat. This easement addresses the request of the ACSD. The Sanitation District will require a line extension, a collection system agreement, and possibly a shared service agreement for the duplexes. There may exist an elevation problem for gravity lines from the RO Lots to the tnmk line on S. Garmisch Street. The Staff Comments 7 applicant should consult with the ACSD to determine ifa pump system or altemative fall line can be designed to accommodate sanitation service. Staff recommends this issue be fmalized prior to acceptance of an application for a building permit. The Engineering and Streets Departments are asking for the development of curb and gutter with this project. The Planning Department concurs with this recommendation. 12. Traffic and pedestrian circulation. a. 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 appr0ved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. 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 Developmere (PUD) ihall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. c. 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 and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Every residential building shall not be farther than sixty (60) feet from an access roadway or drive providing access to a public street. e. All nonresidential land use 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. f. 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: The proposed development meets these standards. Each lot created has adequate access to public rights-of-way. The land owners sharing Lot 12 .will be responsible for maintaining safe access. Staff Comments: Barbee Subdivision A development application for subdivision review shall comply with the following standards and requirements: 1. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. - c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding: The proposed development meets these standards. Please refer to staffs findings for these criteria under the PUD review, pages 1 and 2 of this section. Staff Comments 8 d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision is in compliance with applicable requirements of the land use code considering the variations recommended for approval and the conditions proposed by staff. 2. Suitability ofland 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 snowslide, 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. 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. StaffFinding: The city staff has reviewed this project and found that with the clustering proposal, the land proposed to be developed is suitable, and the layout of the subdivision is spatially efficient. 3. Improvements. The improvements outlined in Section 26.88.040(C)(3) must be provided. StaffFinding: The City Engineer has reviewed the engineering documents provided in the application and provided referral comments. The applicant shall provide lot pins for each lot and provide range points and monuments within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. as determined necessary by the City Engineer. All street improvements and repairing shall be accomplished pursuant to the final plat documents. A new street name is not necessary as the parcels can be numbered with a Dean Street address. Traffic control signs are not expected to be necessary, however, the homeowners' association should be required to install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at any time the City Engineer feels the sign is necessary for safety reasons. The installation of six street trees are required. The installation of the appropriate site utilities and drainage has been included in the provided engineering drawings for the final plat. 4. Design Standards. The design standards of section 26.88.040(C)(4) shall be complied with. a. Streets and Related Improvements. Staff Findine: The City Engineer has requested a 10 foot wide strip of land in front of Proposed Lot #1 be dedicated to the City right-of-way upon the redevelopment of that parcel. This is to correct for a deficient width of the R.O.W. and to allow for safe travel and maintenance of the roadway: The setback and building envelope for that parcel shall be adjusted to correspond with the new property line after the dedication. Dedication of this strip shall be noted on the final plat. The status of the northeasterly corner shall be verified on the final plat. The proposed access way meets these standards and is adequate for fire access. Final paving of the new access way and the final overlay on S. Garmisch Street shall not be completed until one year after all subsurface improvements are completed unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Street names. The three new parcels along S. Garmisch Street shall be numbered with S. Garmisch Street addresses. The seven new parcels accessed from the new drive shall be numbered with Dean Street addresses, unless an alternative street name is proposed and accepted Staff Comments 9 by City Council. The homeowners' association Shall be responsible for traffic control signs ira safety issue arises in the future, as determined by the City Engineer. The City Engineer has requested the provision of two street lights along the property. This is different from the one street light requested at the access way entrance by the City Engineer during fiae conceptual review and as proposed by the applicant.. The City Planning Department believes the one street light proposed by the applicant is sufficient for safety and meets the standard as provided above. This opinion is based on the exact letter of the law, the opinion of the City Engineer during conceptual review, the relatively low traffic levels on this portion of S. Garmisch Street, and the desire to not over-urbanize the edge of town with excessive outdoor lighting. Too much lighting detracts from safety by causing glare. The proposed curb, sidewalk, and planting buffer is adequate and meets city standards. Trees. One street tree per lot facing S. Garmisch Street would result in six trees. The applicant shall install six street trees along the planting buffer of the street R.O.W. or in another suitable location at the discretion of the City Forester. These trees shall be planted in a location where they will not be crushed with plowed snow. These trees shall be three inches or greater in caliper if deciduous, or at east six feet in height if coniferous. b. Easements. Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe a general easement for access and maintenance of utilities within the proposed access way (Lot 12) and specific easements for individual utility agencies as required for above or below ground equipment, pedestals, and service personnel within Lot 12 and within Lots 5-11, as needed. Utility easements for Lots 1-4 shall be shown and described on the final plat to the extent utilities are being currently provided. Otherwise, utility easements on Lot 1-4 shall be provided at the time of actual development. Shared access easements shall also be placed on the plat. c. Lots and blocks. Staff Finding: The proposed Lots meet the design standards for Lots and Blocks. d. Survey Monuments. Staff Finding: The lots shall be pinned and monumented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. If required by the City Engineer, a range poim shall be installed within the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W. and the proposed access way. e. Utilities (Water, sewer, fire, and other). Staff Finding: The final plat shall show and describe plans and specifications for the provision of utilities. Approval from the respective utility provider is required for the final plat. The applicant should be aware that there may exist lack of elevation for gravity flow sanitary sewer from proposed Lots 5-7 and a pump system may be required. f. Storm Drainage. Staff Finding: Staff Comments 10 The City Engineer concurs with the grading and drainage plans submitted for this review. These plans shall be incorporated into the final plat. The applicant shall provide drainage control for construction to limit sediment loaded drainage from exiting the property. g. Flood hazard areas. The following standards shall apply to special flood hazard areas as defined in Section 26.68.040 of the Municipal Code. Staff Finding: The subject lands are not within the flood hazard area. h. The design and location of any proposed structure, building envelope, road, driveway, trail, or other similar development is compatible with significant natural or scenic features of the site. Staff Finding: The proposed development is preserving a substantial portion of the natural and scenic features of the site. i. Variations of design standards. Variations from the provisions of this section, "Design Standards," may be granted by special review as provided for in Chapter 26.64. Staff Finding: The applicant is not seeking any variations form the Subdivision standards. 5. 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 26.48, 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~ 100, Growth Management Quota System. StaffFindinc~: As a new subdivision that would be comprised of new dwelling units, the applicant is seeking GMQS exemptions pursuant to the referenced section. No replacement dwelling units are ' proposed. 6. School land dedication standards. Staff Finding,: This is not an appropriate location for land dedication. Upon application for development each Lot owner shall be responsible for the payment of the School Land Dedication Fee (payment-in- lieu). This fee shall be based upon the fair market value of the respective Lot at the time of development, the land dedication standards applicable for the proposed development, and the calculation formula as specified in the code. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. STAFF COMMENTS: Barbee Rezoning Section 26.92.020, Standards Applicable to Rezoning In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: Staff Comments 11 The development proposed is proceeding through a Planned Unit Development review to ensure consistency with all applicable City requirements. B. WhethertheproposedamendmentisconsistentwithatlelementsoftheAspenArea Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: The rezoning allows for increased density for projects representing 70% affordable housing. This incentive zone is consistent with the AACP and the development being proposed is in substantial compliance with this community document. Please refer to the AACP compliance criteria of PUD more fUlly responded to on pages 1 and 2 of this section. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding,: The rezoning, as well as the level and type of development being proposed is consistent with and appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The rezoning and the level of development being proposed does not represent an adverse effect on road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment ~xould 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: The rezoning and the level of development being considered is within the community's infrastructure capabilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: The rezoning will not have significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment. In fact, a large portion of the property is being preserved against development to the benefit of the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: A mix of free_market and affordable housing is appropriate for this neighborhood and the level of density being proposed is appropriate for the edge of the City's urbanized area. It. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment allows for development of the parcel with 70% of the units being deed restricted to affordable housing and a substantial portion of the property being zoned conservation. The removal of the Lodge (L) overlay on Lot #1 is appropriate given the purely residential use on either side of the lot. Staff Comments 12 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: The proposed rezoning is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the intent of the municipal code. STAFF COMMENTS: VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of the City council's approval of this application, the applicant must request approval of Vested property Rights per Section 26.52.080 of the Land Use Regulations. There are no review criteria that must be met in considering the vesting request.. Staff Finding: Staff is recommending the City COuncil approve the requested Vested Rights for this project. STAFF COMMENTS: PARK FEE WAIVER REQUEST The applicant proposes to meet the park development impact fee requirements of Section 26.44.030 of the Land use code by way of a conveyance of the conservation parcel to the City of Aspen for open space purposes. Such conveyances are permitted pursuant to Section 26.44.080, subject to city council's approval. This proposal is addressed in the Subdivision/PUD Agreement. Staff FindinE: Staff is recommending the City Council approve the requested Park Fee Waiver request for this project. STAFF COMMENTS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING (AND METHOD OF PROVIDING THE HOUSING) The exemption by City Council may ordy be granted subsequent to review and consideration by the GMC. There are, however, no specific review standards for this ' review other than the more general criteria listed below. To the extent possible, staff has incorporated general observations of the project in relation to the Community Plan and the Interim Housing Guidelines under the criteria of the PUD and Subdivision reviews located elsewhere in this Exhibit A. Approval of the method by which the applicant proposes to provide affordable housing shah be at the option of the City Council, upon the recommendation of the Growth Management Commission. In evaluating the Staff Comments 13 applicant's proposal, the advice of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be sought in considering the following factors: 1. Whether the city has an adopted plan to develop affordable housing with monies received fi'om payment of affordable housing dedication fees. 2. Whether the city has an adopted plan identi~ing the applicant 's site as being appropriate for affordable housing. Staff Finding: The City, through the Housing Authority, has developed an affordable housing plan for both public and private monies. The site is not identified in the Community Plan as a potential affordable housing site. The Plan, however; only identified individual parcels and did not provide direction in evaluating all sites in general. However, the City and County Planning Commissions have adopted Resolution No. 98-11, "The Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan" as an update of the Housing Element of the 1993 AACP. Based on it'.s location, size, and proximit~ to general services, staff believes this site is an appropriate site for affordable housing. Staff believes the Interim Housing Guidelines further this opinion. 3. Whether the applicant's site is well suited for the development of affordable housing, taking into account the availability of services, proximity to employment opportunities and whether the site is affected by environmental constraints to development or historic preservation concerns. 'Staff Finding,: The site is an excellent site for affordable housing. Its proximity to physical and social infrastructure, transit, employment and recreation opportunities, and location within an established neighborhood make this a well-suited, appropriate site. Furthermore, the preservation of the majority of the property as a conservation easement protecting Shadow Mountain furthers many community goals, not only those related to affordable housing. 4. Whether the method proposed will result in employee housing being produced prior to or at the same time the impacts of the development will be experienced by the community. Staff Finding: The proposed Subdivision Improvement Agreement prohibits the conveyance of the Free- Market lots until such time as the Category units are built and occupied and the RO Lots have been conveyed. 5. Whether the development itself requires the provision of affordable housing on-site to meet its service needs. Staff Comments 14 Staff F indin~: This development is proposed within the 70/30 incentive zone district AHI/PUD. The community must rely on the private sector to aid in the development of affordable . housing if the community's AH goals are to be accomplished. This is a recognized incentive zone to encourage the private sector' s involvement in the provision of affordable housing. In fact, the "Purpose" of the zone district is explained in the Land Use Code as: "to provide for the use of land for the production of Category 1, 2, 3, and 4 affordable housing and resident occupied lots and units. The zone district also permits a limited component of J~ee market lots/units to off-set the cost of developing affordable housing. It is contemplated that land may also be Subdivided in connection with a developmentplan." The applicant is proposing the category units as Category 4. One condition of approval would allow the Housing Authority to "buy down" these category units to a lower category prior to their conveyance to qualified residents. The number of employees living in the development will far out-number employees generated by the use, and the development will certainly have a more positive impact on the social health of the community than will discouraging local working people from becoming vested members of Aspen. As an additional benefit, the Free Market lots have been proposed with FAR caps limiting their size to a relatively modest 4,500 square feet. While these will be large homes, they pale in comparison to the excessively large homes that are believed to generate substantial numbers of employees. Staff Comments 15 To: Chris Bendon, Project Planner Date: March 9, 1999 Re: Barbee (Family) Subdivision and Final PUI) Physical Address: 601 South Garmisch Street. City of A~pen, CO Legal Description: A 17.67 Ac. tract of land being a part of Lot I, ~ I/4, .xrE I/4, Section 13, T10S, R85W, of the 6th P.M., lying partially in both the City of Aspen and Pitkin County, CO. After reviewing the above referenced application and making a site visit, I am reporting the comments of the Engineering Department: Summary.: The applicants have satisfactorily addressed the majority of the principal requirements and elements for the proposed subdivision. Further refinement will be required to fill out the conceptual plans to construction pins. Changes in Conditions & Subsequent Reviews: fithe proposed use, density, or timing of construction of the project change. or the site, parking or utility plans for this project change subsequent to this review, a complete set of the revised plans shall be provided t6 the Engineering Dept. for review and re-evaluation. The discussion and recommendations give~ in this memorandum apply to the application and plans (dated November 22, 1997) provided for this review and such comments and recommendations may change in response to changes in the use, density, or timing of the construction of the project, or changes in the site, parking or utility designs. 1. Improvement Survey & Rights-Of-Way: After minor corrections, the several survey sheets included in the application should be included in the Final Subdivision / PUD plat for the dev~lopment. 2. Utility. Seryices & Easements: The applicant should verify conformance with the specific requirements for each utility provider. Consm~ction plans must be approved by each respective utility provider prior to building permit application. The design engineer should re-evaluate the extension of saniTm'y sewer service lines to Lots 5, 6 and 7. Water and electric utility meters and service connection points must be accessible to service personnel in the completed project and not obs~'ucted by garbage or recycling containers, parked vehicles, other sn'uctures, landscape features, or vegetariorL Any new surface utilities requiring a DRCM6a99.DOC 1 OF4 Memo - Barbee (Family) Subdivision and Final PIjq3 pedestal or other above ground equipment must be installed on an easerne~t provided by the property owner and not located within the public right-of-way. As stated in the application, the 20 ft wide water main easement into the development will run through the driveway (Lot 12). Any required easements for utilities shall be shown on the final subdivision plat submitted for approval and shall also be shown on the plan sets submitted for building p~m~its. 3. Final Plat, Agreements and Building Permits The applicant will prepare the final subdivision/PUD plat. all agreements and fulfill the conditions of approval which precede any construction activities pnor to submitting any applications for building permits. Utility providers will have signature blocks on the final plat for confirmation of compliance with their standards for their respective utility systems. A space 10 feet wide across the frontage of Lot 1 should be reserved for future right-of-way dedication and identified as such on the subdivision plat. 4. Streets and Pedestrian .-h'ea: The intersection of S. Garmisch St. and Juan St. most likely will require re-construcUon to improve the width. alignment and grading of the roadway and to improve the storm drainage. We expect improvements to the adjacent streets will become necessary, in part, as a result of this development, These improvements should include pavement improvements, re-aligning, grading and reconstruction of the comer of S. Garmisch St. and :Iuan St., street Iightmg, drainage, and landscaping. The street-scape improvements would include curb, gutter and sidewalk, planted median, and street lighting. 5. .Driveway Access: Given the irregular intersection geomen'7 of S. Garmisch St: and Juan St., the driveway to Lot 2 should be located at the northeriy side of this lot to provide better sight distance between the driveway and the intersection. Redevelopment of Lot 1: If, or when the existing house on Lot 1 is removed, the owner will dedicate ten (I0) ft width of fight-of-way to the City dependent upon the existing width of the fight-of-way and the needs of the City for such widening. Correspondingly, the front setback line and building envelope for this lot should be set based upon the revised front lot line after such adjustment, if a front lot line adjustment is completed. 7. Site Drainage and Erosion Control: The new development shall not release more. than historic storm run-off flows (in non-concentrated fashion) from the site and any increase in historic storm run-off flows must be first routed and detained on the site. A drainage plan and report by a currently licensed Colorado civil engineer shall be included in the site development plans submitted for the individual free-market and deed restricted lots as each is developed. The report should provide general conslruction techniques and details (minimum standards) for erosion control and sediment transport control to be employed by the developer(s) when the several residences are constructed. If the lots are developed individually, the property lines shall be fenced with construction and sediment fencing prior to construction and shall be securely DRCM6a99.DOC 2OF4 Memo - Barbee (Family) Subdivision and Final PUD maintained until the later of either establishment of the permanent ground cover or issuance of a C.O. for the project. 8. Mine Closures and Mine Tailing Clean-up: The property, owners should provide flail disclosure of the conditions (size. depth. stability) of the shaecs and mine openings to the City. The several mine shaft 'openings and discovery shafts should be evaluated by a qualified, independent party to determine if any reclamation activities need to be performed to secure the mine workings and secure the sitos as possible hazards to the flatare propert7 ov~ers and the general public. The Colorado Geological Survey may perform the evaluations without charge for the owners. If any remediation or closure work is recommended by the CGS, the owners should arrange to complete the work prior to development of any housing units and prior to conveyance of the open space parcel to the City. The Colorado Division of Minerals & Geology, (Dept. of Natural Resources) can provide recommended design details and procedures for the closure of mines. 9. Survey Monument Records: The epplicant's surveyor shall record the monument records prescribed by State law. These records shall be filed before the recordarion of the subdivision/PUD plat and the proposed annexation of the parcel presently located in the county. 10. West Aspen Mountain Trail: The location of the existing .Mtdng trail shall be included on the Improvement Survey and on the final subdivision plat. Ira new alignment is developed or approved for the trail, this should be shown on the subdivision plat. 11. Water Wells and Water Rights: If there are any water wells on the subject: property, they will be properly abandoned and capped according tothe City Water Department standards prior to development of any housing units and prior to conveyance of the open space parcel to the City. The owners will fulfill the requirements of the City Water Department for new service and conveyance of water rights. 12. Underground Improvements: The ownen will fully disclose the location and condition of any underground improvements, facilities or services such as underground storage tanks (lISTS), wells, vaults, cellars, pipelines, etc. which may be located on the property. 13. Street Lighting: The applicants should provide a street light along the S. Garmisch Street fi'ontage of the.property as per the site plan. 14. Rock Removal: The stone rip-rap along the westerly side of S. Garmisch St. may need to be removed to permit the construction of the sidewalk and provide an easement for the existing sanitary sewer main and manhole. This is contingent upon verification of the right-of- way width and geometry. DRCM6a99.DOC 3 OF4 Memo - Barbc~ (Family) Subdivision and Final PUD 15. ADU Parking: If any ADUs are developed in the free-market homes, on-site ADU parking will be provided for the trait(s) on the re~ective lot. 16. Standard Conditions of Construction: q'he standard conditions regarding construction practices (e.g. dust, debris and drainage control on and around the site, traffic control, temporary facilities and parking, etc.) will be required of the developer at the time of construction. As-built records ir~GIS compatible fqrmat will need to be submitted to the City GIS Dept, to update the city records for the several stages of development. Tl~is condition also applies to the individual development of the free-market lots. DKCM6a99.DOC 4OF4 F,.B l'Z 'S'? 12-: 57PM ASPEH -~Ol_iSi~qIZ, ,Z~F,C -~. ,' MEMORANDUM TO: ChMs Bencon, Community Development Dept. FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: FebmaW 17, !999 FIE: 9,arbee Subdivision and Final PUD Parcel ID No, 2735-t31.4)0-II30 REQUESt': The appiicant received conceptual apDrovai 'co annex the County portion of the property into the City and to subdivide the .Droparty into ~2 lots for development purposes and a conservation parcel. Lot I contains an existing single-family residence. Lots 2, 3 and 4 are to constitute the project's he-market component. The affordable housing portion is to include three Resident O_,:~_Jpied sini;lle-family lots and two Category 4 duplexes. The duplexes are to contain three beclrocms and approximately 1,4~0 square feet of floor area, plus a 500 square foot basement, The Re residences will be restricted tea minimum of three bedrooms, maximum size of 2,200 gross square fast, a maximum 500 square foot garage ar~ an 800 square ~ot basement. REC.~MMENDATION: The Housing Board recommends apDmvaf of this project, b~ would else like the opportunity D re-evaluate the designation of the duplex units to a lower category. A condition of approval is mc.,-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-~mmended that would allow the review of the pro formas to evaluate whether any or all of the U0its Can be categodT. ed to a lower category, MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Community Development Department From: Lee Cassin, City Environmental Health Director Date: February, 2, 1999 Re: Barbee Subdivision and Final PUD Parcel ID #2735-131-00-100 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Depa~tment has reviewed the land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following 'comments. SEWAGE TREAZZvIEhFF AND COLLECTION: Section 11-1.7 "It shall be unlawful for the owner or occupant of any buniding used for residence or business purposes within the city to conslruct or reconsWact an on-site sewage disposal device." The plans to provide wastewater disposal for this project through the central collection lines of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) meet the requirements of this department. ADEOUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NizjzDS: Section 23-55 ',All bejldings, structures, facilities, parks, or the like within th~ city ]krdts which use water shall be connected to the municipal water utility system." The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen system is consistent with Environmental Health policies ensuring the supply of safe water. The City of Aspen water supply meets all standards of the Colorado Depa~hnent of Health for drinking water quality. WATER QUAL1TY IMPACTS: Section 11-1.3 "For the purpos~ of maintaining and protecting its munidpal water ~'uppIy from injury, and poLlulion, the city shall exercise regulator]' and supervisory, juxisdktion within the incorporated limits of the City, of .Aspen and over all streams and souxces contributing to municipal water supplies for a distance of five (5) miles above the points from which municipal water supplies a~e diverted." The applicant has addressed this issue with the provision of dryweBs on site to detain runoff from impervious areas. This drainage plan to mitigate the water quality impacts from drive and parking areas will be evaluated by the City Engineer. AIR OUALITY: Sections 11-2.1 "It is the purpose of [the air quality section of the Municipal Code] to achieve the maxzmum practical degree of air purity, possible by requiring the use of all available practical methods and techniques to control, prevent and reduce air pollution throughout the city..." The Land Use Regulations seek to "lessen congestion" and "avoid transportation demands that cannot be met" as w~]l as to "provide clean air by protecting the natural air sheds and reducing pollutants". The code requires that the proposed development not have a deleterious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the city. The primary negative effect on air quality of a residential development is the traffic generated, and the resulting PM~0 emissions. To meet the code requirements, the development will need to determine which mitigation measures will be the easiest for the applicant to implement. PM-10 (83% of which comes from traffic driving on paved roads) is a significant health concern in Aspen. The traffic generated will also produce carbon monoxide and other emissions that are health concerns. The munidpal code requires developments to achieve the maximum practical deg'ree of air purity, by using all available practical methods to reduce pollution. The applicant needs to implement measures that will minimize traffic increases of the development, or offset the emissions from the project with FM10 reduction measures elsewhere. The application does not address this, but confines its comments to stating that traffic will increase and the neighboring streets can handle the added traffic. In our previous comments on this application we recommended that a c6ndition of approval be that before final submission the applicant provide Lrfformation to the Asperf/Pitkin Environmental Health DeparLment which documents that proposed mitigation measures are sufficient to offset any increases in PM~0 caused by the project. The standard Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Report, Fifth Edition ITE trip generation rate is 9.55 trips/day for a single family home or duplex unit. This number of trips is not expected to be made just by the residents. The figure includes trips by visitors, mail trucks, service workers, etc. However, the Pitkin County, Road Maintenance Standards allow a trip reduction for residential units located within one half mile of a transit stop of 1.5 trips per day. While in many cases, this is not realistic, given the location of this project within walking distance of downtown for errands that do not involve carrying heavy items, and within walking distance of bus routes, this reduction is more reasonable. This project consists of 11 homes, one of which is already existing, so the net number of l~-ips to be offset is 80 trips/day, which produces 11 pounds of PM~0 emissions per day. (This is after taking the reduction for proximity, t.o transit.) There are several measures the applicant can explore to reduce, and then offset the t-{ips. These include, just to list a few of the steps other applicants have taken or proposed, and that might work for this project, · Having reduced homeowners assessments (or sale prices) for owners having one or no cars · Providing covered, secure bike storage facilities (minimal trip reduction) · Providing free bikes for use of owners to reduce car use for short trips (small trip reduction) · Having a gate with small fee so that persons leaving the parking area in a car pay a small fee each time, to encourage residents to make some short trips on foot or bike (Many other measures have been implemented as well, from providing Dial-a-Ride service to adding bus service to providing a connecting bike trail easement to plowing a bike path, to paving an existing unpaved area, etc. These measures would probably not be appropriate for this project.) These or any other programs that the applicant feels might benefit the project, and will also reduce trips could be used. A combination of measures will likely be needed. A condition of approval should be that the applicant provide a PM10 mitigation plan for approval from the A:spen/Pitlcin Enviromnental Health Depa~'Lment, which documents that measures are suffident to offset increases in PM~0 caused by the project. This plan should be approved prior to final approval or issuance of building permits. Without such a plan, the project would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment, This was also a condition of approval of Ordinance No. 44, Series of 1998 and has not yet been complied with. FIREPLACE/WOODSTOVE PER1VI1TS The applicant must file a firepisce/woodstove registration form with the Building Det~armient before the building permit will be issued. In the City of Aspen, buildings may have two gas log fireplaces or two certified woodstoves (or 1 of each) and unlimited numbers of decorative gas fireplace appliances vet building. New homes may NOT have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as filet. FUGI'l lx~E DUST A fugitive dust control plan is required which includes, but is not limited to fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been camed out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windbl0wn dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. Dust control will be crucial due to the closeness of existing homes to the site. CONF©RMANCE W1TrI OTHER ENV~ONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: NOISE ABATEMENT: Section 16-1 '~'he city. council finds and declares that noise is a significant source of envirormlental pollution that represents a present and thcreasthg threat to the public peace and to the txealth, safe ,ty and welfare of the residents Of the Ci.ty oi Aspen and it its visitors......Accordingly, it is the policy of colmcil to provide standards for permissible n~xse levels in various areas and manners and at various times and to prohibit noise in excess of those levels." During construction, noise can not exceed maximum permissible sound level Standards, and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. It is very Ilkely that noise generated during the construction phase of this project will have some negative impact on the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this and take measuzes to minimize the predicted high noise levels. A suggestion that has been very effective for others is notifying neighbors of the construction schedule. To: Chris Bendon, Planner From: Aspen Fire Protection District Subject: Barbee Subdivision and Final PUD Date: February 1, 1999 Chris, This project ~hsll meet all of the codes and requ/rements of the Aspen Fire Protection District. This includes and is not limited to those outlined in Sect/on IV page :20. If you have any questions or concerns please do not hesitate to contact me. Th~nk you, d an Wain en, Fire Marshal E V v Aspen Consohc atec[ Sanitation District Sy Kelly * C[mirman jol'm Kele~er Pa~ Smith ' Treas Frank hous~n Mic~aei Kelly ' Secy B~ce Matheriy, Mgr February 1, 1999 Chris Bendon : ! ...... Community Development "~ ;'~'~' 130 S. Galena St Aspen. CO 81611 ............ Re: Barbee Subdivision Final PUD Dear Chris: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has sufficient line and treatment capacity to serve this project. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District' s rules, regulations. and specifications which are on file at the District office. Once detailed plans are available, tap permits can be completed which will estimate the fees for the project. We would request that the total connection fees be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. The applicant will be requiredto complete a line extension request and collection system agreement for the short line extension that will be needed. Both items will need to be approved by our Board of Directors. Shared service line ageemems will also be needed for the affordable housing component if it is served by shared service lines. There are some downstream lin~ constraints that will be eliminated through a system of proportionate additional charges. It is not clear from the plans how sewer service will be provided for lots 5,6, and 7. The short line extension that is shown may need to be extended to allow lots 5,6, and 7 to be served. District line specifications prohibit taps to manholes. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, District Manager 565 N. Mill SL,,~spen, CO 81611 / (970)925-3601 / FAX (970) 925-2537 lVlEMORANDU1VI TO: Chris Bendon, City Planner FROM: Suzanne Wolff, County Planne~V3 RE: Barbee Family Final Subdivision/PUD DATE: February 2. 1999 I have reviewed the application and offer the following commems: The County Planning staff supports annexation of the remainder of the Barbee parcel into the City and the rezoning and development of the majority of the parcel ass mixed af~brdable housingfree market project. The site is consistent with the philosopias and criteria of the "Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan" that was jointly adopted by the City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions in June of I998. Specifically, the development is within the Aspen metro area, is adjacent to available public mass transit, does not promote sprawl, and is served by existing urban services. The Aspen Skiing Company has proposed in their recently approved Aspen Mountain Master Plan to open existing terrain on lower Shadow Mountain/Wast Aspen Mountain, when conditions permit. Egress from this terrain is represented to be "near Little Cloud Park", but staff would note that this terrain may be adjacent to the 13.6 acre conservation parcel to be established as part of this development. The applicant may wish to contact ASC to determine the boundaries of the ski terrain. ORDINANCE N0. t { (SERIES OF 1999) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, SUBDMSION, REZONING, GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS APPROVAL, AND PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE WAIVER FOR THE BARBEE PROPERTY, LOTS 1 AND 2 OF BLOCK 11, AND LOTS 1-9 OF BLOCK 5, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PLUS ADDITIONAL METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIBED PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND PITKIN COUNTY AS REPRESENTED, PARCEL NO. 2735-131-00-100 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Mary Barbee, John Barbee, Hallie Rugheimer, and Aspen-Pitkin Employee Housing Inc., applicant, for a planned unit development, subdivision, rezoning, growth management exemption for affordable housing, vested property rights approval, and park development fee waiver approval on an approximately 17.67 acre parcel of land, described as Lot 1 and 2 of Block 11, and Lots 1-9 of Block 5, City and Townsite of Aspen plus additional metes and bounds within City of Aspen and Pitkin County as represented, for the development often new residential units consistent with the Affordable Housing - Planned Unit Development (AH1-PUD) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the application was referred to the relevant agencies and the Housing Office, Fire Marshall, Environmental Health Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering Department, Parks Department, and Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on March 16, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, by a 4-0 vote, the City Council approve the Planned Unit Development, subdivision, and rezoning to AH 1/PUD, R-15/PUD and Conservation for the Barbee property, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department, as amended by the Commission; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on March 16, 1999, the Growth Management Commission recommended, by a 7-0 vote, the City Council approve the Growth Management Exemption for Affordable Housing and the method of providing that housing for the Barbee property, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission, the Community Development Director, and the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 1 V~rlEREAS, the City Council 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 WItEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, TItEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Pursuant to Sections 26.52, and 26.84, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, the City Council hereby grants approval of the Planned Unit Development, subdivision, rezoning, growth management exemption for affordable hous'mg, and the method in which the housing will be provided for the Barbee Property, as described. Section 2: Conditions of Approval: . I. The Land Use action is subject to annexation of the property into the City of Aspen. Failure to complete annexation within 180 days of this approval shall render this land use action void, unless the timeframe is extended by City Council. 2. Following annexation, but within 180 days after final l~nd use approval by City Council and prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant shall record a Final PUD/Subdivision development plan. This plan shall include all necessary plat requirements of the City Engineer including site plans, grading plans, utility plans, any physical improvements required to mitigate for additional air quality impacts as determined by the City Environmental Health Department, all utility easements, architectural plans and elevations, and a landscape plan. 3. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for Building Permit, the applicant shall record a PUD/Subdivision Improvements Agreement binding the property, the Barbee Subdivision, to this development approval. The Agreement shall describe all subdivision and PUD improvements, requirements, and restrictions, and maintenance, and shall provide financial assurance to the City for said improvements and the success of the site landscaping for 'a period of two (2) years after installation. The agreement shall be reviewed concurrently with the final plat and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. 4. ThatthefollowingdescriptionofeachLot'sdevelopmentprovisionsbeincludedinthefinal Ordinance: Requirements Common to Entire Develooment Lot Dimensions: As represented on Final Plat. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 Feet. Maximum height (including viewplanes): 25 Feet. Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 2 Building Envelope: No development other than approved landscape materials on natural grade, approved access ways, and approved driveways may occur outside of the building envelope, as represented on the final plat and within the setbacks. Minimum percent open space: No requirement (building envelopes). Lot 1 (existing Free-Market) Zone District: R- 15/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North and East sides 10 feet each. Lot 2 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 60 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 3 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: I 0 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 4 (Free-Market) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 4,500 s.f. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: 50 feet. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 5 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot 6 (resident occupied) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning. Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 3 Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: 10 feet. Lot 7 (resident occurled) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 2,575 s.f. as measured pursuant to City Zoning Maximum Gross Floor Area: Pursuant to APCHA Guidelines for RO Units. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 10 feet. Minimum rear yard: Varies, refer to building envelope on final plat. Minimum side yards: North 10 feet; South 15 feet. Lot. 8 (category unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 35 feet from southem-most lot line. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet, Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 9 feet, Lot 9 (cate~,orv unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s,f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 27 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 7 feet; 0 feet. Lot 10 (catel!orv unit) Zone District: AH 1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 14 feet. Minimuni rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east 0 feet; west 7 feet. Lot 11 (category unit) Zone District: AH1/PUD Allowable Floor Area: 1,400 s.f. plus a 500 s.f. basement. Setbacks: Minimum front yard: 6 feet. Minimum rear yard: 10 feet. Minimum side yards: east !4 feet; west 0 feet. Lot 12 (shared access oarcel) Zone District: AHI/PUD Allowed Uses: 10 carport parking spaces, trash, snow storage, uses accessory to use of residential lots. Residential use shall require a substantial PUD amendment.. Allowable Floor Area: 10 covered carports in two structures as represented on faral plat. Setbacks: As represented on final plat. Trash access area: Minimum 10 feet wide, unobstructed. Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 4 Conservation Parcel Zone District: Conservation Allowed Development and Uses: Uses allowed in the Conservation Zone District and allowed pursuant to the Deed of Conservation Easement, as amended. Uses and development necessary for community health and safety reasons may occur on this parcel. 5. The City shall accept title to the "conservation parcel" only a~er the City Attorney has reviewed all aspects of the Bargain Sale Deed, the Deed of Conservation Easement, and is satisfied that no inordinate liability issues exist with respect to prior mining activities on the parcel To satisfy this concern, the City may require areas of mining activity to be mitigated, or otherwise properly treated, or a legal instrument indemnifying the City prior to conveyance. In the event that title cannot be conveyed tO the satisfaction of the City Attorney, then a trail easement will be conveyed and allowed in the Conservation Area. 6. Replacement after demolition of the existing single-family residence on Lot ~I shall require a GMQS Exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.050, as hmended. 7. The Home Owners' Association, or similar entity responsible for Lot #12, the common access ways shall install a stop sign at the exit of the access way at such time determined necessary for public safety by the City Engineer. 8. Access to Lots 3 and 4 shall be via the shared access easement as described on the final plat. The City Engineer shall issue only one curb cut permit between these two lots. 9. All Lots are subject to the City's Residential Design Standards, as amended. Lots 1-4 shall be included in the Architectoral Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit C of the draft SIA. Lot #1 shall be subject to the provisions of the Landscape Guidelines, as proposed in Exhibit B of the draft SIA upon redevelopment of the Lot. All other aspects of the City's Residential Design Standard, as amended, will apply. 10. For purposes of calculating the fee-in-lieu of school land dedication, the building permit application for each lot shall include an appraisal of the lot's fair market value. The City shall retain the right to concur with the fair market value represented by the owner or obtain a third party appraisal performed by an agreed upon real estate appraiser at the sole cost of the lot owner. 11. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for an individual lot, the School Land Dedication Fee shall be paid in full pursuant to the regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 12. Prior to recordation of the final plat, an air quality mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City Environmental Health Department for approval. Physical improvements to the site required for mitigation shall be delineated on the final plat. 13. A Building Permit application for any and all lots shall include a fugitive dust mitigation plan for review and approval by the City Environmental Health Department. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each lot, the applicant shall gain the necessary permits from the appropriate department for any fireplaces or wood burning devices. Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 5 15. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No Sunday construction activity will be permitted. Exceeding the City Noise Ordinance may result in a stop work order. 16. The applicant shall provide a street light near the vehicular entrance to the development. The standard for this light shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. All exterior lighting, including street lights, shall be downcast, sharp cut-off, and not used to accentuate landscape or architectural features of the development. No exterior up-lighting is permitted. No exterior floodlights are permitted. 17. The Community Development Dept. shall assign street addresses as follows: Lots 2-4 shall receive numbers with a Garmisch Street address~ Lots 5-11 shall receive numbers with a Dean Street address. 18. The applicant is strongly encouraged to protect the existing shed north of the existing parking pad (approximately Lot4 of Block 5). The structure could be preserved permanently on-site as a cultural landscape feature, preserved temporarily on-site until development and moved to a receiving site, or the facades could be incorporated into the S. Garmisch Street side of the carport structure. If preserved for storage use, its FAR shall be exempt. 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the duplex units, six (6) street trees shall be planted along the S. Garmisch Street R.O.W or Midland Trail in locations approved by the City Forester considering the storage of plowed snow. These trees shall be three- inches or greater in callper if deciduous or at least six feet in height if coniferous. 20. Prior to applying for a Building Permit, the applicant Will be required to gain approval for a line extension and a collection system agreement from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. For the duplex units, a shared service agreement may be required. There exists a possibility that gravity service from Lots 5-7 will require a pump system; if so, its design must be approved by ACSD and the City Engineer. 21. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any lot, adequate silt fencing shall be erected to ensure that no sediment-loaded drainage will be leaving the property during construction. This fencing shall remain in place until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the respective lot. 22. Prior to applying for a Building Permit for any lot, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. This agreement can be recorded with the plat and SIA documents. 23. Building Permit applications for any and all lots shall include payment of a $50.00 per project fee in lieu of digital submission requirements. 24. Any work within public rights-of-way shall gain approval from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 25. The applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the County Clerk and Recorder. 26: That the final "mix" of categories shall be as follows, and conditioned as follows: Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 6 a) The project shall consist often (10) new residential units. Three (3) shall be free-market units of no more than three (3) bedrooms each. Three (3) shall be RO Lots, each for the purpose of a single-family residence of no less than three (3) bedrooms. Four (4) shall be Category 4 three bedroom units constructed and conveyed pursuant to APCHA Guidelines. b) At or near completion of the Category duplex units, the applicant shall provide the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority the opportunity to "buy-down" the Category designations of the Category Units and the RO Lots or Units to a lower Category prior to conveyance. 27. nfhat the language of these conditions as finally approved by the appropriate authority be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit set of plans ~ind all other sets made for the purpose of construction. 28. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of all P&Z, GMC, and City Council resolutions and ordinances applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter as part of the building permit application indicating that conditions of approval are known and understood. 29. That a Parking Management Plan be submitted for staffs review and approval prior to the Building permit application which will address the phasing, staging, and construction parking on the site. 30. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Growth Management Commission, and the City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise mended by an entity having the authority to do so. Section 3: Pursuant to Section 26.52.080 of the Aspen Municipal Code and C.R.S. 24-68-104(2), City (5ouncil does hereby grant the applicant Vested Property Rights status for the site specific development plan for the Barbee application as approved by this Ordinance, for a period of three (3) years from the date said Ordinance is signed with the following conditions: 1. The rights granted by this site specific development plan shall remain vested for a period of three (3) years from the effective date hereof. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in forfeiture of said vested property rights. Failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded by the MUnicipal Code shall also result in forfeiture of said vested property rights. 2. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; except that the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication provided for in Section 26.52.080(I)) 3. Zoning that is not part of the site specific development plan approved hereby shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. 4. Nothing in the approvals provided in this Ordinance shall exempt the site specific development plan from subsequent reviews and or approvals required by this Ordinance or the general rules, Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 7 regulations or ordinances of the City provided that such reviews or approvals are not inconsistent with the approvals granted and vested herein. 5. The establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the application of ordinances or regulations which are general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes. In this regard, as a condition of this site development approval, the developer shall abide by any and all such building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, unless an exemption therefrom is granted in writing. Section 4: This Ordinance does hereby waive the park development fee, finding that the conveyance of the Conservation Parcel as described in the site specific development plan adequately addresses the need for open space. SectiOn 5: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under 6r by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity Of the remaining portions thereof. Section 7: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 8: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 12th day of April, 1999 at 5:00 PM in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Halt, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22rid day of March, 1999. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: Ordinance No. __, Series 1999 Page 8 CityAttorney John Benne~,Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, CityClerk FINALLY, adopted, passedand approvedthis day of ,1998. Approved astoform: Approved asto content: CityAttorney John Benne~,Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Ordinance No. ,, Series 1999 Page 9