Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPolicy.Multi-Family Condo Policy.1977 ~. .,.-;. M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Planning Office, Bill Kane RE: Multi-family Condominiumization Policy DATE: May 19, 1977 Given the data presented to date and an of infonnation available at this time we recommend that the Council establish the policy of multi-family condominium approvals with ,two key conditions: 1. That existing tenants be given fair notice and a 90 day exclusive, non-assignable right of first refusal to purchase their unit at the preliminary market value at the time of first notice of intent to condominiuyze. 2. That each unit be restricted to 6 month minimum base provisions. lmk ~ ~. ~ LAW 0 rF1CES OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH So JORDAN 600 EAST HOPKINS STREE;T LEO:"iAAO M. OATES RONALD C. AU STrN .J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH, ..JR. Wll..LlA.!'o1 R. ..JORDAN m ASPEN, COLORADO 8t611 Hay 4, 1977 AREA CODE 303 TELEI=>HONE; 6125-2600 ROB!';RT W. HUGHE;S 9ARRY D. EDWARDS MEMORANDUM TO: Pat Boyd, AEM Partners Craig and Suzette Jacobie FROf.1: Nick HcGrath RE' City's condominiumization pOlicy re mUlti-family dwellings, and your pending applications The general matter of the City's policy on multi-family condominium conversions will be on the agenda of City Council on May 23, and it is my understanding from the City Clerk that the specific matter of your applications will follow on the agenda on that same date. I will be on vacation from May 8 to May 15, but Lennie and I will schedule a meeting with you sometime between the week of May 16 to discuss the matter more fully. /gc bcc: Brian Goodheim P.S. Brian, I cleared these dates with Kathy and said that it was acceptable to you. " ~ Kathy Hauter - --.#... ,.-.. t""1 LAW OF"F"ICe:S OATES, AUSTIN, MCGRATH So JORDAN 600 EAST HOPKINS STREET LEONARD M. OATES RONALD O. AUSTIN .... NICHOLAS MCGRATH, ..lR. Wl1-t..IAM R. ,JORDAN m ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 April 25, 1977 AREA CODE 303 TELEPHONE 92:5-2600 ROBERT W. HUGHES BARRY O. EDWAROS HAND DELIVERED Hon. Stacy Standley, Mayor City of Aspen City Hall 130 So. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado City Council City of Aspen 130 So. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Item IX, Agenda April 25, multi-family condominiumization policy Ladies and Gentlemen: As you will see from a letter from me distributed to you by your Clerk, we withdrew from the April 25 agenda considera- tion of the AEM and Jacobie small, multi-family condominium conversions applications, both of which received conceptual p&Z Commission approval several months ago. We withdrew the request for the individual hearings because the Clerk was kind enough to tell me that the City P&Z Commission would be considering the matter of the condominiumiza- tion policy at its meeting of April 19 and then at its meeting of April 26, tomorrow, the City P&Z apparently having tabeled the matter or having run out of time on the 19th. Notwithstanding that we were informed the City P&Z would consider the matter on the 26th, I now see today that you are again to consider the condominiumization policy on your agenda. I also have not seeH Brian's latest memorandum on the subject, al- though I will soon as a secretary is picking up the package. He apparently overlooked the courtesy of circulating a copy of his memo to me, since there is a copy in your package, and hence, it should have been done Wednesday or Thursday of last week. ..~ .... ~ ,-., ,~ April 25, 1977 Page Two Since he knows it affects two pending applications where the parties are represented by me, and when my office has gone out of its way to circulate its relevant matters to anyone in the City involved in the project, I do think that procedure a bit unfair. I spoke with the City Attorney today. She indicated that Brian's recommendations were to disallow multi-family conversions except for hardship and upon conditions, the details of which I will not be able to discuss in this letter at this time since I have not yet been able to review them. I have indicated to the City Attorney my belief that Brian's specific recommendations are illegal, but that the policy underlying stands a better chance of success in the courts if it were accomplished in a different way, that is, by using certain zoning techniques. It is my understanding that the City Attorney desires further time to evaluate the matter, and since I recommended to Brian over a month ago that the City Attorney be brought into the process at a much earlier stage than now, I do hope that you will give her the time to evaluate the legalities involved. In short, if you are going to be in a gray area, or as we have said in the County, at the "leading edge of the law", you ought to be there on the soundest grounds possible. So far as I am concerned, Brian's memorandum does not give sufficient consideration to those issues. Thus, I assume it fair that you make no decisions tonight, that P&Z consider the matter tomorrow, and that you set the whole policy matter (Brian's memorandum and any p&Z recommendation) together with the specific AEM and Jacobie applications for your next regular meeting. Thank you. Very truly yours, OATES, AUSTIN, McGRATH & JORDAN By ~J it (,..,J J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr. JNMjrjgc P. S. I have a separate scheduled meeting for this evening and hence, cannot attend your meeting. Barry Edwards from my office will be at this meeting if you have any questions concerning our position. cc: Ms. Dorothy Nuttall Mr. Brian Goodheim Mr. Bill Kane =,.~ .,. P I T X I N c o t1 N T Y ,-. ,-, DIRECTOR OF HOUSING . SOt)::E. MaiJll ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . PHONE, (303) 925.6612 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 21, 1977 TO: City Council; Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Brian Goodheim RE: Multifamily Condominiumization Policy In an attempt to formulate public policy regarding_the conversion of multifamily rental apartments we have attempted to define the public impact of condominium- ization by mean,s of a statistical survey. The initial segment of this survey focused upon the social and financial effects of conversion and is documented in the Report on Condominiumization. A second survey has begun in order to understand the differences between those persons who are purchasing the condominiumized apartments and those who are forced to vacate the same apartments. In addition to these research efforts, data has been presented by representatives of the current conversion applicants. From the Report on Condominiumization, it has been determined that: 1. Within the 46 unit scope of the condominium- ization study, 63% of the existing tenants moved out and only 37% purchased their units. Financial considerations were generally cited as reasons why tenants did not exercise their purchase option. 2. The fear that tourists ate purchasing condominiumized apartments for use as vacation homes is reflected by survey evidence. It is predominantly locals replacing other locals with the difference being that the new owners are more affluent than the former tenants. 3. Building owners, tenants, and third party investors have been the promulgators of multi- family conversion efforts. The housing cost and tenant displacement impacts vary according to who the sponsor of the condominiumization is and what this entity's motivations and sensitivities are. -.:.f " 1""'\. ~ MEMO City Council, Planning & Zoning Commission April 21, 1977 page Two 4. Sales prices of condominiumized rental units are likely to be at, or only slightly below, prevalent market levels. The pricing of any given project, however, is a function of the condominiumizing entity and its motivations. 5. If conventionally financed, monthly ownership expenses can be expected to increase above the previous rent level. This increase has been as much as 87% or as little as 8%, depending upon the condominiumizing entity and its motivations. 6. Because of the incongruity between sales prices and pur- chaser income levels, most financing was not on conventiional terms because the purchase~s would not qualify for conventional (80%) loans. Instead, an increase in down~ payment ranging from between $3000 and $12,000 were required to decrease the loan amount to a point at which the buyers could qualify for financing. The average actual increase was 34% above the prev~ous rent. 7. After initial condominiumization, there is evidence to suggest that housing costs have increased beyond that which rents would have been e){pecte.dto increase during this same period. Annual inflation rates ranging from 51% to 80% were documented within one year of condominium- ization. The second survey illustrates the following differences between those purchasing and those displaced: PURCHASERS NON PURCHASERS Mean Income Standard Deviation $18,180 3,856 $13 ,862 7,596 Mean Residency Standard Deviation 31.8 months 31.6 months 78.8 months 33.2 months The conclusionJWhich is apparent is that the new purchasers are more consistently affluent than the non-purchasers. Also, when a few extreme high incomes are deleted from the computation of the average non-purchaser's income, this disparity is greater. The new purchasers have consistently possessed less tenure in the community than the renters whom they displaced. POLICY RECOMMENDATION: Given the above data and the fact that: (1) Our community, because of its tourist economic base and high service industry employment, is heavily dependent upon an adequate supply of rental housing, and... (2) Market pressures exist which would convert the existing rental supply into ownership housing generally not affordable by service employees, and (3) Because the cscenario to losing our large supply of dispersed rental housing is to construct a large, central- ized future rental project. ..., ~ ..-., . .-., MEMO City Council; Planning & Zoning Commission April 21, 1977 Page Three The following policy is recommended: 1. Disallow the condominiumization or conversion of existing multifamily rental units (anything larger than conforming triplexes) . 2. Allow variances from this policy where hardship and the following can be evidenced:' --- A. A displacement of no more than 5% of the existing tenants can be evidenced by contracts for sale or long-term leases in favor of such tenants. B. Conformance with PMH price guidelines in the original sale prices (adjusted accordingly for building '.' amenitdJesor condition) and rights of first refusal on the entire project for original and subsequent sales. It should be the policy of the City to protect the dwindling supply of long-term rental housing by carefully examining the entirety of its public policies for their effects upon the private owners's decision to rent long-term housing. This approach has been suggested by the P&Z as a tandem program to encourage long-term rentals. It is concerned with utility pricing, subdivision fee extraction, taxes, and other municipal expenses. BLG:kc ~ .- P I T It I N c o tJ' N T Y -- I""'. DIRECTOR OF HOUSING .506 E. .Main . ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . PHONE, (303) 925.6612 MEMORANDUM DATE: April 7, 1977 TO: City Council; City Attorney FROM: Brian Goodheim RE: Apartment and Duplex Conversion Policies The formulation of a public policy regarding the conversion of rented duplexes to condominia has been substantially completed by Dorothy and wyself this week. The formulation of a multifamily conversion policy is substantially more complex and is not yet ready. DUPLEX POLICY Basically, our recommendations for a duplex policy center around an adequate notice period and right of first refusal being given to the tenants. Our policy recommendation is to regulate duplex conversions by requiring the following steps be taken, whether the subdivision exemption or sub- division procedure is elected: NOTICE: When an owner of a duplex structure intends to condominiumize, notice of the proposed condominiumization must be delivered to the tenants. This notice must make the tenants aware of their rights as presented below. Evidence of having so notified the tenants musLbe supplied with th e applicants subdivision or exemption request and a current list of tenants, their addresses, telephone numbers, and place of employment must also be submitted. Notice must similarly be delivered to tenants who entered into leases subsequent to the filing of a subdivision or exemption application. .FIRSTRIGHT OF.REFUSAL: Upon final subdivision or - exemption approval, a right of first refusal recorded with the County Clerk in favor of the existing tenants. This right of refusal extends for the term of the tenant's lease or 90 days from the date of recording, whichever period is longer. It may be exercised over bonafide purchase offers which the seller receives during the term ,of the right of refusal. The owners of the duplex must notify the existing tenants within seven days after entering into a bona fide sales contract. Such notification must include a copy of the bonafide sales contract. The tenant will have 21 days from delivery of this notice to exercise his right of first refusal and at least 30 days in addition to effect a closing. The tenants right of first refusal is non-assign- able as provided below. 'ell W ~':> o .0 l:~ "Z ~~ I""', MEMO City Council; City At~orn~y April 7, 1977 Page Two ,-., ASSIGNABILITY OF RIGHT OF REFUSAL : SECOND RIGHT OF REFUSAL . The right of refusal given to the tenant above is non-assignable except that if the tenant waives this right during the initial 21 days after notice has been given, the tenant's, employer shall have a second right of refusal. If 21 days elapses without the tenant having exercised his right of first refusal, the tenant's employer shall automatically enjoy a right of second refusal for a period of 9 days. In addition to the above policy elements, the six-month lease restriction or an equivalent covenant against short-term(non-cultural?) rental should be required. It is important to note that this policy does not attempt to disturb the property rights balance between lessee and lessor. Other policy alternatives do disturb this balance by accruing option rights to the lessee and may force the sale of property which otherwise would remain rented although condominiumized. In summary, this duplex policy follows logically from an analysis of available data. BONAFIDE OFFER: ~ offer to sell or purchase real property on termS which have been accepted by both seller and purchaser and where: seller and purchaser are two separate entities, neither exerting undue pressure on or control over the other; the seller being obligated to sell under the terms of the sales contract; and the purchaser being obligated to purchase under the terms of the sales contract or else forfeit purchaser's earnest money deposit which is at least 5% of the contract price. DUPLEX: (1) A house containing two dwelling units, side by side or one above the other. Or (2) A legally conforming lot containing two dwelling units which may be unattached. MULTIFAMILY POLICY The formulation of a comprehensive multifamily conversion policy however, is not so clear cut. It has already been established that: 1. Condominiumization of existing rental apartment buildings have been promoted by various entities including tenants, owners and third party investors. 2. The effects of these condominiumizations differ among specific buildings and among the sponsoring entities and their motivations. 3. The displacement effect ranged from a low of 40% in the Redwoods and 700 W. Hopkins Projects to a high of 93% in the Aspen View condo miniumization. The overall average displacement was 63% of the former tenants. ". Page 44 ~, f""., ~ THE FUND CONCEPT September, 1975 STATE OF FLORIDA BEFORE THE OEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS 00 CKET NO, 75-1001!! In the Matter of CHARLES H. MANN, JR., President, Title & Trust .Companyof Florida; disbursement practices. DECLARATORY STATEMENT Petitioner req'uests clarification 'Was issued to such an agent,. and Petitioner has set :forth matters s.howing; that his interests, have been or may be affected thereby. Wherefore, the Department acceptsPetitioner'srequ~st as to the clarification-of the previous Declaratory Statement (Docket No. 75.10031), without a hearing, which has been waived by Petitioner. j Section 62,7.784, Florida, Statutes, is 8'l statutory provision administered bY,the, Department of Iusllrance, and Petidoner's 'request for a' declaratory statement "as to the applicability of that provision to his practices is here by'" denied. The previous Delcaratory Statement (Docket No, 75,10031), with respectto which.clarification'is sought, asserts that an unlawfut,::GleCeptive trade practice in violation"of',":~~f~ion .'. 501.204, ,Florida Statutes,occp~'Where a title insurance agentjwho'is:subjec~ to Part II, Chapter 501, Jails' to :discloseto'a purchaser that between" "the . time:':<of the' . property cOnveyence:ahd:the 'effeCtive date of the title'insuran'ce alien' ma'ybe filed for which the buyer is not proteCted. Petitioner, points out that.. there is more ,; than" on'tf'type;"of "real, ;property transaction and req:uests clarification as ,to which types iDf - transactions the necessary disclosure'applies. As a general' st-atem'e-nt,' the "'disclosurE "must be made in all cases where the purchaser of the title insurance, is seeking to protect'his' own ,ioterestin the title, has ilo'actual kriowledg~f of' the existence of the hiatus' or gappei'iod, and' has no alternative insurance to protect his iriterest during.'the hiatus or gap period. More spe'cifically, in a cash' transaction' where the real property purchaser seeks title insurance t6 protecf his"title, the disclosure mu'stbe made~o. hi~. In a mortgage tra?saction wh~re thepurchaser/mortgagor seeks' title" insurimce to protect his title, the disclosure' must' be made.. regardless of any title' insurailce that may also be purchised for the benefit of the lende'l-'fmorti:agee; "',; However, the discloaure need. not be made .to the purchaser/mortgagor where title insurance is purchased to protect the. intereat . of the, lend.er /mortgagee, bu.t no insurance is purchased to protect the title of.thepurchaser/mortgagor. , The above statement assumes that th'e lender/mortgage,e has actual knowledge of any ,gap or hiatus inthe insurance and that the disclosure requirf,Jdby Ru~e 5-21.02, Rules of the Department of Insurance, F AC, has been made to the purchaser/mortgagor. ;-'-~------"'---'-"""+----~-___'_~_7-C---~~____'_'''''-'_~'' '.___ ." The applicability of Section 501.204, Florida Statutes, to situations- IV/here these,a,ssumptions do not pertain is beyond. the scope of this statement and is not considered herein. ROBERT L. SHEVIN A'ITORNEY GENERAL AND HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL"AFFAIRS J,uly 18, 1975 HUO CALLS OWNERS ASSOCIATIONS BIGGEST CONDO PROBLEMS The three-volume, 774-palJe, year-long. HUD study of condominium and cooperative housing wall delivered to Congress August 22, 1975, the deadline ,called for by the 1974 Housing Act.. Thereoo~t cited the rapid .lZJ'owth of this type of dwelJimz and lilted a number of problems but did not'SUlZ'lle.t any Je'lJislative, or '. administrative measures tor, dealing with abuses cited ~ or Breaso! 'p08lible trou.ble. '. , ~:::iome 4.' maHon people live in'1.69 minion ,condominhifif'andcooperative apartment units, the vast majority of tliem' "co'nd'o,miniurris,"there,port said. Thia is a, 15-fold increase since 1970. The "iP'eatest, po'tential proble-n",'Cor condominium purchasers i. the management of their owners associations, which' must be capable of operating and maintaininlJ commonly owned portions of the property, the report said. It listed a number of other problem areas, includine: the complexity of the condominium agreement, abusive practices of developers, ,restrictions in lonlJ-term recreation leasea, involved lelJal docum'ents and the,' disolacement of tenants in rental property converted to oonaomlDlum StaLUS. EXCEPTIONS FOIt r.1llllTGAGES IN OWNER GUARAlIITEES AND POLICIES Fund owner guarantees and owner policies should except under Schedule B any purchase money m,orteages or other mortgages given by the, insured as well ~ as all unsatisfied prior mort pees. See .... Title, Note 1 09~58. The oWD,ereuarantee or policy should never include affirmative coverage as to the present balance due under an existina: mortpge. ~ .1""'\, MEMO City Council; City Attorney April 7, 1977 Page Three 4. The average monthly housing payments required under conventional ownership form increased from a low of 8% in the Tailings to a high of 87% in the Aspen View condominiU!ii'ization. The overall average monthly housing cost increased by 554. 5. The fear of tourists replacing local occupants is unfounded in the initial transfer. Locals are replacing other locals It has been speculated that: 1. Former tenants are being replaced by new owners who are wealthier and have higher incomes. 2. Former tenants are being replaced ,by new owners because the former tenants could not qualify for financing or Come up with a sufficient down payment. 3. Rental housing for local service industry employees is being replaced by ownership housing for local professionals. It is'.important that answers to these questions be available in order to design a comprehensive public policy towards multifamily conversions. Currently, these answers are not known. Because of the potential for rampant condominiumization to completely dry up the existing rental market (essential in our service-based economy ",hich each winter draws an additional 3,500 workers to the local economy) it is imperative that the immediate effects of condominiumization be better understood and the future impacts be more accurately projected. In order to accomplish this, I have initiated an additional survey which is designed to analyze the previous sample of condo conversing for income level and inhabitant profile changes brough about by the conversion process. The questionnaire is attached for your inspection. To date, only seven of sixty have been returned. Additional information is attached which illustrates how the State of Florida is handling the problem and what the concerns of the Department of Housing and Urban Development are with regard to condominiumization and cooperative conversions. Similar statutes are in existance in New York and you already have the benefit of the New Jersey ordinance. In the absence of sufficient information, I suggest that the enclosed oridnance, prpared by Sandy Stuller, be adopted as an interim measure until a long-term policy can be. established. This approach has the benefit of addressing the immediate impaCts of the conversion process(i.e., tenant displacement) while leaving open some of the long-term questions. So 719.401 essor may : or part of Ja)"IDent of Illd operat- es incident I facilities, , award ell )f for such as or other 'ompleted, " facilities teased are id(llllyfor a that the .8 <JStimllt- ilities that lete ",hen I equipped commonly on prior to lmed over ,hall grant ,~>d proper- late of the h anniver- aement, If 1 the price :st and has the lessor t owner a following <BSOCiation thetenns II be axer- the lessor 1 does not the right, eriod has >edill the ~n fret' shell 'this sub- approval d by the U not ap; , United subdivi- ing land aveloper i,by,the ~y, ;,eloper. entex&- mit for lubordi- lender, >rtgage very of ,e unit ~ 197~PLEMENT TO FLORIDA STATUTESt""',Ii '719.402 Conversion of' existing lD1Prove- mente to cooperative.- (1) A developer may create a CO()perative by- con- verting existillg, previously occupiedimprovemente to such ownership by c01l)plying with part I of this chapter. (2)Jf existing,'improvements are converted-to ownership as a residential cooperative, each reside - tial tenant of the existi im ave e ten anex lrin leaseortenanc u n e same rIDS or a rI t a 0 a '7111;403 Phase cooperatives.- t an yS r wntten notice to the tenant of . (1) A developer may develop a cooperative in the Intended conversIOn, A tenant must give written phases, if the original cooperative documents sub- notlce to the develope. ofhis intention to extend his mitting the initial phase to cooperative. ()wnership lease or tenancy within 30 days afier he receives provide for and describe in detail all anticipated notice of the intended Conversion, phases, the impact, if any, which the completion of (3Xa) tis e li of this state that rovisions subseql\ent phases would have upon the initial of contracts, _, or ot er un e n w ch - phase, and the time period within which each phase o o. eve 0 rs at theIr 0 bon to cancel must be completed, te 0 n t e (2)' , .The original cooperative documents shall de- o and improvements co- scribe: . ..' . . . ess an no Ice (a) The land which may become part of the coop- IC, ny prov>- erauve and the land on which each pluiae is to be sions in any contract, lease' or un e' ng which built, The descriptions shall include metes and providesforcancellation or terzninati()n of the term bounds orother}egal descriptions of the land for of anY leasefor an apa,ttment or otherresi~ellceat each. phase, Vlot. p!lI1lIl, an~su.rv"~. ..,..." ." the optionotthe laniiiord or developer fQt realioli oi' (b)-:The number and geneiaJ. S1Zll'of'!lnitll 'to 'be its intended conversion to a cooperative form of own- included in each phase, ership without at least 120 days' notice shall be un- (c)- Each unit's percentage ownership in the com- enforceable except in the following cases: - mon areas as each phase. is added, . 1,. !t the term of the lease has less than 150 days (d) The recreation areas and facilities to be remaining after such notification is giveIl, owned as ~mmon areas by all unit owners and all 2, If the lease ants the tenant an 0 tion to personal property to be provided and those facilities chase e a en or 0 er eSl ence In w c or areaS which may not be built or provided if any . resl es r ess t an a 0 e !lhase or phases are not developed and added as a non-tenants, which option. IS exerclBS . e. r..! e part of the cooperative, tenant dunn.,; a periOd or not less than 9U days atter , (e) The membership vote and ownership in the so9 s, 719.401 owner's share of the rent Or other exactlonsshlllln.ot be extinguished, but shall' be foreClosed and unen- forceable against the mortgagee with respect to that unit's share of the rent and other exactions which mature or become due and payable on or before the date of the final judgment offoreclosure, in the event of foreclosure, or on or before the date of delivery of the deed in lieu of foreclosure, The lienmay,howev. er, automatically and by operation of thele.ll8El or other instrument, reattach to the unit and secure the payment of the unit's proportioIlateshareofthe telltor other exactions comingdl!e.Subsequent to the date offinal decree offoreclosure"r the date of deliv- eryofthe deed in lie.u offoreclosure;. '. . (8) It is declared that the public lpolicy of this stete prohibits the inclu.sipn orenforceDlellt of esca- lstion clauses in leaSeS for recreational facilities, land, or other commonly used facilities serving coop- eratives, and such clauses are hereby declared void for public policy, For the purposes of this section, an escalation clause is any clause in a cooperative lease which provides that the rental under the lease shall increase at the same percentage rate;llS.any nation- ally recognized and conveIlielltJy amiable com- modity or consumer price indax, BJatory,-4. 2, ch. 7&-222. 'Note.-Effeet:ive January 1, 1977. "Note.-BrtlCketed languagesubatituted by the editors for"deed in lieu thereof." conversion of the o ra ',:-/.,'.,..,.,;>0, So 719.403 the mailing of a notice of the intended conversion to the tenant, 3, It the lease provides that the lessaror develop- er shall not convert to cooperative ownership except with the consent of the tenanteof not less than 60 rcent,ot tbea artments or other dweH In 1Dl~ provemen .m n .., conve.. . or ,e p pose.ot thIS vote, unoccupIed apartments or d\Yell- ings shall be counted and the developer or.lessor may vote those apartments, (b) If the lease provides for a notification to the tenant of less than 120 days and if the term of the lease has more than 150 dayS remainingafier notifi. cation is given; notification of termination to the tenant wilt be enectl5be Jl the notice nrovides ~tffae tenant shall nave It>U daYI' or more before cance la- tlOn Or terminstlOb',becomes ettectlve."" .. .~ (0) Leases egecu~ l:iuosequent to the developer's or landlord's announcement of intention .to convert to cooperative ownership may provide for cancella- tion or termination upon not less than 60 days' no- tice.to the tenant, provided the landlord conspicu- ously discloses in the lease the intention to convert the I.'roperty containing the leased premises to coop- erative ownership and that the lease may be can- celed upon 60. days' notice to the tenant, (d) The notice requirements of this subsection shall notapply to a lease entered into simultaneous., Iy with, or subsequent to, a contract to purchase the unit, (4) An notices to tenants shall beglVen when deposited in the United States mail addressed to the tenantlat his last\<nown residence, which may be the address of the property subject to the lease, sent by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, Notice may;nct, be:waived b~':a ~u~ti.ir-.d6iXi the t.eiUlilt'a lease ~tates that the building is to be converted. HfMoIy~"-";2, ch. 76-222. 'Note,-"-Effect,i."e January 1, 1977. .;:,. 3. Employee Classificati~,. Positio~ a Sales o Service D Skil:ed Labor o Unsblled Labor lJ Professiona~ o Technical ~ Office/Clerical CJ Management C1 Other 4. How long have you been an employed resident of Aspen? 5. How long have you been a local resident(irrespective of employment)? 6. How many full-time employees in your household? 7. What was your 1976 gross income(line 13, Form 1040; Line 12, Form 1040A; or a fairly accurate estimate please)? $ 8. If you have purchased a condominiumized apartment: a. How did you come up with the downpayment? 17 By liquidating a reasonable percentage of savings or other assets. D By liquidating almost all other assets. C7 Borrowing from relatives or others. b. ' How did you qualify for mortgage financing? LJ By conventional loan approval ratios. C1 By increasing the downpayment above 20% and lowering the loan amount. D By borrowing from private sources. o Used a co-signer such as a relative CJ Paid cash and did not use mortgage financing. 9. If you did not purchase a unit in your form~r. building, why not?(Check all that apply) CJ Lacked down payment o Could not qualify for financing ~ Other(Please specify) 10. In what apartment building and unit were or are you residing? o Redwoods r:::J 700 Hopkins o Aspen View o Tailings Unit II 11. If you would like to communicate your feelings about condominiumization in general or any specific aspect (government processes, marketing, financing) of conversions, please do so. 12. (Optional) Your name, address and telephone II: .,'" /-\ Dear Former Tenant or New c.....er: As you may be aware, the City Council is in the process the condominiumization of existing apartment buildings. is both critical and difficult to accomplish. of developing a policy towards The formulation of this policy A policy is critically needed because of the immediate housing crisis forced upon existing tenants as well as any long-term effects of extensive condominiumization which may reduce the town's supply of rental housing. A policy is difficult to formulate because there are both beneficial and detrimental effects resulting from apartment conversion. As an example, home ownership is made available to some households who could not afford single family market housing. On the otherhand, the tenant is at the pricing mercy of the condominiumizer and may not qualify to purchase the unit where he has been living, sometimes for several years. In order that we may develop a public policy towards apartment conversions which adequately protects both rental and ownership housing opportunity for moderate income local working persons, I am asking your help by answering the following questions as accurately as possible. I understand the sensitive nature of some questions and, if you desire, your responses will be held in confidence. As the City will be contemplating some action at their April 11th meeting, your input is needed as quickly as possible. Your help is very much appreciated. Brian Goodheim Housing Director o o Survey responses below are confidential and may be disclosed only in summary form without mention of names. Survey responses and comments may be directly published. SURVEY QUESTIONS: 1. Check each that applies: [] Former Tenant P New Owner t:l Current Tenant 2. Employer Classification: Business: l:1 D a CJ CJ o o Real Estate Cl Other Re c rea t ion Bar & Restaurant Retail Store Accomodations Government Construction