HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.su.Ute Park.A42-93
r-<,
.~
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 08/13/93
DATE COMPLETE:
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
A42-93
STAFF MEMBER: KJ
Park Affordable Housinq Subdivision: Amendment
Approval of Deed Restrictions
PROJECT NAME: ute
or GMOS Exemption
Project Address:
Legal Address:
APPLICANT: James Martin
Applicant Address:
REPRESENTATIVE: Tom Baker. Housinq Office
Representative Address/Phone:
5- ff'3/ <.\
Aspen. CO 81611
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
FEES: PLANNING
ENGINEER
HOUSING
ENV. HEALTH
TOTAL
$
$
$
$
$
# APPS RECEIVED
# PLATS RECEIVED
o
TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF APPROVAL: 1 STEP: 2 STEP:
P&Z Meeting Date 08/24/93 PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
DRC Meeting Date
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
REFERRALS:
City Attorney
City Engineer
Housing Dir.
Aspen Water
City Electric
Envir.Hlth.
Zoning
Parks Dept.
Bldg Inspector
Fire Marshal
Holy Cross
Mtn. Bell
ACSD
Energy Center
School District
Rocky Mtn NatGas
CDOT
Clean Air Board
Open Space Board
Other
Other
DATE REFERRED:
INITIALS:
DUE:
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL ROUTING:
DATE ROUTED:
INITIAL:
___ City Atty ___ City Engineer ___Zoning ___Env. Health
~ Housing ___ Open Space Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
,~
r"'"
~
~
>
.,..:;-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Amy Margerum, City Manager
rnnf)
Diane Moore, City Planning Directori\/, '
Ute Park Affordable Housing Project
RE:
DATE:
September 28, 1993
---------------~---------------------------------------------------,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I have attached a copy of a memorandum prepared by Kim Johnson that
outlines the time frame for completion of the Ute Park AH project
and the major issues discussed during the public hearings. As you
can see from her memorandum, the review process was fairly typical
for projects of this magnitude. It should be noted that the
developer requested and received a 160 day extension to the one
year filing deadline for a final PUD development plan, which
reflects a 16 month time period between conceptual approval and
final submission. The developer had ample time to prepare his
final development plans and the time delay is attributed to the
developer and was not caused by staff.
I did call Tom Stevens, land use consultant to Jim Martin, and
asked him to identify steps in the process that could be revised
to enhance the AH zone district process. He said that having
standard subdi vision/PUD agreement forms available would lessen the
time required for the recordation of the plat and sUbdivision/PUD
agreemeht. I believe that this would also help other applicants
filing their final documents and that we should pursue this. It
obviously would require assistance from the city attorney's office.
The other item identified by Tom that added time to the recordation
of the plat and PUD/subdivision agreement was the identification
of a mechanism to secure construction of the affordable. housing
units. This issue was not addressed in the AH zone district and
planning staff and the city attorney had to spend considerable time
with the applicant on this issue. We believe that this issue has
been adequately addressed for future developers in the AH zone
district but it may require code amendments to the AH zone
district.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
.~,
f-',
,
-
To:
Diane Moore
From:
Kim Johnson
Date:
9/28/93
RE:
Recap of the ute Park Subdivision/PUD Process
--------------------------------------------------------------
Conceptual Application Submitted:
P&Z approval:
Council approval:
4/90
7/3/90
8/13/90
4 months
Main issues at Conceptual review were avalanche hazards, ute Avenue
Improvement District, and densities. As this was the first project
processed in an AH (Affordable Housing) zone district, there was
much general discussion related to this zone's development concepts
and dimensional requirements.
160 day extension to I-year filing deadline for Final - 1/13/92
** (16 months between Conceptual approval and Final submission)
Final Application Submitted:
P&Z approval:
Council 1st reading:
2nd reading:
12/3/91
1/21/92
3/23/92
4/13/92
5 months
At Final review, density was reduced and was not a major issue.
However, staff and review bodies were still emphasizing avalanche
safety, deed restrictions and security for production of the deed
restricted units.
Plats and SUbdivision/pun Agreement recorded 2/22/93
(staff worked with applicant for approximately 3 months on these
documents - the difficult issue was the creation of a mechanism to
secure construction of the affordable units)
r,
~
"'" b
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Amy Margerum, City Manager
THRU:
THRU:
Diane Moore, City Planning
Direct~
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planner
DATE:
September 27, 1993
RE:
ute Park Subdivision: Amendment to Growth Management
Exemption for Affordable Housing units to Change Deed
Restrictions - Second Reading of Ordinance 48, 1993
SUMMARY: The owner is proposing to change the deed restrictions
of three of the seven townhomes from Category 3 to Category 4, and
to increase the sales price of all seven units. The Planning
Commission reviewed this proposal on August 24, 1993 and with a
4-0 vote recommended approval with conditions.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: First reading of Ordinance 48 was
approved by a 5-0 Council vote on September 13, 1993.
The Ute Park Affordable Housing Subdivision / PUD was granted final
approval by Council in 1992. It was the first project approved
under the AH (Affordable Housing) zone district requirements. A
part of this approval included GMQS Exemption for the affordable
housing component, which set forth specific deed restrictions.
BACKGROUND: The project owner is James Martin. The amendment
request is being sponsored by the Housing Office. The project is
located at the far east end of ute Avenue. The entire ute Park
approval consists of seven deed restricted townhomes and three free
market single-family lots.
Since the 1992 approval of the project, the owner has determined
that the Category 3 deed restrictions and pricing structure will
not cover his costs of producing the units. He cites that on-
going interest payments and larger than expected water tap fees
necessitate the revised deed restrictions and sales prices. Please
refer to a more detailed explanation in Tom Baker's memo attached
as Exhibit "A".
COMPLIANCE WITH THE ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN: By receiving the
proposed amendment the owner can make the project's financial ends
meet. Thus, one policy within the Housing Action Plan section of
the AACP is clearly supported:
- Whenever available and appropriate, work with landowners
whose property is well suited and well located to develop
affordable housing.
,'-,
~,
CURRENT ISSUES: Staff has determined that the proposed change is
substantial enough to warrant a replication of the original review
process via P&Z and City Council. Because the entire project is
blanketed by a PUD approval, the Planning Director will be able to
process a staff-level PUD Amendment upon approval of the revised
GMQS Exemption by Council. As the first AH project to receive
final approval, ute Park has been a "proving ground" for many
issues related to the AH zone district's blend of affordable and
free market development.
GMOS Exemption for Affordable Housinq: Pursuant to Section 8-104
C.1(c) the Council shall exempt deed restricted housing that is
provided in accordance with the housing guidelines. The Commission
shall review and make a recommendation to Council regarding the
housing package. According to the Code, the review of any request
for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a
determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the
proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the
number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of
dwelling units proposed, specifically regarding the number of
bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the
rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price
categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted.
Response: with this request, there are no changes to the approved
number, size or configuration of the townhome units. All seven
units will remain sale units.
The Housing Board has forwarded its recommendation for approval of
the change from Category 3 to Category 4 for three of the
townhomes. They also have nodded to increased sales price of the
original Category 4 units. The Board finds that the changes are
appropriate given the price structures of all of the ute Park units
as discu.ssed and the mix of units in the recently approved East
Cooper AH project. The Planning Office and the Planning Commission
agree with the Housing Board on this request.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None to the City.
RECOMMENDATION: By a 4-0 vote, the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the proposed amendment to the 1992 ute Park GMQS
Exemption to change the three Category 3 townhomes to Category 4
and to raise the sales prices of the original Category 4 units,
with the following condition which is included in Ordinance 48,
1993:
1. The initial sales price for the three amended units shall
be $135,000.00, and occupancy preference for these three
units shall be to Category 3 households.
2. The initial sales price for the original four Category
2
r,
~.
4 units shall not exceed $180,000.00.
3. All material representations made by the applicant in the
application and during public meetings with the Planning
and Zoning Commission and City Council shall be adhered
to and considered conditions of approval, unless
otherwise amended by other conditions.
ALTERNATIVES: The Council could establish different deed
restriction categories or sales prices for the seven units.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve on second reading Ordinance
48, 1993 to amend the Affordable Housing Growth Management
Exemption for the ute Park Subdivision / PUD to change the Category
3 deed restrictions to category 4, and to raise the sales prices
of the seven affordable townhomes as presented in the application."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Ordinance 48, 1993
Exhibits:
"A" - 8/13/93 Memo from Tom Baker Regarding the Amendment
3
~.
./\
VIII
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
Amy Margerum, City Manager
Direct~
THRU:
THRU:
Diane Moore, City Planning
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planning
DATE:
September 23, 1993
RE:
Central Bank Property Subdivision
Condominiumization and Vested Rights -
Ordinance 46, Series 1993
Exemption for
Second Reading
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Planning staff recommends approval and second reading
for subdivision exemption for condominiumization and vested rights
for the existing structures at the Central Bank Property located
at 420 E. Main Street.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: None.
COMPLIANCE WITH ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN: The AACP does not
specifically address condominiumization of buildings.
BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This CC (Commercial Core) zoned
parcel contains three existing buildings. One structure houses
Central Bank, one structure is used for offices, and one structure
consists of 12 unrestricted apartments. The entire parcel is
22,500 s.f. in area. There are 21 on-site parking spaces, twelve
of which are within a gated parking lot. All spaces are signed for
bank use only.
The proposal is to create two condominium units, one encompassing
the Central Bank building and the parking lot to its west and the
second parcel encompassing the one story office building, the
apartment structure and the courtyard between the two. Please
refer to the site plan and the approximate location of the proposed
condominium boundaries, Exhibit "A".
CURRENT ISSUES: Pursuant to Section '7-1007 condominiumization of
existing developments is exempt from subdivision and shall be
approved by City Council. Condominiumization of an existing
commercial building (subdivision exemption) and vested rights are
non-discretionary actions by City Council. There are no review
standards or mitigation requirements contained within the Land Use
Code for condominiumization of commercial structures, however,
Engineering plat requirements must be met with the condominium plat
prior to recordation. Complete referral comments from the
Engineering Department are attached as Exhibit "B". Staff would
like to remind Council that revisions to the residential
2)
3)
4)
r'\
,..-"
condominium regulations are forthcoming to Council on October 12,
1993 for first reading.
Staff is also including vested rights by ordinance for three years
pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code.
In staff's memo for first reading, one concern had been brought up
regarding the on-site parking. The parcel is currently non-
conforming as it relates to the required number of parking spaces.
It has been determined through research of information from the
late 1960's that parking for this property was not required by land
use regulations. Approximately 23 spaces would be required by
today's land use regulations for the commercial structures on the
property. Currently all 21 spaces on the parcel are posted for
bank use. Originally staff wanted to insure that the small office
building retain some parking spaces for its employees and patrons.
However, as condominiumization is strictly an ownership situation,
the City Attorney has clarified that Council cannot mandate through
condominiumization a division of the on-site parking, nor require
new parking to be added.
The proposed approval ordinance lists the following recommended
conditions:
1)
The applicant shall agree to ]oJ.n any future improvement
districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing
improvements in the pUblic right-of-way.
Prior to the sale of either unit whichever comes first, a
condominium plat must be approved by the City Engineer and
recorded by the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. This plat
shall meet the requirements of Section 24-7-1004 D. of the
Aspen Municipal Code as well as the comments of the
Engineering Department review memo dated August 10, 1993.
A Subdivision Exemption Agreement shall be submitted and filed
concurrently with the Condominium Plat.
All material repreE;entations made by the applicant in the
application and during public meetings with the city Council
shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval,
unless otherwise amended by other conditions.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None are anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends second reading and
approval of Ordinance 46, 1993 for condominiumization and vested
rights of the Central Bank Property.
ALTERNATIVES: Council could alter staff's proposed conditions
affecting the condominiumization approval.
2
r"\
r'\
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve on second reading Ordinance
46, Series 1993 approving condominiumization and vested rights for
the Central Bank Property."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Ordinance 46, 1993
Exhibits:
"A" - Proposed Condominium boundaries
"B" - Engineering Referral memo
3
~
V'd..nV',;5>
"'7"",:o"'.",No~l': ;.J,;"':;IN~:;I !:
'. '-'-""",
.".".,..,.'...."
"..~'..,:;.i~4
,
1
">- ..
~
~
~
:~ '.0 '. ';>1:;1 yo:;!
~i
, ~
~. i
, !. i
i l ,
."
I.. ~+
-.. ~ .~;
( ."; ._...:~_~..D~.n__h<:_=_:..-::~ "''':'.'. .. ~ " f
(.;)"Z ~ ; !! .
.; , o~ il
,t ~..._ ~ "/
: ! ~ . .., ~---------- -------~ J
--:--1"-------------- ~ ~ '"'\+ "
. if j
j_ Hi rl'
1!~I" ,
I;, !In: le-.
-D-____-..----_ ~----If!, l~
i lilii "Iii
f> IV' N' "~..,, ;. ;II.", NO:;l "1:11""
~!
%
-----------
:,1
~l
'l
1-
i~
.. .i':------"-----------------Ti------------------
dli
il
11m
I
,
,
,
-----I
,
,
.
r
I
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
r
I
~
.
~
~ S!li'
, U
~$
.~ ,
, ,j" I
o ~.~ (
~~g (
,
w
~
"
i2
~
~
~
o
", --.~A~r'
it
r.l
~
~
:;;;:
:l1
I
I
,
I
i
.
"I
I!
~!i-
11
.
i
wJ~' ~ Oc~Vttt) jd. ~ 0( ~~. S',F, ~ ~oJ
. ., ~~~ 6Y\ ~ -hriG- ,
MEMORANDUM
~ Il-o
Te:
As~en Plannin~ an. Z.nin~ C.mmissi.n
F!teM:
Kim J.hns.n, Planner
!tEl
ute Park Aff.r.aJde H.usin~ SuWivisi.n: Amendment of
GMQS Exemption Approval of Deed Restrictions
.ATE:
August 24, 1993
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: .Staff recommends approval of an amendment to the deed
restrictions for three of the seven affordable townhomes. The
request is supported by the Housing Board.
BACKGROUND: The Applicant, James Martin, received approval for
this first AH (Affordable Housing) zone development in 1992. The
sUbdivision/PUD consists of three free market lots and seven deed
restrictedtownhomes located at the far east end of ute Avenue.
As part of the entire review, Growth Management Exemption was
granted by City Council (upon recommendation by the Planning
Commission) for the affordable units as allowed within an AH zone.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Applicant seeks to amend the 1992 GMQS
Exemption approval to change the. deed restrictions on three
townhome units from Category 3 to Category 4. The remaining four
units will remain at Category 4. This req~est is necessitated by
increased costs associated with the project which have arisen since
its approval. Please refer to the memo dated August 13, 1993 from
Tom Baker of the Housing Office for more details, Exhibit "A".
STAFF DISCUSSION: Staff has determined that the proposed change
is substantial enough to warrant a replication of the original
review process via P&Z and city Council. Because the entire
project is blanketed by a PUD approval, the Planning Director will
be able to process a staff-level PUD Amendment upon approval of
the revised. GMQS Exemption by Council.
GMOS Exemption for Affordable Housina: Pursuant to Section 8-104
C.1(c) the Council shall exempt deed restricted housing that is
provided in accordance with the housing guidelines. The Commission
shall review and make a recommendation to Council regarding the
housing package. According to the Code, the review of any request
for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a
determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the
proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the
number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of
dwelling units proposed, specifically regarding the number of
bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the
rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price
categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted.
1
I'"',
~
,. ,
Response: with this request, there are no changes to the approved
number, size or configuration of the townhome units. All seven
units will remain sale units.
The Housing Board is forwarding its recommendation for approval of
the change from Category 3 to Category 4 for the three townhomes.
They also have nodded to increased sales price of the original
Category 4 units. The Board :finds that the changes are appropriate
given the price structures of all of the Ute Park units as
discussed and the mix of units in the recently approved East Cooper
AH project. Planning staff agrees with the Housing Board on this
request.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office and Housing Office recommend
approval of the amendment to the ute Park GMQS Exemption for
Affordable Housing to change the three Category 3 units to Category
4 units. .
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend.approval of the proposed
amendment to the 1992 GMQS Exemption for the Ute Park affordable
ho=ing =its to raise the oat"9ory ; I~;::O :;~teFFi1:: 3
Exhibits:
"A" - Memo from Tom Baker, 8/13/1993
2
r
~ '~ II
City ~wll ~.~.t
AppI:oNd IS
,...:::...':.....'.:.,...... .""....,..........:..... .. ,.::....::::.,-..;....
ay ONfrlaDc.
MEMORANDUM
,
TO:
Kim Johnson, Planning Office
Tom Baker, Housing Offi~
FROM:
DATE:
August 13, 1993
RE:
GMQS Exemption: Amending ute Park Affordable Housing
Development Category Mix
PURPOSE: The purpose of this memorandum is to initiate a GMQS
Exemption amendment to the approved category mix of the ute Park AH
Project. The Housing Board has directed its staff to apply for a
change in the unit mix on behalf of the developer, Jim Martin. Jim
was the first person to use the City's AH Zone.
The current approval allows Jim Martin to construct seven (7)
affordable housing units: four 3-bdrm, category #4 units; and three
3-bdrm category #3 units. As you are aware, attached 3-bdrm units
can be sold for a maximum of $193,500 (category #4) and $126,000
(category #3).
Jim Martin originally priced these units as follows:
o category #3.......$126,000
o category #4.......$162,500
During pre-construction Jim discovered his costs had increased
substantially for two reasons: first, interest rates had increased
since the time he started the development review process; and tap
fees (primarily sewer) were significantly higher than expected.
Apparently the sewer tap fee is high due to down stream line
improvements which are necessary in this portion of the city.
Due to these cost considerations Jim Martin requested that the
Housing Board grant him the ability to increase his prices $91,000.
Jim proposes to do this by increasing the sale price of his
category #4, 3-bdrm units to $180,000 and increase the sale price
of his category #3, 3-bdrm units to $135,000.
Therefore, the new unit pricing will be as follows:
o category #4.......$135,000
o category #4.......$180,000
1
3
('\
.-"
The Housing Board wishes to emphasize that the only portion of the
development approval which is being changed is the price of the
units.
HOUSING BOARD ACTION: The Housing Board supports Jim Martin's
request for sales price increases. The Board pointed out that Jim
has the ability to increase the sale price of his category #4 units
up to $193,500 without additional approvals. Jim stated that all
of the units are 3-bdrm units and similar in size and design;
therefore, he wanted the price increases to occur in a manner which
did not preclude his buyers from qualifying and also spread the
increases over all seven units (Jim has buyers selected for all
seven units).
The Board then pointed out that increasing the category #3 units
from $126,000 to $135,000 technically changed the category
designation of these units to category #4. This technical change
causes the development to have seven (7) category #4 units. since
the approvals for this development permitted 4 category #4 units
and 3 category #3 units, we need to request this amendment.
REOUEST: The Housing Board recommends approval of Jim Martin's
request to change the sale price of the 3 category #3, 3-bdrm units
from $126,000 to $135,000. The Board finds that this increase is
appropriate given the price structure of all the affordable units
and given the category mix approved on the East Cooper AH
development. The Housing Board further requests that the 3 new
category #4 units be specified to sell for a maximum of $135,000
and that preference be given to category #3 households for these
units.
martin.gmqs
2
~
1""'"
1"""\
Jty Council Exhibit
Approved , 19
By Ordinance
..
...,.....-
MEMORANDUM
From:
Kate Foster, Project Engineer
AUG I t
To:
Kim Johnson, Planner
E..J,t.:,
Date:
August 10, 1993
Re:
Central Bank Property Condo Application
Having reviewed the above referenced application and having made a site visit, the
Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. Encroachments - An encroachment license is required by the City Engineer for all
encroachments listed, but not limited to, by the surveyor on the submitted plans. This will
include the planter that extends onto the sidewalk in front of the Bank's parking lot.
2. Parking - Identify all parking spaces, all meeting the dimensional requirements of the
City Code. Parking lot gates must also be shown on plat as these are a major structure
on the property.
3. Utilities - The transformer encroachment should be converted to a utility easement.
Also, a 4' by 10' easement located somewhere on the property, perhaps on Lot Q, in the
parking area, is required for future use. This will allow the utility pedestals and meters
to be moved out of the ally right-of-way.
4. Trash - The plans do not indicate a trash storage area. The final plat must indicate a
trash storage area on the applicant's property and not in the public right-of-way.
5. Lanlplage - The final plat must have the Surveyor's Certificate contain language that
all easements and recorded encroachments indicated on title policy number , dated
_, have been shown on the plat.
Recommended Conditions of Approval
1. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed
for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way.
/
r"\
.-..... ....
<
<.
Page 2
Kim Johnson
August 10, 1993
."\
2. Prior to the sale of either unit, a condominium plat must be filed which meets the
requirements of Section 24-7-1004.D of the Municipal Code and the comments of the
Engineering Department review memo of August 10, 1993.
cc: Chuck Roth, City Engineer
Bob Gish, Public Works Director
ccntralbankcondo
f"""'\
.1"""'\
",,"'. -!"''--~
FROM:
Tom Baker, Housing
Plannin1 Directo\.\..
OfficsJwO",
AUG-6
, '-~~;;'~i~0'-;Tf] \'~f\~:\
,:,\.\ i 1\
'..'\'
': 1 I
, :\1
,II
"'." \
'V
i',]
'LV
"~"",,_..-.---I--" \
\
_.~-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Diane Moore, Aspen
DATE:
August 6, 1993
rU\jj--.,-_"~,,,-"
1
":.._~.~--
RE:
Amendment: Ute Park Affordable Housing Development
PURPOSE: The purpose of this memorandum is to initiate an
amendment to the approved category mix of the Ute Park AH Project.
The current approval allows Jim Martin to construct seven (7)
affordable housing units: four 3-bdrm, category #4 units; and three
3-bdrm category #3 units. As you are aware, attached 3-bdrm units
can be sold for a maximum of $193,500 (category #4) and $126,000
(category #3).
Jim Martin originally priced these units as follows:
o category #3.......$126,000
o category #4.......$162,500
During pre-construction Jim discovered his costs had increased
substantially for two reasons: first, interest rates had increased
since the time he started the development review process; and tap
fees (primarily sewer) were significantly higher than expected.
Apparently the sewer tap fee is high due to down stream line
improvements which are necessary in this portion of the city.
Due to these cost considerations Jim Martin requested that the
Housing Board grant him the ability to increase his prices $91,000.
Jim proposes to do this by increasing the sale price of his
category #4, 3-bdrm units to $180,000 and increase the sale price
of his category #3, 3-bdrm units to $135,000.
HOUSING BOARD ACTION: The Housing Board supports Jim Martin's
request for sales price increases. The Board pointed out that Jim
has the ability to increase the sale price of his category #4 units
up to $193,500 without Board approvals. Jim stated that all of the
units were 3-bdrm units and similar in size and design, therefore,
he wanted the price increases to occur in a manner which did not
preclude his buyers from qualifying and also spread the increases
over all seven units (Jim has buyers selected for all seven units) .
The Board then pointed out that increasing the category #3 units
from $126,000 to $l35,000 technically changed the category
designation of these units to category #4. This technical change
causes the development to have seven (7) category #4 units. Since
1
,
~
.... ...-:..,'!
,--
the approvals for this development permitted 4 category #4 units
and 3 category #3 units.
REOUEST: The Housing Board recommends approval of Jim Martin's
request to change the sale price of the 3 category #3, 3-bdrm units
from $126,000 to $135,000. The Board finds that this increase is
appropriate given the price structure of all the affordable units.
The Board recommends that the 3 new category #4 .units be specified
to sell for a maximum of $135,000. The Board also recommends that
preference be given to category #3 households for these 3 new
category #4 units.
The Housing Board requests that the Planning Director sign-off on
an insubstantial amendment, if appropriate or if this issue needs
to go before the city council, please contact me and I will assist
Jim Martin in whatever way I can. The Housing Board has directed
me to expedite this matter in an effort to allow Jim Martin to
break ground this construction season.
martin.ah
2
r
. r
~..
..... ..w~...._
.....,..,.'" ~""""'~
.n..M'Km......OVAlro...""'"A.".
"'''''-'''''''>It ""..... ""(.....,....
:"5" "Oll$",OI'C"1l&lVUION/'UIlTO
'WM"O'",,,,, """">c'J1011'''''''''''!l
...........,-..--'.I~,
.....-...........c-.....""'._
------........
--....--;:r.....---."'"
-~._~
WHt>tI:.<l,......_~.~........_
"""...... ~~...1l,_"""'.-......
-..'...=.._.....ji
(-'''''''...,-.....-.._-
-....-c.-..--....
.....""'-'>.-............
~......... .......w_~
.-........-....-..-.......
-.........,.........--
..._,-.<>>o........C_
..,.'_..r..........-._...""_
"',...."'...."....'.......0'.......
-"'----~--
.....-............"""""...r
........~,........_""6."...
_...,_...._~...-
....Q..-....-.....,..........,..
.......-...-...............
---"[''''----
...-......-.....-.....
-............<llII<ll.............-...
-.....,....~""!.....-
--...... "'='..
c.,.e_...,... ......,...
""""~......__,~t......
....""'...., ---
..,............, .,.....
r...__.. -..
-.............z..,.., __
~--............,...
-......--.....--.........
.-..-"..'......'._..0......,..
--~..........-.........
.........- --...-
""",.~.."._Oyno:=
<<l<.IQ.o.-"'"''''''o.-_~
..ct..."..,,"1t_..~,..,..
,_. ,..................
-...-............. .......
--"'~""IO_,...,..
_...,-"'.._..;;-"'~
....~,..~---
....... ""''''-r.._. =._
.......IkC.......,\,;_ """""
-~.....~.._-
-......--...........-
.
,. .
1.__....._.....--
;'.:,,-:.t.:.'="'~~-:;..c.f-
.....--.
'~-=...,.._-
-'.- --....,-"""'"
~iIIt____......
--......---...-....
-.....,..-.....-.;........<-
-"'"",<--...-..
....""......,..,-..=-
--~.- --
_~A_ _..."""""",,,
............,..."" ,..'t!.':t::
......_.Jor......""'''-
_.,....--~_.(")
""-"-'-"--
...............--.....-
..-__...C"".._
'""-.....,.---.........
.......0-:_.._..__
-........---...-
"""'-.......-.._-
'....-..-........-.........
...."'........................-
-
_~no.O,_...._-.
--...---..
::"_""'!l'~_"''' ,,~..w
-_.."1_......~......._
........--..---
....--..-......-.....
.....-.....,.,.. -
"'TROOOc.D.."".....DOIlIlEUDn;..
umm.._..............,..~"""""'"
."I..<....._......""'-~-
..,...... ,-.......
.TTrsI\""_........""''t::,..,....
~:::.:._...''-!:r.~ '
~"
,