HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20081027CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
October 27, 2008
5:00 P.M.
I) Call to Order
II) Roll Call
III) Scheduled Public Appearances
a) Environmental leadership Award -Silver Partner
IV) Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues
NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes)
V) Special Orders of the Day
a) Mayor's and Councilmembers' Comments
b) Agenda Additions and Deletions
c) City Manager's Comments
VI) Ca
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f0
nsent Calendar
Resolution #104, 2008
Resolution #102, 2008
Resolution #105, 2008
Resolution #106, 2008
Resolution #103, 2008
Minutes -September
-Annie Mitchell Roof Repair
-Appointment of deputy Municipal Judge
- Contract -Parking Pay by Phone
- Settlement lawsuit -City of Aspen vs Shadow Mountain
- Citizen Budget Task Force Recommendations
2, 29, October 6, 17, 2008
VII) First Reading of Ordinances
a) Ordinance #34, 2008 -Lift One Master Plan P.H. 11/10
VIII) Public Hearings
a) Ordinance #32, 2008 -SPA Amendment Paepcke Auditorium -Aspen Institute -
Continue to 11/10
b) Resolution #74, 2008 -Aspen Walk (404 Park Ave. and 414 Park Circle)
Conceptual PUD
IX) Action Items
a) Council Appointments
X) Executive Session
I) Adjournment
II) Next Regular Meeting November 10, 2008
COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M.
~a
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Steve Bossart
THRU: Trish Aragon
DATE OF MEMO: October 17, 2008
MEETING DATE: October 27, 2008
RE: Annie Mitchell (Burlingame D) Roof Repair
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Contract approval for temporary roof snow slide mitigation
at the Annie Mitchell affordable housing project, in the amount of $53,748.00
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: None.
BACKGROUND: This project was the first of three City/APCHA housing projects
delivered under the then new City "Developer Model". This model was designed as a
"Public-Private Joint Venture" with a qualified private developer responsible for all
aspects of project delivery. Parameters were directed at livability and energy efficiency.
The intent of the model, the commitments made in presentations, and the contract
structure, was that the developer would manage all design and construction activities
and maintain the proposed budget.
Once construction activities commenced the City Staff had concerns related to snow
management and energy uses, snow shed areas and the risks to public safety, and the
future unaddressed costs of snow and ice mitigation. Unfortunately these issues were
never fully addressed; as a result the project was faced with the risk of future costs
related to snow and ice mitigation.
Snow and Ice
During the first winter of occupancy the property experienced substantial snow slide
activity. Staff advised the HOA to take immediate steps to protect life safety. During the
next summer the City paid for installation of snow clips in minimal areas. The next
summer the City paid for more snow clips. During the 2006/2007 winter the property
experienced substantial ice buildup which cantilevered over walkways - an illegally
parked automobile was severely damaged by a substantial ice block falling 35 feet.
Fortunately no people or children were in that sidewalk vicinity at that moment.
Page 1 of 3
During the 2007/2008 winter the City paid for snow removal services totaling
approximately $50,000 to address the economic burden to residents of this affordable
project. (If assigned to the one bedroom affordable units this would raise their monthly
dues by $200 in the winter). The City engaged Wiss Janney, a forensic architect, to
review this and other design problems and provide solutions. We are currently pricing
their recommended changes and repairs for implementation next year.
To reduce the snow removal requirements (shoveling, loading, and hauling) for this
winter we sought a proposal for additional low profile glue-down snow clips on low slope
roof areas. The hope is that will hold snow masses in place through spring melt. We
have prior success where the clips were installed in key pedestrian areas. We would
ask the HOA to monitor and document performance. If successful, we may be able to
reduce some of the proposed work planned for next year.
DISCUSSION:
The City will be responsible for snow management costs and design corrections. The
decision is removal or attempt a solution which may have long term benefit. Timing
dictates a sole source emergency contract approach. The contractor is experienced
with the project, its roofs, and conducted the prior snow clip installations.
FINANCIALIBUDGET IMPACTS:
Funding has been allocated for the overall Annie Mitchell repair project and will cover
this contract work. As explained above, the snow clip installation may reduce the
requirements for some of the more major approaches.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
One of the key elements in efficient building is "life cycle cost" -that is, measuring
today's decisions against future savings in energy, labor, maintenance, and
replacement.
The Annie Mitchell situation may necessitate hard decisions on replacement and
rebuilding of certain parts in order to reduce future costs, energy, and CO2 production,
as well as to bring the project to completion, as promised to the residents.
The goal with this portion of the work is to get an immediate benefit, with potential for
long term benefits, by reducing the snow removal costs and impact this winter.
Page 2 of 3
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff believes the City should provide complete projects
that function well for the benefit of the affordable housing owners. We recommend
Council allow for the sole source emergency contract for the snow clip installation.
ALTERNATIVES: Council could alternatively decide that all responsibilities belong to
the homeowners. In fact, that would be the case in a free market or private developer
project. Management and Staff believe the affordable housing program is committed to
providing efficient and effective projects, and thus is responsible for making corrections
for design and execution errors.
PROPOSED MOTION: To approve the Pacific Sheet metal contract in the amount of
$53,748.00
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Contract
Proposal
Annie Mitchell HOA letter of approval
Page 3 of 3
RESOLUTION # ~Q~
(Series of 2008)
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO, AND PACIFIC SHEET METAL SETTING FORTH THE
TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING ANNIE MITCHELL ROOF SNOW
CLIPS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID
CONTRACT
WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract
between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Pacific Sheet Metal, a copy of which
contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that contract
between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Pacific Sheet Metal regarding Annie
Mitchell Roof Snow Clips 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:
Michael C. Ireland, 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 October 27, 2008.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
a~A
CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION
(Short Form)
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into on October 17, 2008, by and between the
CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, hereinafter called the "City", and Pacific Sheet Metal
hereinafter called the "Contractor".
THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and Contracts herein contained,
and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are
hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows:
1. Construction of Project. Contractor agrees to furnish all labor, materials,
tools, machinery, equipment, temporary utilities, transportation and any other facilities
needed therefor, and to complete in a good, workmanlike and substantial manner the
Project as described in the Scope of Work and/or Proposal appended hereto as Exhibit
"A" which is incorporated herein as if fully set forth (the "Project").
2. Plans and Specifications; Compliance with Laws. The Project is to be
constructed and completed in strict conformance with the Scope of Work and/or Proposal
appended hereto for the same approved in writing by the parties hereto. The Project shall
also be constructed and completed in strict compliance with all laws, ordinances, rules,
regulations of all applicable governmental authorities, and the City of Aspen Procurement
Code, Title 4 of the Municipal Code, including the approval requirements of Section 4-
08-040. Contractor shall apply for and obtain all required permits and licenses and shall
pay all fees therefor and all other fees required by such governmental authorities.
3. Payments to Contractor. In consideration of the covenants and Contracts
herein contained being performed and kept by Contractor, including the supplying of all
labor, materials and services required by this Contract, and the construction and
completion of the Project, City agrees to pay Contractor a sum not to exceed fifty three
thousand seven hundred forty eight ($53 748.00 DOLLARS or as shown on Exhibit
ccA»
4. Commencement and Completion. Contractor agrees to commence work
hereunder immediately upon execution hereof, to prosecute said work thereafter diligently
and continuously to completion, and in any and all events to substantially complete the
same not later than November 30, 2008 subject to such delays as are permissible under
the "Extension of Time for Completion" section of this Contract.
CCS-97l.doc Page: 1
2000 otioi oa:os Faa
S. Payment of Bills and Charges. Contractor shall pay promptly all valid bills
and charges for material, labor, machinery, equipment or any other service or facility used
in connection with or arising out of the Project, and shall obtain periodic releases from all
subcontractors and material suppliers supplying labor or materials to the Project
concurrently with Contractor's delivering any payment to such subcontractors and
material suppliers. Contractor shall indemnify and hold City and Citys officers,
employees, agents, successors and assigns free and hamtless against all expenses and
liability suffered or incurred in connection with the claims of any such subcontractors or
material suppliers, including but not limited to court costs and attorney's fees resulting or
arising therefrom; provided that Contractor shall be excused from this obligation to the
extort that City is in arrears in making the payments to Contractor. Should any liens or
claims of lien be filed of record against the Property, or should Contractor receive notice
of any unpaid bill or charge in connection with construction of the Project, Contractor
shall immediately either pay and discharge the same and cause the same to be released of
record, or shall famish City with the proper indemnity either by title policy or by
corporate surety bond in the amount of 150% of the amount claimai pursuant to such
lien.
6. Releases. Contractor shall, if requested by City, before being entitled to
receive any payment due, famish to City all releases obtained from subcontractors and
material suppliers and copies of all bills paid to such date, properly receipted and
identified, covering work done and rho materials famished to the Project and showing an
expenditure of an amount not less than the total of all previous payments made hereunder
by City to Contractor.
odds. Contractor shall furnish performance, payment and oe
Bonds, each in an ied. These Bonds shall rem ~ ~ until the job is
advertised and closed except for a which shall remain in full force
and effect for One Y a e of project closu otherwise provided by
8. Hierarchy of Project Documents. This Contract and the Proposal or Scope
of Work appended hereto se Exhibit KA" are intended to supplement one another. In
case of conflict, however, ibis Contract shall control both.
9. Changes in the Vdork. Should the City at any time during the progress of
the work request any modifications, alterations or deviations in, additions to, or omissions
from this Contract or the ProposaUScope of Work, it shall be at liberty to do so, and the
same shall in no way affect or make void this Contract; but the amount thereof shall be
amortized over the remaining term of this Contract and added to or deducted, as the case
may be, fmm the payments set forth in Paragraph 3 above by a fair attd reasonable
valuation, based upon the actual cost of labor and materials. This Contract shall be
deemed to be completed when the work is finished in accordance with the original
Proposal or Scope of Work as amended or modified by such changes, whatever may be
the nature or the extent thereof The rule of pracfice to be observed in fulfillment of this
~ ooa
I.Juc Yage: 2
paragraph shall be that, upon the demand of either City or Contractor, the character and
valuation of any or all changes, omissions or extra work shall be agreed upon and fixed in
writing, signed by City and Contractor, prior to performance.
10. Contractor's Failure to Perform. Should Contractor, at any time during
the progress of the work, refuse or fail to supply sufficient material or workmen for the
expeditious progress of said work or fail to perform any other provisions of this Contract,
City may, upon giving notice in writing to Contractor as provided herein and upon
Contractor's failure to remedy any such failure within 3 days from receipt of such notice,
terminate this Contract and provide the necessary material and workmen to finish the
work and may enter upon the Property for such purpose and complete said work. The
expense thereof shall be deducted from the payments remaining under Paragraph 3 above,
or if the total cost of the work to City exceeds the amount of such remaining payments,
Contractor shall pay to City upon demand the amount of such excess in addition to any
and all other damages to which City may be entitled. In the event of such termination,
City may take possession of all materials, equipment and appliances belonging to
Contractor upon or adjacent to the Property upon which said work is being performed and
may use the same in the completion of said work. Such termination shall not prejudice or
be exclusive of any other legal rights which City may have against Contractor.
11. Extension of Time for Completion. Time is of the essence of this
Contract and Contractor shall substantially complete the work during the time provided
for herein. However, the time during which Contractor is delayed in said work by (a) the
acts of City or its agents or employees or those claiming under Contract with or
permission from City, or (b) the acts of God which Contractor could not have reasonably
foreseen and provided against, or (c) unanticipated stormy or inclement weather which
necessarily delays the work, or (d) any strikes, boycotts or obstructive actions by
employees or labor organizations and which are beyond the control of Contractor and
which it cannot reasonably overcome, or (e) the failure of City to make progress
payments promptly, shall be added to the time for completion of the work by a fair and
reasonable allowance. Contractor recognizes, however, that the site of the work is in the
Rocky Mountains at a high elevation where inclement whether conditions are common.
This fact has been considered by Contractor in preparing its Proposal and or agreeing to
the Scope of Work. Furthermore, Contractor shall have the right to stop work if any
payment, including payment for extra work, is not made to Contractor as provided in this
Contract. In the event of such nonpayment, Contractor may keep the job idle until all
payments then due are received.
12. Unforeseen Conditions. It is understood and agreed that Contractor,
before incurring any other expenses or purchasing any other materials for the Project,
shall proceed to inspect the work site and all visible conditions and that if, at the time of
inspection therefor, the Contractor finds that the proposed work is at variance with the
conditions indicated by the Proposal, Scope of Work, or information supplied by City, or
should Contractor encounter physical conditions below the surface of the ground of an
unusual nature, differing materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally
CCS-971.doc Page: 3
recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract or inherent in
a work site located in the Rocky Mountains, Contractor shall so notify City, and City
shall at that time have the right and option to immediately cancel and terminate this
Contract or to instruct Contractor to continue the work and add the additional amount
attributable to such unforeseen conditions to the payments due Contractor as set forth
above.
It is agreed that in the event of any cancellation by City in accordance with this section,
Contractor shall be paid the actual costs of the work done prior to the time of
cancellation. In computing such costs, building permit fees, insurance and such financing
and title charges as are not refundable shall be included; provided that supervision time,
office overhead and profit shall not be included in such costs to be refunded to Contractor
by reason of such cancellation.
13. Acceptance by City. No payment hereunder nor occupancy of said
improvements or any part thereof shall be construed as an acceptance of any work done
up to the time of such payment or occupancy, but the entire work is to be subject to the
inspection and approval of City at the time when Contractor notifies City that the Project
has been completed.
14. Notice of Completion; Contractor's Release. City agrees to sign and file of
record within five (5) days after the substantial completion and acceptance of the Project
a Notice of Completion. If City fails to so record the Notice of Completion within said
five (5) day period, City hereby appoints Contractor as City's agent to sign and record
such Notice of Completion on City's behalf. This agency is irrevocable and is an agency
coupled with an interest. Contractor agrees upon receipt of final payment to release the
Project and property from any and all claims that may have accrued against the same by
reason of said construction. If Contractor faithfully performs the obligations of this
Contract on its part to be performed, it shall have the right to refuse to permit occupancy
of any structures by City or City's assignees or agents until the Notice of Completion has
been recorded and Contractor has received the payment, if any, due hereunder at
completion of construction, less such amounts as may be retained pursuant to mutual
Contract of City and Contractor under the provisions of Paragraph 3 above.
15. Insurance.
a. The Contractor agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy
or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other
obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. Such
insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract
or by law. The Contractor shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other
obligations assumed pursuant to the terms of this Contract by reason of its failure to procure
or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in
sufficient amounts, duration, or types.
a
b. Contractor shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of
the Contractor to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed in the
Supplemental Conditions. If the Supplemental Conditions do not set forth minimum
insurance coverage, then the minimum coverage shall be as set forth below. Such coverage
shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to City. All coverage
shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other
obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. In the case of
any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall
be procured to maintain such continuous coverage.
1. Workmen's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by
applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this
contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE
HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE
HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease -policy limit, and
FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - each
employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the
Workmen's Compensation requirements of this paragraph.
2. Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined
single limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and
ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be
applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for
bodily injury, broad form property damage (includmg completed operations),
personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket
contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The
policy shall include coverage for explosion, collapse, and underground hazazds. The
policy shall contain a severability of interests provision.
3. Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum
combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE
MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION
DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate with respect to each Contractor's owned,
hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the services.
The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. If the Contractor has no
owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section 5.4.2.3 shall be met by each
employee of the Contractor providing services to the City under this contract.
c. Except for any Professional Liability insurance that may be required, the
policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City of Aspen and the City
of Aspen's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall
be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City of Aspen, its officers or
employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City of Aspen, shall
be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Contractor. No additional
insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily
CCS-971.doc Page: 5
injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Contractor shall be solely
responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above.
d. The certificate of insurance provided by the City of Aspen shall be
completed by the Contractor's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the
required coverage, conditions, and minunum limits aze in full force and effect, and shall be
reviewed and approved by the City of Aspen prior to commencement of the contract. No
other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this contract and shall
provide that the coverage afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or
materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the
City of Aspen.
e. In addition, these Certificates of Insurance shall contain the following
clauses:
Underwriters and issuers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the
City of Aspen, it being the intention of the parties that the insurance policies so
effected shall protect all parties and be primary coverage for any and all losses
covered by the above-described insurance. To the extent that the City's insurer(s)
may become liable for secondary or excess coverage, the City's underwriters and
insurers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the Contractor.
Underwriters and issuers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the
City of Aspen, it being the intention of the parties that the insurance policies so
effected shall protect all parties and be primary coverage for any and all losses
covered by the above-described insurance. To the extent that the City's insurer(s)
may become liable for secondary or excess coverage, the City's underwriters and
insurers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the
Contractor.Underwriters and issuers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation
against the City of Aspen, it being the intention of the parties that the insurance
policies so effected shall protect all parties and be primary coverage for any and all
losses covered by the above-described insurance. To the extent that the City's
insurer(s) may become liable for secondary or excess coverage, the City's
underwriters and insurers shall have no right of recovery or subrogation against the
Contractor.
The insurance companies issuing the policy or policies shall have no recourse
against the City of Aspen for payment of any premiums or for assessments under
any form of policy. The insurance companies issuing the policy or policies shall
have no recourse against the City of Aspen for payment of any premiums or for
assessments under any form of policy.The insurance companies issuing the policy or
policies shall have no recourse against the City of Aspen for payment of any
premiums or for assessments under any form of policy.
Any and all deductibles in the above-described insurance policies shall be assumed
by and be for the amount of, and at the sole risk of the Proposer. Any and all
CC5-971.doc Yage: 6
deductibles in the above-described insurance policies shall be assumed by and be for
the amount of, and at the sole risk of the Proposer.Any and all deductibles in the
above-described insurance policies shall be assumed by and be for the amount of,
and at the sole risk of the Proposer.
Location of operations shall be: "All operations and locations at which work in
connection with the referenced project is done." Location of operations shall be:
"All operations and locations at which work in connection with the referenced
project is done."Location of operations shall be: "All operations and locations at
which work in connection with the referenced project is done."
Certificates of Insurance for all renewal policies shall be delivered to the Architect
at least fifteen (15) days prior to a policy's expiration date except for any policy expiring on
the expiration date of this Contract or thereafter.
e. Failure on the part of the Contractor to procure or maintain policies
providing the required coverage, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material
breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its
discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period
thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith. All moneys so paid by
City shall be repaid by Contractor to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the
premiums against moneys due to Contractor from City.
f. City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy
and any endorsement thereto.
16. Damage or Destruction. If the Project is destroyed or damaged by any
accident or disaster, such as fire, storm, flood, landslide, earthquake, subsidence, theft or
vandalism, any work done by Contractor in rebuilding or restoring the work shall be paid
for by City as extra work under Paragraph 8 above. If, however, the estimated cost of
replacement of the work already completed by Contractor exceeds twenty (20%) percent
of the insured sum set forth in Paragraph 14 above, City shall have the option to cancel
this Contract and, in such event, Contractor shall be paid the reasonable cost, including
net profit to Contractor in the amount of ten (10%) percent, of all work performed by
Contractor before such cancellation.
17. Notices. Any notice which any party is required or may desire to give to any
other party shall be in writing and may be personally delivered or given or made by
United States mail addressed as follows:
To City:
Steve Bossart, Project Manager
City of Aspen
130 South Galena St
Aspen, Colorado 81611
CCS-971.doc Page: 7
To Contractor:
Brad Stolte
Pacific Sheet Metal
PO Box 70
Carbondale, CO 81623
subject to the right of either parry to designate a different address for itself by notice
similarly given. Any notice so given, delivered or made by United States mail, shall be
deemed to have been given the same day as transmitted by telecopier or delivered
personally, one day after consignment to overnight courier service such as Federal
Express, or two days after the deposit in the United States mail as registered or certified
matter, addressed as above provided, with postage thereon fully prepaid.
18. Inspections; Warranties.
(a) Contractor shall conduct an inspection of the Project prior to final acceptance
of the work with City.
(b) Contractor shall schedule and cause to be performed all corrective activities
necessitated as a result of any deficiencies noted on the final inspection prior to
acceptance. The costs of material and/or labor incurred in connection with such
corrective activities shall not be reimbursed or otherwise paid to Contractor.
(c) Contractor shall obtain, at City's expense, third party warranty contracts (to be
entered into by City).
19. Licensure of Contractor. Contractor hereby represents and warrants to
City that Contractor is duly licensed as a general contractor in the State of Colorado, and
if applicable, in the County of Pitkin.
20. Independent Contractor. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by
the parties that nothing in this Contract shall result in, or be construed as establishing an
employment relationship. The Contractor shall be, and shall perform as, an independent the
Contractor who agrees to use his best efforts to provide the Work on behalf of the City. No
agent, employee, or servant of the Contractor shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the
employee, agent or servant of the City. The City is interested only in the results obtained
under the Contract Documents. The manner and means of conducting the Work are under
the sole control of the Contractor. None of the benefits provided by the City to its
employees including, but not limited to, worker's compensation insurance and
unemployment insurance, are available from the City to the employees, agents or servants
of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for
the acts of the Contractor's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the
performance of the Contract.
Page:B
THE CONTRACTOR, AS AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR, SHALL NOT BE
ENTITLED TO WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS AND SHALL BE
OBLIGATED TO PAY FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX ON ANY
MONEYS EARNED PURSUANT TO THE CONTRACT.
21. Assignment. This Contract is for the personal services of Contractor.
Contractor shall not transfer or assign this Contract or its rights and responsibilities under
this Contract nor subcontract to others its rights and responsibilities under this Contract,
and any attempt to do so shall be void and constitute a material breach of this Contract.
22. Successors and Assigns. Subject to pazagraph 22, above, this Contract
shall be binding on, and shall inure to the benefit of, City and Contractor and their
respective successors and assigns.
23. Entire Contract. This Contract contains the entire Contract between City
and Contractor respecting the matters set forth herein and supersedes all prior Contracts
between City and Contractor respecting such matters.
24. Waivers. No waiver by City or Contractor of any default by the other or
of any event, circumstance or condition permitting either to terminate this Contract shall
constitute a waiver of any other default or other such event, circumstance or condition,
whether of the same or of any other nature or type and whether preceding, concurrent or
succeeding; and no failure or delay by either City or Contractor to exercise any right
arising by reason of any default by the other shall prevent the exercise of such right while
the defaulting party continues in default, and no waiver of any default shall operate as a
waiver of any other default or as a modification of this Contract.
25. Remedies Non-Exclusive. No remedy conferred on either party to this
Contract shall be exclusive of any other remedy herein or by law provided or permitted,
but each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy.
26. Governing Law. This Contract shall be governed by, and construed in
accordance with, the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any action at law or equity
shall be Pitkin County.
27. Attorneys' Fees. If either party to this Contract shall institute any action
or proceeding to enforce any right, remedy or provision contained in this Contract, the
prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to receive its attorneys' fees in connection
with such action from the non-prevailing party.
28. Severability. Any provision in this Contract which is held to be
inoperative, unenforceable or invalid shall be inoperative, unenforceable or invalid
without affecting the remaining provisions, and to this end the provisions of this Contract
are declared to be severable.
CCS-971.doc Page: 9
29. Nondiscrimination. During the performance of this Contract, the
Contractor agrees as follows: The Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or
applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, marital
status, sexual orientation, being handicapped, a disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Viet
Nam era veteran. The Contractor will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are
employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race,
color, religion, sex, national origin, sex, age, sexual orientation, handicapped, a
disadvantaged person, or a disabled or Viet Nam era veteran. Such action shall include, but
not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment
or recmitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of
compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The Contractor agrees
to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment,
notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause.
30. Prohibited Interest. No member, officer, or employee of the City of
Aspen, Pitkin County or the Town of Snowmass Village shall have any interest, direct or
indirect, in this Contract or the proceeds thereof.
31. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and
Conflict of Interest:
a. The Contractor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed
or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an Contract or understanding for a
commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingency fee, excepting bona fide employees or
bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Contractor for the
purpose of securing business.
b. The Contractor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the
City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval,
disapproval, recommendation, prepazation of any part of a program requirement or a
purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standazd,
rendering of advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any
proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other
particular matter, pertaining to this Contract or to any solicitation or proposal therefor.
c. It shall be a material breach of the Contract for any payment, gratuity, or
offer of employment to be made by or on behalf of a Subcontractor under a contract to the
prime Contractor or higher tier Subcontractor or any person associated therewith; as an
inducement for the award of a Subcontract or order. The Contractor is prohibited from
inducing, by any means, any person employed under this Contract to give up any part of the
compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled. The Contractor shall comply with all
applicable local, state and federal "anti-kickback" statutes or regulations.
32. Payments Subject to Annual Appropriations. If the contract awarded
extends beyond the calendaz year, nothing herein shall be construed as an obligation by the
CCS-97l.doc rage: m
coos over oa:oa Fns
City beyond any amounts that may be, from time to time, appropriated by the City on an
annual basis. It is understood that payment under any contract is conditional upon annual
appropriation of :funds by said governing body and that before providing services, the
Contractor, if it so requests, will be advised as to the statue of funds appropriated for
services or materials and shall not be obligated to provide services or materials for which
funds have not ban appropriate.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF', the parties agree hereto have executed this Contract For
Construction on the date first above written.
ATTESTED BY:
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
Enginaring Department
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
City Attorney
ATTESTED BY:
Cov
~ ooi
Pl6,t,c Nafc -/,(E c~wc mE n,.«/e aw ~tSE 2 - ~i ~.~
Note: Certification of Incorporation shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporation. If a '~0" ~`!!
partnership, the Contract shall be signed by a Principal and indicate title. G/A~f~
CONTRACTOR:
By: ~~~
I,doC Ps'a~ll
2008 O1/01 09:04 FA%
CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
(To be completed 'rf Contractor is a Corporation)
STATE OF C1jI..OP..~11~O )
SS.
COUNTY OF C~tRFI LI.i~ _1•. )
On this ~.0~ day of dc.lObE(' , 20.Q~, before
me appeared
~. ~.O~J~~~ Wa
personally known, who, being by me
to me
sworn, did say that ~/he is
'L E ~~"a~~-. C~. and that
the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and
that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by
authority of its board of directors, and said deponent acknowledged 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 written.
~ao2
~~`ifll~, ,~,'{~~f En
Notary Public
13tO %,_,~uxti n ~JE., , Si l~', CO S 1~5z.. _ _•
Address _-
,_ ^;.
My commission expires: ~/ZI° ~ 1z-'
CCS•971.da Page: ~2
.2008 10/18 21:59 Fe1%
I~ U Ul
,t'aci, f~c Sbeet Meta! Ise.
ri~ P, O, Bnx 79
C;arhr~ndale, C0,41fi2j
(97v) 9~3-~3E,s
(970) 943.63¢ Fax
October 1, 2008
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Co 81811
Fax 544-5378
Attention: Steve Bossert 970-429-1790 ~evebo ci.asRen.co.us
Reference: Burlingame Buildings, Aspen
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal for the above referenced project and offer
the following to further clarify the scope of work.
SPECIFICATION: SNOW STOPS
To Include:
Furnish and install approx. 2,986 clear 5x5 Pyramid stick on snow brackets on the low
sloped pitches of ail four buildings. We will leave existing brackets in place and add
new brackets around the existing brackets. This price is based on a unit price of
$18.00 per bracket furnished and installed. Final bid price will be based on the actual
amounts installed.
BASE BID: $53,748.00
NOTE: Pacific Sheet Metal does nvt provide warranties on self adhering retrofit snow
brackets.
PRICE EXCLUDES: Snow and ice removal, E.I. F.S., window and
door flashinga, through wall (lashings, interior sheet metal, all wood work, insulation, painting, saw
cutting, patina to any metals, mock-ups, shop drawings, additional insureds, ice dams and damage
caused by ice dams, liquidated damages, bonds, permits, and fees.
If you have any questions or rf I can further assist you, please feel free to contact me at our office.
ACCEPTANCE OP PROPOSAL: SIGNED BY: DATE:
Sincerely,
Pacific Sheet Metal
~ ~ 7
Brad Stone
Roofing Estimator
Page 1 of 3
Steve Bossart
From: Will Rutledge [will.rutledge@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 10:26 AM
To: Steve Bossart; David Barrow; Kim Decarlo; Matt Burg; Terry Kappeli
Cc: Tricia Aragon; Steve Barwick; Glenn Loper
Subject: Re: Roofs and Snow Clips
Steve,
Thank you for committing to continue to reduce the liability here with the roof slides. I'll let our contractor know with your
specifics.
We need to state, as before, any information and/or opinion any owner and/or representative gives is a novice opinion at best.
We can monitor the roof situation; however, it may not be as complete as necessary, and would only be for a professional to use
as additional information.
We understand the need to reduce the expense of the removals; however, we can not endorse any reduction in removal that
might increase the liability on the sidewalk below. This liability will be determined by our professional contractor.
We understand there is no maintenance free situation; however, with sometimes extensive steps, liability can be reduced to
effectively zero. This is the HOA's ultimate goal. I hope we both can agree on taking the professionals assessments on this.
Please accept this letter as permission to install additional clips at Annie Mitchell Homestead with the reservation that this in no
way infers or passes liability to the Annie Mitchell HOA in any way. This permission does not transmit an agreement that the clips
will reduce snow slides, snow removal costs and/or liability. This permission is only at the request of The City of Aspen.
Annie Mitchell Homestead HOA does not, in any way, admit by this permission that these clips are being placed with regards to a
professional conclusion and/or that they will be more or less effective that the current situation. This agreement coincides with
the parallel agreement that The City of Aspen and Annie Mitchell Homestead will continue to address the situation in the future
with a professional including but not limited to the current contractor, Wiss Janney.
Thanks,
Will Rutledge, President
Annie Mitchell Homestead HOA
From: Steve Bossart
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 8:37 AM
To: Will Rutledge ;David Barrow ;Kim Decarlo ;Matt Bura ;Terry Kaooeli
Cc: Tricia Aragon ;Steve Barwick
Subject: RE: Roofs and Snow Clips
Will et al
Thank you for the comments. I'm going to contract to add a large quantity of low-profile glue-down snow clips on the low-slope
roof areas. I think the areas where we installed similar arrays performed well in the past.
We're pricing the Wiss Janney program for adding snow fences and modifying a number of overhangs next construction season.
I'd like you to keep a rough log on how various areas perform, with photos. This will help us determine the success of the clip
areas. Let's handle the roof shoveling as last season, significantly reducing frequency in the low slope areas until absolutely
10/17/2008
Paget ~f3
necessary. My guess is the clips will hold the mass in place through spring melt -though edge buildup might be removed. The
goal or our added clips would be to substantially reduce the snow removal expense for this season.
There is ultimately no maintenance free roof system -some glue clips will come off year one, and more in year two. Ultimately
we'll have an installation of clips with good adhesion. Your HOA will want to conduct annual inspections and maintain the arrays.
I need a letter from you giving the City permission to do the clip installation. Please fax to me at 544.5378 or send by email.
StephenW. Besssn
Project Manager
City of Aspen
Asset Management
970.429.1790
From: Will Rutledge (mailto:will.rutledge@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 5:47 PM
To: Steve Bossart; David Barrow; Kim Decarlo; Matt Burg; Terry Kappeli; Will Rutledge
Subject: Re: Roofs and Snow Clips
Steve,
I am definitely no engineer, but I'd have to say I walked the entire property today. There are some places where I could see clips
working; however, it seems obvious to me, as a layman, that some of the pitches are so steep, there's no way clips would hold
anything. For instance, if you come by, take a look at the small roof lines that release onto the outside stairs. It won't be much
snow, but there's no way clips could hold anything there.
My mildly-educated opinion would be to use roof rakes securely attached that effectively guarantee no slides.
Thanks a ton for taking the time to handle this. I have to ask again, is The City prepared to subsidize the shoveling this winter,
as I don't see any significant solution before the spring.
Will
From• Steve eossart
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 11:25 AM
To: Will Rutledge ;David Barrow ;Kim Decarlo ;Matt Buro ;Terry Kap~eli
Subject: RE: Roofs and Snow Clips
Will
Snow clips on the ground are a sure sign of spring. But my question is whether or not those array areas did actually function as
intended and hoped. If so, we may find the glue-on approach to be a successful long term approach. If we had an over-
abundance of snow, like last winter, then any building operator would need to hire supplementary snow removal, but not
constantly.
Glue-ons are more likely to come off than screw-downs, requiring annual assessment and replacement. This is more a function of
specific glue/cliplinstallation. Over a couple of seasons the rate would likely diminish. Screw-downs create and leave accessible
holes over time.
I'm proceeding with pricing the consultant's major project approach, but that's not necessarily a 100% solution either.
StephenW. Besss~t
Project Manager
10/17/2008
Page 3 of 3
City of Aspen
Asset Management
970.429.1790
___ __
From: Will Rutledge [mailto:will.rutledge@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 10:02 AM
To: Steve Bossart; David Barrow; Kim Decarlo; Matt Burg; Terry Kappeli; Will Rutledge
Subject: Re: Roofs and Snow Clips
I have found a decent amount of clips on the ground in the spring. They're so small, the grade is so low, and the accumulation is
so big, I just don't see them as effective for preventing a large slide. They hold fine until it gets over two or three feet, then they
become too small to handle the load. This requires continuous shoveling.
Unfortunately the problem is the possibility of large slides and the pedestrian areas that are affected. If the problem areas
weren't over sidewalks I'd probably have a different opinion. However, the risk is too great to take a chance.
From: Steve Bossart
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 9:13 AM
To: William O. Rutledge IV ;Matt Buro ;Preferred Property Mgmt
Subject: Roofs and Snow Clips
We have a bid to install a high number of glue-down snow clips on most all roofs at Annie M. It is expensive. This may actually be
a reasonable long term solution. Can you tell me the results of the similar areas where we previously installed larger areas of low
clips? It seems like it was effective.
StephenW. eossa~t
Project Manager
City of Aspen
Asset Management
970.429.1790
10/17/2008
~6.
t~~aaa
ffiemorandum
TO: Mayor and Members of Council
FROM: James R. True
DATE: October 20, 2008
RE: Appointment of Deputy Municipal Judge
Section 7.2(b) of the Charter of the City of Aspen authorizes the council to appoint one or more
Deputy Municipal Judges. Judge Peterson has recused himself from pending court actions
involving three separate individuals who were involved in a recent incident. Deputy Judge Pip
Porter is unavailable to handle these matters and has indicated to the Clerk of the Court that she
intends to resign her position as Deputy Municipal Judge. In the event that Deputy Judge Porter
resigns from this position, the clerk will advertise for a replacement, which will chosen by the
council from the applications received. However, in the meantime, a deputy judge needs to be
temporarily appointed to address the three presently pending matters.
The City Attorneys' office recommends that the Council appoint Ted D. Gardenswartz as Deputy
Judge to address these three pending cases. Mr. Gardenswartz has practiced law in Aspen for
over twenty years and is well respected in the legal community.
A resolution regarding this appointment is submitted herewith.
ACTION REQUESTED: A Motion to approve Resolution No. ~~~ ;Series of 2008.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
cc: City Manager
RESOLUTION N0. ~d~
(Series of 2008)
WHEREAS, Ted D. Gardenswartz is an attorney licensed in the State of Colorado and
practicing law in the City of Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Court Judge has recused himself from three pending court
cases and presently sitting Deputy Municipal Judge is unavailable; and
WHEREAS, Ted D. Gardenswartz has agreed to act as Deputy Municipal Judge for
these three cases;
WHEREAS, the City Council has the power to make such an appointment, pursuant to
Section 7.2(b) of the Charter of the City of Aspen;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1:
That said Ted D, Gardenswartz be and hereby is appointed a Deputy Judge of the
Municipal Court of the City of Aspen, to preside over the court cases of three individuals
described above.
Dated this day of October, 2008
Michael Ireland, 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 October 27, 2008.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Ordinance #45, Series 2007
Page 1 of 1
FINAL DRAFT, OCTOBER 17, 2007
~C.
Memorandum
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Tim Ware, Director of Parking
Date: October 3, 2008
Meeting Date: October 20, 2008
RE: Verrus Professional Service Agreement
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Pazking Department is requesting Council approval of
a professional service agreement fora "Pay-by-Phone" system provided by Verrus
Mobile Technologies.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: There has been no previous Council action on this
procurement. The pay-by-phone system is a relatively new technology that would
replace the in-caz meters that have been in use since 1995 and are no longer available.
BACKGROUND: When the City implemented the Pazking Management program in
1995, we offered an in-caz-meter as a payment option. This was a device that was leased
from the pazking department and programmed with pre-paid pazking time. The user
would turn the unit on and hang it from their mirror in lieu of paying for parking at the
pay station. When the unit ran out of time, the user would pay for more time and re-fill
the meter at the parking office.
The in-car meter followed the same fee structure as the on-street pay stations but the
advantages were that the in-car meter user did not need to walk to the pay station and that
it worked in real time so that a parking patron could pay only for the amount of parking
time necessary.
This payment option became very popular and over the years and there have been more
than 30,000 of the in-caz-meters distributed.
As of July of 2008, that manufacturer of the in-car-meter is no longer making the unit or
supporting the units already in use. The only other similar in-car devices that are
available require a sepazate smart cazd for operation.
DISCUSSION: Pay-by-Phone is becoming a very populaz parking payment option world
wide. The Pazking Department believes this system would an excellent replacement for
the in-caz-meter program that is no longer available to us.
The system involves a live web-based call center that is very easy to access and use. The
first time user would either call in or go on-line to set up an account. All accounts can be
customized based on the customer's needs and desires.
Once an account is set up, all that a customer needs to do is make aten-second phone call
upon pazking to pay for and start a parking session. The customer is able to pick any
amount of time up to the four hour maximum in the core. If a user returns to a vehicle
prior to the expiration of the parking session, s/he may call in and terminate the session.
A 35 cent convenience fee is chazged to the customer for each parking transaction.
The system may also be set up to send a text message to the customer five minutes prior
to the expiration of a parking session. This text message will also allow the customer to
re-new the session if the four hour time limit has not been exceeded.
The provider, Verrus Mobile Technologies, is capable of honoring the time limits and fee
structure that we have set for on-street pazking. To comply with the progressive fee
structure and the maximum time limit in the core, the following pay-by-phone procedures
will be in place:
Customers will be allowed to purchase up to four hours at a time. After the four
hours the user must wait at least 30 minutes before starting another parking
session.
Any renewals of an existing parking session will follow the same fee structure
that the on-street meters use ($2 for the first hour, $2 for the second hour, $3 for
the third hour and $4 for the fourth hour).
Anytime a pazking session expires, the user will be required to wait 30 minutes
before initiating another one. This is to prevent someone from renewing an hour
at a time to continue paying the lower fee.
The pay-by-phone option will also be available in the Residential Permit Parking Zones
to allow patrons to pay the $7 daily parking fee. In that case, the only payment option
will be the $7 fee, since there is not an hourly rate or a maximum time limit in the
Residential Zones.
Parking enforcement officers will be supplied with smart phones that can be logged onto
the data base and are able see in real-time the license plates of all current parking sessions
to determine if a vehicle has paid for parking.
All parking payment transactions will be done using a live credit card PCI compliant
web-based program. The user may access an account at anytime to review pazking
transactions. Pazking sessions will be assigned event numbers and transactions can be
tracked and audited through those numbers. All calls to the call center-even incorrect
or incomplete transactions-will be documented in order to help resolve any payment
disputes that may arise.
FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: The only set-up cost to the City will be for signage
and for the softwaze development cost to make sure that the system matches our fee
structure and maximum time limits. Informational signs will cost $3,000 and software
development is expected to be approximately $6,000.
The in-car-meter program was budgeted to bring in $840,000 in revenue in 2009. It is
not certain that all the in-caz meter users will convert to the pay-by-phone system, but if a
user elects not to use the pay-by-phone system the on-street pay stations would still be
available as a payment option. For this reason we are not projecting any major increases
or decreases in revenue because of this new payment option.
The provider will be paid the 35 cent transaction fee that is charged to the customer.
There will be no on-going system operating or maintenance costs to the City. Once the
system is set up, there will be increased convenience to the parking patron and decreased
traffic to the parking office because the need to refill the in-car meters will be alleviated.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: This system is part of the overall parking
management plan that is intended to work as an auto disincentive through paid pazking.
The main environmental impact is that the in-car-meters required disposal of batteries
that will no longer be needed.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Parking Department is recommending approval of
the Professional Service Contract between the City of Aspen and Verrus Mobile
Technologies.
ATTACHMENTS:
Professional Service Contract
ALTERNATIVES: Council could elect not to approve the contract and all in-car meter
users would then be required to use the on-street meters.
RESOLUTION # /C7 ~J
(Series of 2008)
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO, AND VERRUS MOBILE TECHNOLOGY
INCORPORATED SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
REGARDING PAY BY CELL PHONE PARKING SYSTEM AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT
WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract
between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Verrus Mobile Technology
Incorporated, a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that contract
between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Verrus Mobile Technology
Incorporated regarding aPay-By-Cell-Phone Parking System 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:
Michael C. Ireland, 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 October 27, 2008.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
(Under $25,000 Total Compensation)
This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY OF
ASPEN, Colorado, ("City") and Verrus Mobile Technologies Incorporated, ("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 the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein.
2. Comnletion. Professional shall commence work immediately upon receipt of
a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as
expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and care and the orderly progress of the Work in
a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to this agreement shall be completed
no later than ongoing service through the duration of the contract. Upon request of the City,
Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's
services which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds, and which shall include
allowances for periods of time required by the City's project engineer for review and approval of
submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule,
when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Professional.
3. Pa ~r~. In consideration of the services performed, City shall pay
Professional services as set forth at Exhibit "B" appended hereto. Professional shall submit, in timely
fashion, invoices for services performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they aze
considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days
from receipt of the Professional's bill.
4. Non-Assianability. 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. Sub-Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the
responsibilities or obligations under this agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely
responsible to the City for the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractors officers, agents
and employees, each of whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the
Professional to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for
payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub-conUactor.
5. Temunation. The Professional or the City may tem~inate this Agreement,
without specifying the reason therefore, 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
termination. Upon any temunation, all fmished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys,
drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepazed by the Professional
pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above,
PS2-971.doc Page 1
Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by
virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments
to the Professional for the purposes ofset-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the
City from the Professional may be determined.
6. Covenant A¢ainst Contingent Fees. The Professional warrants that s/he has
not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the
Professional, to solicit or secwe 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. Independent 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 City. No agent,
employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or
servant of the City. City 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 City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation inswance and
unemployment inswance, are available from City 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 subeontractors during the performance of this
contract. Professional shall indemnify City 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 inswance, 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. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the
City, its officers, employees, inswers, and self-inswance pool, from and against all liability, claims,
and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from
bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of
any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or aze in any manner connected with this contract, if such
injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part
by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Professional,
any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the
Professional or of any subcontractor of the Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's
compensation claim of any employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subeontractor of
the Professional. The Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense
for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Professional,
or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimbwse the City for the defense costs
incwred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by
the final judgment of a cowl of competent jurisdiction that such injwy, loss, or damage was caused
in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the
PS2-97i.doc Page 2
City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act,
omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees.
9. Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at
its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims,
demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such
insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by
law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations
assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by
reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types.
(b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the
Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such
coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City. All
coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other
obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any claims-made
policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain
such continuous coverage.
(i) Worker's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by
applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and
Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease
- policy limit, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease -each
employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Worker's
Compensation requirements of this pazagraph.
(ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single
limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION
DOLLARS ($1,OOQ000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and
operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage
(including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and
employee acts), blanket contractual, products, and completed operations. The policy shall
contain a severability of interests provision.
(iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined
single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION
DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,00-
0.00) aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles
assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a
severability of interests provision. If the Professional has no owned automobiles, the
requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional
providing services to the City under this contract.
PS2-971.doc Page 3
(iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION
DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000)
aggregate.
(c) The Commercial General Liability on licy required above shall be endorsed to include
the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insweds. Every policy required above
shall be primary inswance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or
carried by or provided through any inswance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory
insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional inswed endorsement to the policy required
above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage azising from completed
operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy
required above.
(d) The certificate of inswance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's
inswance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum
limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to
commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall
identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be
canceled orterminated until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City.
(e) Failwe on the part of the Professional to procwe or maintain policies providing the
required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract
upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procwe or
renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums
in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid by Professional to City upon
demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Professional from City.
(f) City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any
endorsement thereto.
(g) The pazties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on, and does not waive or
intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000.00
per person and $600,000 per occwrence) or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided
by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as from time to
time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its employees.
10. Citv's Inswance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of
the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such pazticipates in the
CIRSA Property/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual aze kept at the City of
Aspen Finance Depazlment and are available to Professional for inspection during normal business
hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by
CIRSA. City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or
participation in CIRSA.
PS2-971.doc Page 4
l 1. Completeness of A erg ement. It is expressly agreed 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.
12. 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 mail return receipt requested,
to:
City; Professional:
City Manager Verrus Mobile Technologies hcorporated
City of Aspen 201-1028 Hamilton Street
130 South Galena Street Vancouver, British Columbia
Aspen, Colorado 81611 Canada
13. 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 City's municipal code, Section 13-
98,pertaining to non-discrimination in employment.
14. Waiver. The waiver by the City 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 City,
and forbeazance or indulgence by the City in any regazd 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 City shall be
entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such
forbearance or indulgence.
15. Execution of Agreement by City. This agreement shall be binding upon all
parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.
16. Illegal Aliens -CRS 8-17.5-101 & 24-76.5-101.
a. Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed
House Bills 06-1343 and 06-1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of
and contracting with illegal aliens. These new laws prohibit all state agencies and
political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly employing or
contracting with an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly
contract with a subcontractor who knowingly employs or contracts witlr an illegal alien to
perform work under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services
include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and
conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law.
PS2-971.doc Page 5
b. Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference
are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of
Aspen.
"Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program
created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law
156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department
of Homeland Security.
"Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement.
"Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a
subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that
are merely incidental to the required performance.
c. By signing this document, Professional certifies and represents that at this time:
(i) Professional does not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien; and
(ii) Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot
Program in order to verify that it does not employ illegal aliens.
d. Professional hereby certifies that:
(i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien
to perform work under the Public Contract for Services.
(ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails
to certify to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or
contract with an illegal alien to perform work under the Public Contract for
Services.
(iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation
in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any illegal
aliens; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot
Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall
forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in
writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public
Contract. Professional shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic
Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months
thereafter, until Professional is accepted or the public contract for services has
been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be
required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued.
PS2-971.doc Page 6
(iv) Professional shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake
pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for
Services is being performed.
(v) If Professional obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing
work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with
an illegal alien, Professional shall:
(1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within
three days that Professional has actual knowledge that the subcontractor is
employing or contracting with an illegal alien; and
(2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within
three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the
subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the illegal
alien; except that Professional shall not terminate the Public Contract for
Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor
provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly
employed or contracted with an illegal alien.
(vi) Professional shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado
Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that
the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking
pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S.
(vii) If Professional violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services
pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of
Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for
Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential
damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Professional's violation of Subsection
8-17.5-102, C.R.S.
(ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or
affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United
States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal
law,(2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-101 et seq., and (3) shall
produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to
the effective date of this Agreement.
17. 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.
PS2-971.doc Page 7
(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 aze 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.
(SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
PS2-971.doc Page 8
ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
By:
Title:
Date:
PROFESSION
WITNESSED BY: ~ ~
By: ~ ~ ~ I (~ s a I~~~ -
Title:
Date: ~~-I ~,~~
PS2-971.doc Page 9
EXHIBIT "A" to Professional Services Agreement
THE VERRUS MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES PLATFORM AND APPLICATIONS
Verrus Mobile Technologies Parking Payment Application
Verrus agrees to roll out the Verrus Pay by Cell Phone service ("PBC") for use at Customer's managed
and owned parking facilities agreed upon by Verrus and Customer, to pay for the use of those facilities
through personal wireless devices (e.g., cellular telephones) ("Wireless Devices"), telematics or other
wireless systems.
Verrus Management Information System
Verrus will operate and manage a software application for Customer that will provide real-time information
and management reports on the transactions conducted utilizing the Verrus Parking Payment Application
(the "Management Information System"). Verrus will host the Management Information System on its
computer and network equipment. Customer will access the Management Information System through a
browser-based program installed on Customer's computer hardware.
Computer, Networking and Telecommunication Systems
Verrus will own or possess, and will operate and maintain, all computer and networking hardware and
software required to operate the Verrus PBC service as contemplated in this Agreement, other than
Customers existing computer and telecommunications systems.
Exclusivity
Customer agrees that Verrus will be the sole and exclusive provider of all wireless parking payment
applications (using whatsoever technology) for Customer during the term of this agreement, including, but
not limited to, all wireless payment applications employing Wireless Devices to pay for parking at only the
specific Customer lots where Verrus is deployed.
signage
Customer agrees to provide adequate space at each parking facility at which the Verrus PBC service is to
be available for Verrus signage, with sign size and placement to be mutually agreed by Verrus and
Customer. Customer agrees that signs will be hung and/or located near payment machines at parking
facilities enabled with the Verrus PBC service.
All signage must comply with the Verrus Consumer Branding Standards as outlined in Appendix B.
Marketing Events
Verrus may conduct on-site marketing events and campaigns for the System, whereby Verrus will inform
parking lot consumers of the availability of the Verrus PBC as well as any promotions available with
knowledge and approval of Customer which is not to be reasonably withheld.
Each lot may run a "25% off Parking if Paid by Phone" promotion for two weeks. The Customer will be
compensated by Verrus with an amount equal to the total discounted. Therefore, the net revenue to the
Customer will remain the unchanged. The discount promotion may be rotated through the various lots at
different times.
Customer Training
Customer will, at its own expense, train its staff and employees, including patrollers, to operate the PBC
and related applications and technology at each lot.
PS2-971.doc Page 10
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights
The parties shall cooperate with each other in protecting their respective trade names, designs,
trademarks and other similar intellectual property rights from unauthorized use.
Contract Term
This Agreement shall enter into force for a period of two consecutive years from the date signed. After
the initial term, the contract shall renew for a period of one year.
Ownership of Intellectual Property
The City of Aspen agrees that Verrus shall own all right, title and interest in and to the Services and any
inventions conceived or developed by Verrus resulting from the operation of the services.
Signage
The City agrees to provide adequate space at each parking facility at which Verrus PBC service is to be
available for Verrus Signage, with sign size and placement to be mutually agreed by Verrus and the City
as long as it does not violate the City of Aspen Zoning laws on Signage. The City agrees that signs will
be hung and/or located near payment machines at parking facilities enable with Verrus PBC service. City
agrees to produce, install and maintain Signage to ensure the system is available for use throughout the
duration of the Agreement.
Confidentiality
Neither party will disclose the other party's confidential or proprietary information (including this
Agreement and any information provided by the other party that is confidentially maintained or proprietary
or which derives value from not being generally known to person who can obtain economic value from it's
disclosure or use) except:
(i) With the other party's consent:
(ii) To employees, agents and contractors who have a need to know in the discharge of their duties
and who are subject to a contractual obligation to keep such information confidential that is at
least as restrictive as this Agreement;
(iii) When required to do so by law or by any binding rule, order or request.
Each party shall exercise reasonable commercial care in protecting the confidentiality of the other party's
confidential information disclosed to it. The parties agree that an actual or threatened breach of this
provision would result in irreparable harm to the party whose confidential information would be disclosed
in breach, and shall entitle that party to temporary or permanent injunctive relief without proof of actual
damages.
For purposes of this Section, the parties agree that confidential or proprietary information does not
include any information that is (a) already known to the receiving party at the time of disclosure hereunder
(other than from the other party hereto) as demonstrated by its written records; (b) now or hereafter
becomes publicly known other than through acts or omissions of the receiving party, or anyone to whom
the receiving parry disclosed such information; (c) disclosed to the receiving party, by a third party, under
no obligation of confidentiality to the disclosing party or any other party; or (d) independently developed
by the receiving party without reliance on the confidential information of the disclosing party as shown by
its written records.
Limitation of Liability
In no event shall any party be liable for consequential, special, indirect or incidental damages, including
but not limited to any damages resulting from loss of use or profits arising out of or in connection with this
agreement, whether in an action based on contract, tort (including negligence) or any other legal theory,
even if the party has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
PS2-971.doc Page 11
EXHIBIT "B" to Professional Services Agreement
Rate Schedule
Pay by Cell Phone (PBC)
System will:
1. Register customers by phone or online who wish to pay for parking by cell phone.
2. Activate and collect payment via credit card for parking by cell phone in accordance with
rates specified by the Customer.
3. Display payment status of license plate, space or meter number on Internet capable
handheld device such as cell phone, PDA or handheld computer.
4. Provide secure web based administration intertace for rates control, management and
accounting reports. All report data to be exportable via Excel CSV files
Pricing:
One Time Set-up Fee
NIA
PBC set-up
Monthly Fees due to Verrus
PBC hosting fee N/A
Per Transaction Charges to Verrus
PBC consumer pays $0.35 I transaction
Credit Card Authorization charge (if applicable) N / A
PBC Credit Card Internet gateway charge (if applicable) $0.10 /transaction
`NOTE: Customer's own credit card processing merchant account fees will apply
Pay by Cell Phone Customization
Progressive Fee Structure
1. Provide modifications for a progressive fee structure
2. Requires parkers to pay the progressive fees regardless of stopping their parking
3. Customer to determine time frame to force progressive fee structure (e.g. parking within 15
minutes of last transaction forces previous time to count towards parking rate
4. Detailed specifications to be determined and agree to by both Customer and Verrus.
One Time PBC Customization Fee
$5,750
PS2-971.doc
Page 12
~d.
ALPERSTEIN & COVELL, P.c.
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W
DONALD W. ALPERSTEIN
CYNTHIA F.COVELL
ANDREA L. BENSON
GILBERT Y. MARCHAND, JR.
Ot Counsel
1600 BROADWAY, SUITE 2350
DENVER, COLORADO 80202-4921
dwa@alpersteincovell.c o m
cfc@alpersteincovell. com
alb@alpersteincovell.com
TELEPHONE (303) 894-5191
FAX (703) 661-0420
.. ,i.i .i ti~h.'1`i 1J
TO: Aspen City Council
CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager
FROM: John Worcester, City Attorney
Phil Overeynder, Water Director
Cynthia F. Covell, water counsel
RE: Shadow Mountain/Eubanks Interpleader Action (Pitkin County District Court
Case No. 07CV71): Recommended Settlement
DATE: October 6, 2008
Back round
The City entered into an extraterritorial Water Service Agreement in 1996, with Billy Ray
Eubanks and Bonnie Jean Eubanks ("Eubanks"), who owned property located at 1 Toby Lane in
Pitkin County. The Water Service Agreement provided, among other things, for the Eubanks to
pay about 60% of the cost of constructing a new water main ("Main") that would be required to
provide water service to the Eubanks' property. The Water Service Agreement also stated that
for a period often yeazs, the Eubanks could recover a portion of their payment for the Main from
owners of other properties that made new connections to the Main.
Shadow Mountain, LLC ("Shadow Mountain") owns property located at 310 South
Seventh Street. When a new home was planned for this property, Aspen advised Shadow
Mountain that a recoupment payment was owed because this home would be a new connection to
the Main. Shadow Mountain disagreed, asserting that it was not seeking a "new connection,"
and, moreover, it should not have to pay a recoupment payment in any event. However, Shadow
Mountain paid a recoupment payment to Aspen "under protest" in the amount of $41,754.50, in
order to be connected to the Main.
Aspen accepted Shadow Mountain's recoupment payment made "under protest," and
connected the new residence to the Main. Aspen filed an interpleader action in the Pitkin County
District Court, Case No. 2007CV71, asking the Court to determine whether Shadow Mountain or
Eubanks is entitled to these funds. Shadow Mountain filed numerous counterclaims against the
City, claiming constitutional violations. While counsel do not believe these claims have merit,
legal fees will be incurred to seek their dismissal, or to defend the City in a jury trial if the claims
are not dismissed. CIRSA is providing a defense under a reservation of rights.
Settlement Proposal
Staff proposed a settlement for this case that has been accepted by both the Eubanks and
Shadow Mountain. The settlement requires Eubanks to forego $13,918.17 of the recoupment fee
which they claim Shadow Mountain must pay. The settlement also requires Shadow Mountain
and Aspen each to pay approximately $13,918.17 to the Eubanks. Shadow Mountain does not
believe it is required to pay any money to the Eubanks, and Aspen does not believe it is required
to pay any money to either party. Therefore, in order to avoid the expense and uncertainty of
trial, each of the three parties is foregoing approximately $14,000 to which it claims entitlement.
A copy of the Mutual Release, signed by the Eubanks and Shadow Mountain, is attached
to the resolution accompanying this memorandum. Staff recommends that the City Council
approve this settlement proposal, authorize payment to the Eubanks in the amount of $13,918.17,
and authorize execution of the Mutual Release on behalf of the City. From a strictly business
standpoint, making this payment to the Eubanks, with no admission of any liability, is a cost-
effective way to resolve this litigation, which is set for a jury trial in January, 2009. Although
CIRSA is defending the counterclaims under a reservation of rights, City staff and water counsel
are also expending time and resources in preparing for trial. By this settlement, staff and water
counsel's time and resources can be devoted to other matters, and the risk and uncertainty of trial
can be avoided.
Recommendation
City staff recommends that the City Council approve this settlement agreement, as set forth in the
Mutual Release.
RESOLUTION NO. ~~
(Series of 2008)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
WHEREAS, the City is party to an extraterritorial Water Service Agreement dated
December 19, 1996, with Billy Ray Eubanks and Bonnie Jean Eubanks ("Eubanks") which,
among other things, provided for Eubanks to pay approximately 60% of the cost of constructing
a new water main (AMain@) that would be required to provide water service to the Eubanks'
property; and
WHEREAS, the Water Service Agreement also provided that, for a period often years,
the Eubanks could recover a portion of their payment for the Main from owners of other
properties that were connected to the Main; and
WHEREAS. Shadow Mountain, LLC ("Shadow Mountain"), owner of property located
at 312 South Seventh Street in Pitkin County, Colorado, requested City water service before
expiration of the 10-year recoupment period and the City advised that a recoupment payment of
approximately $41,754.50 should be made to Eubanks; and
WHEREAS, Shadow Mountain, asserting that no such recoupment payment was
required, made the payment to the City "under protest," and obtained City water service; and
WHEREAS, the City filed Case No. 2007CV71 in the Pitkin County District Court and
deposited the recoupment payment into the registry of the Pitkin County District; and
WHEREAS, Shadow Mountain filed counterclaims against the City in Case No.
2007CV71, and the City has denied said counterclaims; and
WHEREAS, the City, Eubanks and Shadow Mountain have reached a negotiated
settlement regarding disposition of the recoupment payment and settlement of Case No.
2007CV71; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the parties' settlement agreement, Shadow Mountain will pay
$13,918.17 as recoupment to Eubanks, the City will also pay $13,918.17 to Eubanks to facilitate
the settlement, and Eubanks will forego $13,918.17 to which it claims entitlement pursuant to the
Water Service Agreement, and Case No. 2007CV71 will be dismissed with prejudice,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN as follows:
Section One. Approval of Mutual Release. The City Council hereby approves the
Mutual Release between and among the City of Aspen, Billy Ray Eubanks and Bonnie Jean
Eubanks, and Shadow Mountain LLC in the form attached hereto, and authorizes payment of
$13,918.17 to Billy Ray Eubanks and Bonnie Jean Eubanks in order to facilitate this settlement
and end the litigation.
Section Two. Execution of Documents. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby
authorized and directed to execute the Mutual Release described in Section One above, and the
Mayor, City Clerk, City Manager, City Attorney and Water Director, as appropriate, are
authorized and directed to execute such other documents and perform such other actions as may
be necessary or desirable to effectuate the consummation of the Mutual Release, release of the
funds from the registry of the Court consistent with the terms of the Mutual Release, and
dismissal of the litigation as contemplated by this Resolution.
RESOLVED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2008.
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
By:
Mayor
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
City Clerk
MUTOAL RELEASE
1.0. DEFINITIONS
1.1 "Eubanks" as used herein shall mean Billy Ray Eubanks and
Bonnie Jean Eubanks, and all heirs, executors, administrators,
successors, directors, officers, employees, agents, attorneys,
independent contractors, insurance carriers, and assigns of, and
anyone holding claims which derive from Eubanks.
1.2 "Shadow Mountain" as used herein shall mean Shadow
Mountain, LLC, and all member, managers, administrators,
successors, assigns, directors, officers, agents, employees,
attorneys, independent contractors, insurance carriers, and assigns
of, and anyone holding claims which derive from Shadow Mountain.
1.3 "Aspen" as used herein shall mean the City of Aspen
and/or its insurer, Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency,
and all other insurance carriers, administrators, successors,
assigns, directors, City council members, officers, agents,
employees, attorneys, independent contractors and predecessors in
interest of Aspen and/or Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing
Agency.
1.9 "Parties" as used herein shall mean Eubanks, Shadow
Mountain and Aspen collectively.
1.5 "Occurrence" as used herein shall mean the assessment of
a Recoupment Fee on Shadow Mountain for extraterritorial municipal
water service provided for Shadow Mountain's real property and
residence located at 312 S. Seventh Street, Aspen, Pitkin County,
Colorado ("Subject Property"), as partial reimbursement to Eubanks
for costs Eubanks incurred in relation to construction of a new
water. main which provided extraterritorial municipal water service
to the Eubanks real property and residence located at 1 Toby Lane,
Pitkin County, Colorado, and to which the Subject Property has also
been connected for its extraterritorial water service, and all
matters relating thereto and any and all consequences thereof which
Eubanks, Shadow Mountain and Aspen have claimed or could have
claimed against any or all other Parties, and any claims which were
asserted or which could have been asserted in District Court,
Pitkin County, Colorado Case No. 07 CV 71, by way of counterclaim,
cross-claim or otherwise.
1.6 "Recoupment Fee" as used herein shall mean the amount of
$41,754.50 assessed to Shadow Mountain for receipt of
extraterritorial municipal water service, which amount Shadow
1
Mountain paid to Aspen under protest and Aspen interpleaded with
the court in District Court, Pitkin County, Colorado Case No. 07 CV
71.
2.0. RELEASE
2.1 In consideration of Aspen's payment to Eubanks in the
amount of Thirteen Thousand Nine Hundred Eighteen Dollars and
Seventeen Cents ($13,918.17); the release to Eubanks of Thirteen
Thousand Nine Hundred Eighteen Dollars and Sixteen Cents
($13,918.16) from the Recoupment Fee interpleaded with the court;
and, the release of the balance of the Recoupment Fee interpleaded
with the court in the amount of Twenty-Seven Thousand Eight Hundred
Thirty-Six Dollars and Thirty-Four Cents ($27,836.34) to Shadow
Mountain, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the Parties do hereby release, acquit and forever
discharge each other of and from liability for any and all damages,
injuries, losses and liabilities of whatsoever kind and nature
arising from or in any way arising out of any and all known and
unknown, foreseen and unforeseen damages, injuries, losses, claims,
costs, expenses, attorneys fees and liabilities which the Parties
may now have or hereafter have, resulting directly or indirectly
from the Occurrence.
3.0. DISMISSAL OF LAWSUIT
3.1 The Parties shall dismiss all claims asserted in the
lawsuit filed in. Pitkin County, Colorado District Court Case No. 07
CV 71 with prejudice and sign any and all further documents
necessary to accomplish such dismissal with prejudice.
4.0. WARRANTIES AND REPRESENTATION3
4.1 The Parties-fully realize that they may have sustained or
will sustain unknown or unforeseen damages, injuries, losses and
liabilities resulting directly or indirectly from the Occurrence.
By executing this document, the Parties fully intend to release
each other from any and all liability for any and all such unknown
or unforeseen damages, injuries, losses and liabilities resulting
directly or indirectly from the Occurrence.
6.2 The Parties state that the settlement underlying the
execution of this document was made in contemplation not only of
known damages, injuries, losses and liabilities, but also in
contemplation of the possibility that the Parties have sustained or
will in the future sustain damages, injuries, losses and
liabilities which are presently in existence but unknown to them or
which may not now be in existence, but which may arise or become
known in the future resulting directly or indirectly from the
Occurrence and the Parties fully intend to release each other from
liability for any and all such known or unknown, or unrealized
damages, injuries, losses and liabilities.
6.3 The Parties are fully informed as to the nature, extent
and character of their damages, injuries, and losses and
liabilities and as to the nature, extent, duration, risk of
consequences, aggravation, and all other known and unknown,
foreseen and unforeseen consequences of those damages, injuries,
losses or liabilities.
6.4 For the consideration stated herein, the Parties assume
the risk that the settlement underlying the execution of this
document was made on the basis of mistake or mistakes, mutual or
unilateral, including but not limited to mistakes regarding: the
nature or extent of the underlying damages, injuries, losses or
liabilities; the future course, effect or consequences of known or
unknown damages, injuries, losses or liabilities; the impression
that the Parties are fully informed as to the nature, extent,
effects, or consequences of the underlying damages, injuries,
losses or liabilities; and the possibility of mistake as to
damages, injuries, losses or liabilities, which are presently
unknown or unforeseen but which the Parties have sustained or will
in the future sustain resulting directly or indirectly from the
Occurrence.
6.5 The Parties have been advised of their right to consult,
at their expense, additional professionals of their choosing,
regarding any and all known and unknown, foreseen and unforeseen,
damages, injuries, losses and liabilities of whatsoever kind and
nature the Parties may have or will incur resulting directly or
indirectly from the Occurrence.
6.6 The Parties warrant that no promise or inducement has been
offered except as set forth herein and that this document was
executed without reliance upon any statement or representation by
the other Parties and that the Parties are legally competent to
execute this document and accept full responsibility for it and
assume the risk of any mistake of fact as stated herein.
6.7 The Parties understand and agree that the acceptance of
the consideration is in full accord and satisfaction of disputed
claims for which the Parties expressly deny liability.
6.8 The Parties further understand and agree that all
agreements and understandings between them are embodied and
3
expressed in this document and that the terms of this document are
contractual and not mere recitals.
6.9 The Parties understand and agree that the signing of this
document shall be forever binding upon them and no rescission;
modification, or release of the Parties from the terms of this
document will be made for any reason.
6.10 Eubanks and Shadow Mountain understand that it is their
decision as to how the settlement is characterized. Aspen cannot
and does not make any representations as to the tax consequences of
the settlement. if any state and/or federal authority determines
that any part of the payments to Eubanks and/or Shadow Mountain
under this settlement are taxable, Eubanks and/or Shadow Mountain
agree to be solely responsible and liable for payment of all such
taxes, including interest and penalties. If Aspen is directed to
pay any such taxes, interest or penalties for any reason
(including, without limitation, late payment, non-payment and/or
non-reporting), Eubanks and/or Shadow Mountain--which ever party
from which the taxes, interest or penalties are derived and only
that party--shall indemnify and defend Aspen and hold Aspen
harmless from liability for same.
6.11 The Parties warrant and agree that they have neither
assigned nor transferred any portion of their claim to any
insurance company or other person or entity, and they agree that
they will not hereafter assign or allow any assignment to any
insurance company or other person or entity. Furthermore, the
undersigned represent that they know of no subrogation interest, or
interest by assignment regarding their claim, of any insurance
company or other person or entity, nor do they know of any
assignment, transfer, subrogation interest, or any other interest
in any other person or entity, including liens, as the result of
any conveyance or operation of law, including derivative claim(s).
6.12 This Mutual Release may be executed in one or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of
which, together, shall constitute one and the same Mutual Release.
6.13 This Mutual Release shall be construed and interpreted in
accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any
legal actions in relation to this Mutual Release shall be in
District Court in Pitkin County, Colorado. In the event it becomes
necessary for any of the Parties to initiate litigation to enforce
the provisions of this Mutual Release, the prevailing party shall
be entitled to' recover their reasonable attorney's fees incurred in
the enforcement thereof.
4
DATED effective this ~ day of September, 2008.
;C/ •
Bi11y~Ray •ubanka Bonnie Jean Euba ks
Shadow Mountain, LLC City of Aspen
by Robert K. Coretz,
Member
STATE OF Cp~pfC~~O
COUNTY OF P ~ ~'~~ -^
) ;38.
Subscribed to before me thi:o 2~1 day of Sen~~rr, 2008,
by Billy Ray Eubanks and Bonnie :lean Eubanks.
Witness my hand an~~ffi ia'~ se
My commission expi
- ~ 't
NATA1:iF
~ GOLDEN
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
~s.
) 1!y CoAU~at7ion
08R5Y1011
Subscribed to before me this day of 2008,
by Robert K. Coretz, Member of Shadow Mountain, LLC.
witness my hand and official seal. .
My commission expires:
Notary Public
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
by
Subscribed to before me this day of , 2008,
on behalf of the City of Aspen.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
6
OCi-1-2008 16:14 FROM: 70:919709253977 P.6
DATED effective this day of September, 2008.
Billy Ray Eubanks
by Robert
Member
Bonnie Jean Eubanks
City of Aspen
5
/~`'~
OCT-1-2~8 16:14 PROM:
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
ss.
70:919709253977 P.7
Subscribed to before me this day of 2008,
by Billy Ray Eubanks and Bonnie Jean Eubanks.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
STATE OF 9F-~G.hom~. )
ss.
COUNTY OF ! u l~~ )
Subscribed to before me this ~ S~- day of ~~~P.~, 2008,
by Robert K. Coretz, Member of Shadow Mountain, LLC.
Witness my hand and offi al sea ~D I~
My commission expires:
,~~ MN J.1~1
Nota"ry Public -~1' ~~~OW/ipep
SUM 11.610
STATE OF COLORADO )
~ ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
Subscribed to before me this day of , 2009,
by , on behalf of the City of Aspen.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
6
~c1
rq
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office
THRU: Tom McCabe
DATE: October 20, 2008
RE: REPLACEMENT OFSMUGGLER MOUNTAINAPARTMENTS
Below is a quick assessment that was done by Chris Everson on the costs to redevelop Smuggler
Mountain Apartments:
Size Category Qty APCHA Min Net Livable
sq ft per each Total Net
Livable sq ft
Studio 1 8 400 3200
2BR 1 2 850 1700
3BR 1 1 1000 1000
Totals 5900
5900 net livable sq ft / 0.8 = 7375 gross square feet for construction + approximately 625 sq ft
covered porch =approximately 8,000 total gross sq ft for redevelopment
Assumptions:
1. Approximate low range redevelopment per square foot = $375/ft*
2. Approximate high range redevelopment per square foot = $475/ft*
3. Plus parking @ $40,000 per space with 1.5 spaces per unit **
4. Costs do not include possible asbestos remediation or potential .
$375 x 8,000 = $3,000,000 estimated low range for redevelopment (need to add parking)
$475 x 8,000 = $3,800,000 estimated high range for redevelopment (need to add parking)
Rough estimate for parking: $40,000 per space x 1.5 x 11 = $660,000
Low range estimate for redevelopment: $3,660,000
High range estimate for redevelopment: $4,460,000
* Intended to be a range of estimates for total redevelopment including demolition, soft costs,
infrastructure, grading, retention, hard construction, but not including parking.
* * Estimate for surface parking
It may behoove Council to request the Housing Board to authorize the expenditure of funds to
have a conceptual redesign/redevelopment plan created by a design professional and to have a
conceptual estimate done, which would cost anywhere from $15,000 to $30,000 to have that
done; however, the Housing Staff supports the AspenWalk project as this is the most cost
effective development for this property at this point in time for the City of Aspen as shown by the
above calculations.
Below are estimates for repairing the existing building:
Item Estimate
Main Water
Heater
$37,000
Roof $45,200
Unit water
heaters
$8,000
Exterior $12,700
Laund $5,600
Vehicle $8,820
Retainin $15,000
A liances $17,125
Bathrooms $44,000
Contin enc $31,555
Estimated total $225,000
2
ltle. [~j
THE CRY OF ASPEN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: R. Barry Crook, Business Process Manager
THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager
DATE: October 20, 2008
MEETING DATE: October 21, 2008
RE: Citizen Budget Task Force Final Report
Backeround:
In January 2008 the Aspen City Council commissioned a Citizen Budget Task Force (CBTF) with
the purpose of evaluating and providing recommendations on major budget policy issues of the
City of Aspen. The CBTF was officially appointed on January 22"d, 2008; upon City Council
approval of the task force bylaws and initial membership. By March, the Task force had
identified subject areas and formed subcommittees to begin issue evaluation work. These subject
areas included:
Transportation
Housing
Community Development
Information Technology
Tax and Finance
By May 2008 the Task Force had narrowed its focus to three subject areas for in depth study, and
had identified specific issues for evaluation within each subject area:
Transportation: RFTA's Bus Rapid Transit proposal (the Subcommittee later added an evaluation
and recommendation of the City's proposed Transportation Development Plan process to its work
plan).
Housine: Optimizing use of current housing resources, evaluating spending efficiency of housing
funds for operations and development.
Tax and Finance: Evaluate the City's plans and capacity for using debt to finance affordable
housing.
Through its subcommittees the Task Force developed a series of recommendations for the City
Council to consider. To date some of these recommendations have been adopted by the Council,
while others have been reviewed by City staff and are in the evaluation process.
Page 1 0[ 6
Discussion:
Task Force Recommendations
provided in italics.
Housine Subcommittee:
are summarized here by Subcommittee and an update has been
• Housing Subcommittee Recommendations on Housing resource efficiency. Adopted by City
Council as Resolution #69-2008.
Housing Subcommittee Recommendations set #2. Adopted by City Council as Resolution
#69-2Q08:
/ Financial Audit of Burlingame Project accounting by McMahan and Associates.
Completed July 2008.
/ Performance Audit of Burlingame Project by Alvarez and Mazsal. Completed July 2008.
/ Numerous other recommendations some of which are highlighted below:
• Expert Construction/Desien Task Force for Burlingame 2/3 Review: The
subcommittee recommended that the City form a group of independent
construction experts drawn from the local community to advise the City as it
compiles its plans to complete the BG project. This group would provide their
expertise and advice on construction methods, density considerations, partnership
possibilities, sizing of units and the development model to be employed.
The City Manager had already formed a "Construction Experts Group" to
advise him about how best to proceed on designing and building Burlingame
Phase 2/3 and this group functioned as the Task Force the Subcommittee had
contemplated.
Creation of committee to investieate incentives: We recommended that the City
consider employing financial "incentives" as a way to motivate affordable
housing residents to downsize, sell or bridge to free market housing.
This committee has been formed by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority
under the name Housing Frontiers Committee and has been meeting since
Wednesday, August 27, 2008.
Development of policies and procedures to ensure accuracv of voter information
and financial ro'ections: We recommended that the City institute the necessary
internal controls to assure that financial information included in voter
information documents and press releases is accurate.
The accuracy of and the release of financial information will be the joint
.responsibility of the Director of Finance and the City Manager's Office.
Analyzine the bonding capaciri of the Ciri's Affordable Housine Fund: We
recommended that the City undertake an analysis of its bonding capacity in light
of the recent downturn in the economy and resulting reduction in Real Estate
Transfer Tax (RETT) revenues.
This work is a regular feature of any proposed use of debt frnancing and is a
joint effort of the Finance Department and our Bond advisors.
• Development of an implementation plan and timeline for the recommendations
from the two audit firms and the CBTF: We requested the City Council to d>iect
Page 2 of 6
staff to create a comprehensive implementation plan and timeline for the many
recommendations that have been made by the two independent audit firms and
the CBTF.
This effort is underway, with an RFP for a possible Project Manager for the
implementation effort being prepared and the recruitment for the Director of
Capital Asset Management underway. Finalization of the implementation plan
will be done after that person is recruited, on board and able to weigh in on the
draft plans for implementation.
Tax and Finance Subcommittee:
• Adopt an objective methodology for evaluating the proposed subsidy element of all
future affordable housing development projects
To be finalized by the Affordable Housing Project Manager and the Director of Capital
Asset Management in conjunction with the Director of Finance and the City Manager's
Office -but is understood to include all relevant cost elements of a housing project as
prepared for the Subcommittee in the reconciliation work
• As an element of project planning develop specific subsidy target levels for all affordable
housing projects and benchmark project progress against this subsidy tazget through the
entire project development process.
The current thinking is to provide this target on a case-by-case basis and use it as a
comparison between competing projects and as a way of analyzing projects over time.
The calculation of the subsidy per unit or per bedroom will remain an element of the
project's performance over the lifetime of the project.
• Only seek to borrow funds for major capital projects through bond issues or other debt
instruments once a detailed project plan is in place and has been communicated to the
public. Such a detailed plan should include estimates for all cost components, with
documented underlying assumptions for all vaziables influencing cost.
This is understood to be the current direction of the City Council and is being followed as
part of the planning process for Burlingame Phase 2/3 and other possible housing
projects that are contemplated to be debt financed.
Transportation Subcommittee:
• RFTA should address mazketing shortcomings in its BRT proposal to provide detailed
factual information documenting the need for the requested improvements in the BRT
plan, focusing on the benefits to current and future customers and a cleaz explanation of
the status quo vs. BRT scenario as supported by the facts.
RFTA bears the responsibility for taking action.
• The City of Aspen, CDOT and RFTA must work together more effectively in finding
systemic solutions to traffic and transportation issues involving the entrance to Aspen
including consideration of traffic flow improvements including more effective use of
HOV vehicles, addressing parking demand and capacity, continuing to evaluate
alternative transportation solutions as long term options, including rail, and finally the
entrance itself.
The City of Aspen has commissioned several consultant, reports and made proposals to
the Council:
/ To study the three options that have risen to the forefront on the entrance: (1) the
Preferred Alternative, (2) the Split Shot, and (3) the Reversible 3"d Lane.
Page 3 of 6
/ In addition studies for intersection improvements at Cemetery Lane (roundabout or
grade-separated interchange) are being completed.
/ Both of the above topics will be the subject of a Council Worksession scheduled for
November 18, 2008.
/ Changes to the parking demand operations are in the works to extend paid parking
by 3 blocks in every direction from the downtown core and to institute new
technology used for enforcement. These changes are scheduled to begin on February
1. 2009.
• The Task Force recommends the City Council approve the staff recommendation for a
Transportation Development Plan (TDP) study related to transportation needs within the
City of Aspen.
Council approved the undertaking of the TDP work on August 25, 2008.
The Task force recommends the Council create a Citizen's Transportation Advisory
Committee for the purpose of evaluating TDP study results and providing citizen input on
all transportation, entrance and parking policy issue as they relate to service level and
budgetary impacts.
This is the fast time this recommendation has come before the City Council. The staff has
included an advisory committee for the TDP (including an invitation to every member of the
CBTF Transportation Subcommittee).
Task Force as a Whole:
The Task Force also considered generally the potential benefit of a standing Citizen Budget and
Finance Committee and while it reached no consensus for recommendation as to form, wished to
forward this question to the City Council for further consideration.
This is the first time this recommendation has come before the City Council
Previous Council Action:
Housinc Subcommittee Recommendations:
The Council has previously accepted all of the recommendations of the Housing Subcommittee
with the adoption of Resolution 69-08. Four of those recommendations were referred to the
Aspen-Pitkin County Housing Authority for their review:
• Establish Independent Compliance Advisory Board to advise housing executives on
compliance matters, and monitor compliance complaints.
Council response: Council referred this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Board for their review and recommendations.
• Establish Outsourced 24 hour Help Line for Compliance.
Council response: Council referred this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Board for their review and recommendations.
• Outsource Eligibility Testing to Specialized Firm.
Council response: Council referred this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Board for their review and recommendations.
• Legal Review of All Contracts for Maximizing City Rights.
Page 4 of 6
Council response: Council refereed this recommendation to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Authority Board for their review and recommendations.
Compliance Advisory Board.• According to the Housing Office the Housing Board has
determined that IT will continue to function as the independent compliance advisory board.
24-Hour Help Line.• The Housing Office is currently doing some research on a possible 24-
hour Help Line -looking into possible vendors and the cost of providing the service, and will
be bringing information to the joint Council/BOCC meeting in December of the first quarter
of 2009.
Outsourced Eli ig bility Testing The Housing Office is currently utilizing an outside source
(Choicepoint) to pull additional data on applicants. Staff has also revamped the application
and is requesting backup documentation on stocks and bonds, retirement accounts, checking
and savings accounts, tax assessor statements on property owned and mortgage statements.
Legal Review of All Contracts: The Housing Office's outside attorney, Tom Smith, currently
reviews all leases, contracts, guideline changes, deed restrictions, etc.- this is being done
already.
Clarifications Reeardine What is in the Report
Taxation and Finance Subcommittee:
The Task Force Report states:
"The City seems to have considered a bond issue that can be serviced exclusively from one
particulaz special revenue fund, the Housing Development fund, which receives the majority of
its revenues from Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) receipts. The City also seems to have
considered issuing such bonds in a form that is backed by the full faith and credit of the City in
order to reduce the interest rate. If bonds are issued in such a form there can be consequences
other than merely achieving a lower interest rate. For example, there would be a risk of having to
increase property or perhaps other taxes unless the housing fund revenues are sufficient to cover
the debt service. As a further example, issuance of such a bond could limit the City's capacity to
issue further debt for other purposes. Perhaps other bond terms, possibly unfavorable, might also
be affected. The City should consider carefully all effects of extending the full faith and credit of
the City and weight such effects against the value of any expected savings of debt service costs."
The City has considered issuing debt backed by the housing RETT revenue, the housing sales tax
revenues and the net operating revenue of the Housing Development Fund. By considering an
additional pledge of the full faith and credit of the City, the City anticipates receiving a better
rating of such an issuance and securing a better interest rate from the marketplace -potentially
saving the City millions in repayment expenses (depending an the total issued and final rates).
The City would continue to weigh carefully all of the effects of extending the full faith and credit
of the City to any Bond issue. The City has an excellent bond rating and its financial policies are
designed to insure that the City maintains that rating. It takes the obligation to repay money that
it borrows very seriously. Since the City will do whatever it takes to repay the money that it has
borrowed anyway, it may as well get the benefit of the de facto pledge when it can, by issuing
bonds with general obligation pledge. This saves the City money in the form of lower interest
costs.
Page 5 of 6
Request of Council:
If the Council so desires, it should pass Resolution 103-08, accepting the Final Report of the
Citizens Budget Task Force and thanking the members for their contribution to the City of Aspen
and the City Council.
Of the recommendations made to the Council, the issue of creating a Citizens Transportation
Advisory Committee is outstanding.
Page 6 of 6
RESOLUTION NO. 103
Series of 2008
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO
RECEIVING AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL REPORT OF THE ASPEN CITIZEN
BUDGET TASK FORCE.
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2008, by resolution of the City Council of the City of
Aspen, Colorado, City Council did create a City of Aspen Citizen Budget Task Force, provide
for a schedule of meetings, and request said Task Force to provide a final report of its findings
and recommendations by September 1, 2008; and
WHEREAS, The Mayor proposed and City Council endorsed the creation of a Citizen
Budget Task Force to evaluate major issues of budgetary and financial policy and provide a set
or findings and recommendations to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 2008, the Citizen Budget Task Force met with the City
Council and presented its Final Report to the citizens of Aspen and to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, Marcia Goshorn (Chair), Howie Mallory (Vice-Chair), Danny Aronson,
Lisa Baker, Don Davidson, Jim DeFrancia, Maurice Emmer, Jenny Elliot, Alan Fletcher,
Michael Fox, Peter Fuchs, Scott Gordon, Ward Hauenstein, David Hyman, Michael Kaczynski,
Peter Louras, Tom Oken, Bill Pope, Tom Schwerin, Lex Tarumianz, Charlie Tarver and Torre
have given many hours of their time in reviewing the various budget implications of city
operations and the fiscal/tax policies associated with a variety of city issues, have issued a final
report and have presented that report to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we the City Council do receive and accept this
report and these final recommendations and do express our immense gratitude for the work of
the members of the citizen budget task Force on behalf of the people of Aspen.
APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of October, 2008.
Michael C. Ireland, 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 on the day hereinabove stated.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
~a .
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council
FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
RE: Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Final Review
First Reading of Ordinance No.~, Series 2008
Public hearing scheduled for Nov. 10, 2008
DATE: October 27, 2008
SUMMARY:
City Council initiated the Lift One Neighborhood Master
Plan COWOP review through the adoption of
Resolutions No. 13 and 80, Series of 2008. The 27-
member Master Plan Task Force met every Thursday
from April 10`h through October 2"d and made their
formal recommendation by a 19 to 1 vote (with one
abstention). The Plan has been review by the Historic
Preservation Commission and the Planning and Zoning
Commission. Both boards supported the project by
unanimous votes.
The proposed ordinance implements the
recommendation of the Task Force and provides final
approvals for the proposed redevelopment.
The Master Plan incorporates a new high-speed quad lift
replacing the current lift 1 A, a new surface lift along the
historic lift one corridor, a ski museum, public parking,
two new lodging facilities with associated commercial space, affordable housing both on-
site and off-site, and rehabilitation of historic resources.
PROPOSED REVIEW SCHEDULE:
October 27'x' -First Reading. This will be a "traditional" first reading with a minimal
presentation by staff on scheduling issues and not a substantive presentation of the
project.
November 10''' -Second Reading & Public Hearing. This will be a presentation of the
Master Plan, the background, the COWOP process, project goals, the final site plan, and
the Task Force recommendation.
1
November 24~n -Continued Second Reading & Public Hearing. This will be a more
detailed presentation of the project including architecture, massing, energy efficiency
measures, lodging program, and a review of the proposed ordinance.
December 1" -Continued Second Reading & Public Hearing. This will be a chance for
the project team to respond to questions from the first two public hearings. The COWOP
process included several experts on mountain planning, project financing, energy
efficiency, etc., and those experts will be on-hand for this meeting. Amore detailed
review of the proposed ordinance is also expected.
December 8`h -Continued Second Reading & Public Hearing. This is expected to be
the final meeting where the project team will respond to any remaining questions and a
final review of the proposed ordinance occurs.
APPLICANTS:
1. Aspen Land Fund II, LLC (Centurion Partners). Represented by John Sarpa.
2. Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC. Represented by Robert Daniel.
3. Aspen Skiing Company. Represented by David Bellack
4. The City of Aspen.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. ~, Series 2008, upon first reading.
The public hearing is scheduled to begin on November 10`n
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No. ~ Series of 2008, the Lift One Neighborhood
Master Plan, upon first reading."
2
ORDINANCE N0.34
(SERIES OF 2008)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN
AMENDING AND CONFIRMING THE BOUNDARIES AND APPROVING THE
LIFT ONE NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLAN AND GRANTING FINAL LAND
USE APPROVALS AND A DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR ALL PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE MASTER PLAN INCLUDING PROPERTY
LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF SOUTH ASPEN STREET SOUTH OF DEAN
STREET OWNED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN, THE ASPEN SKIING COMPANY,
ASPEN LAND FUND II LLC (AKA CENTURION PARTNERS LLC), AND
ROARING FORK MOUNTAIN LODGE-ASPEN LLC, ALL WITHIN THE CITY
OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received a completed
application from Aspen Land Fund II, LLC also known as Centurion Partners, LLC;
Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen LLC; the Aspen Skiing Company; and, the
Aspen City Manager, for a determination of eligibility for a project, known as the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan, reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfaze of
the public (COWOP) for a redevelopment of lands, owned by the above mentioned
parties, for the purpose of providing or improving the provision oflift-served skiing
access to Aspen Mountain, pedestrian, vehicular and emergency vehicle access to
properties along South Aspen Street, non-traditional energy sources such as ground
source energy system, recreational facilities, a museum focused on the evolution of skiing
in Aspen, public parking, and commercial, lodging, free-market residential, and
affordable residential land uses; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen manages public rights-of--way in the planning
area including Hill Street, Summit Street, Gilbert Street, the alley within Block 10 of the
Eames Addition, South Aspen Street, Juan Street, and Dean Street and owns certain
public land known locally as Willoughby Park and Lift One Park; and,
WHEREAS, the legal descriptions of the lands subject to this review aze attached
as Exhibit 5 and aze generally described as lands on both sides of South Aspen Street
south of Dean Street, excluding the Shadow Mountain Townhomes; and,
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan's public and private
property landowners were represented by their respective property owners and/or
representatives including Robert Daniel of Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen LLC,
John Sarpa of Centurion Partners LLC, David Bellack of the Aspen Skiing Company, and
Chris Bendon of the City of Aspen, all of whom were authorized to represent their
individual public or private property interests; and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP land use review process, Chapter 26.500 of the City of
Aspen Land Use Code, was created and adopted by the City of Aspen to allow the
planning of projects of significant community interest, when determined necessary by the
City Council according to said Chapter, to evolve an iterative process considering input
from neighbors, property owners, public officials, members of the public, and other
parties of interest assembled as a formal reviewing authority of the City of Aspen
providing recommendations directly to City Council; and,
WHEREAS, via adoption of Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008 and No. 80 Series
of 2008, the City Council found that the proposal for review as a project reasonably
necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public met the Standards for
Determination, Section 26.500.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, for the
following reasons:
(a) The Master Plan could provide enhanced access to lift-served skiing on
Aspen Mountain, lodging facilities that meet the needs of the of the community,
affordable housing units that serve the needs of the community, improved vehiculaz,
pedestrian and emergency vehicle access, the development of public parking, the
preservation of important local and national historic resources, the development of non-
traditional energy sources such as ground source energy system, recreational facilities, a
museum focused on the evolution of skiing in Aspen, and a unified approach to managing
construction impacts and ongoing maintenance and operations of the azea's
infrastructure;
(b) Preserving and enhancing short-term lodging facilities, providing adequate
emergency services and access, the provision of effective access to lift-served skiing,
housing the workforce, and energy efficiency are stated community goals that could be
addressed through master planning of this area;
(c) Portions of the subject area aze owned by the City of Aspen and a Master
Plan could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties;
(d) Portions of the subject area aze managed by the City of Aspen as rights-of-
way and a Master Plan could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties;
(e) The bifurcated ownership of the subject azea and independent projects in
various stages of entitlement may result in an ad-hoc development pattern while a master
planning process using an interactive and multidisciplinary approach with a diverse
COWOP task team, including neighbors of the project and persons with special interest in
the property and its development will lend itself to the type of open dialogue needed to
determine a cohesive future vision for the neighborhood; and,
WHEREAS, via adoption of Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008 and No. 80 Series
of 2008, the City Council established a COWOP Task Force Team to develop a Master
Plan for the Lift One Neighborhood including the quantitative elements of the plan, broad
urban design elements of the plan, and the contextual relationship of the plan to
surrounding properties; and
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 2
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team
is comprised of citizens with a broad range of perspectives, expertise, and awareness of
community issues. Following are the members of the task force and their affiliation:
City of Aspen City Council Mick Ireland
Dwayne Romero
P & Z Cliff Weiss
HPC Alison Agley
Com. Dev. Chris Bendon, (non-voting)
Landowners Lodge at Aspen Mtn. John Sarpa
Lift One Lodge Bob Daniel
Aspen Skiing Dave Bellack
Com any
Neighbors South- Shadow Chrissy McNamara
Mountain
West- Juan St., Derek Johnson
Trainors Landing Denis Murray
North- South Point, Galen Bright
Timber Ridge Tami Solondz
East Sissy Erikson
Mountain Queen Zachary Matthews
Gilbert Street
Other Affected Parties Aspen Hist. Society Georgia Hanson
AVSC Mazk Cole
ACRA Debbie Braun
Community At Large Yasmine dePagter
Allyn Harvey
Mark Hughes
Mary Janss
Andrew Kole
Ruth Kruger
Mary Anne Meyer
Bernard Phillips
*Brian Schaefer (removed for non-
attendance)
Bill Wiener, Jr.
and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 3
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Community Development Director was a non-
voting member and served as the chair of the Task Force Team, in compliance with the
requirements of Section 26.500 of the Aspen Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team
has met every Thursday for a minimum of three hours and up to seven hours from
April 10, 2008 to October 2, 2008, for a total of 26 meetings to consider the project goals,
constraints, concepts, and possible development scenarios; and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP review process enabled the planning and design of the
master plan to reflect community values, taking into consideration various opinions and
expressed points-of--view from neighbors, land owners, citizens, and technical expertise
from professionals assisting the planning effort; and,
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team
adopted the following master plan goals which were subsequently acknowledged by the
Aspen City Council via adoption of City Council Resolution No. 59, Series of 2008:
• Respect Aspen's history: integrate the balance of architecture and design
through the relationships, mass and scale of historic and proposed structures.
• Showcase and promote Aspen's ski history and traditions.
• Provide easy and welcoming access to all users that integrates the Lift One
neighborhood and town while minimizing traffic and pavement.
• Develop improved lift access and infrastructure that includes the World Cup
venue and year-round activities.
• Create a "lights on" mix of lodging, services, amenities and on-site affordable
housing to attract visitors and locals while respecting the nature of the
neighborhood.
• Develop an economically viable and flexible project without imposing
burdens on the community.
• Create an environmental showcase that exploits on-site energy generation and
responsibly uses energy and other resources.
and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP land use review procedure does not and has not
lessened any public hearing, public noticing, or any critical analysis or scrutiny of the
project as would otherwise be required; and,
WHEREAS, the Task Force meetings were run in a public hearing type format
with the ability for members of the public and concerned citizens to comment on the
progress of the master plan; and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 4
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the project received approximately 59 pages of emails and letters
which can be viewed on the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan website accessed from
www.aspenpitkin.com; and
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Internet web site had approximately 340 page
views per month; and
WHEREAS, the progress of the task force and all materials, meeting summazies,
diagrams, and maps related to the planning effort were maintained in 2 project binders
available for public inspection at the City of Aspen Community Development
Department and on the City of Aspen Internet web site, www.aspenpitkin.com/; and,
WHEREAS, during the planning process for the Master Plan updates on the
progress of the planning effort were considered as agenda items at public meetings by the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Boazd, the City Planning and Zoning
Commission, and the Historic Preservation Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission was updated regarding the
progress of the Task Force throughout the project by their Task Force Representative
Alison Agley; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission were updated regulazly
regarding the progress of the Task Force by their Task Force Representative, Cliff Weiss;
and,
WHEREAS, on August 12th, approximately 60 citizens attended an "open-
house" style public meeting, notice of which was published in the Aspen Times,
conducted to provide information and discuss planning issues with neighbors and
interested citizens; and
WHEREAS, approximately 18 articles in the Aspen Times appeared over the
course of the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan Task Force review process detailing
ongoing planning issues and the evolution of the plan, including 5 articles that were
published prior to the formation of the Task Force and an additional 10 letters to the
editor; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Daily News published 13 articles regarding the Lift One
Project including 5 that were published prior to the formation of the Task Force; and,
WHEREAS, staff and members of the Task Force presented the progress of the
Task Force to the Board of Directors of the Aspen Chamber Resort Association on July
29, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, On August 21, 2008, an update was provided at the annual ACRA
Luncheon by Task Force member and ACRA President Debbie Braun to approximately
250 attendees; and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 5
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority on August 6, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Aspen Board of
Realtors on August 13, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, City of Aspen Project Assistant Travis Coggin and City of Aspen
Community Relations Officer Sally Spaulding spoke about the project and where/how to
access information related to the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan on the KSNO radio
station on August 19, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, City of Aspen Community Development Director Chris Bendon and
Project Assistant Travis Coggin spoke about the project and where/how to access
information related to the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan on the KSNO radio station
on October 17, 2008; and
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Commercial
Core and Lodging Commission on August 20, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the City of Aspen
Community Development and Engineering Departments on August 20, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Pitkin County
Community Development Department on September 8, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen devoted one episode of City Matters to the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan and filmed an on-site program with members of the Task
Force; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen filmed a special edition of City Matters on
October 15, 2008 with members of the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the City Matters program covering the Lift One Neighborhood
Master Plan has aired approximately 11 times on CGTV; and,
WHEREAS, there have been informational slides running continually on CGTV
displaying the time and date of upcoming Lift One Task Force Meetings as well as the
Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan website; and,
WHEREAS, City Council reviewed the progress of the Master Plan during two
(2) publicly noticed work sessions on June 9 and July 21, 2008, considered progress of
the effort and provided direction as to the proper planning and design objectives and
issues to be fully considered; and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP Task Force determined that the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan provides the following community benefits associated with
the Goals created by the COWOP Task Force.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 6
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
History
1. Respect Aspen's history: integrate the balance of architecture and design
through the relationships, mass and scale of historic and proposed structures.
2. Showcase and promote Aspen's ski history and traditions.
View plane corridor maintained. Revitalized sense of history. Museum
integrated providing historical connection. Recycles historical buildings as
historical assets.
Accessibility
1. Provide easy and welcoming access to all users that integrates the Lifr One
neighborhood and town while minimizing traffic and pavement.
2. Develop improved lift access and infrastructure that includes the World
Cup venue and year-round activities.
Creative and uniquely Aspen solution for people mover. Infrastructure
updates -sidewalks on Aspen Street. Year-round access to top of hill, surface
lift from Dean Street. Proven technology/appropriate to area. Improved
skiing to Dean Street. Neighborhood -more inviting and more inclusive.
Removes "load" from other lifts. Corner of Aspen and Durant will be safer.
Vitali
1. Create a "lights on" mix of lodging, services, amenities and on-site
affordable housing to attract visitors and locals while respecting the nature of the
neighborhood.
2. Develop an economically viable and flexible project without imposing
burdens on the community.
Lockers at starting point of skiing. Affordable commercial is a possibility.
Local's friendly steak house for beer, etc. Revitalized and beautified a huge
section of town at base of mountain. Lights on neighborhood from addition
of affordable housing.
Added hot beds and hotel. Better World Cup venue.
Sustainability
1. Create an environmental showcase that exploits on-site energy generation
and responsibly uses energy and other resources.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 7
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
• Increased tax base--50% less fossil fuel consumption than similar uses, sets
new standard for lodges--LEED Silver or Gold; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan is of higher quality as a result of the COWOP Task
Force Team review process and the thoughtful and interactive discussions that allowed
multiple iterations and development scenarios to be discussed would not have otherwise
occurred if the Master Plan had not been reviewed as a COWOP application; and,
WHEREAS, the Master Plan is consistent with the Goals and Objectives of the
2000 Aspen Area Community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the project meets the goals created by the COWOP Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan received a vote of 19 in
favor, one opposed and one neutral at the final Task Force Meeting on October 2, 2008;
and,
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission formally reviewed the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan during a series of public hearings beginning August 27,
2008 and concluding October 8, 2008, resulting in a vote of 4-0 in favor of the Master
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission formally reviewed the
Conceptual Application for relocation of structures, development of Lift One Park, and
development of Willoughy Pazk beginning August 27, 2008 and concluding October 8,
2008 and voted unanimously to grant Conceptual Approval for Major Development and
Relocation for the properties located at Willoughy Pazk, Lift One Park, 233 Gilbert Street
and 710 South Aspen Street, as evidenced by Resolution No. 23, Series of 2008.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission formally reviewed the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan during a series of public heazings beginning August 26,
2008 and concluding on October 7, 2008, resulting in a vote of 6-0 in favor of the Master
Plan; and
WHEREAS, Hill Street, Summit Street and their associated alleys, a portion of
Gilbert Street, a portion of Juan Street and a portion of Dean Street west of South Aspen
Street rights-of--way, as currently platted, do not provide for efficient or practicable
vehicular movement and the City of Aspen believes it is in the best interests of the City,
and its residents, to vacate the rights-of--way, concurrent with the approval of the
development proposal and effective upon recordation of the Master Subdivision/Street
Vacation Plat, such that the lands may be used for development purposes; and,
WHEREAS, the lands subject to this right-of--way vacation aze depicted on
attached Exhibit 3 and shall be depicted and described on the Master Subdivision/Street
Vacation Plat; and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 8
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the vacation action, considering the Master Plan entire land
assemblage, will not leave any land without a means of adequate access to a public right-
of-way; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen has reviewed, verifies, and hereby accepts the
vacation of the Hill Street, Summit Street, a portion of Gilbert Street, a portion of Juan
Street and a portion of Dean Street west of South Aspen Street rights-of--way and the
reversion of associated lands to adjacent pazcels, as depicted and described on the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, as consistent with the requirements of C.R.S. Section
43-2-301 et. seq.; and,
WHEREAS, the vacation of these portions of the Hill Street, Summit Street, a
portion of Gilbert Street, a portion of Juan Street and a portion of Dean Street west of
South Aspen Street rights-of--way meets or exceeds the review criteria for affecting such
changes as adopted by the City of Aspen; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304 and 26.500 of the Land Use Code, City
Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny all requisite land use approvals
necessary to grant a development order for a proposed development determined eligible
for COWOP land use review upon a recommendation from the Community Development
Director and consideration of comments offered by the general public at a duly noticed
public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Community Development Director has reviewed
the proposed development in consideration of the recommendations of the COWOP Task
Force Team, the requirements of the Land Use Code, and comments from the City
Engineer and applicable referral agencies and has recommended approval of all necessary
land use approvals for granting a development order for the proposed Project including
Final approval of a COWOP Land Use Review including: Subdivision, Final PUD
Development Plan approval, Rezoning of portions of the lands within the Lift One
Neighborhood to L, Lodge (PUD), Planned Unit Development Overlay; NC,
Neighborhood Commercial (H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development Overlay; and
PUB, Public ;(H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development Overlay, Vacation of
certain public rights-of--way, Dedication of certain public rights-of--way and easements,
Growth Management Quota System ("GMQS") allotments for lodging, free market
residential and affordable housing units, commercial net leasable space, and essential
public facilities, Condominiumization, removing and re-establishing historic landmark
designation of a parcel, Final Timeshare approval, Mountain View plan review approval,
8040 Greenline approval, Conditional Use approval, and Commercial Design Review
approval; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the
development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as
identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team, the Community Development
Director, P&Z, HPC, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered
public comment at a public hearing; and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 9
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
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,
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 the City Council hereby amends the
boundary of the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan (the "Master Plan") as set forth in
Section 1 below; hereby approves the Master Plan as described and depicted in the
Decision Packet; and hereby declares that such approved Master Plan and all land use
approvals necessary or appropriate thereto, as herein set forth, shall constitute a site
specific development plan as defined in Section 24-68-102(4)(a) of the Colorado Revised
Statutes, subject to the conditions described herein.
Section 1: Elieibility Confirmation and Amendment to Master Plan
Boundaries
The lands included in the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan aze hereby
amended to include land owned by the Aspen Skiing Company extending generally to the
south from the southwesterly boundary of the Mountain Queen Condominiums, the
southerly boundary of Block 12 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of
Aspen, the south end of the South Aspen Street right-of--way and the southerly boundary
of the Shadow Mountain Condominiums to the southerly boundazy of the City of Aspen,
as depicted on the Master Plan Boundary Map attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
The purpose of including these additional lands is to accommodate the uphill
terminal of the new "surface lift" and the lower terminal of the new high speed Lift lA,
and to accommodate certain pedestrian access improvements south of the South Aspen
Street right-of--way.
Pursuant to Section 26.500.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan, as described in Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008, and in
Resolution No. 80, Series of 2008, and with the inclusion of the additional Aspen Skiing
Company lands as described above, is and continues to be reasonably necessary for the
Convenience and Welfare of the Public and eligible for the COWOP review process.
Section 2: Leval Descriptions
The legal descriptions of the lands within the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan
boundary are attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
Section 3. Master Plan Approvals; Vested lti¢hts: Development Order
(a) The Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan is hereby approved, and the
respective owners of lands within the Master Plan boundary (the "Lift One
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page l0
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Neighborhood"), as such lands are described in Section 2 above, are hereby granted all
land use approvals necessazy or appropriate to the implementation of the Master Plan,
including without limitation the following:
(i) Final PUD Development Plan approval for the developments
described in Section 11 below;
(ii) Subdivision approval as described in Section 4 below;
(iii) Rezoning of portions of the lands within the Lift One
Neighborhood to L, Lodge (PUD), Planned Unit Development Overlay; NC,
Neighborhood Commercial (H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development
Overlay; and PUB, Public (H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development
Overlay as described in Section 8 below;
(iv) Vacation of certain public rights-of--way as described in Section 9
below;
(v) Dedication of certain public rights-of--way and easements as
described in Section 10 below;
(vi) Growth Management Quota System ("GMQS") allotments for
lodging, free mazket residential and affordable housing units, and commercial net
leasable space as described in Section 14 below;
(vii) Condominiumization as described in Section 28 below;
(viii) Final Timeshare approval for the developments described in
Section 11 below;
(ix) Mountain View plane, 8040 Greenline, Conditional Use and
Commercial Design Review approval for the developments described in Section
11 below; and
(x) Removing historic landmark designation from 710 South Aspen
Street a/k/a the Skiers Chalet Steak House and designating Lot 3 as a Historic
Landmark.
(b) Pursuant to HPC Resolution No. 23, Series of 2008, unanimously adopted
on October 8, 2008, Conceptual HPC Approval has been obtained for the relocation of
the Skiers Chalet Steak House building to a portion of the South Aspen Street right-of-
way being vacated pursuant to this Ordinance, and for the relocation of the Skiers Chalet
Lodge to Willoughby Pazk and its conversion to a Ski Museum. Final HPC approval for
these actions must be obtained before a Building Permit or Permits are applied for in
connection therewith.
(c) The right to undertake and complete the development and use of the Lift
One Neighborhood pursuant to the site specific development plan hereby approved shall
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 1 I
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
be vested for a period of fifteen (15) years from the date of final adoption of this
Ordinance, all as shall be more specifically set forth in a Vested Rights Development
Agreement to be approved contemporaneously with this Ordinance.
(d) No later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption of this
Ordinance, the Aspen City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general
circulation within the City of Aspen a notice advising the general public of the approval
of a site specific development plan and the creation of a vested property right for the Lift
One Neighborhood pursuant to Section 26.304.070(A) of the City of Aspen Land Use
Code. Following the publication of said notice, the Community Development Director
shall issue a written Development Order containing the information required by Section
26.304.070(B) of the Land Use Code, which Development Order shall have an effective
date as of the date of publication of the notice of approval of the site specific
development plan.
Section 4: Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat
Within two (2) years following the date of final adoption of this Ordinance by the
City Council, the record owners of the underlying lands shall prepare, execute and record
a Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat of the Lift One Neighborhood which
subdivides the area into the following parcels, as depicted on the Proposed Subdivision
Map attached hereto as Exhibit 4.
(a) Lot 1: Lift One Lodge
(b) Lot 2: Lift One Pazk
(c) Lot 3: Skiers Chalet Steak House
(d) Lot 4: Willoughby Park
(e) Lot 5: Lodge at Aspen Mountain
(f) Lot 6: Deane Street Condominiums
For purposes of this Ordinance, Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 together shall hereinafter be
referred to as the "Lift One Project" and Lots 5 and 6 together shall hereinafter be
referred to as the "Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project".
The Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat shall also depict and describe a
development envelope for the relocation of the Lift 1 A base azea as more specifically
addressed and described in Section 11.6 below, shall vacate the public rights-of--way
described in Section 9 below, shall dedicate the public rights-of--way described in Section
10 below, and shall grant certain perpetual easements beneath, within or above public
rights-of--way and beneath Lot 2, Lift One Park, and Lot 4, Willoughby Park, as described
in Section 10 below. A Master Utility and Drainage Plan for the Lift One Neighborhood
shall be recorded concurrently with the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat.
The City acknowledges that the boundazies of Lots 3 and 6, respectively, may
need to be adjusted, and the Community Development Director shall have the authority to
approve such adjustment(s) as an Insubstantial Amendment to this Ordinance. The final
boundaries of such Lots (and of any adjoining Lots affected by the approvals granted by
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 12
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
such adjustments) shall be depicted and established on the individual Subdivision Plats to
be executed and recorded pursuant to Section 7 below.
The City further acknowledges that lot line adjustments may be required to
accomplish the conveyance of portions of vacated Deane Street and of vacated South
Aspen Street into the ownership of adjacent property owners. The Community
Development Director shall have the authority to approve and execute any related Lot
Line Adjustment Plats via administrative review.
Section 5: Master Development Agreement
Contemporaneously with the recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation
Plat, the owners of the lands within the Lifr One Neighborhood (excluding the City of
Aspen) shall prepare, execute and record a Master Development Agreement which sets
forth a description of the subdivision improvements and other amenities required by the
Master Plan, including the following:
(a) The relocation of South Aspen Street and associated sidewalks as depicted
on the Proposed Subdivision Map attached as Exhibit 4;
(b) The installation and/or relocation of all utilities and drainage facilities
depicted and described on the Master Utility and Drainage Plan;
(c) Deane Street right-of--way improvements, including sidewalks;*
(d) The landscaping of South Aspen Street and other public rights-of--way;
(e) The new Lifr lA high speed lift and other improvements to facilitate
access to the lift from South Aspen Street;
(f) The surface Lifr from Willoughby Park to the Lifr lA Base Area
Development Envelope;;
(g) 80 subgrade public parking spaces beneath areas to be depicted on the
Master Subd ivision/Street Vacation Plat;
(h) Public locker facilities;
(i) A Ski Museum located in Willoughby Park;
(j) The relocation of the volleyball courts currently located in Willoughby
Park; and
(k) Improvements to Willoughby Park.
*The design of the Deane Street right-of--way improvements for that
section of Deane Street between the South Aspen Street and Monarch
Street rights-of--way shall be coordinated with the City of Aspen
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 13
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Community Development, Parks, and Engineering Departments. All, or
a portion, of the $250,000 allocated to Deane Street improvements by
Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2005 (the Chart House contribution) may be
used for the design and implementation of these improvements.
(1) An allocation amongst the owners (excluding the City) of the
responsibilities for the ongoing maintenance of said improvements and amenities.
5.1 Seguencine: If Lodee at Asnen Mountain Project Proceeds First. In
the event the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project elects to proceed with the permitting and
construction of its development ahead of the Lift One Lodge Project, the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project shall be obligated to provide financial assurances for and to construct
the improvements and amenities described in Section 5 above, excepting utilities and
drainage facilities that fall entirely within the other Project site and which are not
required for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, and excepting the surface lift and the
improvements described in subparagraphs (i), (j) and (k) above, all of which will occur
within the Lift One Lodge Project area.
In lieu of the surface lift, the Lodge at Aspen Mountain shall establish and
operate a regulaz public van service along South Aspen Street to the Lift lA base area
until such time as the surface lift is operational. The Lift One Lodge Project shall
construct these excluded improvements during the course of the development of its own
Project.
The Lift One Lodge Project shall be obligated to reimburse the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project, within ten (10) days following the date of issuance of the initial
building permit for the Lift One Lodge Project, for all costs and expenses incurred to date
by the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project that would otherwise have been the
responsibility/shaze of the Lift One Lodge Project under the terms of the Master
Development Agreement. If the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project chooses to implement
a Special District to provide the required improvements or some of them, then the Lift
One Lodge Project's reimbursement obligation shall be to the Special District to the
extent the Special District has incurred such costs and expenses.
5.2 Seguencine: If Lift One Lodee Proiect Proceeds First. In the event the
Lift One Lodge Project elects to proceed with the permitting and construction of its
development ahead of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Lodge Project, the Lift One Lodge
Project shall be obligated to provide financial assurances for and to construct the
improvements and amenities described in Section 5 above, excepting utilities and
drainage facilities that fall entirely within the other Project site and which are not
required for the Lift One Lodge Project.
The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project shall be obligated to reimburse the Lift
One Lodge Project, within ten (10) days following the date of issuance of the initial
building permit for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, for all costs and expenses
incurred to date by the Lift One Lodge Project that would otherwise have been the
responsibility/shaze of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project under the terms of the
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 14
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Master Development Agreement. If the Lift One Lodge Project chooses to implement a
Special District to provide for the required improvements or some of them, then the
Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project's reimbursement obligation shall be to the Special
District to the extent the Special District has incurred such costs and expenses.
Section 6: Special District
To the extent the owners of the Lift One Lodge Project area and of the Lodge at
Aspen Mountain Project area elect to form a Special District to fund, construct, operate
and/or maintain certain of these subdivision improvements and amenities, the details
thereof shall be set forth in the Master Development Agreement. The Agreement shall
provide that in the event either the Lift One Lodge Project or the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project is ready to proceed with its development ahead of the other Project,
then that Project shall have the right to proceed on its own to form the Special District
with the requirement that the other Project will join the Special District when it is ready
to do so. If the Special District chooses to issue bonds for purposes of constructing
improvements, and if the Special District has sold bonds sufficient in amount to cover the
approved estimated cost of accomplishing the improvements undertaken by the Special
District, the City agrees that such Special District funding shall be deemed adequate
financial assurance from the Project owners for such subdivision improvements. In
establishing the boundaries of and the real property interest to be included within the
Special District, Lots 1, 3 and 5 shall be included and all publicly-owned property and
facilities, including underground public parking, and owner occupied affordable housing
units, shall be excluded.
Section 7: Individual Subdivision/PUD Agreements
No later than two (2) years following the date of recording of the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat and the Master Development Agreement, individual
Subdivision Plats and individual Subdivision/PUD Agreements shall be prepared,
executed and recorded covering the Lifr One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project, respectively. Said individual Subdivision Plats and Subdivision/PUD
Agreements may be recorded at the same time or at different times, as the respective
developers may determine to be appropriate. Contemporaneously with the recording of
each individual Subdivision Plat and Subdivision/PUD Agreement, a Final PUD
Development Plan shall be recorded for that property and shall include the following
information:
(a) An illustrative site plan of the Project depicting the proposed
improvements, the approved dimensional requirements, and adequate snow storage areas;
(b) A drawing(s) representing the Project's architectural character, which
demonstrates the general architectural character of each building and depicts materials,
fenestration, projections, and dimensions and locations of elevator shaft heads, skylights,
mechanical equipment, etc.. Mechanical equipment shall be screened from pedestrian
view;
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 15
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(c) A landscape plan depicting the location, amount, and species of landscape
improvements with an irrigation plan, containing a signature line for the City Parks
Department; this plan should also include any movable planters/pots within pedestrian
azeas;
(d) A grading and drainage plan, with any off-site improvements specified;
(e) A utility and public infrastructure plan meeting the standazds of the City
Engineer and City utility agencies; and
(f) An exterior lighting plan meeting the requirements of Section 26.575.150
of the Land Use Code.
(g) Cost estimates for the improvements and requirements described in the
Subdivision/PUD Agreements; and
(h) A description of the financial assurances to be provided.
Section 8: Rezonin~s
Upon the approval of this Ordinance by the Aspen City Council, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4
and 6 are hereby rezoned as depicted on the Proposed Zoning Map attached hereto as
Exhibit 2. The rezoning shall become effective upon the recordation of the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, and the Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen
shall be amended by the Community Development Director as follows.
(a) Lot 1, Lift One Lodge, shall be depicted as included within the (L) Lodge,
zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay which presently
encumbers a portion of proposed Lot 1 shall be removed.
(b) Lot 2, Lift One Park, shall be depicted as included within the (PUB)
Public, zone district with a Historic (H) Overlay and a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Overlay.
(c) Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House, shall be depicted as included within the
(NC) Neighborhood Commercial, zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Overlay. Lot 3 shall also include a Historic H) Overlay to reflect the prior Historic
Designation of the Skiers Chalet Steak House building and its relocation thereto.
(d) Lot 4, Willoughby Park, shall be depicted as included within the (PUB)
Public, zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay. The Historic (H)
Overlay which presently encumbers a portion of proposed Lot 1 shall be removed.
(e) Lot 6, Deane Street Condominiums, shall be depicted as included within
the (AH) Affordable Housing, zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Overlay.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 16
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Section 9: Public Right-of-Wav Vacations
The following public right-of--way vacations within the Lifr One Neighborhood
shall be and hereby are approved, and the fee simple ownership of the lands underlying
such vacated rights-of--way shall be combined with and incorporated into the respective
adjacent parcels. Such vacations and resulting ownerships are shown on the Proposed
Street and Alley Vacation Map attached hereto as Exhibit 3, shall be depicted and
described on the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, and shall become effective
upon the recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat and the Master
Development Agreement.
(a) That portion of Deane Street located east of Garmisch Street along the
northern boundary of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project;
(b) That portion of Juan Street depicted on Exhibit 3, the Proposed Street and
Alley Vacation Map;;
(c) That portion of South Aspen Street located south of Juan Street and north
of the northern boundary of the Shadow Mountain Condominiums;
(d) Those portions of Gilbert Street depicted on Exhibit 3, the Proposed Street
and Alley Vacation Map;
(e) Hill Street east of South Aspen Street through the Lift One Lodge Project;
(f) Summit Street east of South Aspen Street through the Lift One Lodge
Project; and
(g) The portion of the remaining alley in Block 9, Eames Addition to the City
of Aspen, within the Lift One Lodge Project.
Section 10: Public Ri¢ht-of--Wav Dedications and Perpetual Easements
The Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat shall accomplish the following
public right-of--way dedications and shall grant the following perpetual easements and
encroachment licenses as depicted on the Proposed Subdivision Map attached hereto as
Exhibit 4, to wit:
(a) A public right-of--way for relocated South Aspen Street;
(b) A public pedestrian easement along the vacated portion of Juan Street;
(c) A public ski and pedestrian easement within Lot 1, Lift One Lodge
Project, within Lot 2, Lift One Park, and within Lot 4, Willoughby Park;
(d) An easement granted to the Aspen Skiing Company and/or assigns within
Lots 1, 2 and 4 for purposes of constructing, operating and maintaining the surface lift
and other associated skiing improvements and operations;
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 17
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(e) A perpetual subsurface easement beneath Lot 2, Lift One Pazk, and Lot 4,
Willoughby Park, for the use and benefit of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at
Aspen Mountain Project for purposes of constructing, operating, using, maintaining and
accessing parking garages;
(~ A perpetual subsurface easement beneath a portion of relocated South
Aspen Street for the use and benefit of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at
Aspen Mountain Project for purposes of constructing, operating, using, maintaining and
accessing a parking garage; and
(g) A perpetual access easement across Lot 1 for the benefit of the Aspen
Skiing Company.
In addition to the foregoing, the City of Aspen public right-of--way known as
Dean Street, a/k/a Deane Street, is hereby officially named and designated Deane Street
(with an "e"), and this spelling shall be reflected in the vazious Plats and Agreements
recorded pursuant to this Ordinance.
Section 11: Aaaroved Uses and Development Proerams
11.1 Lot 1. Lift One Lode. The Lift One Lodge Project is approved as a
mixed use membership lodge/whole ownership project consisting of 35 lodge units, 5
free market residential units, the affordable housing components described in Section
16.1 below, a maximum of 9,000 square feet of net leasable commercial space and a total
of 250 subgrade pazking spaces.
The Project's lodge component will consist ofone-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-
bedroom and four-bedroom suites. Each bedroom within the lodge component will be
separately keyed as a "lock-off' unit. For Growth Management Quota System purposes,
the Project's lodge component will contain a total of 101 bedrooms equaling 101 keys or
separately rentable divisions.
The Project's commercial component shall consist of a public restaurant, kitchen
and bar; and various facilities for the Aspen Skiing Company, including, but not limited
to, a ticket sales area, public/employee locker rooms, other skier servicing facilities, etc.
The public restaurant, bar and kitchen will contain a maximum of 4,000 squaze feet of net
leasable commercial area. The Aspen Skiing Company's facilities will contain a
maximum of 5,000 square feet of net leasable commercial azea. The lodge will also
include other guest service areas, facilities and ancillary spaces and uses which aze not
considered net leasable area for Growth Management Quota System purposes.
The Historic Preservation Commission previously granted Conceptual Approval
for the relocation of the Skiers Chalet Lodge and the Skiers Chalet Steak House. The Lift
One Lodge Project shall require final approval from the Historic Preservation
Commission for both relocations, which shall be processed separately from the Master
Plan in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land Use
Code.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 18
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
11.2 Lot 5, Lodge at Aspen Mountain. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project
is approved as a mixed use hotel/fractional/whole ownership project consisting of 75
lodge units, 26 fractional ownership units, 5 free mazket residential units, the affordable
housing components described in Section 16.2 below, a maximum of 18,000 square feet
of net leasable commercial space, and a minimum of 238 subgrade parking spaces.
The Project's hotel component will consist of 72 standazd/executive and one-
bedroom lodge rooms; 2two-bedroom lodge suites; and one two-bedroom presidential
suite for a total of 78 bedrooms. The Project's fractional ownership component will
consist of 8three-bedroom units and 18 four-bedroom units containing a total of 96
bedrooms. For Growth Management Quota System purposes, the Project's hotel and
fractional ownership components will contain a total of 174 bedrooms and 101 keys or
sepazately rentable divisions. No "lock-off' bedrooms are proposed. The whole
ownership component will consist of one three-bedroom free market residential unit and
4four-bedroom free mazket residential units.
The Project's 18,000 squaze feet of net leasable commercial azea will consist of a
spa; the hotel's restaurant and kitchen, rooftop bar, lobby lounge, sundries shop, meeting
rooms and ballroom; and a small sales center for the fractional ownership units. The
hotel will also include other guest service areas, facilities and ancillary spaces and uses
which aze not considered net leasable area for Growth Management Quota System
purposes.
The Project will be condominiumized in two or more condominium regimes (one
covering the Deane Street Condominium affordable housing project on Lot 6), and the
fractional ownership units will be sold pursuant to a timeshaze use plan.
11.3 Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House. The Skiers Chalet Steak House is
approved as a mixed use commercial/affordable housing building which will contain
approximately 1,052 square feet of net leasable commercial space on its ground floor and
a total of 5 dormitory affordable housing rooms on its second and third floors. An
outdoor seating area will be provided adjacent to the building. The commercial space's
net leasable area shall be identified in the Lift One Lodge Final PUD Development Plan
and individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement.
The Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall also include a list of
permitted uses for the commercial space, which list shall be derived from those uses
permitted within the (NC), Neighborhood Commercial, zone district.
11.4 Lot 4, Willoughby Park. Approval is granted for the relocation of the
Skiers Chalet Lodge to Willoughby Pazk as depicted in the Decision Packet, and the use
of the building for community purposes including, but not limited to, a historical
museum, affordable housing, and/or affordable commercial space. The building's use
shall be addressed in the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Agreement to be recorded
concurrently with the Lift One Lodge Final PUD Development Plan.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 19
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
11.5 Lot 6. Deane Street Condominiums. Lot 6 is approved for the
development of a 15 unit affordable housing project. The Deane Street Condominiums
Affordable Housing Project will consist of 7 studio units, 4one-bedroom units, 2 two-
bedroom units, and 2three-bedroom units.
11.6 Lift lA Base Area Develonment Envelope. The Lift lA Base Area
Development Envelope is approved for the uses, activities and improvements necessary,
ancillazy and incidental to the development, function, operation and maintenance of
winter and summer recreation and a ski area base, including, but not limited to the
following:
(a) Skiing, snowboazding, and other winter and summer recreational sports
and activities;
(b) Ski and snow sports racing, competitions, demonstrations, other special
events, including supporting activities, facilities, improvements and infrastructure;
(c) Ski lifts and mechanized uphill transportation, including all related
improvements and equipment, such as lift terminals, towers, platforms, supporting or
retaining walls and foundations, stairs, elevators, plaza spaces, lift mazing, housings,
roofs, and similar structures, operator houses or lift shacks and storage;
(d) Ticketing sales and all necessary and incidental commercial skier services
functions, facilities and equipment, including, but not limited to ski and equipment rental,
lockers, public restrooms, offices, ski school facilities, emergency medical care, and
related activities and uses;
(e) Making, clearing, removing, sculpting, grooming and maintaining snow
and snow surfaces, together with all the infrastructure, deep and shallow utilities, and
equipment and machinery necessazy for performing the same, whether fixed or mobile;
(f) Motorized vehicle access and use, including snow grooming equipment as
described above, as well as snowmobiles, emergency vehicles, wheeled vehicles, service
and support trucks and other vehicles routinely used in the conduct and performance of
mountain recreation, operations, services, construction, supply, events and the permitted
uses described herein;
(g) Operational, commercial, interpretive, and informational signage
reasonably necessary and/or incidental to the performance of other activities and
functions described herein;
(h) Any and all customazy activities, equipment, housings, structures, and
functions which may be necessary, appropriate, ancillary and/or incidental to the full use,
practice and enjoyment of skiing and other recreational sports and activities, mechanized
uphill transportation, and related business purposes and activities; and
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 20
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(i) Installation, staging, construction, maintenance, alteration, repair,
operation, servicing, and replacement of all of improvements, structures, materials,
landscaping and/or equipment described or contemplated herein.
Section 12: Aaaroved Dimensional Requirements
12.1 Lot 1, Lift One Lode. The following dimensional requirements are
approved for Lot 1 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development Plan for the Lift
One Lodge Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Reaz Yard Setback
(f) Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between
Buildings
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Pazking
Spaces
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
5'
0'
5'
Varies, 55.5 ft. at highest point
Per Final PUD Development Plan
135,000 sq. ft.
250
12.2 Lot 5. Lodge at Asnen Mountain. The following dimensional
requirements are approved for Lot 5 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development
Plan for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback
(f) Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between
Buildings
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking
Spaces
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
5'
5'
5'
Varies, 59.5 ft. at highest point
Per Final PUD Development Plan
191,000 sq. ft.
238
12.3 Lot 3. Skiers Chalet Steak House. The following dimensional
requirements are approved for Lot 3 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development
Plan for the Lift One Lodge Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
S
5'
0'
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Page 21
(~ Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between
Buildings
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking
Spaces
34'
Per Final PUD Development Plan
4,000
12.4 Lot 4, Willouehbv Park. The following dimensional requirements are
approved for Lot 4 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development Plan for the Lift
One Lodge Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size Per Final PUD Development Plan
(b) Minimum Lot Width Per Final PUD Development Plan
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback 40'
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback 10'
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10'
(f) Maximum Building Height 32'
(g) Minimum Distance Between
Buildings Per Final PUD Development Plan
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area 6,000 sq. ft.
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking
Spaces 0
12.5 Lot 6, Deane Street Condominiums. The following dimensional
requirements are approved for Lot 6 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development
Plan for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size Per Final PUD Development Plan
(b) Minimum Lot Width Per Final PUD Development Plan
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback 0'
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback Y
(e) Minimum Rear Yazd Setback 5'
(f) Maximum Building Height 35'
(g) Minimum Distance Between
Buildings Per Final PUD Development Plan
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area 13,000 sq. ft.
(i) Minimum Off=Street Parking
Spaces 0
12.6 Height and Floor Area Measurements.
(a) Height, building. The height of a building shall be the maximum distance
possible measured vertically from interpolated natural grade, to be recorded in the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, to the highest point or structure within a vertical plane.
Architectural and mechanical appurtenances including but not limited to antennas,
chimneys, flues, vents, trellises, flag poles or similar structures shall not extend over ten
(10) feet above the specified maximum height limit.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 22
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(b) Floor area. For the purposes of calculating the maximum allowable floor
area, there shall be included that floor azea within the surrounding exterior walls as
measured from the outside face of structural sheathing. The calculation of the floor azea
of a building or a portion thereof shall not include decks, balconies, exterior stairways,
gazebos, porches, landscape terraces and similar features. For any story that is partially
above and partially below interpolated natural grade, as recorded in the Master
Subdivision/Streetvacation Plat, only the floor area above the point at which
interpolated natural grade crosses the subfloor elevation of that story shall be counted
towards floor area.
Section 13: Reconstruction Credits
The following reconstruction credits have been verified by the City of Aspen and
shall be credited against the Growth Management Quota System allotment requirements
of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project.
13.1 Lift One Lodge Project
(a) A total of 38 lodging reconstruction credits consisting of 201odge units in
the former Holland House Lodge; l O lodge units in the former Skiers Chalet Lodge; and
8 lodge units in the former Skiers Chalet Steak House shall be credited against the Lift
One Lodge Project's lodging GMQS allotment requirement. The 38 reconstruction
credits shall equate to 76 lodging pillow for allotment purposes.
(b) One free mazket residential reconstruction credit located in the former
Holland House Lodge shall be credited against the Lift One Lodge Project's free market
residential GMQS allotment requirement.
(c) A commercial reconstruction credit of 3,374 squaze feet of net leasable
azea consisting of 2,429 square feet in the Skiers Chalet Steak House and 945 squaze feet
in the Lift lA base structure shall be credited against the Lift One Lodge Project's
commercial GMQS allotment requirement.
13.2 Lodge at Aspen Mountain Proiect
A total of 19 free market residential reconstruction credits consisting of one
single-family dwelling unit, and two duplex units and 16multi-family dwelling units
located in the former Mine Dumps Apartments, shall be credited against the Lodge at
Aspen Mountain Project's and the Lift One Lodge Project's free mazket residential
GMQS allotment requirements.
Section 14: Growth Management Quota Svstem Allotments
The following Growth Management Quota System allotments are hereby granted
to the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project and the Lift One Lodge Project.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 23
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Develo ment T e Allotment for Lod eat As en Mountain
Residential-Free Market 0 Units (5 Reconstruction Credits)
Commercial 18,000 Net Leasable S uaze Feet
Residential-Affordable Housing 15 Dormitory Rooms
Lodgin 348 Pillows
Develo ment T e Allotment or Li t One Lod e
Residential-Free Market 0 Units (5 Reconstruction Credits)
Commercial 9,000 Net Leasable Square Feet
Residential-Affordable Housing 23 Units
Lodging 126 Pillows
Develo ment T e Allotment for Skiers Chalet Steakhouse
Commercial 1,052 Net Leasable Square Feet
Residential-Affordable Housing 5 Dormitory Rooms
Develo ment T e Allotment for Ski Museum
Essential Public Facility Exem t (9,000 Gross Squaze Feet)
Development Type Allotment for Deane Street Affordable
Housin
Residential-Affordable Housing 15 Units
The Growth Management Quota System allotments granted pursuant to this
Ordinance shall expire on the day after the fifteenth anniversary of the effective date of
the Development Order issued by the Community Development Director described in
Section 3(d) above.
Section 15: Growth Manaeement Ouota Svstem Accountin¢
The Lodging and Commercial Growth Management Quota System allotments
granted in Section 14 above constitute multi-yeaz development allotments as provided for
in Section 26.470.090.1. of the Land Use Code. Pursuant to Section 26.470.090.1.c, the
Community Development Director is hereby directed to reduce the Annual Allotment, as
provided in Section 26.470.030.D, in future years to accommodate the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan as follows.
Development Typical Lift One 2009 2010 2011
Type Annual Neighborhood GMQS GMQS GMQS
Allotment Master Plan Yeaz Year Yeaz
Lodging 112 pillows 474 pillows
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 24
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Section 16: Affordable Housine Requirements
16.1 Lot 1, Lift Oue Lode. The Lift One Lodge Project will generate 53.5
employees. The Project has committed to provide affordable housing mitigation for 40
employees or 75 percent of the employees generated. The Project's employee generation
and mitigation commitments are as follows.
(a) Lodge Bedrooms. The development of lodge units within the L, Lodge,
zone district generates 0.5 employees per bedroom. The Lift One Lodge Project contains
101 lodge bedrooms and has a lodge GMQS reconstruction credit of 38 bedrooms. The
Project's 63 net new lodge bedrooms, therefore, will generate 31.5 employees.
(b) Main-Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the main level of a
building in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 4.1 employees per 1,000 square feet of
net leasable space. The Lifr One Lodge Project contains approximately 3,600 square feet
of net leasable area on the main level and has a commercial GMQS reconstruction credit
of 3,374 square feet. The Project's main-level net new commercial space, therefore, will
generate approximately 1.0 employees.
(c) Basement/Upper Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the
basement and upper levels of a building in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 3.075
employees per 1,000 squaze feet of net leasable space. The Lift One Lodge Project
contains approximately 5,400 square feet of net leasable area on the basement and upper
levels. The Project's commercial component on these levels, therefore, will generate
approximately 16.5 employees.
(d) Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House Commercial Space. The Skiers Chalet
Steak House will contain approximately 1,052 of commercial net leasable space on its
main level. Commercial space on the main level of a building in the NC, Neighborhood
Commercial, zone district generates 4.1 employees per 1,000 square feet of net leasable
space. The Skiers Chalet Steak House's commercial space, therefore, will generate
approximately 4.5 employees.
(e) Total Employees GeneratedlMitigation Requirement
(i) Lodge Bedrooms 31.5 Employees
(ii) Main-Level Commercial Space 1.0 Employees
(iii) Basement-Level Commercial Space 16.5 Employees
(iv) Skiers Chalet Steak House
Commercial Space 4.5 Employees
(v) Total Employees Generated 53.5 Employees
(vi) Required Mitigation @ 75 Percent 40 Employees
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 25
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(f) Affordable Housing Mitigation. The Lift One Lodge Project's affordable
housing mitigation shall be met as follows.
(i) On-Site Rental Unfits. The Lift One Lodge Project shall provide 20
studio units and 3two-bedroom units on Lot 1 within the Lift One Lodge and 5
dormitory rooms on Lot 3 within the Skiers Chalet Steak House building. These
units will house a total of 38.75 employees. The Lift One Lodge Project shall
provide housing for no less than 21 employees in a configuration of studio units
and two-bedroom units on Lot 1 within Lift One Lodge and dormitory rooms on
Lot 3 within Skiers Chalet Steak House building. The configuration of the
dormitory shall be set forth in the Final PUD Development Plan for the Project.
The units will be deed restricted to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority
("APCHA") Category 3 income and occupancy guidelines for rental units in
effect at the time of recording of a Condominium Map for the Project. The deed
restriction will provide that whenever an affordable housing unit becomes
available for rental, the unit owner shall have a period of thirty (30) days from the
date of termination of the prior tenancy to rent the unit to a person employed
within the Project, provided that such person is otherwise qualified under the
current APCHA Guidelines. If no such qualified Project employee has signed a
lease agreement on the unit within said thirty (30) day period, APCHA shall have
the right to select a qualified tenant for the unit. No Final Certificate of
Occupancy shall be issued for the Project until the deed restriction for the
affordable housing units has been executed and recorded.
Unless a different arrangement is worked out with the City Attorney, and
only to the extent necessary to comply with applicable Colorado law, at the time
of recording of the deed restriction the owner of the affordable housing units will
convey aone-tenth of one percent interest in the affordable housing units to
APCHA, subject to such terms and conditions as the owner and the City may
mutually agree upon.
(ii) Lift One Lodge/City of Aspen Partnership. The Lift One Lodge
shall financially contribute to a City of Aspen affordable housing project in an
amount necessary to house the balance of the 75% required mitigation not housed
on Lot 1 and Lot 3 as delineated in (f)(i) above. It is anticipated that this will be
the Burlingame Ranch affordable housing project, but a different City affordable
housing project may be substituted in whole or in part, by mutual agreement of
the parties. The Lift One Lodge Project and the City of Aspen shall enter into a
Housing Agreement whereby the Project agrees to contribute to the City the dollar
amount calculated to be required to build the number of units needed to house the
number of employees calculated herein. Based on a cooperative analysis
performed by the City and the developer, the Burlingame Ranch subsidy shall be
$130,000.00 per employee. The Housing Agreement shall be attached as an
Exhibit to the Lift One Lodge Project individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement.
The affordable housing units developed with this financial contribution shall be
sold or rented, at the City's election, at a sale or rental rate determined by the City
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 26
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
in accordance with applicable APCHA Guidelines, and shall not be owned or
controlled in any manner by the Lift One Lodge Project.
(g) Total Employees Housed/Lift One Lodge.
(i) Lots 1 and 3, On-Site Rental Units 21 Employees
(ii) Partnership Units 19 Employees
(iii) Total Employees Housed 40 Employees
16.2 Lot 5, Lodge at Aspen Mountain. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project
will generate 166 employees. The Project has committed to provide affordable housing
mitigation for 125 employees or 75 percent of the employees generated. The Project's
employee generation and mitigation commitments aze as follows:
(a) Demolition of the Mine Dumps Apartments. The pre-existing, prior to
demolition, Mine Dumps Apartments consisted of 16multi-family units, 23 bedrooms,
and 7,722 square feet of net livable area. Demolition of these units resulted in a
replacement requirement of 8 units, 12 bedrooms and 3,861 squaze feet of net livable
azea. These units, bedrooms and net livable area must be provided on Lot 5 to satisfy the
replacement requirement. The replacement requirement equates to housing for 15
employees.
(b) Lodge/Fractional Ownership Bedrooms. The development of lodge and
fractional ownership units in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 0.5 employees per
bedroom. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project contains 1741odge/fractional bedrooms.
The lodge and fractional ownership components of the Project, therefore, generate 87
employees.
(c) Main-Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the main level of a
building in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 4.1 employees per 1,000 square feet of
net leasable area. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project contains approximately 10,800
net leasable square feet on the main level generating approximately 44.5 employees.
(d) Basement-Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the basement
level of a building in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 3.075 employees per 1,000
square feet of net leasable area. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project contains
approximately 7,200 net leasable square feet on the basement level generating
approximately 22 employees.
(e) Total Employees Generated/Mitigation Requirement:
(i) Mine Dumps Replacement 15 Employees
(ii) Lodge/Fractional Ownership Bedrooms 87 Employees
(iii) Main-Level Commercial Space 44.5 Employees
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 27
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(iv) Basement-Level Commercial Space
(v) Total Employees Generated
(vi) Required Mitigation @ 75 Percent
22 Employees
168.5 Employees
126.5 Employees
(f) Affordable Housing Mitigation. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project's
affordable housing mitigation requirement shall be met as follows.
(i) On-Site Rental Units. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project shall
contain 15 dormitory affordable housing units on Lot 5. Each dorm unit will
house two employees for a total of 30 employees housed. The configuration of the
dormitory shall be set forth in the Final PUD Development Plan for the Project.
These affordable housing units will satisfy the Project's replacement affordable
housing requirement described in Section 16.2(a) above. The units will be deed
restricted to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority ("APCHA") Category 3
income and occupancy guidelines for rental units in effect at the time of recording
of a Condominium Map for the Project. The deed restriction will provide that
whenever an affordable housing unit becomes available for rental, the unit owner
shall have a period of thirty (30) days from the date of termination of the prior
tenancy to rent the unit to a person employed within the Project, provided that
such person is otherwise qualified under the current APCHA Guidelines. If no
such qualified Project employee has signed a lease agreement on the unit within
said thirty (30) day period, APCHA shall have the right to select a qualified tenant
for the unit. No Final Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for the Project until
the deed restriction for the affordable housing units has been executed and
recorded.
Unless a different arrangement is worked out with the City Attorney, and
only to the extent necessary to comply with applicable Colorado law, at the time
of recording of the deed restriction the owner of the affordable housing units will
convey aone-tenth of one percent interest in the affordable housing units to
APCHA, subject to such terms and conditions as the owner and the City may
mutually agree upon.
(ii) On-Site Sale Units. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project shall
provide 7 studio, 4one-bedroom, 2two-bedroom and 2three-bedroom affordable
housing units on Lot 6, to be known as the Deane Street Condominiums. These
units will house a total of 26.25 employees. The unit mix and minimum sizes
shall be set forth in the Final PUD Development Plan for the Project. These
affordable housing units will be deed restricted to the APCHA Category 3 income
and occupancy guidelines for sale units in effect at the time of recording of a
Condominium Map for the Deane Street Condominiums. No Final Certificate of
Occupancy shall be issued for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project until the deed
restriction for these affordable housing units has been executed and recorded.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 28
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(iii) Off-Site Sale Units It is anticipated that 27 employees will be
housed in Units I-Q of the Pacific Avenue Condominiums, which are to be
constructed at the Aspen Airport Business Center pursuant to BOCC Resolution
No. 135-2004 recorded October 29, 2004 as Reception No. 503623. The Lodge at
Aspen Mountain shall retain the right to select the first purchaser of each of these
affordable housing units, provided only that such purchaser is qualified by the
APCHA to be a purchaser under the applicable APCHA Guidelines. No Final
Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project
until the deed restriction for these affordable housing units has been executed and
recorded.
(iv) Lodge at Aspen Mountain/City of Aspen Partnership. The Lodge
at Aspen Mountain Project shall financially contribute to a City of Aspen
affordable housing project in an amount necessary to house the balance of the
75% required mitigation not housed pursuant to (i), (ii) and (iii) above. It is
anticipated that this will be the Burlingame Ranch affordable housing project, but
a different City affordable housing project may be substituted in whole or in part,
by mutual agreement of the parties. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project and the
City of Aspen shall enter into a Housing Agreement whereby the Project agrees to
contribute to the City the dollar amount calculated to be required to build the
number of units needed to house the number of employees calculated herein.
Based on a cooperative analysis performed by the City and the developer, the
Burlingame Ranch subsidy shall be $130,000.00 per employee. The Housing
Agreement shall be attached as an Exhibit to the Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement. The affordable housing units
developed with this financial contribution shall be sold or rented, at the City's
election, at a sale or rental rate determined by the City in accordance with
applicable APCHA Guidelines, and shall not be owned or controlled in any
manner by the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project.
(v) Mine Dumps Tenants. The tenants in the Mine Dumps Apartments
at the time of demolition thereof shall be provided a right of first refusal to
purchase an affordable housing unit in the Deane Street Condominiums. Such
buyers shall meet the qualification requirements of the APCHA.
(g) Total Employees Housed/Lodge at Aspen Mountain
(i) On-Site Rental Units 30 Employees
(ii) On-Site Sale Units 26.25 Employees
(iii) Off-Site Sale Units 27 Employees
(iv) Partnership Units 43.25 Employees
(v) Total Employees Housed 126.5 Employees
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 29
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Section 17: Parlcine Saaces and Parkin¢ Gara¢e
The Lift One Lodge Project and Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project parking garage
shall be considered an approved commercial pazking facility. Minimum pazking spaces
to serve each Project are identified in Section 12 above. Allocated spaces shall be
identified on the individual Subdivision/PUD Agreements (or the Final PUD
Development Plans attached thereto) required under Section 7 above. Allocated spaces
shall not be sold or leased separate from the portion of a Project to which they are
allocated. Unallocated spaces may be leased by the owners thereof on a daily or longer-
term basis, or may be sold to third parties.
The parking spaces in the parking garage shall be used for parking vehicles and
accessory storage (such as ski storage at the head of a parking space), and shall not be
principally used for storage, trash containers, mechanical equipment, or other non-
automobile related purposes.
Section 18: Buildin¢ Permit Auplication
The building permit application for each of the Lift One Lodge Project, the Lodge
at Aspen Mountain Project, and the Lift lA Base Area Project, respectively, shall include
the following:
(a) A copy of this final City Council Ordinance, as recorded, and a letter from
the primary contractor stating that the Ordinance has been read and understood.
(b) The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building
permit set.
(c) A completed tap permit for service from the Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District.
(d) Evidence that a tree removal permit has been attained pursuant to the
requirements of the City Parks Department. The tree removal permit shall be
accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and
new plantings proposed on the site.
(e) A drainage plan including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff
plan prepared by aColorado-licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and
debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required a soil
percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 5-year storm frequency
should be used in designing any drainage improvements.
(f) A final construction site management plan and parking plan pursuant to
the requirements set forth in Section 19 below.
(g) An excavation/stabilizationplan prepared by a licensed Engineer.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 30
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(h) A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Environmental Health
Department which addresses watering of disturbed areas including haul roads, perimeter
silt fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent rights-of--way, speed limits within and
accessing the site, and the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance
during construction. The Project developer shall wash tracked mud and debris from the
street as necessary, and as requested by the City, during construction.
Section 19: Construction Management Plan
At the time that each of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project submits a proposed individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement to the City
for review, and at the time the Lift lA Base Area Project submits a building permit
application to the Building Department for review, the Project developer shall also
prepaze and submit a Construction Site Management Plan and Parking Plan (the "CMP")
to the City for consideration. The CMP shall be reviewed by the City's Construction
Management Officer and the City Engineer, and shall be consistent with the City's
revised CMP Requirements Manual of June, 2007, as it may be amended from time to
time. The final CMP shall be attached as an Exhibit to the Project's Final PUD
Development Plan, or in the case of the Lift lA Base Area Project, to its Building Permit.
Any further regulations regarding construction management that may be adopted by the
City of Aspen prior to application For a building permit for a Project shall be applicable.
A temporary encroachment license is required for use of City right of way for
construction purposes. A Project developer shall not be allowed to close South Aspen
Street during construction except for relocation and reconstruction of the street and the
construction of subgrade improvements beneath the street. Street closure of South Aspen
Street concurrent with significant public events like World Cup shall be avoided.
Throughout the construction process, access will be maintained to Lift lA and Shadow
Mountain Condos.
A Project developer shall provide phone contact information for the on-site
project management to neighboring properties, and shall post such information on a sign
at the construction site in full public view so that concerns about the development may be
made directly to construction management personnel.
Section 20: Aanroval for Temporary Use of Willoughbv Park and Lift One
Park
The City Council hereby approves the temporary use of Willoughby Park and Lift
One Pazk for construction-related purposes in connection with both the Lift One Lodge
Project and the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, respectively, provided that the details
and conditions of any such uses shall be described in the CMP for each Project pursuant
to Section 19 above and shall be coordinated with the City Parks Department.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 31
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Section 21: Pre-Submittal Meetin
A Project developer shall an•ange with the Community Development case planner
to conduct apre-submission meeting with the City Community Development Staff prior
to submittal of a building permit application. This meeting shall include the developer,
the general contractor, the architect of the construction drawings, the project planner, the
Community Development Engineer, a representative of the City Building Department,
the City Construction Management Officer, and the Community Development
Department's case planner.
Section 22: Juan Street Pedestrian and Emer¢encv Vehicle Easement
The Juan Street Pedestrian and Emergency Vehicle Easement, as depicted on the
Proposed Subdivision Map attached hereto as Exhibit 4, shall be established as a
perpetual easement on the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat pursuant to Section 4
above. The bridge over Juan Street connecting components of the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project shall be at least sixteen and a half feet above Juan Street to allow for
the passage of emergency vehicles under the structure.
Section 23: Impact and Other Proiect Fees
The Lift One Project, the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, and theLift IA Base
Area Project respectively, shall be responsible for payment of impact, permit, timeshare
mitigation and other project fees to be defined in the Master Development Agreement.
Section 24: Fundine of Realacement of Lift lA
24.1 Lodge at Aspen Mountain Proiect. Pursuant to an agreement with the
Aspen Skiing Company, in the event the developer proceeds with the construction of the
Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, the developer shall provide Four Million Dollars
($4,000,000) to the Aspen Skiing Company towards the cost of replacing Lift lA with a
new high-speed lifr. Such commitment is hereby incorporated into this Ordinance as a
condition to City Council approval. If the new lift is not yet operational when the Lodge
at Aspen Mountain Project is ready for occupancy, in order to be granted a right of
occupancy by the City the developer shall provide to the City and to the Aspen Skiing
Company, as co-beneficiaries, a Letter of Credit or Performance Bond in the amount of
$4,000,000 (less any portion thereof already advanced by the developer to the Aspen
Skiing Company), in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, as collateral security for
developer's performance of this condition.
24.2 Lift One Lodge Proiect. In the event the Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project does not proceed, the Lift One Lodge Project and the Aspen
Skiing Company have agreed to share the cost of replacing Lifr lA with a new high speed
lift. If the new lift is not operational when the Lifr One Lodge Project is ready for
occupancy, in order to be granted a right of occupancy by the City the developer of the
Lifr One Lodge Project and the Aspen Skiing Company shall together provide to the City
a Letter of Credit or Performance Bond in the amount required to complete the
installation of the new lift, as calculated by the Aspen Skiing Company and reviewed and
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 32
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
approved by the City, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, as collateral security for
the completion of the new lift.
Section 25: Environmental Initiatives
The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project and the Lift One Lodge Project have each
committed to the following energy goals for their respective Projects. Such goals aze
hereby included as conditions of approval.
(a) Fifty percent (50%) less fossil fuel consumption in the Project's buildings
compared to the Ashrae 90.1 baseline;
(b) LEED Silver or Gold Certification when the Project becomes operational;
and,
(c) Post-occupancy "true-up" through off-sets, operating improvements, or
capital improvements.
The details of the energy conservation program shall be set forth in the individual
Subdivision/PUD Agreement for each Project.
Section 26: condominiumization
condominiumization of (a) the Lift One Lodge Project; (b) the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project, and (c) the Deane Street Condominium Project, respectively, are
hereby approved by the City of Aspen. Upon substantial completion of construction of
each Project, the developer shall submit a Condominium Map of the Project to the
Community Development Director for review and approval. During the period of vested
rights described in Section 3(c) above, the Condominium Maps shall be reviewed under
the applicable provisions of the City's Land Use Regulations in effect on the date of final
adoption of this Ordinance. Following expiration of said vesting period, the
Condominium Maps shall be reviewed under the then-current condominiumization
requirements of the Land Use Regulations. The condominiumization of each Project shall
be accomplished prior to the closing of the sale of any unit or fractional interest in the
Project.
With regard to the Deane Street Condominiums, the Condominium Declaration
and the HOA Articles and Bylaws shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority before the affordable housing deed restriction is recorded on
the property. The Condominium Declaration and HOA documents shall be consistent
with the provisions of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act.
Section 27: Vacation of Townhome Aanrovals; Further Vested Rights
Extension.
The developer of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project has represented to the
City that the approvals previously granted by Ordinance No. 32 (Series of 2003) for the
development of 14 free mazket townhomes and 17 affordable housing units on the Project
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 33
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
site, together with all vested rights extensions associated therewith (the "townhome
approvals"), shall be deemed fully and forever vacated, terminated and of no further force
or effect upon the execution and recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat
described in Section 4 above. The Project developer and the City shall cooperate in the
execution and recording of such instruments as may be ncessay or appropriate to
accomplish the vacation and/or termination of said townhome approvals. The foregoing
commitments by developer aze incorporated herein as a condition to the City Council's
approval of this Ordinance.
The vested rights period associated with the townhome approvals presently
expires on July 28, 2009. In light of the complexity of the several developments approved
by this Ordinance and the two (2) year time period established in the Ordinance for the
recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, said vested rights period is
hereby further extended by the City Council for a period of two (2) additional years, to
expire on July 28, 2011.
Section 28: Master Plan Amendments
The entire Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan shall remain active as a COWOP
land use review subject to the provisions of Land Use Code Section 26.500, Development
Reasonably Necessary for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public, and the procedures
therein and as established pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 13 (Series of 2008)
and Resolution No. 80 (Series of 2008), for the entire vested rights period set forth in
Section 3(c) above or as otherwise extended by the Aspen City Council. The purpose of
the COWOP land use review remaining open is to allow for the consideration and
enactment of potential amendments to the Master Plan, some of which could be
substantive and require City Council approval.
Amendments may be processed at any time and from time to time by any one or
more of the developers of the Lift One Lodge Project, the Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project, and the Lift lA Base Area Project.
Amendments which are not materially inconsistent with a representation or
condition of approval and which are substantially consistent with the goals of the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan and the use, character, intensity, traffic generation,
employee generation, circulation patterns, and public amenities of the Master Plan
development as approved in this Ordinance by the City Council, may be approved by the
Community Development Director. By way of example and not of limitation, the types of
amendments to the Master Plan approval which may be approved by the Community
Development Director may include insubstantial changes to the site plan, azchitectural
materials, fenestration, character, projections, floor area, gross floor area, net leasable
commercial area, unit counts and configuration, interior partitioning and circulation,
parking ratios and layout, insubstantial height modifications, location and vertical
projections for mechanical equipment or elevator overruns, the location and design of
pedestrian amenity space, and the conversion of free market residential units to fractional
ownership units and the conversion of fractional ownership units to lodge units. The
Community Development Director may choose to refer all or part of an amendment
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 34
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
request to the City Council. The Director's decision shall be considered the final
administrative action on the matter. An amendment not considered insubstantial by the
Community Development Director shall be reviewed as a substantive amendment. An
applicant may appeal a decision by the Community Development Director to the City
Council, which appeal shall be processed as a substantive amendment, as outlined below.
Substantive amendments shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council.
Substantive amendments shall be those which represent a fundamental change to the use,
character, intensity, traffic generation, employee generation, circulation patterns, or
public amenities of the Master Plan development. The review shall be at a public hearing
and shall require adoption of an Ordinance. The City Council shall use the same Land
Use Code criteria as used for the initial City Council approval of this within Ordinance,
unless certain criteria have no bearing on the specific amendment request. At the
discretion of the City Council, a COWOP Task Force Team may be convened or
reconvened to consider substantive amendments and to provide advice and guidance to
City Council pursuant to Section 26.SOO.OSO.D of the Land Use Code.
Amendments to the Master Plan after the expiration of the vested rights period
and any extensions thereof that may be enacted shall be reviewed in accordance with the
standards and procedures set forth in the City of Aspen Land Use Code then in effect that
govern amendments to a Planned Unit Development.
Section 29: Material Representations Preserved
All material representations and commitments made by the Lift One Project, the
Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, and/or the Lift lA Base Area Project, respectively, in
connection with the Master Plan development approvals as herein awazded, whether in
public hearing or documentation presented before the Lift One Neighborhood Task Force
or the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such development approvals and
the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an
authorized entity.
Section 30: Existin¢ Liti¢ation
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 any ordinances
repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded
under such prior ordinances.
Section 31: Separability
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.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 35
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Section 32: Public Hearine
A public hearing on this Ordinance was held on 2008, in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which
hearing a public notice of the same was 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 day of , 2008.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Attest:
,~ Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2008.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John P. Worcester, City Attorney
Attachments:
1 -Adjusted Master Plan Boundary
2 -Proposed Zoning Map
3 -Public Rights-of--Way Vacations & Dedications
4 -Proposed Subdivision Map
5 -Legal Descriptions
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 36
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
1
Exhibit 1 -Adjusted Monamn56eet /._) ~
Master Plan I, _ _ ~•/• ~`~~ ~
Boundary ~ ~' ~ ~,~,,6,,n l '-I ~ ~'""~
~!
L.T ~~ - - ioundsry i ~
I ~ soao
~ . ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ i ~ ~~ _ J L 1 J ~ Oraen~ine
~, ~
sow ~.~ Swat
_. _lr______ ..~ ,_,_,l
Y ;~ ; ~ ~~
I >s ~
~, ~ . ~ . t'' J l aeoan cra
Limib
~ ~. , I
i ~
armscn s=reK ., / I
Exhibit 2 -
Proposed Zoning l r
P
Ma PUB (N) (PUD) ~~ • /
I vwlN.e unrc J
~ UaWOpnrnl O..ly /
a ~r.r
1 C
PUB (PUD) a I ~ mn..nan
Public. Pgnmtl UPR j L _ . _ ~ ~- - - , P
.J -~ ' l
~ , ~ J ~ I
~.~yyy
NC (H) (PUD) ~ L (PUD) I / r
NaV~EVnmd Cm,n.rc~Y, luaP. PYMNA Unu /// •
Nb102 ~MY~%innN a ~ Dwebpn.n ONW/
un~i oa.akvmrn venal I I ~
AH(PUD) a ~•~•~•~
arto,e.ni. ~k,IWw ^ ~ I
PlannM VMt ~ 1
Ga.lap+a.l Mb ^ ~ . I / / I
Lill floe NaynEMlooE Masbr Plan
FOSS ~ .. - .>. r.ai'~,,. 2
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 37
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Exhibit 3 -Public
Right-of-Way
vacations and
Dedi at'ons Map
Exhibit 4-
Proposed
Subdivision Map
,,
I HIII
e GiIMrt
I'
esoe~~
- J Sbeet ~'
11
e
loco sheet -~ ! Semei
I
Drn Sbaet-~ e
r - -'
neeioon e
._.~•J
~ r
~'~ ~•~
~mmtt Street ~~
'/ Pt
e~
e ~~
~~
----°r /
-.~, J _.(
/~ ~~
J
~
~ /
IiR ale w I ~IUOC MnY Flr
pet:. ~ g. - - .=.... ;.,^~3
I r
., ~' ~ .~
I
i .e
~ ~~..
~ i.,,, ~a Z.•••.., '~
''
-' ~ -=.
e .... ...~'~ ~ 1 ~
1_ ~ Puhlx SRi enW J ~ e
r1•Ptlaetrian ~ lM 3 PeEUQ1en =~
1 =mm~1 I -s ~~'~-
e 3 lat5 -,
~ ~~
.~.J ~
r..,..... ~ I
r=~,-~J 1 ~ / I
~ I
LHI or wgr~wr Rlubr Flr
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 38
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Exhibit 5 -Legal Descriptions
A. Property of Aspen Land Fund II, LLC
South Aspen Street Subdivision/Planned Unit Development Lots 1, 2, and 3, as described
on the plat thereof recorded Apri127, 2007 with the Pitkin County Clerk and recorder as
reception number 537080 in Book 83, Page 50.
B. Property of Aspen Skiing Company
1. Land Under Contract with Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC which is
included in the Lift One Lodge Application:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14,
Block 10, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 12,
EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for the construction, erection,
operation and maintenance of a cable ski chair lift, as created, defined and established by
Easement Agreement between the Boazd of County Commissioners of the County of
Pitkin and Friedl Pfeifer recorded October 24, 1962, in Book 199 at Page 489, and,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for skiing purposes, as created,
defined and established by Easement Agreement by and between the City of Aspen and
Aspen Skiing Corporation recorded October 17, 1969, in Book 244 at Page 31, and
TOGETHER WITH that portion of the alleyway for Block 10 vacated in Book 259 at
Page 83.
2. Land Area generally adjacent to and south of the Lift One Lodge Site:
That property owned by the Aspen Skiing Company extending generally to the south
from the
southwesterly boundary of the Mountain Queen Condominiums, the southerly boundazy
of Block
12, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, the south end of the South Aspen
Street
Right-of--way and the southerly boundary of the Shadow Mountain Condominiums to the
southerly boundary of the City of Aspen.
C. Property of Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC
Lots 12, 13 and 14, Block 8, together with that portion of the alley in Block 8 abutting
said lots, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Eames Addition, City and
Townsite of Aspen (Skiers Chalet Steakhouse); Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, Block 9,
together with Lots 4 and 11, Block 9, less the west 22 feet thereof, Eames Addition to the
City and Townsite of Aspen, and that portion of the alley in said Block 9 vacated by the
City of Aspen in Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2006, recorded April 11, 2006 under
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 39
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Reception No. 522845 (Skiers Chalet Lodge); and Lots 1, 2, 13 and 14, Block 9, Eames
Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, together with that portion of the vacated
alley between Lots 1 and 14 and the west 20 feet of the vacated alley between Lots 2 and
13, Block 9, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen (Holland House).
D. Property owned or maintained by the City of Aspen.
Willoughby Park:
Lots 1-14, Block 7 and Lots 1-3, Block 8 Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen,
and that portion of Juan Street east of South Aspen Street between Blocks 7 and 8, Eames
Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen and that portion of the alley in Block 8 adjacent to
Lots 1, 2, and 3 Block 8, Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen.
Lifr One Park:
Lots 3 and 12 Block 9 and the western 22 feet of Lots 4 and 11, Block 9 Eames Addition,
City and Townsite of Aspen.
Public rights-of--way:
• South Aspen Street south of Durant Avenue.
• All unvacated portions of Dean Street west of Monarch Street.
• Juan Street between South Aspen Street and Garmisch Street.
• The alleyway between Lots 1, 2 and 3 and Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 8, Eames
Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen (unopened).
• Garmisch Street from Juan Street to Durant Avenue.
• Gilbert Street west of Monarch Street.
• Hill Street west of Monarch Street (unopened).
• Summit Street west of Monarch Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway between Hill Street and Summit Street east of
South Aspen Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway south of Summit Street east of South Aspen
Street (unopened).
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 40
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
LIFT 1 ~ UNRESOLVED ISSUES
A. No Fullback Position -What happens if~
1. Council does not approve it becnuse the West Lodge (John Snrpa's) may be larger than what
was previously rejected by Council.
2. Public might not accept as too big, out of scale, and is contrary to the character, look and
feel, of Aspen.
3. Construction cost may exceed the budget and the project would not move forward.
4. Financing, reportedly in place, might disappear.
5. Tram Board does not approve
Consequences
1. The whole thing will collapses. Projects are tied for financing of the public amenities.
2. The new street can not be built.
3. The lift(s) can not be built.
4. The other lodge can not move forward.
5. The Aspen Historic Ski Museum may not become a reality.
6. The two historic chalet buildings, are not protected.
7. Performance bond no good. Only comes into play after a construction contract is executed.
B. Excessive Vesting Proposed
Concerned about the proposed 15 year vesting.
Unnecessary, too long. Chris said it's becnuse of the present economic conditions.
It is not the city's responsibility to bail out n developer who might hove made a bad decision.
The future needs will be different, so it would be better to then hove a new design review.
C. Excessive Size of Buildings
1. Aspen projects in the style of the great lodges of our National Parks.
These grand lodges are located on a site of more than 100,000 acres.
This style is inappropriate in nn urban environment with no setbacks.
2. Now imagine two of these lodges across the street from each other.
The street between these two massive buildings becomes a canyon.
In shade or shadow most of the day, will be depressing in the winter. Little direct sun light.
3. The new lodges will be twice as high, and 3 to 4 times as wide as the Glenwood Sp. Wal-Mart.
Inappropriate for Aspen. Big box retail outlets, would not be approved.
SIZE MATTERS
D
A Possible Solution Worth Considering
1. Produced an alternate concept "Plan W"
This separates the two projects, allowing one to go forward without the other.
Made concept drawings, asked the facilitator, Tim, if I could present them.
He said that it would be better to do it at the next meeting.
The fol%wing week, was not on the agenda, asked Tim why.
He told me that Chris did not want it presented.
I then asked Chris why. He told me that the two developers did not want itshawn.
The COWOP was not allowed to see "W", discuss it, and make a decision on the facts.
This was not the only time that control was exerted to keep the COWOP on a path.
That supported the original plan that had been rejected by council for being too large.
Plan "W" vacated 5. Aspen St. the full width (70 or 75 feet) going to the adjoining lodges.
The entire lower part went to the west lodge ~ the entire upper part to east lodge
New 25 foot peripheral roads on the East and West would be constructed,
flunking the combined sites, creating a park like open space.
Wider lot more design opportunity
Buildings placed across the slope not up and down the hill.
Each lodge would have it's own parking solution independent of the other.
Could have a campus plan (Aspen Meadows like) that could have smaller buildings
maybe connected nt grade, below ground, of above the ground.
Each lodge could move forward even if the other lodge elected not to proceed.
Concept "W" developed before the Poma surface lift was envisioned, it is easy to
incorporate
E
2. Have copies of the early drawings, will make them available.
Council Action
i. It would be inappropriate for me to suggest any action, just as it is inappropriate for other
members of the COWOP to promote (lobby) for the plan which they birthed and approved.
2. However if I can be of any additional service, please feel free to contact me.
3. For the record: The COWOP vote was not unanimous.
Bill Wiener, A.I.A. A,I.P. ~ phone: 970/948-8255ce11 ~ email: Design. Bill@gmail.com
nod n~Z o5~ nQl
a~i~r.
,~oad~
sa
., ~+
a
~.._
~~a
~I '
i
~--
T
i
`~
~1
.~~
t ~.
~ n t ~
~- ~: ~
', ~ ~
;,~~ ,;.
~L ~ r~ .~
`R:C } ~ : T ~, f
~ +
' .;~ ~~ti
i
i ~
t ~
t ~
t
\\ i.~ ,
t
i
'"~ ~~.
A. The 70' - 75' street is abandoned and the
whole lower part goes to John's Lodge.
The whole upper part goes to Bob's Lodge.
B. The city acquires right of ways from both
John and Bob on both the East and West
sides of the study area. Their net site is
changed very little. However they are better
sites, ns they are more flexible. Can build
across the slope or develop a cluster plan,
C. Anew town lif t can be built along the historic
route to take people to the new mountain lift.
D. The museum is in the historic park.
E. Anew volleyball court is created.
F. The major non skiing transportation
is by vans on rubber tires. Flexible.
G. The parking is beneath. Entries anyplace.
H. The new lodges do not have to be super
buildings -can be more in scale with Aspen.
I. The whole site becomes more park like.
I
MEMORANDUM .~~
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director(JV`
FROM: Jason Lasser, Special Projects Planner
RE: The Aspen Institute -Paepcke Auditorium -Consolidated SPA Amendment and
GMQS Review, -Ordinance No.3'Z, Series of 2008 -Public Hearing
MEMO DATE: October 20, 2008
MEETING DATE: October 27, 2008
SPECIAL NOTE:
Due to notice issues and scheduling conflicts, the applicant has requested that the City
Council open and continue the 2"d hearing review until November 10~h, 2008.
This will allow time for the applicant to post and mail notice, and to allow the architects
and Institute to attend the public hearing.
APPLICANT /OWNER:
The Aspen Institute
REPRESENTATIVE:
Jim Curtis, Curtis and Associates
LOCATION:
Paepcke Auditorium -Lot 1-B of the Aspen Meadows Subdivision, commonly known as The
Aspen Institute, 1000 N. 3`d Street, Aspen
CURRENT ZONING:
A/SPA (Academic) zone district with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) Overlay
SUMMARY:
The Applicant requests consolidated SPA approval in order to expand the existing auditorium.
The applicants are requesting approvals for a conceptual and final SPA amendment and for
Growth management Quota System (GMQS) Review at this time.
RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE~:
"] move to continue the public hearing for the Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment to the
Paepcke Auditorium to November 10~h, 2008."
fib.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council
FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director-~
RE: Aspen Walk (404 Park Avenue and 414 Park Circle) -Conceptual Planned Unit
Development -Resolution No. 74, Series 2008 -Public Hearing (continued from
October 14`nl
MEETING
DATE: October 27, 2008
SPECIAL NOTE: This staff report is an amended version of the October 14`h memo and is
a supplement to the September 29`n memo. It contains the following:
• Additional comment on the issues of employees housed at 414 Park Circle,
and further discussion on garden-level affordable housing; and
• Updated tables that show the project changes over time; and
• Staff recommendation & motion.
The September 29`n memo is included for reference at the end of this update.
SUMMARY:
At the September 29`n hearing for the Aspen Walk application, the City Council discussed the
changes in the application and continued the hearing to October 14`n. The October 14`n hearing
was continued to October 27`n. Additional comment from staff is provided below.
1) Em~lovees Housed. As mentioned in the September 29`n memo, the housing director has
provided amended information on the affordable housing unit types (studio, 1 bedroom, etc.) that
currently exist at the Smuggler apartments. This new information changes the number of
employees housed when using the schedule provided in the Land Use Code from 16.75 to 18.25
employees housed by the apartments. Also mentioned at the last meeting was the fact that a
resolution of the City Council from 1991 stated that the apartments provided mitigation for 17.5
employees. There is no explanation in the resolution as to the basis of the calculation.
Due to the confusion with regard to the number of bedrooms within the units, staff has conducted
a site inspection to determine .fin what the bedroom count should be. Upon inspection, staff
determine that one three bedroom unit functioned as a three bedroom and another functioned as a
two bedroom and a storage room. Staff recommends using the adopted methodology for
calculating employees housed outlined in the Land Use Code to determine the existing number
of employees housed. The replacement housing (eight studios, two 2-bedrooms and one 3-
bedroom) requires 17.5 employees to be housed.
2) 'Garden Level' Affordable Housing. As discussed previously, an affordable housing standard
requires that a percentage of a unit's finished floor be at or above grade. Included as Exhibit `P'
of this memo is a staff interpretation of how that measurement is calculated. Essentially, a
1
percentage of the floor or walking surface needs to be at or above grade. The proposed garden
level affordable housing units with the units' entire floor located below grade does not meet the
affordable housing standard of the Land Use Code.
Although the APCHA board states that they are in support of the garden level concept, the Land
Use Code currently does not allow 100% of a unit's floor to be below grade. In some cases units
that are not too far into the ground, have access to natural light, and provide a quality living
environment may be a perfectly acceptable design solution; however, garden level units that are
predominately below grade may not provide a quality living environment. If City Council
believes that garden level units should be allowed in some instances, staff recommends that a
code amendment be developed allowing for discretionary approval of garden level units.
3) Cash-in-Lieu. At the September 29`h hearing, the Applicants proposed acash-in-lieu payment
of $982,782.61 for the expansion of the fourteen free-market units. By proposing acash-in-lieu
payment, the Applicants can provide a development with reduced mass and scale. Staff
recommended that instead of a cash-in-lieu payment, the Applicants provide off-site affordable
housing units within the City of Aspen city limits. Since the October 14`~ hearing, staff has met
with representatives of the proposal and the Applicants are now proposing off-site affordable
housing units. At this point in time, a location has not been determined nor the details.
4) Amended "fables. The tables have been amended (Exhibit `O') to show the changes in the
project between August 25`h and September 29`h.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
In reviewing the proposal, staff believes that the project provides affordable housing that is a
benefit to the community by redeveloping the existing Smuggler apartments and providing
additional affordable housing mitigation with the redevelopment of 404 Park Avenue. Staff is
supportive of affordable housing development within Aspen and recognizes the importance and
need for it within the community. Staff also recognizes that the Aspen Area Community Plan
notes that "housing should be compatible with the scale and character of the community" as well
as "preserve and enhance our sense of community" with infill projects.
In past memos, staff has noted concern over the scale of the project. The Applicants have made
changes to the project that reduce the mass and scale of the project that assists in creating a
building that will be more compatible with the existing neighborhood. A number of items still
remain to be resolved including: the number of employees housed in the Smuggler apartments,
whether the garden-level affordable housing units proposed meet the Land Use Code
requirements, and whether acash-in-lieu payment is acceptable to the City Council. Staff
recommends that:
• City Council determine that the existing Smuggler apartments house 17.5 employees.
After a site inspection with the Applicants' representative staff has determined that the
official count should be eight studios, two 2-bedrooms and one 3-bedroom.
• The current garden level affordable housing units do not meet the Land Use Code;
however, Council may decide that garden-level units may be acceptable. Council can
direct staff to develop a code amendment allowing discretionary approval of garden level
2
units. Staff can see situations in which garden level units can meet the intent of creating
quality affordable housing units.
• Off-site affordable housing units are an acceptable option rather than acash-in-lieu
payment.
• Additionally, the Applicants should clearly outline that the project is solvent and that
financial securities to complete the project can be acquired at final PUD application.
The intention of Conceptual Review is to discuss the initial threshold issues relating to a large
development proposal, and to evaluate the suitability of a development project on a particular
parcel of land. The review enables P&Z, Council, staff, and the public to review proposed land
uses, use mixes, access and infrastructure issues, and other threshold issues at a basic level
before a full fledged development proposal is brought forward. By identifying the issues at
Conceptual Review, the Applicants are able to address them as part of the Final PUD
Application when more specificity in unit counts, site design, architecture, and other land use
issues (such as new zoning, growth management, etc.) are addressed. The Conceptual Review
also allows for initial identification of questions and concerns relating to development on any
given parcel.
The Applicants have heard City Council's concern with the size of the building and have reduced
the scale and massing of the project. This has resulted in a smaller building that meets the
underlying zone district dimensional standards. It also provides some garden level housing that
can meet the intent of quality affordable housing units if they are well designed and have good
access to light. Staff supports the changes the Applicants have made in decreasing the size of the
building and we realize that a smaller building necessitates additional development off-site.
The Applicants have agreed to off-site mitigation rather than acash-in-lieu payment and will
need to provide a clear proposal of where and how much. Council, at a conceptual level, can
decide that off-site mitigation is acceptable and allow the Applicants to develop a concrete
proposal at Final PUD Application.
The resolution included with this is written in the affirmative, approving the Conceptual PUD as
presented on September 29`h. Council will need to determine whether the proposal, as presented
is acceptable ata conceptuallevel.
RF.COMMF,NDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE:
"I move to approve Resolution No. 74, Series of 2008, approving with conditions, the
Conceptual PUD for Aspen Walk."
CITY MANAGER
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A -Review Criteria (provided with 8/11/08 and 8/25/08 staff memo)
EXHIBIT B-P&Z Resolution No. 14 (Series of 2008) (provided with 8/1 I/08 staff memo)
3
EXHIBIT C - P&Z minutes: April 15, 2008 and May 20, 2008 (provided with 8/11/08
staff memo)
Exttielr D -Public comment from Nina Merzbach dated May 15, 2008 and Mike
McCollum/Shael Johnson dated May 20, 2008 (provided with 8/11/08 staff memo)
ExHIeIT E-Supplemental Memo dated May 7, 2008 from Stan Clauson Associates, Inc.
(provided with 8/11/08 staff memo)
EXHIBIT F -Supplemental Renderings updated July 24, 2008 (provided with 8/11/08 staff memo)
ExwelT G-Application (provided with 8/11/08 staff memo)
Exhibit H -Memo dated August 14, 2008 from Cindy Christensen (APCHA employee)
(provided with 8/25/08 staff memo)
Exhibit I -Correspondence dated 9/14/08 from Randy May, Aspen Walk project manager
(provided with 9/29/08 staff memo)
Exhibit J -Survey Results on Current Tenants dated 9/10/08 (provided with 9/29/08 staff memo)
Exhibit K -Email from Tom McCabe dated 9/11 /08 (provided with 9/29/08 staff memo)
Exhibit L -Resolution No. 14, Series of 1991 (provided with 9/29/08 staff memo)
Exhibit M -Memo from the Housing Board dated 9/29/08 (provided with 9/29/08 staff memo)
Exhibit N -Supplemental Renderings dated 9/19/08 (provided with 9/29/08 staff memo)
F,xhibit O -Amended tables
Exhibit P -Land Use Interpretation
Exhibit Q -PUD Review Standards
ber LY"' Memo
APPLICANT /OWNER: ~ PROPOSED LAND USE:
PFG Aspen Walk, LLC (404 Park Avenue) and
Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (414
Park Circle)
RF.PRF.SENTATIVE:
Stan Clauson, Stan Clauson Associates, Inc.
Randy May, RSMay & Associates, LLC
LOCATION:
Lot 3, Sunny Park Subdivision and Lot 5, Sunny
Park Subdivision commonly known as 404 Park
Avenue and 414 Park Circle, respectively.
CURRENT ZONING aSc U$E
Located in the residential multi-family (R/MF)
zone district with a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) overlay. 404 Park Ave. contains 14 free-
market dwelling units while 414 Park Circle
contains 11 affordable housing dwelling units.
The Applicants are requesting to develop a
residential multi-family building containing
sub-grade parking, 18 affordable housing
units and 14 free-market residential housing
units.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended Conceptual PUD approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council
require the Applicants to revise their plans
prior to a final PUD Application.
SUMMARY:
The Applicant requests of the City Council
Conceptual PUD approval.
GENERAL BACKGROUND
Since the application was last heard by the City Council, the Applicants have amended the
proposal. At the previous hearing major issues that were raised included: breaking up the
mass/size of the building and looking at creative ways to accommodate parking. Changes from
the August application to what Council is reviewing include:
A Reduction in Dwelline Units The proposal now contains a total of thirty-two (32) dwelling
units rather than the thirty-eight (38) previously proposed including six (6) fewer affordable
housing units for a total of eighteen (18). The project still maintains fourteen (14) free market
residential units. The Applicant is also requesting to pay acash-in-lieu payment for some
required affordable housing.
Changes to the Off-Street Pazkin~ The proposal includes the same twenty-eight (28) parking
spaces for the free-market dwelling units. The proposal has reduced the number of pazking
spaces from twenty-five (25) to twenty-three (23) for the affordable housing units. The
Applicants are also proposing two electric cars to be available for use by the affordable housing
residents.
A Reduction in Floor Area. In the initial application provided to the Community Development
department, the Applicants requested a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.56:1 (51,040 sq. ft.).
Additional redesign now has an FAR of 1.25:1 or 40,968 square feet. In part, the reduction has
been accomplished by removing square footage associated with both the free-market and
affordable components of the project. The Applicants are asking for 1.28:1 or 41,951 sq. ft. and
will be requesting this number at the hearing.
Massing Chances. The single structure has been replaced by two structures separated by a
courtyard. The cover to the parking access ramp cover that provided deck space for the
affordable housing units has been removed and an at-grade patio is proposed. Additionally the
building is located further from the shared property line with the Tailings Condominiums
creating a setback from the shared property line of approximately thirty-four (34) feet. There
have also been additional changes to exterior materials.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The Applicants, PFG Aspen Walk, LLC and the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority
(APCHA) have requested approval to demolish two existing buildings containing a total of
twenty-five (25) dwelling units (11 affordable housing and 14 free-market dwelling units).
The Applicants would like to redevelop the two (2) lots with two (2) new multi-family buildings
containing eighteen (18) affordable housing units (six studios, six 1-bedrooms, and six 2-
bedrooms) and fourteen (14) free market residential dwelling units for a total of thirty-two (32)
units. As shown in Figure 1, the buildings are proposed to contain:
1) A shared sub-grade parking garage for the dwelling units. Vehicular access to the
property and the garage will be from Park Circle on the northern end of the property
adjacent to the Tailings Condominiums. The garage will provide a total of fifry-one
(51) parking spaces: twenty-three (23) for the affordable housing units and twenty-
eight (28) for the free-market residential units.
5
2) The next level is garden level (partially above and below grade) and contains five (5)
free-market residential units and six (6) affordable housing units.
3) The third level is above grade on all sides and contains four (4) free mazket
residential dwelling units and six (6) affordable housing units.
4) The fourth level contains five (5) free-market residential dwelling units and six (6)
affordable housing units.
Figure 1: Building Section of the Proposal
W_
_ ~ ---~
- ---
__ __ ~ ~~
~~«
=.-
i BUILDING bEC11ON ONE
~`r'r~
Dimensional Requirements:
The existing development includes eleven (11) affordable housing units with a total of 5,624
sq. ft. of net livable area and fourteen (14) free-market residential units with a total of 9,424 sq.
ft. of net livable area. The redevelopment would provide eighteen (18) affordable housing units
at 12,006 sq. ft. of net livable area and fourteen (14) free market units at 29,932 sq. ft. of net
livable area. Table 1, below, outlines the proposed dimensional requirements for the project.
The highlighted cell is the proposed standard that is requested to exceed permitted requirements
for the underlying zone district.
Table 1: Comnazison of Pronosed vs. Required Dimensional Requirements
Dimensional
Requirement Proposed Dimensional
Requirements Underlyfing Residential Mnlti-Family Zone
District Requirements
404 Park 414 Park
Entire Project
Minimum Lot 17,550 sq. ft. 15,224 sq. fr. 6,000 sq. ft.
Size 32,774 sq. ft.
Minimum Lot
Width X91 Feet 60 Feet
Minimum Lot
Area/Dwelling N/A No requirement for multi-family dwellings
6
Dimensiouai Progosed 1)meusional Underlying Residential Matti-Family Zane:
Requirement Requirements District Requirements
404 Park 414 Park
Entire Project
Minimum Front 5 Feet 5 Feet
Yard Setback
Minimum 5 Feet 3.33 Feet
Alternative Front (formerly 0) (Corner lots are required to provide one front yard
Yard Setback meeting the minimum setback and one at 1/3 the
required front yard setback)
Minimum Side 5 Feet 5 Feet
Yard Setback
Minimum Rear 5 Feet 5 Feet
Yard Setback
Maximum Height 32 Feet, with the exception of 32 Feet
elevator shafts
Floor Area Ratio 1.25:1 or 40,968 sq. ft 1.25:1 or 40,968 sq. ft
(FAR) (formerly1.42:1 or46,725 sq. ft.)
Requesting 1.28 or 41,95bsg.ft.
The proposal presented before the Council is to demolish the existing affordable housing units at
414 Park Circle (Lot 5) and the free-market units at 404 Park Ave. (Lot 3). There are two
different types of mitigation provided for the demolition of the existing affordable housing and
free-market residential units. The following two sections are divided to address each type of
mitigation provided.
Demolition or Renlacement of Affordable Housing;
Any existing affordable housing is required to be replaced when demolition occurs. The number,
size, and type of units can be changed; however, the minimum number of employees previously
housed is required to be housed in the redevelopment. In the original application, the information
provided by the Applicants on the number and type of units calculated to 16.75 employees
housed; however, since then the housing director, Tom McCabe, has noted that the existing type
of units are different than originally submitted which changes the number of employees housed.
Based upon his research, he has stated that the Smuggler apartments should be considered to
house 17.5 employees per Resolution No.14 (Series of 1991 -Exhibit L). Mr. McCabe has stated
that the official count should be eight (8) studios, one (1) two-bedroom, and two (2) three-
bedroom apartments (Exhibit K). The current land use code calculates the amended mix at 18.25
employees housed rather than 17.5 employees; however, the previously mentioned resolution
states that the building mitigates for 17.5 employees.
The Applicants based their required replacement affordable housing on 16.75 employees housed
and their unit mix (5 studios and 6one-bedrooms) is noted in Exhibit I. This new information
changes the mitigation requirement for the existing affordable housing units and cannot be
7
accomplished by the unit number and mix outlined by the Applicants. Council will need to
decide if the number of employees to be housed is 17 5 or 18 25
The existing affordable housing units are Category 1, considered "low-income level" in the
Employee Housing Guidelines and will be replaced with a mix of Category 2 (lower moderate-
income level) and Category 4 (middle-income level) units.
Demolition or Replacement of Multi-Family Housing
For approximately twenty-seven years, the City has required a certain amount of affordable
housing to be developed when existing free-market multi-family residential dwelling units are
demolished. The basis for this requirement was the observation that as existing multi-family
units (which had often served as housing for local working residents) were demolished and
replaced, the new units no longer housed local working residents. The latest modification to this
requirement occurred as result of the moratorium in 2006 and became effective in June of 2007
(Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2007). For afree-mazket residential multi-family project that is
demolished, a developer has two mitigation options. The redevelopment proposed by the
Applicants is now through the 50% replacement option rather than the 100% replacement option
• One option is to replace one hundred percent (100%) of the units (as well as bedrooms
and net livable area) of the previously existing building as Resident Occupied (RO)
affordable housing; the remaining development on the site may be free-market as long as
there is no increase in the number of free-mazket residential units that previously existed.
• A second option is to replace fifty percent (50%) of the existing units (as well as
bedrooms and net livable area) of the previously existing building as Category 4
affordable housing; the remaining development on the site may be free-market as long as
there is no increase in the number of free-market residential units that previously existed.
Additional mitigation (for the 50% replacement option) is required when the net livable
area of the free-market component is increased from what previously existed. When
additional area is proposed, thirty percent (30%) of the increased net livable area (which
has a finished floor at or above natural or finished grade) is required to be mitigated as
affordable housing.
The existing free-market building contains fourteen (14) free-market residential units, twenty-
five (25) bedrooms and 9,424 sq. ft. of net livable area (as outlined in Table 2). Fifty percent of
the previous amount of units, bedrooms, and net livable azea is required to be developed as
affordable housing: 7 dwelling units, 12.5 bedrooms, and 4,712 sq. fr. of net livable area. The
proposed mix will meet the 50% replacement standard. The units will be deed restricted a mix of
Category 2 and 4.
8
Table 2: Existing Free-Market Residential Comnnnent
Unit Type Existing Units ` Existing No. of Bedrooms Existing Net Livable Area
studio 4 4 ~*
1 bedroom 2 2 ~*
2 bedroom 6 12 ~+
3 bedroom 1 3 ~*
4 bedroom 1 4 ~*
Totals 14 25 9,424*
Notes: *Only a total net livable area was provided by the Applicants for the existing units.
Table 3: Affordable Housine Mitigation for the Free-Market T in;rc
Unit Type Unit Count v Employees Net Livable Bedrooms
Housed Area
studio 1 1.25 501 1
(1 x 1.25) 1@501
1 bedroom 0 0 0 0
2 bedroom 6 13.5 5,103 12
(6 x 2.25) 3@850
3@851
Totals 8 14.75 5,604 13
Additionally, the Applicants have proposed that the expansion in free-mazket net livable area
(from the 9,424 sq. fr.) that previously existed, be mitigated by a cash-in-lieu payment rather
than additional on-site (or off-site) affordable housing. An additional 3,019 sq. fr. of net livable
area is required to be provided as affordable housing due to the proposed increase in the size of
the free-market component of the project. The above referenced number is reached by the
following calculation:
29,932 (total free-market net livable area proposed)
- 9,424 (existing sq. ft. mitigated by proposed on-site 50% Replacement
affordable housing)
10,442 (garden level's finished floor level is below grade and not counted)
10,066 sq. fr. (30% of 10,066 sq. fr. is required to be developed as affordable housing)
10,066 sq. fr. x .3 = 3,019 sq. ft.
The land use code allows an applicant to request of City Council acash-in-lieu payment for
mitigation required with the expansion of the free-market component. The code also allows the
units to be provided on or off site. The Applicants are requesting to pay acash-in-lieu payment
for the 3,019 sq. fr. required to be provided for affordable housing as a result of the expansion of
the free-market units.
Sta comment: The City Council will need to determine how many employees are currently housed
in the Smuggler apartments (17.5 or 18.25). Staff recommends using the existing codified numbers
of employees housed for unit type to calculate the current number of employees housed. The
replacement number could potentially be met with additional reconsideration of the unit count and
type by the Applicants. The affordable housing mitigation required for the existing free market
residential units: SO% replacement of the number of existing units, bedrooms, and net livable area
is currently met.
The Applicants have proposed acash-in-lieu payment for the 3, 019 sq. ft. of net livable area that is
required to be developed as affordable housing due the expansion of the free-market component.
This can only be approved by Council. An option that could be considered is to allow the additional
affordable housing be developed off-site rather than on-site to allow for an overall smaller project
at the subject site.
Additionally, the land use code requires that "each (affordable housing) unit be designed such that
the fmished.floor level of fifty (50) percent or more of the unit's Net Livable Area is at or above
Natural or Finished Grade whichever is higher. " As shown in the elevations in Exhibit N, part of
the finished floor of the affordable housing units located on the garden will be below Natural or
Finished Grade. As such they will not meet the design standards.
Parkine:
With regard to the off-street parking, following is a table to explain the parking requirement for
the project. As mentioned under "Notes" for Table 1, an existing deficit is allowed to be
maintained when a property is redeveloped; however, this deficit is only for the previously
existing number of units and any new units are required to meet the off-street parking standards
unless granted a variation in the requirement. In a PUD, the minimum off-street parking
requirement can be established as part of the Final PUD. The Applicant proposes a parking
allowance of twenty-three (23) spaces for eiehteen (18) affordable housing units with two of the
stalls being used for electric cars.
Table 4 outlines the parking requirements of the project as it is currently designed. Some of the
stalls are proposed in a tandem configuration. The Applicants are proposing to purchase two
electric vehicles to be used by the affordable housing residents. With two (2) parking stalls being
used for the electric vehicles, twenty-one (21) stalls are left for the residents' personal vehicles.
Two (2) parking stalls per free-market unit are proposed.
10
Table 4: Off-Street Parkin¢ Requirements
Existin Develu went ' Itetteve lo 1=:
Unit Spaces Spaces Unit Spaces Spaces Deficit.
Total Re aired Provided Total Re aired Provided
New Dwelling Units 0 0 0 8 9 9 9
(AH)
414 Park Circle 11 16 10* 10 15 14 0
(AH) or
10**
404 Park Ave. (FM) 14 22 5* 14 ?*** 28 ?***
or
5**
Notes:
* The existing number of spaces: 10 spaces for 414 Park Circle and 5 spaces for 404 Park Ave
may be maintained when the existing units are redeveloped.
** This lower number is allowed if the existing parking deficit is carried forward.
* * * No bedroom counts were provided for the proposed free-market units.
Staff comment: Council requested that the Applicants be more creative with their proposed off-
street parking. Providing electric vehicles for the use of residents is a step forward. Council will
need to determine if approximately one parking space per affordable housing unit is appropriate.
Overall Comparison of Project Changes:
The following information is provided for Council and compares the changes in the project.
Table 5: Affordable Housing Units
Existing Formerly Current ' lllifference
Proposed Proposal Between Former'
and Current:
Pro oral"
Number of Units 11 24 18 -8
Net Livable Area 5,624 16,127 12,006 -4,121
(sq. ft.)
Table 6: Free-Market Residential Units
Existing Formerly Current ; ; Hatlerence
Proposed Proposal Between Former
and Current
Pra osal
Number of Units 14 14 14 0
Net Livable Area 9,424 33,239 29,932 -3,307
(sq, ft.)
RESOLUTION N0. 74
(SERIES OF 2008)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A
CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR ASPEN WALK, COMMONLY
DESCRIBED AS 404 PARK AVENUE AND 414 PARK CIRCLE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED
AS LOT 3 AND 5, SUNNY PARK SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY,
COLORADO
Parce! ID:
2737-074-04-705
2737-0741-04-701
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from
PFG Aspen Walk, LLC and the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority represented by Stan
Clauson of Stan Clauson Associates, Inc., requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend approval of a Conceptual Development Plan for a Planned Unit Development
(PUD); and,
WHEREAS, an application was submitted to consider both lots as one site to be
redeveloped with amulti-family structure containing twenty-five (25) affordable housing units
and fourteen (14) market rate dwelling units; and
WHEREAS, the application requested that the PUD's dimensional standards meet the
underlying zone district standards of the Residential Multi-Family (RMF) zone district with the
exception of Maximum Height, Maximum Allowable Floor Area, Minimum Setback and
Minimum Off-Street Parking; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from
the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building Department, Fire
Protection District, and Parks Department as a result of the Development Review Committee
meeting; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Conceptual PUD
approval may be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public
hearing after considering recommendations by the Community Development Director and
relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on April 15, 2008, the Planning and Zoning
Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and continued the
public hearing to May 20, 2008; and
WHEREAS, on May 20, 2008, the Planning and Zoning Commission continued the
public hearing on Aspen Walk, reviewed the proposed changes of the project and design which
included fourteen (14) market rate dwelling units and twenty-four (24) affordable housing units
and recommended City Council approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development application
by a four to two (4-2) vote, with the findings and conditions listed hereinafter; and,
Page 1 of 5
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Conceptual PUD
approval may be reviewed by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing afrer considering
recommendations by the Community Development Director, Planning and Zoning Commission
and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on August 11, 2008, the City Council opened a
duly noticed public hearing to consider the project; and,
WHEREAS, on August 11, 2008, the City Council at a public hearing on Aspen Walk,
reviewed the project and design which included fourteen (14) market rate dwelling units and
twenty-four (24) affordable housing units and continued the hearing to August 25, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2008, at a continued public hearing the City Council
considered the application and upon the applicants' request continued the public hearing to
September 29, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, on September 29`h hearing the Applicants presented an amended
application which included fourteen (14) market rate dwelling units and eighteen (18) affordable
housing units; and,
WHEREAS, at the September 29`" hearing City Council considered the amended
proposal and approved the Conceptual Planned Unit Development application by a to
L-~ vote, with the findings and conditions listed hereinafrer; and,
WHEREAS, Conceptual PUD approval, granted by City Council, shall only grant the
ability for the applicant to submit a Final PUD and the proposed development is further subject
to Final PUD review as well as additional relevant land use review approval pursuant to the
Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the development review standards for Conceptual
PUD have been met, as long as certain conditions are implemented.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Aspen City Council approves the
Conceptual Planned Unit Development for the project known as Aspen Walk, subject to the
conditions listed in Section 1 below.
Section 1:
The approval is subject to the following conditions:
The Final PUD application shall reflect and demonstrate compliance with the findings of the
Commission and City Council, allowing for the development of eighteen (18) affordable
housing units and fourteen (14) market rate units. Additionally, the Final PUD may be
submitted with the following dimensional standards as requested in the application:
• The Maximum Allowable Floor Area shall be no greater than 41,951 sq. ft. or a
Floor Area Ratio of 1.28:1.
• The Maximum Allowable Height shall be no greater than 32 (excepting elevator
shafrs) feet as outlined in the application.
Page 2 of 5
• The Minimum Off-Street Parking standazd for the affordable housing units shall be
23 spaces for the 18 affordable housing units and the Applicants will provide two
electric vehicles for the use of the residents of the affordable housing.
2. The Final PUD's design shall be in substantial compliance with the conceptual PUD,
inclusive of the proposal of two structures and a shazed underground pazking facility.
3. The Final PUD application shall include:
a. An application for Final PUD application and the proposed development is further
subject to Final PUD review as well as associated land use review approvals pursuant
to the Municipal Code. Apre-application conference with a member of the Community
Development Department is required prior to submitting an application.
b. Delineation of all dimensional provisions to become requirements of the PUD.
Section 2: Building
The final design shall meet adopted building codes and requirements if and when a building
permit is submitted. Clarification and code compliance on the shared property line, exiting from
the basement garage, exiting from the market rate units, existing from each story, elevator
openings, accessible parking spaces, accessible entries, and the 2003 Efficient Building Program
is required.
Section 3: Engineering
Final design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21
and all construction and excavation standards published by the Engineering Department.
Resolution of the proposed land swap (approximately 618 sq. ft. of public right of way for a
certain amount of private property) shall be resolved prior to Final PUD application. Storm water
drainage fees may be applicable to this development proposal.
In order to achieve the ROW swap and accomplish the pedestrian connectivity and appropriate
traffic calming for the project, the alignment of Park Ave & Park Circle intersection needs to be
consistent with the Pazk Avenue Pedestrian and Transportation Plan. This includes shifting the
roadway and installing sidewalk on the west side of Park Ave. It also includes a speed table and
associated crosswalk just south of the intersection. A traffic impact analysis will be required for
the project.
Section 4: Affordable Housing
Provision of affordable housing shall be such as to provide 50% replacement for the existing free
market units. Acash-in-lieu payment is permitted for the 3,019 sq. ft. of affordable housing
mitigation required for the expansion of the free-market units. The existing affordable housing
units to be demolished shall be house employees.
Section 5: Fire Mitigation
All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not
limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire
sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907).
Page 3 of 5
Section 6: Public Works
The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and
with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of
the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility
placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards.
Section 7: Sanitation District Requirements
Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications,
which are on file at the District office.
Section 8: Environmental Health
The state of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regard to asbestos.
Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a
prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise abatement
and pool designs.
Section 9: Exterior Liehtine
All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to
Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor lighting.
Section 10: School Lands Dedication and Impact Fees
The Applicant shall pay all impact fees and the school lands dedication assessed at the time of
building permit application submittal and paid at building permit issuance.
Section 11: Parks
A formal vegetation protection plan shall be required with building permit application. Final
layout of the plantings within the public right-of--way require Park Department approval and
shall meet the comments from the Parks Department during the Development Review Committee
meeting.
Section 12:
This Resolution 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 13:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be
deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
APPROVED by the City Council at a special meeting on September 29, 2008.
Attest:
Page 4 of 5
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Page 5 of 5
Exhibit O
Table 1: Comparison of Proposed vs. Required Dimensional Requirements
Dimensional Proposed Proposed Underlying Residential Mttlti-
Requirement Dimensional Dimensional Family Zone District
Requirements Requirements Requirements
(August 25~") (September 29`~
404 414 404 414 Park
Park Park Park Circle
Ave. Circle '-Ave•
Entire Project Entire _ 8ject
Minimum Lot 17,550 15,224 17,550 15,224 6,000 sq. ft.
Size sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft.
32,774 sq. ft. 32,774 sq. ft.
Minimum Lot X91 Feet X91 Feet 60 Feet
Width
Minimum Lot N/A N/A No requirement for multi-family
Area/Dwelling dwellings
Minimum Front 5 Feet 5 Feet 5 Feet
Yard Setback
Minimum 0 Feet 5 Feet 3.33 Feet
Alternative Front (Comer lots are required to
Yard Setback provide one front yard meeting
the minimum setback and one at
1/3 the required front yard
setback)
Minimum Side 5 Feet 5 Feet 5 Feet
Yard Setback
Minimum Rear 5 Feet 5 Feet 5 Feet
Yard Setback
Maximum 32 Feet, with the 32 Feet, with the 32 Feet
Height exception of exception of elevator
elevator shafts shafts
Floor Area Ratio 1.42:1 or 46,725 1.25:1 or 40,968 sq. 1.25: 1 or 40,968 sq. ft
(FAR) sq. ft. ft
(formerlyl.42:1 or
46,725 sq. ft.)
Requesting 1.28 or
41,951 sq. ft.
Minimum Off- 53 spaces 51 spaces August 25` September 29th
Street Parking Free-Market Free-Market
Dimensional Proposed Proposed Underlying Residential Multi
Requirement Dimensional Dimensional. Family Zone District
Requirements Requirements Requirements:..
(August 25th) (September 29t°)
404 414 404 414 Park.
Park Park Park Circle
Ave. Circle Ave.
Entire Project Entire-Project
Residential: 28 Residential: 28 Free Market: Free Market:5*
spaces spaces 5* Affordable
Affordable Affordable Housing Affordable Housing: 23*
Housin Residentia123 Housing: 30
Residentia125 spaces
spaces
Notes: * An Applicant is allowed to maintain an existing deficit in parking when a property is
redeveloped; however, new dwelling units are required to meet the off-street parking standards.
Table 2: Existing Affordable Housing -Employees Housed
August 25~ Memo September 29t Memo
Unit Net Unit Employees Bedrooms Unit Employees Bedrooms
Type Livable Count Housed Provided Count Housed Provided
Area
studio ?* 8 10 8 8 10 8
(8 x 1.25) (8 x 1.25)
1 0 0 0 0 0 0
bedroom
2 ?* 3 6.75 6 1 2.25 2
bedroom (3 x 2.25) (1 x 2.25)
3 ? 0 0 0 2 6 6
bedroom (2 x 3.0)
Totals 5,624* 11 16.75 14 11 18.25 16
Note: * Only a total net livable area was provided by the Applicants for the existing units.
Table 3: Proposed Replacement Affordable Housing for the Existing Affordable Units
August 25 Memo ` September 29 Memo
OnitType Unit Employees Net Bedrooms Unit Employees Net Bedrooms
Count Housed Livable Provided Count Housed Livable Provided
Area Area
studio 3 3.75 1,209 3 5 6.25 2,502 5
(3 x 3@403 (5 x 3@500
1.25) 1.25) 2@501
1 1 1.75 600 1 6 10.5 3,900 6
bedroo 1@600 (6 x 3@600
m 1.75) 3@700
2 5 11.25 4,250 10 0 0 0 0
bedroo (5 x 5@850
m 2.25)
Totals 9 16.75 6,059 14 11 16.75 6,402 11
Table 4: Proposed Affordable Housing Mitigation for the Free-Market Units
August 25` Memo September 29` Memo
Unit Unit Employ Net Bedroo Unit Employ Net Bedroo
Type Count ees Livable ms Count ees Livable ms
Housed Area Housed .Area
studio 2 2.5 810 2 1 1.25 501 1
(2 x 2@405
1.25)
1 8 14 4.820 8 0 0 0 0
bedroom (g x 2@605
1.75) 2@603
2@602
2@600
2 4 9 3.418 8 6 13.5 5,103 12
bedroom (4 x 3@856 (6 x 3@850
2.25) I@85o 2.25) 3@851
3 1 3 1,020 3 0 0 0 0
bedroom
Totals 15 28.5 10,068 21 7 14.75 5,604 13
'O ~ ~
M N
d 'Z,i
0 7 L
d N ~ M ~ ~ ~--~ d' D1 00 00 O 7 M ~
O~ i
. ra ~ N N .
-i N N ~--~ ~--~ ~--~ N N N N
a
d
~ O O C
i+
~ G O
L Z ~ ~%
p.
~
8 a
~
a ~
~ o ~
o D
L
a
Ca
~'
d
O
~
~
oo
~
N
~
V'
~
~
M
O M
~
a\ ~;
C
'O
w
G ~
Z ~
~ ~ O ~
~ ~
.--~ M
O M
N V
N V
N V
N V
N ~
N 0
N 7
N
a\ O M
N ~
V N /
/~~~~
\J a
a\\
~l ~
all
V ~a
\\
~l ~
l a
l n a
l
~ M
O a ~ N N ^,
8 X
N N
N
d W
% O
O
N
G p
y
O
N
~
O`
O
N ~,,
W
++
~ 50. ~.
~ y
~Q ~ .N~
«cddd
.U.
~
~ a~
h
ma a
Q Q
G C
L ~ O N D` M O „
y '~
O
a -
,,
~ .
~
~
* b
'">
b o
~. y
z ~ i00. N O CL
w r
~ d °` °'~
~~
3 ~
9
~
o ~ 3
y. o
y O
L
d'
N
N
M
d'
N ~ ~
N O
w wz ~b
~ >~
en c
e ~
y q
~
C
N
~D
^~ ~ ~
O T
~ ~ Y Y
W ro V
_T
Ti
O
~ O
~ O
~ O
~ O
~ ~
Y
O
'b
~
'd
b ~!
CC Vi
Y
b a a p ~ .o c °
Z
D y .-• N M v F
ro
H
G
~~+
G
.~
bOA
N
ro
a.
v
y
i
w
O
ro
~-
V
O
O +-'
~
A bA
~ .N
Y X
~ ~~
G ~ O N U
U
~ a ~
C~
N
U
3
~ ~
~ .~
M « v
~~
~ .-~ 0 0 C' O C
~ ~
a ~
.
~
~
~~
d; ~
~ F >,
~~
~
O
~ I
T
~
~
^
A 3
L
~
r
~
V
.
•O
o
~
N ~
~
O•
~ 0. U
w
~
ifr .
'n «.~
N b 'U
. V
e0 a O V i. iF
O ~p 4. jt
O N b
y
d
~ N .-.
O N
v) iU., ~
a ~ :~
~ a
a cn
'
~ N
s. X
U
~7
a w
~
u ' o Y
fl
o
o ~ ~ ~
.
a
3
.
.n O
y ~ ~ Q ~
ee O o ~ N
W
~ ~
a
C
bq q
''
p o
~ O ~ ' N a
i
F" .X b o
v v --
„ a
~ °' ai ~
> F" ~
U d N
~
*
3 ~a
i
/
~ a z~
¢
.. a
~~~ x ~~
z~ ~
~Q °~
~~
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
LAND USE INTERPRETATION
JURISDICTION:
APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS:
26.470.070 4.c.
26.104.100
City of Aspen
Affordable Housing
Definitions: Floor
Net Livable Area
EFFECTIVE DATE:
WRITTEN BY:
APPROVED BY:
October 3, 2008
Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Director
Chris Bendon,
Community Development Director
SUMMARY
This Land Use Code interpretation is being issued to clarify language in the growth management
chapter of the Land Use Code related to the provision of affordable housing by explaining how to
measure an affordable housing unit's compliance with a standard that requires a certain percentage
of an affordable housing unit to be at or above grade.
BACKGROUND
Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2006, amended sections of the Land Use Code and initially introduced
language with regazd to affordable housing stating that "Each unit provided shall be designed such
that the finished floor level of fifty (50) percent or more of the unit's net livable squaze footage is at
or above Natural or Finished grade, whichever is higher." Since the passage of Ordinance No. 12,
slight changes to this language have occurred and subsection 26.470.070 4.c. of the Land Use Code
currently notes that:
"Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty (50) percent or more
of the unit's Net Livable Area is at or above Natural or Finished grade whichever is higher."
The above-mentioned standard is reviewed under the purview of the Planning and Zoning
Commission. In addition to the above referenced standard, the definition of Floor and Net Livable
Area as defined below are used in the interpretation.
Floor. The base walking surface within a room or other enclosure.
Net Livable Area. The area available within a building for habitation and human activity measured
from interior wall to interior wall, including interior partitions, and inclusive of, but not limited to,
habitable basements and interior storage areas, closets, and laundry areas; but excluding
uninhabitable basements, mechanical azeas, exterior storage, stairwells, garages (attached or
unattached), patios, decks, and porches.
INTERPRETATION
The affordable housing standazd in question requires a certain percentage (50%) of "the finished
floor level of the unit's Net Livable Area to be at or above.... grade". Finished floor level refers to
the actual Floor of a unit which is defined in the Land Use Code as "the base walking surface within
a room or other enclosure." Thus, the initial unit of measure to calculate the percentage of area to
be at or above grade is the base walking surface within the dwelling unit. "Base walking surface" is
atwo-dimensional concept. The volume of the unit that may extend above grade is not relevant to
this determination.
The calculation of the actual percentage of the floor level that must be above grade is a function of
the Net Livable Area. The Land Use Code defines Net Livable Area as "the azea available within a
building for habitation and human activity measured from interior wall to interior wall, including
interior partitions, and inclusive of, but not limited to, habitable basements and interior storage
areas, closets, and laundry areas; but excluding uninhabitable basements, mechanical areas, exterior
storage, stairwells, gazages (attached or unattached), patios, decks, and porches." The Net Livable
Area definition simply excludes certain portions of a unit from being counted towazds net livable
azea. This too is atwo-dimensional measurement. Area as used herein is mathematically defined as
a quantity expressing the size of a figure in the Euclidean plane or on a 2- dimensional surface. It is
measured in terms of squaze feet. Again, volume, measured in terms of cubic feet, has no relevance
in this discussion. Thus, once a determination of net livable area is made, 50% of that area, on the
"base walking surface" of the unit must be above natural or finished grade.
APPEAL OF DECISION
As with any interpretation of the land use code by the Community Development Director, an
applicant has the ability to appeal this decision to the Aspen City Council. This can be done in
conjunction with a land use request before City Council or as a separate agenda item.
26.316.030(A) APPEAL PROCEDURES
Any person with a right to appeal an adverse decision or determination shall initiate an appeal by
filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Director. The notice
of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the City office or
department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (14) days of the date of the
decision or determination being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed
time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this Title to appeal any decision or determination.
Exhibit Q
Sec. 26.445.050. Review standards: conceptaal, final, consolidated and minor PUD.
A development application for conceptual, final, consolidated, conceptual and final or minor PUD
shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the limited issues associated with
conceptual reviews and properties eligible for minor PUD review, certain standards shall not be applied as
noted. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application
and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title.
A. General requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community
Plan.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land
uses in the surrounding azea.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the futwe development of the
surrounding azea.
4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt
from GMQS or GMQS allotments aze available to accommodate the proposed development
and will be considered prior to or in combination with, final PUD development plan review.
B. Establishment of dimensional requirements: The final PUD.development plans shall
establish the dimensional requirements. for all properties within the PUD as described in General
Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying Zone
District shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During
review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and
existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall
comply with the following:
1. T'he proposed dimensional requvements for the subject property aze appropriate and
compatible with the following influences on the property:
a) The character of and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses
in the surrounding area.
b) Natural or mati-made hazards.
c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as
steep slopes, waterways, shade and significant vegetation and landforms.
d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the
surrounding area such as noise, traffic; transit, pedestrian circulation, parking and
historical resources.
2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing and quantity of open
space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of
the surrounding area.
3. The appropriate number ofoff-street parking spaces shall be established based on the
following considerations:
a) The prohable number of cars used by those using the proposed development
including any nonresidential land uses.
b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is
proposed.
c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including
those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive
techniques in the proposed development.
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general
activity centers in the City.
4. .The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there -exists
insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be
reduced if:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities or other utilities to
service the proposed development.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road
maintenance to the proposed development.
5. The maximum allowable density within aPUD may be reduced if there exists natural
hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be
reduced if:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground
instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the .natural
watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the
surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway or trail in the
proposed development.is not compatible with the terrairi or causes harmful disturbance to
critical natural features of the site.
6. The maximum allowable density within a PiJD may be increased if there exists a
significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern
is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical
constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if:
a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed
in the'Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property
is subject.
b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there
exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in Subpazagraphs 4 and
5, above, those areas can be avoided or those characteristics mitigated. .
c) 1fie increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible
with and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern,
land uses and characteristics.
Notes:
a) Lot s'~zes for individual lots within a PUD may be established at a higher or
lower rate than specified in the underlying Zone District as long as, on average, the entire
PUD conforms to the maximum density provisions of the respective Zone District or as
otherwise established as the maximum allowable density pursuant to a final PUD
Development Plan.
b) The approved dimensional requirements for all lotr within the PUD are required
to be reflected in the final PUD development plans.
C. Site design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is
complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces and
ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following:
1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual
interest or a specific reference to the past or contribute to the identity of the town are
preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and
vistas.
~3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural
context where appropriate and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and
pedestrian movement.
4. Buildings and access ways are apprpprately arranged to allow emergency and
service vehicle access.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
6. ite drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and
reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties.
7. For nonresidential land uses, spaces between buildings aze appropriately designed to
accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use.
D. Landscape plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed
landscape with the visual character of the City, with surrounding parcels and with existing and
proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the
following: '
1. The landscape plan exhibits awell-designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves
existing significant vegetation and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant
species suitable for the Aspen area climate.
2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness
and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner.
3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features
is appropriate.
E. Architectural character.
I. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate
to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for and
indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and
cultutal resources.
2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage
of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and. by use of non- or less-intensive
mechanical systems:
3. Accommodate the stotage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and
appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be
lighted in an appropriate manner considering both Public Safety and general aesthetic concerns.
The following standards shall be accomplished:
1. -All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any
kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site. features, stmctures and access ways is
proposed in an appropriate manner.
2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standazds unless
otherwise approved and noted In the final PUD documents: Up-lighting of site features,
buildings, landscape element's and lighting: to call inordinate attention to the property is
prohibited for residential development. .
G. Common park, open space or recreation area If the proposed development includes a
common park, open space or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the
proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met:
1. The proposed amount, location and design of the common park, open space or
recreation area enhance"s the character of the proposed development, considering existing and
proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the
property's built form and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and
property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation azeas is
deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the
PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the
permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas and shazed facilities together
with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial or industrial development.
H. Utilities and public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development
does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does
not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated
with the development'shall comply with the following:
Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by
the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities or site improvements are provided appropriately
and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement.
I. Access and circulation. (Only standards 1 & 2 apply to minor PUD applications) The
purpose of this standazd is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly bwden
the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and
minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall
meet the following criteria:
1. Each lot, structure or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public
street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way or other area
dedicated to public or private use.
2. The proposed development, vehicular access points and parking arrangement do not
create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development or such
surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development.
3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of or connections
to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system and adequate access to significant public lands and
the rivers aze provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for
appropriate improvements and maintenance.
4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific
plans, regazding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths and transportation are
proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner.
5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private
ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to enswe appropriate public and
emergency access.
6. Security gates, guard posts or other entryway expressions for the PUD or for lots
within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical.
J. Phasing of development plan. (does not apply to conceptual PUD applications) The
purpose of this criteria is to enswe partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary
burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts.of an individual phase are
mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined
in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to•function as a complete
development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases.
2. The phasing plan describes physical azeas insulating, to the extent practical,
occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases.
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to
public facilities, payment of impact fees. and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be
used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing and any
mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with
the phase. (Ord. No. 12, 2007, §24)
r.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office
THRU: Tom McCabe
DATE: October 20, 2008
RE: REPLACEMENT OFSMUGGLER MOUNTAINAPARTMENTS
Below is a quick assessment that was done by Chris Everson on the costs to redevelop Smuggler
Mountain Apartments:
Size Category Qty APCHA Min Net Livable
sq ft per each Total Net
Livable sq ft
Studio 1 8 400 3200
2BR 1 2 850 1700
3BR 1 1 1000 1000
Totals 5900
5900 net livable sq ft / 0.8 = 7375 gross square feet for construction + approximately 625 sq ft
covered porch =approximately 8~ total gross sq ft for redevelopment
Assumptions
1. Approximate low range redevelopment per squaze foot = $375/ft*
2. Approximate high range redevelopment per squaze foot = $475/ft*
3. Plus parking @ $40,000 per space with 1.5 spaces per unit **
4. Costs do not include possible asbestos remediation or potential .
$375 x 8,000 = $3,000,000 estimated low range for redevelopment (need to add pazking)
$475 x 8,000 = $3,800,000 estimated high range for redevelopment (need to add parking)
Rough estimate for pazking: $40,000 per space x 1.5 x 11 = $660,000
Low range estimate for redevelopment: $3,660,000
High range estimate for redevelopment: $4,460,000
* Intended to be a range of estimates for total redevelopment including demolition, soft costs,
infrastructure, grading, retention, hard construction, but not including pazking.
** Estimate for surface pazking
It may behoove Council to request the Housing Board to authorize the expenditure of funds to
have a conceptual redesign/redevelopment plan created by a design professional and to have a
conceptual estimate done, which would cost anywhere from $15,000 to $30,000 to have that
done; however, the Housing Staff supports the AspenWalk project as this is the most cost
effective development for this property at this point in time for the City of Aspen as shown by the
above calculations.
Below are estimates for repairing the existing building:
Item Estimate
Main Water
Heater
$37,000
Roof $45,200
Unit water
heaters
$8,000
Exterior $12,700
Laund $5,600
Vehicle $8,820
Retainin $15,000
A liances $17,125
Bathrooms $44,000
Contin enc $31,555
Estimated total $225,000
Jg'a.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
DATE: October 21, 2008
RE: Council Appointments
Below are the current Council assignments. JE's committees need to be
reassigned and Council needs to elect a Mayor Pro Tem.
Mayor Pro Tem
CAST
RFTA
RFTA alternate
DRGW Covenant Enforcement
NWC Council of Governments
Aspen Chamber Resort Assn.
Arts Council
Ruedi Water & Power Authority
CORE Board
Sister Cities
Healthy Mountain Communities
Rocky Mountain Rail Assn
Burlingame Housing Inc.
CML Policy Advisory Board
Nordic Council
ASC Advisory Committee
Steve Skadron/Jack Johnson
J. E. DeVilbiss
Dwayne Romero
Jack Johnson
Dwayne Romero/Steve Skadron
Mick Ireland/J. E. DeVilbiss
Jack Johnson/Mick Ireland
J. E. DeVilbiss/Jack Johnson
J. E. DeVilbiss
Steve Skadron/J. E. DeVilbiss
Randy Ready
J. E. DeVilbiss
Mick Ireland
Steve Skadron/Dwayne Romero
Dwayne Romero