Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20090223CITY COUNCIL AGENDA February 23, 2009 5:00 P.M. I) Call to Order II) Roll Call III) Scheduled Public Appearances Outstanding Employee Bonus Awards 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 Comments b) Councilmembers' Comments c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI) Consent Calendar (These matters maybe adopted together by a single motion). a) Minutes -February 9, 2009 b) Resolution #12, 2009 -Contract -Castle Creek Hydroelectric Environmental Study c) Request for Food & Wine Banners on Main Street Light Poles VII) First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #4, 2009 -Approving an SPA Amendment for Aspen Institute P.H. 3/9 b) Ordinance #5, 2009 -SPA Amendment Pitkin County Jail c) Ordinance #6, 2009 -Growth Management Aspen Ambulance District VIII) Public Hearings a) Ordinance #3, 2009 -Adopting Instant Runoff Voting Procedures b) Ordinance #2, 2009 - Buckhorn Lodge Deed Restriction IX) Action Items a) Resolution #13, 2009 - SIA Amendment -Hannah Dustin Building X) Executive Session XI) Adjournment Next Regular Meeting March 9, 2009 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. A ;I ~ Outstanding Employee Award City Council Presentation Letter Dear Officer Rick Magnuson, CONGRATULATIONS! It is my pleasure to inform you that you have been selected to receive a City of Aspen Outstanding Employee Award for the first quarter of 2009. Please plan to attend the February 23, 2009 City Council meeting to formally receive your award. You are receiving this award because of meritorious performance in an emergency situation and commitment to the City of Aspen's Declaration of Values. These contributions have demonstrated exceptional Work Ethic, Communication, Safety, Teamwork, and Customer Service with regard to both the public and your co-workers within the City of Aspen and Aspen Police Department. Specifically, your response to a reported structure fire in the early morning hours of August 13tH, 2008, was commendable and exemplary. In this emergency situation, you exceeded the standard Aspen Police Department protocol. The Aspen police officers often respond to fire and medical emergencies, in an effort to secure the scene until the appropriate personnel arrive. You took responsibility for not only securing the scene for responding units, but you selflessly acted to protect the residents and their home. Upon arrival to a residence outside the city limits, you didn't hesitate to act even though the property was outside your jurisdictional responsibility. After communicating the location of the fire to dispatch and while awaiting the arrival of the Aspen Fire Department, you entered the building to check for occupants, where you located the sleeping residents. Once you evacuated the occupants in a safe and appropriate manner, you attempted to control the fire with an extinguisher until help arrived. This demonstration of invaluable work ethic, effective communication, consideration of the safety, cooperation with responding emergency workers, and respect to the needs of all citizens is a reflection of your selflessness and dedication. Your contributions saved lives and inspire others to exceed expectations - at work and in life. Richard Pryor, Chief of Police Aspen Police Department Date 506 E Main Street, Suite 102, Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-920-5400 970-920-5409 (fax) www.aspenpolice.com Jeff Pendarvis• Asset Property Manager City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 February 12, 2009 THE CITY OF ASPEN OFFICE OF ~IHE CITY MANAGER Jeff: Congratulations! This is to let your know your nomination for an Outstanding Employee Bonus Award has been approved, and you will receive this award at the beginning of the February 23, 2009 City Council meeting. Please plan to attend. You are being recognized for your exceptional performance during times of staff shortage, taking on assignments and tasks outside of your job description, and exemplary caring attitude that show a tremendous commitment to the City's Declaration of Values specially teamwork, customer service and communication. Last August Asset Manager Bentley Henderson left the City. You stepped up and took responsibility for many projects and Asset Manager duties during the time between Bentley's departure and Scott Miller's arrival in December. To save the City money and avoid over $60,000 a year in leased space costs, you coordinated and oversaw the Canary Office move and interdepartmental shuffle of offices in the Yellow Brick building and other City properties. You also helped Transportation, Special Events, Roaring Fork Valley Vehicles and several community non-profits shuffle around in the basement to gain better use of the space and you coordinated the move of many Building Department plans that were stored in the Yellow Brick to space available in the Hopkins annex. Other projects you worked on during the fall included the research, budget adjustment, and replacement plan for fire sprinklers and fire alarm system in City Hall; the design and construction of the fence around the air conditioning units behind City Hall; and the painting, repairs, and preparation of three Water Place units for new owners as the units turned over within a very short period of time. Simultaneously, you worked with Brad and Susie Krevoy on the-Isis building-- designing and building a "notch" and getting other building improvements made to meet the needs of building owners and tenants. This controversial project involved numerous meetings with the Krevoy's and the Historic Preservation Committee on the design, bidding process, and a subsequent redesign. 130 SocrH GALENA STREET ~ Aseen, COLORAIXI 81611-197b ~ PHONe 970.920.5212 ~ Fax 970.920.5119 Pei~ted nn Renxled Paper The Krevoy's said, "Jeff has been responsive to every issue with the building....Jeff has undertaken these responsibilities in a fair and balanced manner... He has acted professionally and fairly. He also truly cares about the people connected to the Isis, and the building itself." You coordinated the bidding process and managed a major time-sensitive roof replacement project at City Hall, sixteen affordable housing units, and the Red Brick building. During this time you also managed to study for and successfully acquire a Light Commercial BEST card, demonstrating proficiency in field applications of the 2003 International Building Code. You truly exemplify the City's values by providing quality service with professionalism, integrity and honesty and by "stepping up" during the more than three months that we were without an Asset Manager and taking on all of the complex projects mentioned, plus your other day-to-day duties. We appreciate your flexibility, eagerness to help with any project, and ability to deal with diverse and sometimes difficult customers. The City of Aspen is fortunate to have you a~ our Property Manager. Again, congratulations! Sincerely, C' Randy Ready Assistant City Manager ~Ib, MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Couucil FROM: John Hines, Utility Engineer THRU: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Director DATE OF MEMO: January 26, 2009 MEETING DATE: February 23, 2009 RE: Contract Award to Miller Ecological Consultants - Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Licensing REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests awazd of a contract to Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. for Exhibit E preparation of the Castle Creek Hydroelectric facility's Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license, as well as continued assistance on aquatic resource issues for this new hydroelectric facility. The total contract award is $75,777. This is the second phase of work by Miller Ecological Consultants. Phase I consisted of coordination with city's licensing consultant to develop a detailed scope of work and schedule for studies needed in the FERC license application. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: During a July 27, 2007 Council Work Session, council approved staff s request to proceed with a November 2007 election fora 5.5 million dollaz bond issue, as well as an open space exchange to secure building site for the new hydroelectric facility. On September 8, 2008 a Public Hearing was held during which council approved the $5.5 Million General Obligation Bond Issuance which occurred that same week. BACKGROUND: The Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plan is a key component in providing renewable energy courses to Aspen's electric customers. The 1.05 Megawatt facility will produce approximately 5.5 million kWh annually, or about 8.5 percent of the annual energy requirements of Aspen's electric customers. It will reduce COZ emissions by approximately 5,167 tons, representing a 0.6% community-wide reduction in COZ. The turbine and generator equipment convert the force of the falling water into electric power Since approval of the two ballot measures, preliminary agreement has been reached with the Open Space Boazd regarding use of the site adjacent to the historic hydroelectric plant building. An application has been filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a "Declaration of Intention" to resume operations of this historic Castle Creek plant. Baseline sound measurements have been taken at the project site in order to aid the design process and ensure that post project sound levels are consistent with conditions at the present time. Bids Page 1 of 3 PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution # CITY MANAGER ATTACHMENTS: 1. Contract between City of Aspen and Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION # f (Series of 2009) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND MILLER ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE CASTLE CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC LICENSING 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 Miller Ecological Consultants regarding consulting services for the Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Licensing, 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 Miller Ecological Consultants regarding Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC Licensing 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 February 23, 2009. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, ("City") and MILLER ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, INC., ("Profession- al" 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. Completion. 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 caze 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 August 31, 2009. 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. Payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit "B" appended hereto. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed $75,777.00. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work 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-Assienability. 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 maybe due to any sub-contractor. 5. Temunation. The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the temunation. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, PS1-971.doc Page 1 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, 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 of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional maybe 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 secure this contract, that s/he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. 7. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be constmed 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 aze under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, aze 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 subcontractors 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 insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. 8. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance 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 subcontractor 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 reimburse the City for the defense costs incuned by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the fmal judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused PS 1-971.doc Page 2 in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the 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) Workers' 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 Workers' 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 ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall contain a sevenbility 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 ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($I,OOQ00- 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. PS 1-97 Ldoc 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 policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insur- ance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or tamed by or provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional insured endorsement to Ure policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance 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, temunated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. (e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minunum 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, 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 parties 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 occurrence) 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 Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA Property/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual are kept at the City of Aspen Finance Department 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. PSI-971.doc Page 4 11. Completeness of Agreement. 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 William J. Miller City of Aspen Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. 130 South Galena Street 2111 S. College Avenue, Unit D Aspen, Colorado 81611 Fort Collins, CO 80525 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 forbearance 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. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, this agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute the same. 16. Illegal Aliens -CRS 8-17.5-101 & 24-76.5-101. a. Puroose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06-1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07-1073) 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 hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work PS1-971.doc Page 5 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. 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 shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States; and (ii) Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that new employees are not employ illegal aliens. d. Professional hereby confirms that: (i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that Fails to confirm to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States 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 new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; 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 PS1-971.doc Page 6 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. (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 a new employee who is 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 has newly employed or contracted 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 new employee who is an 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 Deparhnent 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. PS1-971.doc Page 7 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. (b) If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date hereinafter written. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE) ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: By: Title: PSI-971.doc Page 8 Date: WITNESSED BY: ~~ Seed ~ar~/ PROFESSIONAL: I°I +~~) C,r ~ CO ~o~ ~-~.t I.OnSG,~~Q~~~~ ~y-hG By: n _ ~ 2_ Title: p" ~ e 5 ~ ~C Cn~ Date: ~"b' ~~ PSI-971.doc Page 9 EXHH3IT "A" to Professional Services Agreement Scope of Work MILLER 211 15. College Ave., Unit D ECOLOGICAL Fort Collins, CO 60525 CONSIli TANTS, TNC. (970) 224-4505 MEMORANDUM Date: Decenrbcr 23, 2006 To: John Hines, City of Aspen From: William J. Miller, Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. CC: Subject: Proposal for Continued Assistance on aquatic resource issues and Bxhihit E preparation on the Castle Creek Hydro-F-lectric Project Scope This proposal is submitted to assist the Water Utilities and its Consultant team during the licensing of the Castle Crcek Hydro-electric project This is the second phase of work which includes completion of studies and reports to support the license effort. The proposed faciliTy will use the existing diversions on Castle and Maroon Creeks and deliver it to a power plant via pipeline and penstock to the power plant on lower Cas[le Creek. The objective of [he Miller Ecological portion of Phase 2 work on Exhibit &Environmental Report _. will'-BB [D descfibethe existing conditions and any potential changes in the following resource esFegone-' s Water quantity andwater qua rty, ~s an wt t e, vegetation, geology artd soils,~and land and water uses. No new studies are proposed For to develop the information needed for the above resources for the Exhibit E. We plan to rely on existing information that has been collected by the county, state, and federal agencies to describe the existing environment and the environmental consequences. In addition, ¢ general description of [he Roaring Fork Valley was recently published by the Roaring Fork Conservancy, which will be used as an additional data source. The tasks included in this portion of the Project include: • Contacting the various agencies to acquire data for the project area and vicinity. • Summarizing and analyzing the data • Si[e visit to the Project eree to verify the existing conditions • Determming environmental consequences and the biological assessment for Threatened and Endangered species • Determining environmental consequences of the proposed action • Yreparetion of the appropriate sections of the Exhibit E (draft and final) • Meetings and Coordination wtih the utilities staff and consultants during the project I have assumed that the existing information, including the minimum instream flow data, is adequate for prepnation of Exhibit E. There arc existing minimum slows on both Castle and Miller Ecologial Coasuaeuta, lee, Page 1 PS1-971.doc Page 10 EXHIBIT "Ba' to Professional Services Agreement Rate Schedule Maroon creeks, which would remain and wouldnot be violated by the project. FERC, when contacted during the conduit exemption exemption process may recommend additional studies. The one study that may be recommended is an updated instream flow analysis using more current methods to quantify change in habitat with flow. I have included a cost estimate for the additional instream flow analysis. Fstimated Cost The cost for all tasks excluding the new insu"eam flow study is estimated not to exceed $75,777.00. This cost is based on our experience with projects of similar nature, the assumaption that fire data is available to describe the existing environment and environmental consequences. If n new insucam flow study is required, the estimated cost to complete that particular study is $62,383.00. The detailed cost estivate is presented below. Task Labor Direct Coats Total b Task Taskl-A am rvordimaion anal s[s $2400.00 $- $2400.00 Task 2 - Date n uisitian $6 20.00 $50.00 $ti 570.00 Task3-De[aAn 's $11840.00 $- $11840.00 iaskd-Inpream Dow dau uisitioo $S 52.00 $25.06 E5,377.00 7'esk S -l;ootdination with en ' udn an iliti $4 500.00 $• E4 600.00 Tatkb-Dmfl ExhbitEPartal 24 $17840.00 $- $17640.00 Task7•Final ExhibilE $7136.00 $- 57,136.00 Task B-A nc calsultation on 7@0 $8920.00 $- $5920.00 Tack 9 - Meeting3 and mordinetion with oroiect teem 510 784.00 $710.00 SI O 894.00 -Totarwii ut ndw PFG~SI1VI atutT- -~7$~~ S7S 777.00 Tuk ]0-0 tlooal PlrAD.SlM sled 541 88.90 $20,395.00 $62383.00 Total with additional PRABSIM Sll 0.00 _ $21480.00 $138,160.00 Schedule: The current schedule is to complete the work requireA for Exhibit E as soon as practicable (tentatively summer 2009). If FERC recommends a new ins[ream flow study, work on that task would begin in early spring 2009 and completion in fall 2009. The City is not anticipating a new instream flow study and understand if it is required, Miller Ecological Consultants will charge an additional $62,383.00 for the study. The fee for the instream flow study must be approved by the Aspen City Council and is not included in this contract. PS1-971.doc Page 11 ~C, MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk DATE: February 17, 2009 RE: Request to Use Main Street Light Poles -Food and Wine REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The ACRA and Food and Wine request Council approval to place banners on lamp posts along Main Street for their event in June 2009; the banners would be up June 8 to June 22°d. See attached letter from ACRA. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: December 8, 2008, Aspen Gay & Lesbian Community Fund requested banners on Main Street Light posts for Gay Ski Week. Staff reminded Council they were directed to work on a code amendment to the sign code and are so doing and the recommendation will be banners be allowed for local organizations with annual events or significant anniversaries. Council approved the request for banners for Gay Ski Week. In December 2001, Council adopted policies regarding signs on public property. Section IV(E) Eligibility for Banners and Flags on Main Street Light Posts states: Only applicants for significant anniversaries (25, 50, 75 and 100) of local non-profit organizations shall be eligible for consideration pursuant to this policy. All other requests from other organizations or for other types of events shall be forwarded to City Council. In May 2003, Council voted to allow Food and Wine banners in the commercial core and NOT allow them on Main street, see minutes May 12, 2003. In a January 2003 work session with the special event committee, Council agreed that allowing banners on the light poles in the commercial core (not Main Street) was up to the committee. In May 2004 Council approved banners on light poles on Main Street for Food and Wine, see minutes May 10, 2004. At that meeting, Council discussed amending the policy regarding Main Street banners to allow banners for annual events that support the community. The policy has not been amended. In Apri12005, Council approved banners on Main Street Light Posts for the 2005 event, see minutes April 11, 2005. In 2006, Food and Wine was permitted banners on the light posts along Main street and in the commercial core. There was no Council review. Food and Wine had to share the Main street light post banner space with the Writer's Foundation. The 2007 was the 25`h anniversary of Food and Wine and they did not have to apply for permission from Council for banners along Main street. DISCUSSION: 2009 is the 60`h anniversary for both the Aspen Music Festival and School and the Aspen Institute. Both institutions have applied to have anniversary banners up, 14 days for the Music Festival and 14 days for the Institute. This is a significant anniversary, which does not need Council approval; however, I wanted Council to know there will be banners up 4 weeks starting June 22„a Council has approved requests for banners on light poles for World Cup, for X-Games, for Broncos winning the Superbowl. John Worcester, city attorney, cautions against allowing the light poles on Main street to be used as a public forum, which is why staff is working on a code amendment regarding banner/flag placement. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Allowing banners on Main Street is currently a Council decision. Food and Wine has had banners along Main Street 5 out of the last 6 years (one was a significant anniversary). I recommend allowing Food and Wine to place banners on the light posts on Main Street ALTERNATIVES: If Council denies Food and Wine banners on light posts along Main Street, they will still be able to put banners on the light poles in the commercial core. PROPOSED MOTION: By approving the consent calendar, Council is approving move Food and Wine banners on light posts along Main street for their June 2009 event and to direct staff to draft changes to the 2001 sign policy on public property Section N(E) Eligibility for Banners and Flags on Main Street Light Posts. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachments: Letter from ACRA - 2009 ASPENC CHAMBER RESORT ASSOCIATION February 17, 2009 Ms. Kathryn Koch, City Clerk City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Kathryn: I am writing to you on behalf of the FOOD & WINE Classic in Aspen and the Aspen Chamber Resort Association. The 2009 event takes place June 19-21, 2009 and we are looking forward to another successful year. To honor FOOD & WINE Magazine's longstanding commitment to the Aspen community, we would like to request council's special consideration in allowing the FOOD & WINE Classic in Aspen to place lamp post banners on Main Street and in the commercial core on all available brackets. Previous approval of this request has been granted since 2003. Two of past six years approval allowed placement in just the commercial core, the remaining four years (including the FOOD & WINE Classic's 25~" anniversary) allowed placement in both the commercial core and on Main Street. We are requesting placement in both the commercial core and Main Street for 2009. We truly appreciate Council's consideration of our request again. We do understand that the City's current policy allows for placement for significant anniversaries only. Given FOOD & WINE'S consistent powerful and positive economic impact on our community, we are asking for special consideration to this policy. Council's approval over the past several years of the X-Games and World Cup banners for events not taking place on significant anniversary years has demonstrated flexibility and support by the City for these important events. We would like to ask council to do the same for one of the community's long-standing favorite events, the 27U Annual FOOD & WINE Classic in Aspen. The Classic brings an educated and affluent attendee who loves Aspen and returns year after year for the experience. Ninety-three percent of participants say the Classic exceeds or meets their expectations. The average stay is five days; the average spent per attendee $8,553; and the average household income is $893,300 (Source: 2007 Classic Survey conducted by Beta Research Group.) This event cleady attracts a very desirable demographic to the Aspen Community. We do respect council's efforts to develop a reasonable policy on these lamp post banners. Our request is to place tasteful and subtle banners throughout the commercial core and along Main Street that will enhance the Classic in Aspen experience. We appreciate your consideration in these matters. Please help us to continue to support the FOOD & WINE Classic in Aspen. Sincerely, Jennifer Albright Carney Debbie Braun Devin Padgett Vice President of Event Marketing -ACRA President -ACRA Producer Special Projects - Food & Wine Magazine tea, MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director % '`.~,~ ~~ FROM: Jason Lasser, Special Projects Planner JL RE: The Aspen Institute -Greenwald Pavilion (Tent) -Consolidated SPA Amendment and GMQS Review, -Ordinance No.~, Series of 2009- ISt Reading MEMO DATE: February 17, 2009 MEETING DATE: February 23, 2009 APPLICANT /OWNER: The Aspen Institute REPRESENTATIVE: Jim Curtis, Curtis and Associates LOCATION: Greenwald Pavilion (Tent) -Lot 1- B of the Aspen Meadows Subdivision, commonly known as The Aspen Institute, 1000 N. 3rd Street, Aspen CURRENT ZONING: Academic (A) zone district with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) Overlay SUMMARY: The Applicant requests consolidated SPA approval for a permanent, summer-only tent. The applicants are requesting approval fora SPA Amendment and for Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Review at this time. -~ sl' ~ ~I ~<~R[ t~ y'am`-vE J'~~R -~~ 1 ~'c. -- t :~ '14 ~ .~ 1 ~' 'qr ~ i j ~. ~'"" ~~_` , ~ ~ --- ' Y ~ rM~> ~ - ~+ a t, a ~. F. ~ ; YNdi., . '; " a,y r ~ I 1 r ,~i !'_~ r ',t ~~~~ ~" ~ 1 « ,~ ~ ~~ t ?M!~ ' , ~ , • Ya ~~:. Photo: the Aspen Institute, north portion ol~ the lot STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the application with conditions for the permanent, summer- only tent. Page 1 of 11 REQUEST OF THE CITY COUNCIL: The City Council will be reviewing the following land use approvals for a permanent, summer-only tent: Specially Planned Area Amendment and Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility. The applicant has requested a consolidated review (allowing atwo-step review before the Planning and Zoning Commission and then review by City Council). The review of a Specially Planned Area is (in most cases) a four step review process. Step one is conceptual review before the Planning and Zoning Commission, step two is conceptual review before City Council, step three is final review before P&Z, and step four is final review before Council. The land use reviews required as part of this application are: • Specially Planned Area (SPA) -Consolidated Review (Section 26.440.040 B) to allow for a permanent, summer-only tent. The application shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council. • A Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility (Section 26.470.090.4), to assess, waive, or partially waive, affordable housing mitigation requirements. The application shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council. BACKGROUND: The Aspen Institute is one component in the Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area (SPA) approved through Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1991. The Ordinance approved zoning map amendments to create several zones including Academic (A) and Open Space (OS) zone districts and Subdivision Review to create 10 sepazate lots at the Aspen Meadows Subdivision/SPA. The Aspen Institute was originally located on Lot 1 of the Aspen Meadows Subdivision, but in 1992, the First Amended Plat was approved to reconfigure the subdivision and created Lot 1-B, for the Aspen Institute. Lot 1-B is approximately 13.160 acres and has three existing buildings: the Bechter Building (on Gillespie), the Seminar Facility, and the Paepcke Auditorium building, this lot also contains the Greenwald Pavilion Tent. The Aspen Meadows SPA Development and Subdivision Agreement defines dimensional requirements (shown on the plat), off-street parking, site improvements, trails, financial assurances, and employee housing for each individual parcel (see pages 16 -18 of the SPA agreement for the Aspen Institute; attached as Exhibit H). The 1995 Lot 1-B Second Amendment to the plat shows dimensions, setbacks, and adds a site plan reflecting the addition and modifications to the existing Seminar Building. The amended plat states that "the Aspen Institute shall shaze continued responsibility to comply with the Meadows Traffic Mitigation Plan." The Greenwald Pavilion tent operated under a temporary use permit for 2005, 2006, and again received approval for temporary use under Resolution #8, Series of 2007. For seasonal uses, the City council determines the maximum number of annual recurrences, which shall not exceed ten (10) yeazs. The tent has been used for a variety of events including the Aspen Ideas festival, the Dalai Lama blessing, and finished the season with lectures from John Edwards, the Cleveland Health Clinic, and John McCain. Page 2 of 11 PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to amend the SPA in order to use the tent on a permanent, summer-only basis in order to construct a permanent floor for the tent, terrace, paths, a concrete pad for port-o- potties, install water, gas, electric to the tent, and to install AV cables to interconnect to the other Institute buildings. The permanent, summer-only tent, which is approximately 134 feet by 55 feet (7,370+/- sq. ft.), and is proposing to seat between 400-750 people. The remaining un-built squaze footage (3,271 sq. ft. from the 1991 SPA Plan (after the additions to the Paepcke Auditorium), will need to be expanded to accommodate the additional square footage for the tent. The initial application submission (December 20, 2007) proposed to keep the permanent, summer-only tent in its existing location. However, upon further examination of the site existing utilities that ran directly under the existing location were identified. The existing floor of the temporary use tent is crushed gravel over natural vegetation and topography. An amended application and new locafion were proposed in the November 7, 2008 drawings (Exhibit I) that would keep the tent off of the easements. During the November 19, 2008 Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting, it was determined that the permanent tent could be located on the easements, however, the floor material installed needs to allow for immediate access to the utilities below -asphalt, not concrete). The addition of 400-750 seats in the permanent tent (which is approximately the same amount of seating as the existing temporary use tent which accommodates 400-750 people) allows for lazger scale events to be held at the Institute. The increase in visitors from the 1991 SPA will require pedestrian and vehicular traffic and transportation mitigation for the additional users. The application is not proposing additional pazking, but the Aspen Institute and the City of Aspen have participated in drafting a Greenwald Tent Traffic Mitigation Plan which is attached as Exhibit L. The Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed and conceptually approved the permanent, summer- only tent. At the November 12, 2008 hearing, HPC decided 4-1 to bring the application back to conceptual due to significant changes to the application. Specifically, questions were raised about height, mass, landscaping, and the size and location of the proposed terrace. On January 14, 2009 the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed and approved the application (see HPC minutes -Exhibit F) for a permanent, summer-only tent by a vote of five to zero (5-0). { Gx ,~ ~,iGtrK~cs y~° The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application on January 6, 2009 and recommended approval to the City Council for the SPA amendment and for the GMQS review to deternune the employee generation rate (which approved the proposal for no new employees, subject to an audit from APCHA). On December 9~', the applicant submitted a supplemental site plan, proposing to locate the tent over the utilities, known as "Scheme B". The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application at on December 16~' and requested additional information, citing the transportation plan, location of the tent, landscaping, pedestrian, vehicular fire access, and landscape concerns. The Commission requested that a DRC meeting occur prior to their decision to review the proposal (Scheme B) that located the tent over to the discovered utilities (water and sewer). The applicant amended the application in order to meet the criteria for the SPA amendment, specifically addressing Page 3 of 11 At the December 16~' public hearing on The Aspen Institute Greenwald Pavilion (permanent, sutmner-only tent), the Planning and Zoning Commission raised a number of issues that they asked be addressed in further detail prior to moving on the application. An informal Development Review Committee meeting was held on December 17 to review the December 9, 2008 submission "Proposed Plan A" (tent location off utilities) and "Proposed Plan B" (tent location straddling utilities). Due to site constraints, the applicant is requesting the Planning and Zoning Commission review the December 9, 2008 submission "Proposed Plan A." Changes to the landscape plan features have been included in the drawing submitted by the applicant on December 30, 2008, attached as Exhibit K. At the January 6`h public heazing on The Aspen Institute Greenwald Pavilion (permanent, summer- only tent), the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and recommended the application to the City Council by a vote of five to zero (5-0), with conditions. The Applicant amended the design of the project during the Planning and Zoning Commission review process, and a summary of the changes are provided below. Comments from Staff follow in a separate, italicized paragraph when applicable. 1) Proposed changes proposed during Planning and Zoning Commission Review -responses from the 12/30/08 supplemental provided by the applicant (attached as Exhibit I~: • Pavilion Location At the December 16' 2008 heazing, the location of the tent was discussed, particularly "scheme B" (with the tent straddling the utilities). An informal Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was immediately scheduled, and it was determined to be unacceptable by Public Works due to difficulties with emergency access. Community Development Staff and the referral agencies recommend "Scheme A;" presented with "scheme B" on December 9, 2008. The proposed location of the permanent, summer-only tent will be north of the existing temporary use location to allow for emergency access to the water and sewer mains. The terrace on the south side of the tent will allow for emergency access, the material to be determined, but likely to be ADA compliant crusher fines, installed to the specifications of the Building Department. The Utility Department has stated that the tent cannot be located on the easement. Scheme A-2 was provided on 12/30/08, showing reduced landscaping on the north side of the tent for screening. Per the International Building Code (IBC): All paths shall be firm, stable, and slip resistant. Staff recommends the applicant continue to research materials and work with the Parks, Engineering, and Building departments to meet their requirements for construction. • Reducing the width of asphalt to six (6) feet on the fire truck access road Questions about the material of the fire access road, hammerhead, and relationship to the pedestrian path were raised by the Commission and Staff, specifically the increase in the amount of impervious surface area. In response to the comments about the 14' wide asphalt road, the applicant has instead proposed a 6' wide pedestrian, bike, and cart path, with pavers (that allow grass or vegetation to pass through) that make up the additional width required to allow for proper fire truck emergency access requirements. The additional width will be comprised of a material to be determined (crushed fines, grass between pavers, landscape/pedestrian friendly) but will allow for the Page 4 of 11 required loads. Configuration of the turnaround "hammerhead" will accommodate the existing trees, as approved by the Parks Department. Per the International Fire Code (IFC): Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities (this provision does not specify a particular type of surface. It is written in performance language; therefore, the surface must carry the load of the anticipated emergency response vehicles and be drivable in all kinds of weather).If grass pavers are to be used, they must be installed to meet the above standards. The grass paved areas must be maintained (be careful of snow plowing ripping out the pavers). The grass paved areas must be delineated from adjacent landscaping. Staff recommends that the Council approve the request, as the applicant has minimized the amount of asphalt, providing an alternative material for the access road in order to provide a pervious, landscape friendly experience for the pedestrian. • The bike/cart/pedestrian path has been moved beyond 15 feet from ton of slope Concerns were raised about the proximity of the initial proposal in which the pedestrian bike/cart path was directly adjacent to the top of slope (Stream margin Review standards do not allow for any development within a setback of 15 feet from top of slope). The applicant has relocated the cart path to the south to avoid encroaching into the required 15' setback from top of slope. Concerns about the proximity of the relocated path to the top of slope were expressed at the December 16, 2008 hearing. A request to move the path to avoid being within IS feet from the top of slope by Commission members and Staff has been addressed by the applicant to locate the path outside of the IS' setback. The disturbed areas shall be re-vegetated with native plants as approved by the Parks Department. Staff recommends approval, but that the applicant continue to work with the Parks Department on the landscape plan for the proposed path and surrounding areas to provide the most natural and effective screening plan. • LandscaninQ Neighborhood concerns about the mass and scale of the temporary tent have been raised. A berm and. screening landscaping to the north of the tent have been proposed. In addition, to meet requirements for facilities, the application proposes three (3) port-o-potties to be located between the tent and the Koch seminar building. The bathrooms are to be required only when the permanent, summer-only tent is functioning for events. Landscape screening for both the tent and temporary facilities has been proposed. In order to reduce the perceived mass and height of the tent, the applicant has submitted a detailed landscape plan for the area to the north of the tent, along the pedestrian and bike path. Parks has requested that the trees be deciduous either aspen or cottonwood, as the tent will only be used in the summer (when the leaves are out) and when the tent is removed in the winter, the bare trees will allow for transparency through the site. The applicant has responded to a request to screen the temporary facilities with landscaping from both the Commission and Staff. Building department has reviewed and conceptually approved `proposed plan A" December 9, 2008 submission, and determined that temporary port-o potties are sufficient for the needs of the events in the Pavilion. At least one (1) ADA compliant stall shall be provided. Staff recommends the City Council approve the request, but that the applicant continue to work with the Parks Department during construction and planting to provide the most natural and effective screening plan. Page 5 of 11 A maximum of 20 damper veaz at the Greenwald Pavilion, no nrivate events, all events must comply with Citv of Asnen sound ordinance requirements Due to neighborhood concerns about noise, frequency, and use; the number of days has been limited to twenty (20) per summer. Concerns about noise from late-running private parties, (such as weddings) have been raised by neighbors. The applicant has agreed to eliminate private events, and all events will be scheduled to comply with the City sound ordinance. Changes in 2006 from the original 2005 temporary use permit included the elimination of private' events due to noise complaints and violations (of City Ordinance). Staff recommends limiting the number of events to alleviate traffic and transportation concerns. Private events have more flexible schedules (such as weddings with dancing at the end of the evening, for example) than a lecture or ideas festival type event, which has brochures and marketing material with a specific timeline. Staff recommends that Council limit the number of days -not to exceed twenty days per year at the Greenwald Pavilion, prohibit private events (weddings, etc.), and require all events to comply with the City of Aspen noise Ordinance. STAFF COMMENTS: SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA -CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: A Specially Planned Area (SPA) is a process in which a site specific development plan is created which encourages flexibility and innovation in the development of land and promotes objectives outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan by allowing the vaziation of the underlying zone district's land uses and dimensional requirements for the benefit of the public. The pazcel currently exists with an SPA overlay. Based upon the new proposal the site specific development must be amended to allow the additional development. Although the addition of a 55'x 134' (7,370 sq. ft.) permanent, summer-only tent would extinguish the existing remaining un-built azea (3,271 sq. ft.) and require an additional 4,099 of allowable floor area, the underlying zone Academic (A) does not have any dimensional standards -the standards are set by the adoption of the Specially Planned Area (SPA). Allowing for additional development on Lot 1-B should be considered in the context of the entire grounds, if it is compatible with surrounding land uses, development, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Strong attention to the relationship between the surrounding structures, pedestrian and vehiculaz site circulation, pedestrian amenities, significant view planes and environmental impacts should also be considered. In the Development Review Committee (DRC) comments, the City of Aspen Engineering Department commented that it "is unable to determine if there are adequate public facilities" in particular pedestrian walkway/bikeway connections from town to events and adequate public transportation facilities. A Transportation goal in the AACP is to "improve safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, mass transit riders, and automobiles in the Aspen Area. The applicant has worked with the City of Aspen transportation and Engineering Departments to draft a traffic mitigation plan, and will review the schedule and mitigation plan on an annual basis. The proposed tent is compliant with the AACP as it adds to the "continued vibrancy of arts and culture as part of our community". The revised application identified major utilities (water and sewer mains -see Exhibit J) that run directly under the existing temporary tent, and proposes to relocate the tent to the north to avoid interference with access to the mains. If located on the easements, ACSD will require a revocable Page 6 of 11 license to allow the terrace to be located over the easement and utilities, pending information explaining the material of the terrace, and will need to allow for any additional easements that may be required for access. The floor material in the current temporazy configuration is crushed gravel over natural grade. The new permanent floor material would be either concrete (off) or asphalt (on), depending on whether the tent is located on or off the utilities. Pazks has requested a detailed tree protection plan, an approved tree permit and proper tree protection. All new plantings will need to be irrigated and the landscape plan reviewed by the Pazks Department. Although the current temporary use tent has a crushed gravel base for a floor material, the original approvals required the material to cover, not remove the native vegetation. The proposed permanent, summer-only tent will require removal of vegetation, topography changes, and an increase in impervious surfaces with the addition of a terrace, additional paths, and fire truck access roads. The Fire Mazshall has required a fire truck access road with a turnaround (hauunerhead), with a width requirement of (minimum) 14' with 1' each side for road base. The Land Use Code states; "the dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned area. Staff finds that the proposal meets the requirements of the underlying Academic (A) zone district, and is compatible, or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, height, bulk architecture, landscaping and open space. There will be an increase of 5'-3 in height from the existing temporary tent to the new `Tentnology' structure; the overall height from 20'-3 (existing ridge) to 25'-6 (at the peaks) and 20'-0 (at the low point of the valleys). Although the height has increased, the variations in the ridgeline, sloping ends, and mesh sides improve (from the existing the aesthetics and architecture of the new `Tentnology' structure. The landscape and open space will be affected by the creation of a new terrace, fare safety hammerhead, relocation of the bike path, and introduction of a berm with screening landscaping. However, using pervious material to minimize the amount of asphalt, using deciduous trees (for summer-only screening), and a reconfiguration of the bike path to provide an option of walking north or south of the tent adequately mitigates for the disruption of the existing site plan. Staff recommends that the applicant hold annual meetings to coordinate schedules with both the MAA and the City of Aspen Transportation and Engineering Departments to resolve any potential concurrent event conflicts, and to properly control to traffic generated by tent events. GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM: With Ordinance 14, Series of 1991 (Exhibit G), the City Council granted final approval of the Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area (SPA), which also granted a Growth Management exemption for an Essential Public Facility. Included in the Aspen Meadows SPA Agreement and considered to be an Essential Public Facility is the Aspen Institute (see pages 16-18 of the SPA Agreement -attached as Exhibit H). As the Aspen institute has been considered an essential public facility in the past (Ord. 14 -Exhibit G), it is logical to continue to consider it an essential public facility. When determined to be "an essential public facility, upon recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission" "the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purposes of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals". Page 7 of 11 Pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations, "each Essential Public Facility proposal shall be evaluated for actual employee generation". The applicant proposes no additional employees will be generated in the employee analysis provided with the application (please see Exhibit C). The City Council may assess, waive, or partially waive, affordable housing mitigation requirements. APCHA Staff recommends that the applicant submit an employee audit prior to building permit issuance and two yeazs after issuance of C.O. the form and methodology of the audit shall be reviewed by APCHA and be consistent for both audits. The applicant shall provide mitigation for any increase in employees unless otherwise waived by City Council. Staff finds that the proposal meets the reguirements of "a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use by, or benefit of, the general public and serves the need of the community ". The addition of 400-750 seats in the permanent tent (which is approximately the same capacity as the existing temporary use tent) allows for larger scale events to be held at the Institute. For the proposed permanent tent, APCHA Staff is requiring that an employee audit be submitted prior to building permit issuance and two years after C.O. Staff recommends the City Council waive the affordable housing mitigation requirements (as the Institute has been determined to be an essential public facility, in Ordinance 14, Series of 1991), but recommends requiring an employee audit to show that there is not an increase in employees. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Zoning Officer, Parks Department, Fire Mazshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Building Departrnent, Housing Department, Historic Preservation Officer, Utilities, Transportation, and Parking Departments have all reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Initially, in the first proposal, the removal of existing plantings and increase in non-landscaped surfaces, paved trails and vehiculaz access ways detracted from the existing pedestrian experience, and did not enhance the mix of development in terms of open space (relationship to Anderson Park) and landscaping. However, with reductions in tent size, limiting impervious surfaces, moving the pedestrian path (from within 15 feet from top of slope), and landscape screening for the tent and temporary facilities the proposal has addressed the concerns of the neighbors, Planning and Zoning Commission, and Community Development Department. p Staff recommends that the City Council approve the application with conditions. Specifically, Staff recommends • Conditions of Approval 1) The applicant shall provide a drainage plan, grading plan, and transportation plan (mitigating for Tent events) as approved by the City Engineer.a.nd '~iwKSPor t=fish D i rec1~ r• 2) The transportation plan and scheduling of events shall address the number of concurrent events, increasing the mitigation and management for overlapping events as approved by the City Engineer. 3) The institute shall not exceed twenty (20) days per year at the Greenwald Pavilion. 4) No private events shall be held at the Greenwald Pavilion (weddings, etc.) 5) All events must comply with City of Aspen sound ordinance requirements. Page 8 of 11 6) The Greenwald Pavilion shall comply with the requirements of the ACSD and Public Works (no tent or structures over the utility easements) to allow for emergency access. 'n Landscape screening on the north side of the tent and azound the toilet facilities shall be provided azound the north and west edges of the temporazy facilities (port-o- potties with a minimum of one (1) ADA stall required). 8) At least one (1) pedestrian path through the Paepcke Memorial Garden shall be accessible (ADA -all paths must be firm, stable, and slip resistant). 9) The Tent dimensions (attached in the Ordinance as Exhibit A) aze to be 55' x 134' in plan, 25'-6 in height to the peaks, and 20-0 in height at the low point of the valleys 10) The Tent is to be used approximately from the last Mon. in June to the 4th Sunday in August (with set-up one week before and take down one week after the final Sunday of events) RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIItNIITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.~, Series of 2009, on first reading." ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A -SPA Amendment, GMQS Staff Findings EXHIBIT B -Applicant Supplemental Information -SPA, GMQS criteria -letter dated 6/30/2008 EXHIBIT C -Applicant Supplemental Information -Employee Analysis -letter dated 8/18/08 EXHIBIT D -Applicant Supplemental Information -Traffic & Parking Memo -email dated 8/19/08 EXHIBIT E - DRC Comments - APCHA, Pazks, Transportation & Parking, Engineering, and Zoning EXHIBIT F -Historic Preservation Commission Minutes - 5/28/08 (continued), 7/23/08 (approved with conditions), November 12, 2008 (continued), and January 14a' (final approval) EXHIBIT G -Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1991 -Final Approval of the Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area (SPA) EXHIBIT H -The Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area Development & Subdivision Agreement EXHIBIT I -Revised Plan, Elevations -December 9' 2008 submission -Tent Utilities and 2"a Alternate location (over sewer and water mains) -Schemes "B" and "A" and associated letter ExHISIT J -Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes - 10/16/08 ( `~' EXHIBIT K -Revised Plans (Proposed Plan A-2 and landscape plan) -December 30, 2008 submission -Alternate location (off of sewer and water mains) ExHISIT L -Applicant Supplemental Information -Greenwald Tent Mitigation Plan (traffic) - Working 5`h draft -dated 2/7/09 Page 9 of 11 Page 10 of 11 Page 11 of 11 Site Plan: The Aspen Institute, north portion of the lot (including the 12/30/08 "A-2" proposal for the Greenwald Pavilion tent) ORDINANCE N0. ~, (SERIES OF 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A CONSOLIDATED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) AMENDMENT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR A PERMANENT, SUMMER-ONLY TENT, LOCATED UPON LOT 1-B OF THE ASPEN MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ASPEN INSTITUTE, 1000 NORTH THIRD STREET PARCEL ID: 2735-121-29-809 WHEREAS, the property commonly known and referred to as the "Aspen Meadows" has previously been designated a specially planned azea (SPA) on the City of Aspen Official Zone District Map; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1991, of the City Council of the City of Aspen, granted final approval of the Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area (SPA) final development plan, and associated land use approvals; and WHEREAS, in 1992, the First Amended Plat was approved to reconfigure the subdivision to create Lot 1-B, a parcel that is 13.160 acres and has three existing buildings; the Bechter Building, the Koch Seminar Facility, and the Paepcke Auditorium building. WHEREAS, in 1995, the Second Amended Plat was approved, allowing modifications to the Seminar Building, defining dimensions and setbacks with a supplemental site plan. WHEREAS, the Institute has been operating asummer-only tent as a temporary use from 2005 through 2008 for special events that exceed the capacity of existing meeting rooms on the Institute campus; and WHEREAS, the applicant, The Aspen Institute, represented by Jim Curtis, Planner, requested conceptual major development approval for a permanent, summer-only tent, located at 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute, Aspen Meadows, Lot 1 B, City and Townsite Aspen; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 23, 2008 (after the hearing was noticed, opened, and continued from May 28, 2008 and July 23, 2008), the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review standards and "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and approved the (conceptual) application with conditions by a vote of 5 to 0. WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better comply with the requirements of a Specially Planned Area (SPA); and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public heazing continued to January 6, 2009, upon further public testimony, discussion and consideration, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted Resolution No. 35, Series of 2008 by a five to zero (5-0) vote; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all the applicable development standazds 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 Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all the applicable development standazds 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 Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public heazing on March 9, 2009, the Aspen City Council approved a (Consolidated) SPA amendment to allow for a permanent, summer-only tent, and for Growth Management Quota System to be determined an Essential Public Facility, as described herein, by a vote of to ~-~: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1• Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council approves a Consolidated Specially Planned Area (SPA) Amendment and Growth Management Quota System Review for conceptual major development approval for a permanent, summer-only tent, located at 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute, Aspen Meadows, Lot 1B, City and Townsite of Aspen, with the following conditions: Conditions of Approval 1) The applicant shall provide a drainage plan, grading plan, and transportation plan (mitigating for Tent events) as approved by the City Engineer. 2) The transportation plan and scheduling of events shall address the number of concurrent events, increasing the mitigation and management for overlapping events as approved by the City Engineerc~p d 'f'~ p o ~Za1.wa. ~; rerwr . 3) The institute shall not exceed twenty (20) days per year at the Greenwald Pavilion. 4) No private events shall be held at the Greenwald Pavilion (weddings, etc.) 5) All events must comply with City of Aspen sound ordinance requirements. 6) The Greenwald Pavilion shall comply with the requirements of the ACSD and Public Works (no tent or structures over the utility easements) to allow for emergency access. 7) Landscape screening on the north side of the tent and azound the toilet facilities shall be provided around the north and west edges of the temporary facilities (port-o- potties with a minimum of one (1) ADA stall required). 8) At least one (1) pedestrian path through the Paepcke Memorial Gazden shall be accessible (ADA -all paths must be firm, stable, and slip resistant). 9) The Tent dimensions (attached as Exhibit A) are to be 55' x 134' in plan, 25-6 in height to the peaks, and 20-0 in height at the low point of the valleys 10) The Tent is to be used approximately from the last Mon. in June to the 4th Sunday in August (with set-up one week before and take down one week after the final Sunday of events) Section 2: Buildin¢ The Applicant shall meet adopted building codes and requirements in effect at the time a building permit application is submitted. This may include a newly developed efficient Building Program for Commercial projects if adopted prior to submission of a building permit application. Accessible routes to any public right-of--way and accessible parking spaces will be required. The proposed project will be subject to the newly adopted Use Tax on building materials. . Section 3: En¢ineerin¢ The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21, and all design and construction standards published by the Engineering Department. Section 4: Affordable Housing Audit The applicant shall submit an employee audit prior to building permit issuance and two years after issuance of C,O. the form and methodology of the audit shall be reviewed by APCHA and be consistent for both audits. The applicant shall provide mitigation for any increase in employees unless otherwise waived by City Council. Section 5: Fire Mitieation All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC). Fire appazatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire appazatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities (this provision does not specify a particular type of surface. It is written in performance language; therefore, the surface must carry the load of the anticipated emergency response vehicles and be drivable in all kinds of weather). If grass pavers aze to be used, they must be installed to meet the above standards. The grass paved azeas must be maintained. The grass paved azeas must be delineated from adjacent landscaping. 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 standazds. No structures shall be permitted over the utility easements. Emergency access to service the utilities shall be provided at all times. Section 7: Sanitation District Requirements Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways including hard landscaping which will impact public ROW or easements owned by the district. A revocable license issued by the district to the Institute will be required to construct a terrace on the district's easement. Prior approval of construction material for the terrace will be required. Additional access easements will be required from the applicant to the district to facilitate the district's ability to maintain the main sanitary sewer lines. Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. ACSD will not approve service to food processing establishments retrofitted for this use at a later date. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells, elevator shafts drains must flow thru o/s interceptor. Permanent improvements aze prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation foundation or access/infrastructure permit. Section S: Dimensional Standards The dimensional requirements which shall apply to this tent aze represented in Exhibit A, attached to this ordinance. Section 9: Parks An approved tree permit is required before submission of the building permit set (decrease the amount of spruce trees, increase in aspen, cottonwood, Douglas fir, and service berry bushes). The new grading and planting will require City seed mixes and approval of the landscaping. All new plantings will need to be irrigated and the landscape plan reviewed by Pazks Department. Tree protection fences must be in place and inspected by the city forester or his/her designee before any construction activities are to commence. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, and storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree on site. Hand work only will be approved within the protection zones and for the re-opening of the irrigation ditch. Section 10: Transaortation The Institute shall meet with the City of Aspen Transportation Department Staff prior to each summer season to discuss their schedule of events and associated transportation/pazking impacts as well as mitigation such as increased shuttle service, etc. The Institute shall communicate with event staff/attendees about alternative transportation options prior to large events. Section 11: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awazded, whether in public heazing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 12• This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 13: 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 sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 14: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 9th day of Mazch, 2009, at a meeting of the City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 23rd day of February, 2009. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 9th day of March, 2009. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Michael C. Ireland, Mayor List of Exhibits Exhibit A -Plan, Section, Elevations, Greenwald Pavilion (Tent) Dimensions, Approved Site Plan me-:u eOjeoadsrr~•sropea~~vadsy ..~o~ ; II Z-~' II ugid Pasodo.~ - lva1, uoR~ned PIgMU~~~ asist3 ^ C`7 o s.~opeay~ uads~ aqy - a~n~i~suI aads~ ayy ,,,, Sw... W l H 0 3 J t .~ I J y ~ /~ Lf / ~~' ~!j;~ ~ ~A i ~ a~~ ~ w ~ I; ~ b ~ ~ ~' ~ Q~ v/ ~ r £$~ @~ ,tlo~ ~ Qv. ~~if X 3 e - ~~ ~ ¢Y e~I ,~,,, ~,Yt w ~•'~ C \ > v" ~ ~s ~ ~~ ~. .____. ~ _ x sa ~ w-~«. c .. ~~ .. ~ g _ t ~ "', "9 ~ ~ s ., {~ ' q96p ~ -- dk ~ ~ 5 ~ Z ~6 ~0 _ ~Z ~-4 y'~~!' ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~,, ~ °~iS. - ~' - r t 4 ,i I ~3 _ ~` 3~6 o ~ ' ~~ ~ '~' ~ ~ ~_- ® ~ a . qi ~~ ,~ ~ ~ ./ gar .¢ ~. Y /~ /~~. /~' r F~ ` \I ~t 3e ~~ \~ ~a ~\ g~ 1 k i 1$ Y~ 2K 9 b y O r w w 0 y F (C ~_ N r S J 7 Ii 1 I ~ ( i ~- - .I-.e: ` ` y 4 S ~ Ab 9 2 ti e O 4 a o ~ r7 z 0 J v .~ f Z N LL Q w z U z O U w Vl 41 ": b 4 SPA Sec. 26.440.050. EXHIBIT A Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA). A. General. In the review of a development application for a conceptual development plan and a final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture,landscaping and open space. Staff Finding: The proposed development does not change the existing land use. The amount of development will be increased from the existing permanent structures (the existing summer tent has a temporary use permit), and there will be an increase of 5'-3 in height from the existing temporary dent to the new `Tentnology'structure; the overall height from 20'-3 (existing ridge) to 25'-6 (at the peaks) and 20'-0 (at the Zow point of the valleys). Although the height has increased, the variations in the ridgeline, sloping ends, and mesh sides improve (from the existing) the aesthetics and architecture of the new 'Tendnology'structure. In order to reduce the perceived mass and height of the tent, the applicant has submitted a detailed landscape plan for the area to the north of the tent, along the pedestrian and bike path. Parks has requested that the trees be deciduous either aspen or cottonwood, as the tent will only be used in the summer (when the leaves are out) and when the tent is removed in the winter, the bare trees will allow for transparency through the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Staff Finding: The addition of 600-750 seats in the permanent tent (which is approximately the same capacity as the existing temporary use tent) allows for larger scale events to be held at the Institute. The increase in visitors will require pedestrian and vehicular traffic and transportation mitigation for the additional users. The Transportation and Engineering Departments have worked with the applicant and the application has been amended to include a traffic mitigation plan (Working 5'h Draft !s attached as Exhibit L). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mudflow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. Staff Finding: Concerns about the proximity of the relocated path to the top of slope were expressed at the December 16, 2008 hearing. A request to move the path to avoid being within 15 feet from the top of slope by Commission members and Staff has been addressed by the applicant to locate the path outside of the IS' setback. The disturbed areas shall be re-vegetated with native plants as approved by the Parks Department. Staff recommends the applicant continue to work with the Parks Department on the landscape plan for the proposed path and surrounding areas..Staff does not find this criterion to be met. The parcel for the proposed permanent, summer only tent does not have significant slope or ground instability, and while the tent will be located adjacent to the top of slope of the Roaring Fork River, it is setback from the top of slope as required, and is not in immediate danger of mudflow, rock falls, avalanche, or flood hazards. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. Staff Finding: The proposed location for the tent will relocate the existing bike path (north edge of property). The relocated path will come within several feet from the top of slope, which will require that it does not disturb or replaces disturbed existing native vegetation. Although the proposed fire safety hammerhead increases the width of an existing driveway from eleven (Il) feet to fourteen (16) feet, only six (6) feet of asphalt will be used, with five feet of pervious material on either side to maintain a similar condition to the existing gravel and pebble border. The fire truck turnaround area has been located !o avoid removal of trees, and to allow for easy access to the temporary port-o potties. Additional landscape screening that camouflages the temporary facilities seeks to protect the users from visual connection. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: From the AACP; From the AACP; "Walter Paepcke helped found Aspen as a unique community... in which arts, culture and education provide cornerstones of our lifestyle, character, and economy. "The Institute and the Auditorium provide a venue to facilitate many of the goals of AACP, spec~cally Arts, Culture, Education, Design Quality, and Historic Preservation. Staff finds the application to be consistent with the goads of the AACP. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Finding: The proposal does not require public funds to provide public facilities for the proposed parcel. Staff frnds this criterion to be met. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent (20%) meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Subsection 26.445.040.B.2. Staff Finding: There are no slopes in excess of twenty percent on the proposed Lot. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. Staff Finding. The Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that there is no change from the existing numbers of employee generation rate (see Exhibit C for an employee analysis provided by the applicant). Stafffinds this criterion to be met. B. Variations permitted. The final development plan shall comply with the requirements of the underlying zone district; provided, however, that variations from those requirements may be allowed based on the standards of this Section. Variations may be allowed for the following requirements: open space, minimum distance between buildings, maximum height, minimum front yard, minimum rear yard, minimum side yard, minimum lot width, minimum lot area, trash access area, internal floor area ratio, number of off-street parking spaces and uses and design standards of Chapter 26.410 for streets and related improvements. Any variations allowed shall be specified in the SPA agreement and shown on the final development plan. Staff Finding: Although the addition of a 60'x140' (8, 046 sq ft.) permanent, summer-only tent would extinguish the existing remaining un-built area (3,271 sq. ft.) and require an additional 4,775 of allowable floor area, the underlying zone Academic (A) does not have any dimensional standards -the standards are set by the adoption of the Specially Planned Area (SPA). In conjunction with the limited time the tent will be erected -approximately 7 weeks -the SPA allows for flexibility and allows a mix of development through innovative design practices. Staff frnds this criterion to be met. GMQS Sec. 26.470.090. Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, all City Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotments and development ceiling levels. 4. Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. Staff Finding.• The applicant is requesting that the Aspen Institute (and MMA) continue to be considered an Essential Public Facility as previously determined in the 1991 SPA Plan (See Exhibit G for Ordinance 14, Series of 1991). Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. Staff Finding: Pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations, "each Essential Public Facility proposal shall be evaluated for actual employee generation ". In the Public (P) zone district, for example, the calculation of 3.9 employees generated per 1, 000 sq. ft. of net leasable space is used. All essential public facilities shall be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission to determine employee generation. The applicant proposes no additional employees in the employee analysis provided with the application (please see Exhibit C). Stafffands this criterion to be met. Sec. 26.470.050. General requirements. A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development: 1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard. Staf(Finding. Growth management allotments are currently available; however, the application notes that no additional employees will be generated (see Exhibit C). Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: Please see SPA criterion 5. While the proposed tent adds to the "continued vibrancy of arts and culture as part of our community ", it does not "maintain valued open space ". Staff finds the application to be consistent with the goals of the AACP. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district. Sta!lFinding: The Land use Code states; "the dimensional requirements which shall apply !o all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned area. The Academic (A) zone district requirements are set by the SPA. Staff frnds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable. Staf(Finding: The application received final approval on January 14, 2009, as stated in the Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No., Series of 2009. Please refer to the HPC minutes from May 2$ 2008, July 23, 2008, November Il, 2008, and January 14, 2009). Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Sta Finding: The applicant is requesting for Council to waive the affordable housing requirements, as the Institute has been previously dedermined to be an essential public facility (as approved in 1991). The proposal for the Greenwald Pavilion does not include additional employees (see Exhibit C). The City Council may assess, waive, or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. Starj Finding.• Not Applicable. 7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14, 2007, § 1) Sta Finding: The revised application identified major utilities (water and sewer mains) tha! run directly under the existing temporary lent, and proposes to relocate the tend to the north to avoid interference with access. ACSD will require a revocable license to allow the terrace to be located over the easement and utilities, and will need to allow for arty additional easements that may be required for access. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. EXHIBIT B TO: Jason Lasser, FROM: Jim Curtis, DATE: November 10, 2008 MEMORANDUM Aspen Community Deve. Office Owner Representative The Aspen Institute RE: Greenwald Pavilion Tent Updated SPA Application Information SPA Amendment Application, Dated December 20, 2007 Aspen Institute Property 1000 N. Third Street Lot 1-B, Aspen Meadows Subdivision Parcel#2735-121-29-809 Pursuant to our conversation on November 4, this updated information is outlined as follows: A. Project Summary B. Greenwald Tent Design & Location C. Lower West End Mitigation Plan D. Land Use Code Sections 1. Combined Deve. Reviews 2. Deve. In Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) 3. Review Standards for Deve. In A Specially Planned Area (SPA) 4. SPA Application 5. Consolidated SPA Amendment 6. Growth Management Review For Essential Public Facility 7. GMQS General Requirements 8. Essential Public Facilities 9. Impact Fees & Dedications Sec. 26.304.090(B) Sec. 26.435 Sec. 26.440.050(A) Sec. 26.440.060(A&B) Sec. 26.440.090(B) Sec. 26.470.040(D)(3 ) Sec. 26.470.050(B) Sec. 26.470.090 Sec. 26.600 LasserUpdateAppInfoSPAAmend 11108 1 2. Need for the Tent The Tent gives the Institute a venue to hold larger, but limited, keynote events during the Summer Season in a wonderful outdoor setting. The events held in 2007 and 2008 were the following: 2007 Events • July 02 - 08 • July 10 • Aug. 04 • Aug. 09 • Aug. 13 • Aug. 15 2008 Events • June 30 -July 6 • July 21 • July 25-26 • Aug. 04 • Aug. 14 Aspen Ideas Festival Socrates Lecture Aspen Institute Board of Trustees Lecture John Edwards Lecture Institute - ACIH -Cleveland Clinic Health Lecture John McCain Lecture Aspen Ideas Festival King Abdullah Lecture Tibet Symposia Justice Kennedy Lecture John McCain Lecture The Tent is sized to hold the larger keynote events of 400 to 750 people. No other facilities at the Institute are sized to hold these larger keynote events. The Doerr-Hosier Center was never designed nor sized to handle the 4 - 5 largest events which occur only in the summer. The Doerr-Hosier Center was always sized to handle 250 - 350 people with both banquet and seminar style seating with supporting food service for both winter and summer operations. Secondly, the Institute will continue to try to hold the larger events in the Benedict Music Tent as it has done in the past. However, as we know, the Music Tent is used virtually every day by the Music Festival from late June to late August and especially during the high-use weekend days. If the Aspen Community supports these larger keynote events, then a permanent summer-only venue is desirable for scheduling, organizing and staging the events. B. GREENWALD TENT DESIGN & LOCATION The design and location of the Tent has changed, and hopefully improved, since the December 20, 2007 SPA application mainly based on comments from the Historic Preservation Commission and City Staff. The changes are summarized below: LasserUpdateApplnfo SPAAmend l 1108 The Tent is proposed to be white with white "see-thru" mesh walls for the front and sides, and a solid white wall for the rear. The Institute has samples of the proposed white canvas and white "see-thru" mesh walls. Please note, no clear reflective plastic side walls are proposed for the New Tent. The size of the Tent remains basically the same. The New Tent is 60' x 134' (8,040 sf.) and the combined Old Tent 60' x 120' and Support Wing 20' x 40' total 8,000 sf. 3. A concrete slab floor or equivalent is still proposed for the New Tent as well as electric and audio-visual wiring. Please note, a water line connection is not proposed for the New Tent. C. LOWER WEST END MITIGATION PLAN A "Working Draft" of a Lower West End Mitigation Plan is attached as an Exhibit. The document has the following objectives regarding the parking, traffic and transit concerns of the neighborhood during the Summer Season. To update the "Aspen Meadows 1991 Traffic Mitigation Plan" which was adopted as part of the 1991 SPA Plan. 2. To brainstorm relatively simple, low-cost mitigation measures which can be implemented during the 2009 Summer Season. 3. To be a "working document" to solicit ideas and input from the 3 non- profits, City, Lower West End neighbors and general public. The mitigation ideas in the Exhibit have been generated from 2 meetings to date: September 16, 2008 -Meeting with Aspen Institute (Amy Margerum, Jim Curtis), Music Associates of Aspen (Mathew Loden, Mathew Ritter), City of Aspen (Randy Ready, Tim Ware), and West End neighbor (Steve Falender). 2. October 23, 2008 -Meeting with Aspen Institute (Jim Curtis) and City of Aspen (Randy Ready, Tim Ware, Lynn Rumbaugh), the Music Associates of Aspen was not able to attend and Steve Falender was not able to attend. Disclaimer The Aspen Institute is gladly willing to facilitate and participate in discussions and actions among the Music Associates of Aspen, City of Aspen and Lower West End LasserUpdateApplnfoSPAAmend t I I OS Neither the Tent or associated development with the Tent fall within the above language. As shown on the drawings, the Relocated Cart Path is between 155' - 185' horizontal distance from the southern bank of the Roaring Fork River and is approximately 83' higher than the Roaring Fork River. The Tent and associated development is clearly outside the Stream Margin and Flood Hazard Area as defined by the Code. C. Stream margin review standards. No development shall be permitted within the stream margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below: (only review standards 8 & 9 below apply) 8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below the Top of Slope or within fifteen (1 S) feet of the Top of Slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparian vegetation and bank stability. New planting (including trees, shrubs, flower and grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the riverside shall be native riparian vegetation as approved by the City. A landscape plan will be submitted with all development applications. The Top of Slope and 100 year flood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department; and The northwest portion of the Relocated Cart Path is within the 15' setback of the Top of Slope, which is approximately 7855' Elevation pursuant to the Schmueser, Gordon, Meyer survey submitted to the Planning Office under separate cover, and as shown on the attached New Tent -Proposed Plan Details drawing. As stated above, the intent of the 15 foot setback from Top of Slope is twofold: a. To Protect Existing Riparian Vegetation. The Relocated Cart Path does not impact any riparian vegetation because the Relocated Cart Path is 155' - 185' horizontal distance from the southern bank of the Roaring Fork River and is approximately 83' higher than the Roaring Fork River. No riparian vegetation exists where the Relocated Cart Path is located. b. To Protect Bank Stability. Applicant feels the Relocated Cart Path will not harm bank stability. The Relocated Cart Path within the 15' setback is estimated to require no more than 6" - 10" of cut or fill to construct the path. Applicant will field stake and engineer the Relocated Cart Path within the 15' setback and will have the path field reviewed by the Parks and Engineering Departments if requested prior to construction. LasserUpdateApplnfoSPAAmend11108 7 Applicant feels the proposed development is both consistent with and an enhancement of the 1991 SPA Plan and the other facilities of the Aspen Institute for the following reasons: A. The Tent gives the Aspen Institute a venue to hold larger, but limited, keynote events like the Aspen Ideas Festival. These keynote events support the mission of the Aspen Institute to promote open dialogue and the exchange of ideas, and help foster the intellectual and cultural heritage of Aspen. B. The Tent was tested during the summers of 2005-2008 and proved to be very successful for the Aspen Institute and hopefully the Aspen community. If the Aspen community supports these larger keynote events, then a permanent summer-only venue is desirable for scheduling, organizing and staging the events. C. Tents have historically been used on the Aspen Institute property as well as the adjacent Music Association of Aspen property. The SPA approval of the Tent on a permanent summer-only basis will allow the Aspen Institute to make improvements to the Tent so it is more attractive and functional. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. Applicant feels the project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure. Applicant is not aware of any infrastructure problems that occurred during the summers of 2005 - 2008. However, as a good neighbor, the Aspen Institute has asked the Music Associates of Aspen and the City of Aspen to jointly participate in an "updated" Lower West End Mitigation Plan which is attached as an Exhibit. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mudflow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. The parcel is suitable for development. The parcel is flat level ground. No hazards impact the site to the knowledge of the applicant. See Environmentally Sensitive Area description herein. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. LasserUpdateApplnfoSPAAmend l 1108 This information is given in the original December 20, 2007 SPA Application and updated herein. b. A conceptual description of the proposed development. This shall include, but not be limited to a statement of the intent of the proposed development and a conceptual description ofproposed land uses, densities, design concepts, access ways and a general time schedule for construction of the proposed development. As described herein. c. A statement outlined in conceptual terms how the proposed development will be served with the appropriate public facilities and how assurances will be made that those public facilities are available to serve the proposed development. As a good neighbor, the Aspen Institute has asked the Music Associates of Aspen and the City of Aspen to jointly participate in an "updated" Lower West End Mitigation Plan which is attached as an Exhibit. d. A conceptual Site Plan, illustrating: Existing natural and manmade features. As described herein. 2. General configuration ofproposed land uses, access ways and existing and proposed utilities. As described herein. 3. Schematic drawings ofproposed buildings, indicating general site design features and overall mass and height ofproposed structures. As described herein. B. Final Development Plan. Contents of application. The contents of a development application for a Final Development Plan shall include the following.• a. The general application information required in Chapter 26.304. LasserUpdateApplnfoSPAAmend 1 1108 11 Applicant feels the proposed amendment is consistent with and an enhancement of the 1991 SPA Plan for the following reasons: A. The Tent gives the Aspen Institute a venue to hold larger, but limited, keynote events like the Aspen Ideas Festival. These keynote events support the mission of the Aspen Institute to promote open dialogue and the exchange of ideas, and help foster the intellectual and cultural heritage of Aspen. B. The Tent was tested during the summers of 2005 - 2008 and proved to be very successful for the Aspen Institute and hopefully the Aspen community. If the Aspen community supports these larger keynote events, then a permanent summer-only venue is desirable for scheduling, organizing and staging the events. C. Tents have historically been used on the Aspen Institute property as well as the adjacent Music Association of Aspen property. The SPA approval of the Tent on a permanent summer-only basis will allow the Aspen Institute to make improvements to the Tent so it is more attractive and functional. g. A plat which depicts the applicable information required by Subsection 26.480.060.A.3. Applicant will provide a SPA Plat post the Aspen City Council review of the application as has been the procedure of the Community Development Office in past SPA reviews. h. A proposed SPA agreement which conforms to Section 26.440.070 below. Applicant will provide a SPA Agreement post the Aspen City Council review of the application as has been the procedure of the Community Development Office in past SPA reviews. 5. CONSOLIDATED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREAS (SPA) AMENDMENT, CODE SECTION 26.440.090(B) (B) All other modifications shall be approved pursuant to the terms and procedures of the final development plan, provided that the proposed change is consistent with or an enhancement of the approved final plan. If the proposed change is not consistent with the approved final development plan, the amendment shall be subject to both conceptual and the final development review and approval. LasserUpdateApplnfoSPAAmend 11108 13 b. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the uses, pursuant to Section 26.470.030(0), Development Ceiling Levels and Section 26.470.030(D), Annual Development Allotments. To the best knowledge of the applicant, sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the use. c. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Applicant feels the proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. d. A sufficient percentage of the employees expected to be generated by the project are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash- in-lieu thereof in a manner acceptable to the City Council. The Employee Generation Rates may be used as a guideline but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs. The City Council may waive, or partially waive, affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The proposal will not generate any new employees. The use of the Tent during the summers of 2005 - 2008 demonstrated the Aspen Meadows existing staff can service the Tent. No new staff was added in 2005 - 2008. Because no new employees will be generated, the Aspen Institute respectfully requests a waiver of affordable housing mitigation. At the request of the Planning Office, a current Aspen Institute and Aspen Meadows employee analysis has been submitted to the Planning Office under separate cover. e. Free-Market residential floor area on the parcel is accompanied by affordable housing units or mitigation pursuant to 26.470.040(0)(6), unless otherwise restricted in the zone district. The City Council may waive, partially waive, or establish a different limitation as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. Not applicable. No free-market residential housing is proposed. f The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated through improvements proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, selvage treatment, energy and communication utilities, LasserUpdateApp[n foSPAAmend l l 108 15 The Aspen Institute pazcel is zoned Academic -Specially Planned Area. The conference, gathering, educational purpose of the Tent is consistent with the Academic zoning of the pazcel and the Academic use of the surrounding Aspen Institute buildings. The zoning standards of the pazcel are set by the SPA review. 4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Conceptual Planned Unit development approval, as applicable. Applicant feels the proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historical Preservation Commission approval. 5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100. A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. The proposal will not generate any new employees. The use of the Tent during the summers of 2005 - 2008 demonstrated the Aspen Meadows existing staff can service the Tent. No new staff was added in 2005 - 2008. Because no new employees will be generated, the Aspen Institute respectfully requests a waiver of affordable house mitigation. At the request of the Planning Office, a current Aspen Institute and Aspen Meadows employee analysis has been submitted to the Planning Office under sepazate cover. 6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. Not applicable. LasserUpdateApplnfoSPAAmend t 1108 1 ~ guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. The proposal will not generate any new employees. The use of the Tent during the summers of 2005 - 2008 demonstrated the Aspen Meadows existing staff can service the Tent. No new staff was added in 2005 - 2008. Because no new employees will be generated, the Aspen Institute respectfully requests a waiver of affordable housing mitigation. At the request of the Planning Office, a current Aspen Institute and Aspen Meadows employee analysis has been submitted to the Planning Office under separate cover. 9. IMPACT FEES & DEDICATIONS. CODE SECTION 26.600 A. Impact Fees, Code Section 26.610. The Aspen Institute requests a waiver of the Park Development Impact Fee and the Transportation Demand Management/Air Quality Impact Fee under the Waiver of Fees, Section 26.610.100 as an Essential Public Facility. City Council Ordinance #14 (Series of 1991) which approved the 1991 SPA Master Plan found both the MAA and Aspen Institute facilities to be Essential Public Facilities. Most recently in December, 2004, the City Council found the Doerr-Hosier Center under Resolution #45 (Series of 2004) to be an Essential Public Facility. Additionally, the Greenwald Pavilion Tent is a "summer-only" Tent supplemental to the Aspen Institute existing summer events and facilities. The summer events held in the Tent are limited to 3 - 5 larger keynote events which benefit the Town's cultural heritage and summer economy. The Tent does not add any new residential or lodging units or year-round daily use leaseable square footage. B. School Land Dedication, Code Section 26.620. Not Applicable under Section 26.620.030, Exemptions. The Tent is anon-residential use. [.asserUpdateApplnfoSPAAmend I ll 08 19 y ~ <~~ ~ ~ 4 um .. 0"y F ~ $ U. x N m 3 T~~r ~ Y Q ~• ~ ~~ i ~~~` o n E ___ ~~c S~~a no ~ o3d. ~E p =° ~~i m y ~ a $ 3 m ++ $ d m ~ # t 2 ~ ~ U j W {~ C Y - & m m w - Fde °a =- ~ ~ a o ~ / O U ` ~x N // ~ j / \ ''"__ b 8 Y O \. N s / ~ / W \/\//~/} ~.-J ~ Q ' ~ N 6 . \ • / Q m 'b W 2 ip ~.,i,-,', Oi I a r i U O N ~ E ~$gn - 1§~ ~~$$$ ~~~~~ _J _. -_ P ~~c~ a ~~~ $~~~~ ~~~~~ Existing Tent Summer 2008 Existing Tent Summer 2008 Existing Tent Summer 2008 EXHIBIT C To: Jason Lasser, From: Jim Curtis, Date: August 18, 2008 MEMORANDUM Aspen Community Deve. Office Owner Representative The Aspen Institute Re: Aspen Institute & Aspen Meadows Employees Analysis Exhibit A, attached, gives the Existing Employees Analysis for the Aspen Institute & Aspen Meadows. A summary of the Employees Full-Time Equivalents (FTE's) is given below based on 2,080 hrs./yr./FTE based on the Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority FTE standard. A. The Aspen Institute a. Full-Time, Year- Round Emp. 18.0 FTE b. Part-Time Staff, Summer Season Emp. 4.9 c. Interns , Summer Season Emp. 1.7 d. Part-Time Staff, Winter Season Emp. 0.0 e. Interns , Winter Season Emp. 0.0 24.6 FTE B. The Aspen Meadows a. Full-Time, Year-Round Emp. 101.0 FTE b. Part-Time, Summer Season Emp. 20.7 C. Part-Time, Winter Season Emp. 19.0 140.7 FTE C. Combine Total 165.3 FTE For background, the 1991 Specially Planned Area Master Plan (SPA Plan) subdivided the "Meadows campus" in order that the 3non-profits (The Aspen Institute, Music Association of Aspen and Aspen Center for Physics) could own their own land and buildings. This ownership was critical to the 3non-profits for their sustainability and ability to continue to operate in Aspen. Of the total "campus", the Aspen Institute owns approximately 40 acres known as Lot lA & 1B, Aspen Meadows Subdivision. Lot lA is LasserAspCommDeveEmpAnalysis 1 Of 5 Council approvals thereafter have also found the Aspen Institute facilities to be Essential Public Facilities. Most recently in December, 2004, the City Council found the Doerr- Hosier Center under Resolution #45 (Series of 2004) and in November, 2005, the Health Center facilities under Resolution #46 (Series of 2005) to be Essential Public Facilities. There is a reason why the 1991 City Council and subsequent City Councils have found the Aspen Institute facilities and operations to be Essential Public Facilities. The Aspen Institute operations are a major part of the history and cultural heritage of the community. Most of the Aspen Institute programs and lectures are open to the Aspen public either free, by reservation or for a nominal fee. Most programs and lectures are taped for Grassroots TV for repeat showings. The Aspen Institute 2007 Summer Events program was submitted as part of the Paepcke Auditorium SPA application. Over 30 events are listed for the Summer of 2007, and subsequent events and lectures have been added. These events, highlighted by the Aspen Ideas Festival, the McClosley Speaker Series and the Dalai Lama visit, add immensely to the rich intellectual and cultural experience of Aspen. The Aspen Institute strongly believes in its mission and its outreach to the Aspen community, and requests the continued recognition of its operations as an Essential Public Facility. cc: Amy Margerum LasserAspCommDeveEmpAnalysis 3 Of 5 B. Aspen Meadows Employees ~ 1. Summer Season a. 101 Full-Time Year-Round (101 FTE) (2,080 hrs./yr./person avg.) b. 83 Part-Time, Summer Season (20.7 FTE) (mid-June, July, Aug., mid-Sept.) (3 months (13 weeks) @ 40 hrs./wk. = 520 hrs./person avg.) 2. Winter Season a. 101 Full-Time Year-Round (FTE above) (2,080 hrs./yr./person avg.) b. 45 Part-Time, Winter Season (19.0 FTE) (mid-Nov., Dec., Jan., Feb., March, mid-April) (5 months (22 weeks) @ 40 hrs./wk. = 880 hrs./person avg.) 3. Saring & Fall Shoulder Seasons a. 101 Full-Time, Year-Round (FTE above) (2,080 hrs./yr./person avg.) b. 0 Part-Time, Shoulder Seasons (0 FTE) (late-April, May, early June & late Sept, Oct., early Nov.) The Aspen Meadows will contract with a local labor pool to provide supplemental service staff for their largest dinners, receptions or events on an as needed basis. 2. FTE's Full-Time Employee Equivalents based on 2,080 hrs./year/FTE based on Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority FTE standard. LasserAspCommDeveEmpAnalysis 5 Of 5 EXHIBIT D To: Jason Lasser, From: Jim Curtis, Date: August 19, 2008 MEMORANDUM Aspen Community Deve. Office Owner Representative The Aspen Institute Re: Traffic & Parking Memo Paepcke SPA Amendment Application, Dated April 2, 2008 The Aspen Institute feels the renovation and modest expansion of 60 seats to the Paepcke Auditorium will have minimal traffic and parking impacts to the existing traffic and parking patterns in the West End. The expansion of the Auditorium from 346 to 406 seats will primarily benefit the Aspen community by providing more seats inside Paepcke Auditorium for popular events like the summer season public lectures series. As you are aware, we currently provide "overflow" in every nook and cranny of our building, using speakers and video where possible. The additional seats inside will help us provide a more pleasurable listening experience for the public. Parking The Paepcke parking lot has 91 parking spaces. Although the parking lot is owned by the Aspen Institute, the Institute shares the parking lot with the Music Associates of Aspen in the summer. The MAA reserves half of the spots for their musicians and staff. The Music Associates of Aspen does allow the Aspen Institute to use the MAA "big" parking lot when this lot is not being used by MAA events. This cooperative sharing has worked well between the Institute and MAA during big events. However, the majority of the time we encourage our participants to not drive to our events due to the limited parking. Attached to this memo is an example of the depths to which we go out of our way to encourage people to not drive. We go further by providing continual shuttle service from the Meadows into town every 30 minutes and for large events we pay for additional shuttles from the Rio Grande parking garage and from the Ruby Transit station. In addition, we run golf carts around the perimeter of the Meadows property, rent up to 20 electric golf carts to go back and forth on our property, offer bikes on our property for guests, and hire peidcabs for big events. All of our events encourage people to take transit, walk or ride bikes. Traffic The Aspen Institute does not have any current traffic counts for the West End streets or the lower segment of North Third Street, which provides access to the Paepcke parking lot. Moreover, West End traffic is a mix of traffic - - a large amount of traffic is Main Street/Highway 82 traffic driving through the West End to avoid the "Highway 82 Bottle Neck", MAA traffic during music events, Physics traffic, Aspen Institute traffic during events, construction traffic, and general tourist and homeowner traffic, especially during the summer. Yes, Paepcke events do generate traffic on an event-by-event basis. On all Paepcke events, but especially on the larger events, the Institute encourages, by promotional material, people to walk, bike or take the cross-town shuttle. The Aspen Institute feels the modest expansion of 60 seats to Paepcke Auditorium will not increase our increment of the current overall traffic in the West End (due to the fact that we accommodate overflow crowds now) and that the community benefit of making Paepcke more available to the Aspen community is worth the trade-off. a'~~1 ~M .y s `°'` ~ ,,~ w1d~~ His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama Benedict Music Tent • July 26, 2008 • 10:00 am IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR TICKET HOLDERS ARRIVE EARLY, ENTRANCE WILL OPEN AT 9:OOAM No Event Parking • Ticket holders For this event are strongly encouraged to walk, bike or utilize public transportation. Public Transportation • Shuttle service looping between Rio Grande Parking Plaza and Rubey Park in downtown Aspen, and the Aspen Institute campus, is available from S to 10am and from 12 to 2pm; see detailed public and shuttle transportation information on the back of this flyer. Benedict Music Tent and Lawn Seating Eller via Music Tent parking lot • White tickets designate Benedict Music Tent seating. • Green tickets designate lawn seating. • Only those holding white and green tickets will be admitted to the Benedict Music Tent property. • White and green ticket holders will enter from the Music Tent parking lot. Music Tent Security • Original tickets are required for entry. Lost tickets cannot be reprinted. • All white and green ticket holders will enter through a metal detector for security purposes. • If possible, please limit metal objects including jewelry, large belt buckles, cell phones, pagers, etc. • No cameras or recording equipment will be admitted. • No backpacks, briefcases, large purses, bags, lawn chairs, umbrellas, coolers, food or drink will be admitted. Paepcke Auditorium and Doerr Hosier Center Simulcast Seating Enter via Meadows Road • Pink tickets designate Paepcke Auditorium simulcast seating. • Yellow tickets designate Doerr Hosier Center simulcast seating. • All pink and yellow ticket holders must walk, by entering at Meadows Road. No vehicles will be allowed beyond the entrance at Meadows Road. (directional map is provided on the back of this flyer). • There will be no public parking available. EVENT SHUTTLE INFORMATION Event shuttles wil run in a loop from the Rio Grande Parking Plaza, stopping at Rubey Park, to the Benedict Music Tent, and back. Shown in red. EVENT SHUTTLE SCHEDULE: To the event: 8:OOam - t0:00am Rio Grande to Rubey Park to Benedict Music Tent From the event: 12:OOpm - 2:OOpm Benedict Music Tent to Rio Grande to Rubey Park RUBEY PARK DuRANT DURANT COOPER v ~ 2~ ¢ HYMAN Q w d = ,vjt A N p 2 HOPKINS , ¢ ~ `1 n ~ ~ F W HBTEL MAIN cc ~ O o e ~ ~ IEROME = = SLEEKER O RIO GRANDE ~ PARKING PLAZA _ ~ FRANCIS r C 2 ~, 2 SMUGGLER y NORTH • • •• • •• GILLESPIE BENEDICT MUSIC TENT JULY 26TH SEATING LOCATIONS 7:24 am - 11:00 pm daily (beginning June 6) From Rubey Park to The Benedict Music Tent :06 and :36 past each. hour. From The Benedict Music Tent to Rubey Park 15 and :45 past each hour. GSiLE~ LREEN~ Ca6TLE iH11L ~, cgeex DOERR HOSIER CENTER Simulcast Seating careramaaarEa ! fellow Tickets auTrtma mra , eriurr reed F PIIIIa merelmro i r Ram FOR ® RIVE • • ® 61CVtlE ` _~ ® WAIpWp TO PNrx , ® SIMULCAST • • ® SEATIBB RxhERSGx PiRN gORRIN4•~ ® ` FGRN iRnLL WALUWp TD SIMUICASf ppEPCAE AUDITORIUM SFATIM6 Simulcast Seating - Pinh Tickets is BENEDICT MUSIC TEXT ~ i ~ Insitle Sealing BENEDICT MUSIC TEMT ~ White Tckets • MEADOWS ROAD Cann Seating -- Simulcast EMronce Breen licketa InR vehinles beryntl this poim) Evaxrx Security Entrance SLflEEi .-~~ 0 HNRRI6 XNLL i015PEH xoRT marx , xIRD smEEr SiflEET STREET CLOSED GILLFSPI ~xtli8»' ~ From: Jim Curtis <jcurtis@sopris.neb Subject: Paepcke Auditorium Date: August 8, 2008 11:39:24 AM MDT To: Jason Lasser <Jason.Lasser@ci.aspen.co.us> Supplemental info. per your request: Existing Building 17,805 SF +/- Proposed Additions 614 SF +/- (Per HPC Plans dated 7/23/08 attached (307 SF per side)) Total 18,419 SF +/- City Council SPA Ordiance #14 (Series 1991) "The Aspen Meadows" SPA Development & Subdivision Agreement Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks, Jim Curtis EXHIBIT E Date: November 26, 2008 Project: SPA Amendment Greewald Tent City of Aspen Engineering and Transportation Departments Joint DRC Comments These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting. Review Standards: 26.440.030(A) (2) Whether sufficient Public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development 26.440.030(A) (6) Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive pubic funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or surrounding neighborhood: o Application encourages people to pazk in the MAA main parking lot or walk or bicycle to Paepcke events. The City at this time is unable to determine if there is adequate public facilities to service the proposed development. In particular pedestrian walkway /bikeway connections from town to events, traffic control for events and adequate public transportation facilities. The applicant must complete an Aspen Institute Event Mitigation Plan. The plan must include the same goals as the "Aspen Meadows 1991 Traffic Mitigation Plan". Additionally the, mitigation plan needs to include a traffic control plan for larger events which incorporates protecting apedestrian /bikeway connection and transportation connections with temporary traffic control measures. The applicant must outline which portions of the plan the institute will fund for larger events including temporary traffic control measures, increased transit service, and shuttle services. 26.440.030(A) (3) Whether the parcel proposed~fot development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. o Where applicable, 100-yr floodplain and floodway boundaries shall be defined. 26.440.030(A) (4) Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. o The City at this time is unable to determine if the project does not have an adverse environmental impact. A comprehensive drainage plan will need to be submitted which shows an 80% total suspended solids reduction of the project azea. Project packet must include a discussion of anticipated and proposed drainage patterns, detention storage and.outlet concepts. o Additional Environmental Comments: o The project will impact the top of slope azea with additional fill and the relocation of the trail. Impacts of this area need to be evaluated. o Plans show a proposed pond. What is this pond for? o Staff recommends reducing the amount of impervious azea on the plans by incorporating ideas such as pervious pavers for the service road, terrace area and parking areas. o The service road should drain away from the River. Miscellaneous Lower West End Mitigation Plan -This plan needs to be revised as mentioned above. Additional comments to the plan: Item B(1): should state that representatives from the Aspen Institute, MAA and COA meet each year instead of just 2009. Item B(2): Please provide specific examples of public information efforts that will be made. Suggestions include *including alternative transportation information on MAA and institute web pages; *including alternative transportation information on MAA and institute seasonal brochures and mailers; *paid newspaper advertising prior to large events such as 4`s of July, Dalai Lama, etc. *Transportation information included with event tickets. • Item B(3): Who will fund this additional transit service? What options can the parties implement to encourage increased walk bike/carpool modeshaze? • Item B(6): Not sure what the effectiveness of this will be • Item B(7): City recommends a compressive traffic control plan for pedestrians and traffic as mentioned above. • Item B(8): What will be the basis of this investigation? When will the investigation occur and what will trigger the shuttle service? Who would provide and pay for this service? Transportation is not I am not 100% comfortable with this idea. Is it encouraging attendees to drive and park in the west end rather than using existing/new shuttle services? If an idea such as this was to be implemented, I'd prefer perhaps encouraging a shuttle from the Parking Plaza, etc. • Item B (10) Include this Streetscape plan in the application. Who will fund the implementation of this plan? Construction Management - A construction management plan must be submitted in conjunction with the building permit application. The plan must include a planned sequence of construction that minimizes construction impacts to the public. The plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, truck traffic, noise, dust, and erosion/sediment pollution. Storm Sewer System -A Stormwater System Development Fee shall be assessed against all properties at the time of development or redevelopment of the property. The fee shall be assessed against the total impervious area of the development, not simply the increased impervious area. Detailed plans are required prior to council -please see engineering department for specific details. Parks Department DRC requirements Aspen.Institute improvements Greenwald Pavilion Tent The proposed planting (screening) needs to decrease the amount of spruce trees and increase aspen, cottonwood trees, douglas fir and service berry bushes. A mix of these will fit the existing vegetation found along the top of slope as well as provide the intended screening. Appropriate spacing will be required for all new plantings. Coniferous Trees will require adequate spacing between trees and distance from buildings, trails or structures to allow for mature growth. Deciduous Trees will require adequate spacing from structures to accommodate mature growth in height. The new grading and planting within the city of aspen property and within the 15' setback will require City seed mixes and approval of the landscaping by the City Parks Department. An approved tree permit will be required before any demolition or access infrastructure work takes place.. Please,contact the City Forester at 920-5120. Mitigation for removals will be based on.Yhe approved mitigation for this SPA site. 4. A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site and their renresented drip lines. A formal plan indicating the location of the tree protection will be reauired for the bldg_permit set. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, and storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree remaining on site. This fence must be inspected by the city forester or his/her designee (920-5120) before any construction activities are to commence. A silt fence and edge of disturbance fence will be required at the furthest point of disturbance closest to the City Property. 5. Hand work only will be approved with in the protection zones and for the re- opening of the irrigation ditch. 6. The proposed new access road has a direct affect on the character, visibility and safety of the trail access point to the north of the parking lot. The applicant will be required to work with the trails Coordinator to design a new trail access point and trail head for the benefit of the trail users. ACSD Requirements- Greenwald Pavilion Tent Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways including hard landscaping which will impact public ROW or easements owned by the district. A revocable license issued by the district to the Institute will be required to construct the terrace on the district's easement. Prior approval of construction material for the terrace will be required. Additional access easements will be required from the applicant to the district to facilitate the district's ability to maintain the main sanitary sewer lines. Page 1 of 1 Jason Lasser From: Cindy Christensen Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 2:15 PM To: Jason Lasser Subject: Referral on Greenwald Tent SPA The applicant states that by providing a permanent tent, no new additional employees will be needed. The employee analysis provided to Housing by the applicant shows that they currently have 165.3 FTE's. The Housing Office would like as part of the approval that the applicant is required to do an employee audit 2 years after Certificate of Occupancy of the placement of the permanent tent, as well as the increase of square footage for Paepcke Auditorium. i Rift S?Ji;t ~ .:.n ... t`: ::1 12/2/2008 Page 1 of 1 Jason Lasser From: Lynn Rumbaugh Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 8:57 AM To: Jason Lasser; Tricia Aragon Subject: RE: 5th draft -Institute Mitigation review Hi Jason: I have no issues with the 5th draft. They have addressed all of my concerns. Thanks, Lynn Rumbaugh Transportation Programs Manager City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 voice:970-920-5038 fax: 970-544-9447 web: www aspenpitkin.com ___ From: Jason Lasser Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 8:50 AM To: Tricia Aragon; Lynn Rumbaugh Subject: 5th draft -Institute Mitigation review Tricia, Lynn I'm trying to wrap up the Council packet for the Tent - do you have any concerns regarding the Greenwald tent Mitigation Plan (5th draft)? If you could let me know by Tuesday, February 17th, it would be greatly appreciated- Thanks Jason Lasser City of Aspen ~ Special Projects Planner Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Sl. (Aspen, CO 81611 970.429.2763 ~ www aspenpitkin.com 2112/2009 EXHIBIT F ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28 2008 Brian, said the rhythnvc standpoint Exhibit III makes more sense. Alison and Sarah agreed. MOTION: Brian made the motion to continue the public hearing and conceptual development of 204 N. Monarch until June 15"'; second by Sarah. Motion carried 4-1. Michael said the commission is in favor of seeing an application that reflects the design of Exhibit III. Sarah said she would like to see a model. Tim said for clarification the board would like to see the mimicking of the Blue Vic gable flushed out and the recess gable filled in. Alison asked if the board wanted the gable higher than the Blue Vic. Jeffery said they can lower it and flush the roofs. Sarah said there are a lot of merits to scheme II. VOTE: Jay, no; Brian, yes; Alison, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes. Paepcke Auditorium Ann was seated. Amy said the main purpose of the project is to provide some mechanical upgrades to the building for presentations and also to potentially expand some of the seating by approximately 50 seats which is about a 540 foot expansion. Paepcke Auditorium was built in 1961. Staff's memo refers to the SPA plan that was adopted in 1990 and 1991 which talks about future expansion. We did not find anything about expansion of the auditorium in the document. HPC's purpose is to discuss design review issues and the historic preservation guidelines. Herbert Bayer was a respective artist in many fields and this is where his architecture career began. He was brought to the Aspen Institute to develop the campus. He used such simple materials such as concrete block. This building built by Herbert Bayer is significant and we need to be sensitive to any changes. A lot of the work will be on the interior. In terms of the auditorium itself staff has a strong objection to the notion of demolishing a portion of the auditorium walls. Staff estimates that 45% of the wall planes would be demolished in order to create new wings to ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008 create the extra 50 seats. The restaurant and health club have been expanded which was easier to do because they are up against embankments and are not visible from all four sides. This building is free standing and observed from all four sides. Staff objects to demolishing 45% of the walls of the auditorium in order to make the expansion. We recommend if there is additional seating that it needs to be accommodated some how within the interior space. There are some other issues which include replacing the windows and an original skylight that can be handled at final. The fundamental issue is whether the demolition and expansion can take place. Jim Curtis, represented the Aspen Institute Michael Scoring, F&G Architects Jim said F&G has a track record in Theatre architecture and post 1950 preservation work. Michael Scoring said Bayer had a desire to integrate the inside and outside and as an environmental designer he brought real connections to the outside. From a materials conservation standpoint we are looking at this building as a rehabilitation and a complete overhaul. We are dealing with preservation issues, material conservation, additions, accessibility, systems, finishes and adaptive reuse so it runs the gamete of all the things that you can possibly do to any particular building. Michael did a power point presentation. The lobby is undersized by today's code standards. There are a series of paths that connect in and out of the building. Based on staff's recommendation we are not removing the skylight. We do show a skylight in the back lobby area that is more of a roof monitor to bring light into one of the walls. We have new seating areas and are making the stage accessible which are two low sloped ramps so that everyone can get to the stage at any given time. Jim Curtis said where the cooler is proposed for the auditorium there is a stand of aspen trees and behind the trees there is an opening. From the Parks Department point of view there is no problem putting the cooler behind the trees which makes it less visible. We have options as to where the fluid cooler could go and how the heating and cooling for the building is handled. Jim pointed out that the heating system is forced air set in concrete. We have redesigned the projection room in order to create more space in the foyer which is undersized. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008 Michael Schoring said with the side walls they aze trying to be respectful to the Bayer geometry. There will be patios on either side with TV monitors so that you can see inside from the outside. We aze attempting to keep the Bayer ceiling as close to the original as possible. Originally we had duct work within the space and that made the ceiling drop so after further discussion it was determined that the duct work should be out over the roof. We are creating an enclosure to supply air to the auditorium. Jim Curtis said there are two important questions: Why is the Institute proposing this renovation and second why is the seating being increased. The comprehensive renovation could be in excess often million dollazs. The intent is to make the building current and viable for the next 50 years. For the last 50 years we have raised money and put band aids on. The energy and enthusiasm at the institute under Water Isaacson and Amy Margerum gives them the opportunity to go out and raise money. Everyone is excited at the institute about the renovation. It would be difficult to raise money and loose seating due to ADA requirements so that is why we are proposing to increase the seating. The local Aspen and Roaring Fork Valley citizens benefit from the increased seating in the summer. The institute does not need the increased seating for their winter programs. With the TV monitors outside you can accommodate another 50 people. Clearly the threshold issue is any demolition of this building good, bad or permitted. If the sense of the board is no demolition we need to know that tonight. Amy Margerum, vice-president of the Aspen Institute. Amy said we have been told by the Community Development department that we have to do certain things even if we do not do any demolition. We want to preserve this building and preserve the Paepcke and Bayer dream. We spent a year with a community committee and there was 100% unanimous approval of doing something like this to the building. Amy also pointed out that there are many other Bayer buildings that have been added onto, demolished and changed over the years. We have heard over and over that the building should be opened up to more people. We are doing this to open the building up to the community. Jim Curtis said if we keep the existing footprint we will loose between 15 to 25 seats. Amy Margerum also pointed out that in the staff memo it stated that 45% of the wall would be demolished. All the walls of this building are important 6 and it is 9% of the entire building that will be demolished. It is only 500 square feet and a very simple and modest plan. Sarah asked about the materials of the pushed out walls and the insulation. Michael Shoring said they are proposing to use concrete block. Michael said there is a four inch veneer and a 1 1/2 inch of insulation and an 8 inch block inside. Ann asked about the glazing. Michael Shoring said all the glazing will be changed. We have not identified the system. The system that is there is a thin aluminum. The windows for the theatre in the slots will get replaced and we are also looking at having those window operable. Michael Shoring said there are very few center isles anymore. The presenter looks out to the audience not the isles. Amy pointed out that in the elevation the doors to the stage are not shown. Michael Shoring said with the new seating pattern we found it necessary to add the doors and it is a code requirement. Michael inquired about the demolition. Michael Shoring said all the seats will go away; we will build over the stage to extend it out to accommodate the accessibility. We are also changing the entry sequence. Alison asked when the entire roof is replaced will there be any problems keeping the existing structure around the outside since it is concrete block. Michael Shoring said it is a straight roofing replacement. The hard work is in the auditorium. We have looked at the walls with an engineer and we see no problems. The laminated beams will be left in place and we will add structure. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. Lisa Markalunas said she has had a life time experience with this building. The landscape is equally important on this site. There are some of the largest stands of aspen trees on this property. The concern is how the landscape relates to the building. Jim Markalunas said he has some practical issues, the two exit doors. On the north side of the building since it is shady there is a lot of ice buildup and ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008 the exit walkway should be heated. Proper position of benches on the south wall are recommended to provide a seating area as you walk through the institute. The natural vegetation should not be disturbed. The natural pasque lilies only exist on the north bank, the Ute Cemetery and Aspen Grove Cemetery. Steve Falender said his house is right across from the exit of the music tent parking lot. I am completely in favor of renovating the auditorium. The seating should be expanded so that it is a function auditorium for a long period of time. As the entities become more successful they generate an incredible amount of traffic. We need to have the institute get involved with having some kind of control of the parking. The open space doesn't need to be used for parking but right now there is no control over the parking. Amy Margerum offered to help resolve some of the parking issues. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman closed the public hearing. Michael said the first issue is any demolition going to be permitted by the HPC. Jay pointed out that we need to guide the applicant in the best way that we can. Jay said in looking at the guidelines it is clear in 2.1, 6.1 and 10.10 that if we allow some demolition to this building we are basically not complying with the guidelines. If we allow demolition we need to come up with strong reasons to do so. Jay said when we deal with residential historic structures we preserve the historic part of that structure. This plan does not follow that. Do we preserve something that was not the original plan by the architect? Comparing the original building to what was actually built is night and day. Is it our job to preserve what he actually built because of his significance within the architectural community or do we allow the renovation of his original design. Michael pointed out that the property is not landmarked but part of the SPA. Jim Curtis went over the procedures. HPC & P&Z will do a resolution and then both go to city council. If we choose to enact under Ordinance #48 we have a 90 day negotiation period with City council that will not be an appeal hearing. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008 Jim True, city attorney said if HPC applies the criteria and approves the resolution then it moves forwazd to P&Z and City Council. If HPC denies it they have the right to go into the Ordinance #48, 90 day period. Ann said our mission is to preserve historic resources and the integrity of them. To preserve them we are not just talking about brick and mortar. There are different dimensions. This is a performing arts center and it needs to adapt to different circumstances and requirements. It absolutely has to have ADA compliance. In order to preserve the historic resource in this case you need to preserve the function and the only way to make that successfully is to make the modifications. I do see an important need to upgrade it. In terms of the design the original design is very elegant and exact. All the lines are parallel and the angles are perfect. What we have now are new angles and the outdoor relationships have been destroyed. The landscape is as important as the building. The new design has fragmented the design. You need to work hazd to maintain the elegance and very cazefully thought relationship of the building to the landscape and to the other buildings on the site. You need a site plan showing the existing trees etc. so that we can see what trees we are going to loose and what trees need to be protected. Sarah said the act of preserving this building is enabling it to live on as its current function. Jay said preservation is not just preserving buildings but preserving open space and land use. That could be the swaying factor to allow the structure to be changed. We need to be in agreement with why we are allowing some demolition to historic resources. Brian also agreed with everything that has been said. This campus needs to be brought up to functionality. Incremental changes over time could be more detrimental than a well thought out plan. There are some small things that could be tweaked to make it better. I am in favor of bringing this structure up to par in order to allow it to function the way it was intended to. I am struggling with the guidelines. Alison said ten yeazs from if we don't make changes this structure will look horrible. This is part of the question of Post War mid-century preservation. It is very different than the tum of the century preservation. These buildings where built differently and a lot of time experimentally. It is important that this building evolve and this building is a community asset. Having the ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008 indoor outdoor relationship is necessary. Alison asked staff if we had guidelines for commercial structures. Amy said we have the guidelines that relate to the commercial districts. The general guidelines as to how to add onto an historic building apply. There are still issues with limiting demolition. Jay said someone mentioned the windows and that they where going to be replaced. Jay pointed out that it was HPC decision to retain the doors on the Red Onion and why wouldn't we retain things on this building to help reach the goals of the remodel. Michael asked Amy to do some research on how other communities handle these situations. Sarah said she looked at the guidelines and found three that support the project. Guidelines are an interpretation and everyone will interpret differently. In this case the addition is sensitive. The landscape plan needs a lot of help. It is up to us to interpret and we have to struggle to work through what we have. The landscape is very significant on this campus. 2.1 We are preserving original materials. This building is intact and the majority of original materials are remaining and being repaired. 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. This building is not being altered very much in its shape and form. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. Those are the three guidelines that stand out in support of this project. Alison said in essence they could have come forward and said they where going to raise the entire building and build a new auditorium under today's standards. Michael said he is not comfortable moving forward tonight. He would like to know what other communities do in similar situations. Amy Margerum said HPC is just one step. We have to go through P&Z and we are worried about process. Amy pointed out that they need a decision tonight. Amy also agrees with the board on the landscaping and will supply that at final. to ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008 Michael pointed out that HPC can either approve, disapprove or continue the public hearing. MOTION.• Sarah moved to approve Paepcke Auditorium at the Aspen Institute based on the guidelines stated earlier; second by Alison. Ann said she cannot approve this because the angles are discordant as to what is going on. Jay also agreed that conditions should be placed on the approval. Sarah and Alison both agreed that we are going to be seeing this project again and there is a lot of process to go through. AMENDED MOTION: Sarah amended the motion and Alison second the amendment. 1. Restudy the new walls (exterior) of the addition to be more sympathetic to the existing portion of the building. 2. Work on a landscape plan that is congruent to Herbert Bayer's designs. The plan has to be acceptable to the HPC. 3. Existing trees to be retained as much as possible and ifsome need to be removed that we are informed and are part of that process. Trees to be removed should be indicated on a site plan. 4. That the cooler is not put in the proposed location. S. No wall to be built on the walkway. 6. A model be presented at final for us to really understand the mechanical implications of the roof and the new bump (humpback) that is going to be on top of this building. We need to understand everything in three dimensions. Brian requested that the following condition be added to the motion and amended motion. 7. The new overhead door to the deck be looked at more closely and do a design that is more sensitive to the existing architecture. Jay recommended that the windows be restudied and preserved. Jay said the board needs to be careful because we are being asked to move away from our guidelines. We need to be in agreement why we are allowing this to move forward. 8. Restudy all existing materials and preserve them. 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008 9. Do not remove any other exterior walls over those indicated on the plan tonight. Jim Curtis stated for the record that they will come back to the HPC on a voluntary basis before going to City Council. Michael said the question is are we going to allow the back third of this building to be demolished so that the project can meet future needs in a better way. Sarah said you need to look at this building as a whole and what is being retained. The majority of this building is being retained. We are talking two walls. Ann pointed out that there are different ways to retain the original glazing and preserve it and meet the energy requirements. Brian said the question is whether we allow this portion that has been brought to us to be demolished. The details that Sarah brought forth should be outlined. Sarah said in no way is this setting a precedent. This is a unique situation. Sarah amended the amended motion to add the recommendations by Jay and Brian, conditions 7,8,9. Alison second all the amendments and recommendations. Sarah made another amendment to include all the changes discussed in the points I -9 to include that the applicant will come back to HPC for a workshop that addresses these points before going to city council. Alison second the amendment. Michael said the meeting is for the purpose of HPC providing comments to city council for their first review. Sara pointed out that there is time on the agendas to adopt the proposal in a timely fashion. Jay said in light of what Sara said continuing this hearing and voting down the current motion would not slow the applicant down by any means. 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008 Sarah pointed out that HPC is reviewing things that Planning & Zoning is not reviewing. The applicant cannot physically sign up for P&Z unless they have conceptual approval from HPC. MOTION carried 4-2. dote: Jay, no; Brian, no; Alison, yes: Ann, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes. Isis -Minor Development MOTION.• Sarah moved to continue the public hearing on the Isis until June 11, 2008; second by Alison. All in favor, motion carried. Greenwald Tent at the Aspen Institute Jim Curtis said the Aspen Institute is willing to table the agenda. Public Comments: Paul Taddune: Paul said he represents the Pitkin Reserve homeowners association. Their concern is that this is going to be a temporary solution for one or two years and the concern is the color and landscaping. Maybe the color of the tent could be muted so that it doesn't stand out and harmonizes. Amy Margerum talked about their search for a tent that will fit into the landscaping. They are still searching. Lisa Mazkatunas said in respect to the native landscaping the river bluff is very important. In the application there where no references to trash facilities. There is a real bear problem along the river bank. As part of their permanent facility there should be permanent beaz proof trash dumpsters that are a sufficient size and that they fit into the landscape. Pitkin Preserve planted trees in order to shield the impact from the white tent. The tent is only going to be up a couple of months of the year which is preferable than all year round. Also on the north side of the root path catering trucks etc. should not have full access to park along the sage meadow. Lisa's letter was entered into the record. MOTION.• Sarah moved to continue the public hearing on the Greenwald Tent until July 23'd; second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION.• Michael moved to adjourn, second by Alison. All in favor, mot' n carri d. ee i g•adjo ed at 9:00 p.m. amt. l ~ ti . ~-_. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 13 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 Chairperson, Michael Hoffinan called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Ann Mullins, Jay Maytin, and Brian McNellis and Sarah Broughton. Nora Berko and Alison Agley where excused. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Public, Caroline Stewart said she spent the winter here and rode Lift I in 1948. She was at Willoughby Park last week and it is a true gem. She hopes that the HPC keeps the park if at all possible. Paepcke Auditorium 1000 N. Third Street Amy said at the last meeting HPC asked the applicant to come back before they proceed to other commissions to resolve as much as possible. Michael Shoring, architect for the Paepcke Auditorium. Jim Curtis, representing the Aspen Institute. August Hasz, Resource Engineering Group. Mechanical engineer working on Geothermal for the Institute. Amy Margerum, Executive Vice-president of the Aspen Institute. Jim said we are working on an upgraded cooling system for the Paepcke building. We do not want to locate it on the roof top as it is quite large. It is six feet wide, 12 feet long and 8 to ten feet high. We have looked at alternative places and the Institute wants to be a leader in the environmental movement. The idea would be to do a geothermal that would provide cooling and heating and size it so that we can tie into the existing Koch building. The proposed pond location and configuration need restudied. We also need to find out what kind of safety features are needed around the pond. From a visual point of view fencing would not be appropriate around the pond. Another area for the pond would be across the service road. If we don't do the pond we can do a fluid cooler. The benefits for the pond are that it eliminates the large piece of equipment and provides cooling in the summer and also provides supplemental heating in the winter. The fluid cooler only supplements the cooling system for the summer. The projected savings for gas and electric in the Doer Hosier are 40°/a. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 Michael Shoring went over the power point presentation. The two additions on either side of the auditorium have been revised and there has not been any change in the administrative wing. The floor plan indicates where the trees will be removed. On the entry areas we are still looking at removing the projection booth from the lobby and pushing that into the auditorium. The most significant thing that we are looking at are the use of the shifting walls and slot windows. In the profile of the building it shows how the original walls step down sharply to echo the mountains surrounding the building. There is a small revision to the patio on the south side. On the northern side there is a stepped connection into the patio so that you can come out of the exit doors and out the side doors to the patio. With the revised patio we are able to have ADA access from the Paepcke and Koch buildings. There are new walls and we want to take the existing slot windows and use those in a new way, re-centering of the new opening to the north and south. The large door and glazing above would echo the slot windows and the mullions would align with the existing windows and joint lines as they do now. There was discussion about mechanical duct work. Through studies it would be better to move the duct work outside and onto the roof. In doing so it would allow us to replace the existing ceiling and get the duct work out of the auditorium so we present ourselves with a better acoustical situation. The mechanicals will be enclosed on the roof in the shape of the existing roof and less visible from the ground. The building has very poor air quality so we need to install new duct work. If the duct work where inside the auditorium we would have to drop the ceiling 24 inches which would affect our acoustics. Michael Shoring went over additional changes for the auditorium and answered clarifications. Jim discussed the proposed doors, windows and materials. Michael Shoring said they are preserving the existing masonry surfaces. The roofing will be changed and the windows on the auditorium will be changed. The slot windows will be custom built to look exactly like the existing ones. The windows are a big problem. The front doors are not going to be replaced. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 August Hasz said the existing windows have an R value of less than 1. If we where to increase the windows to today's standards we would get a 20% reduction in the heating and cooling energy load which translates to about a 20% reduction in the carbon footprint. The windows are a key item for certification of the building. The auditorium is not insulated. In the administrative wing there is fiberglass insulation. We can use spray foam to get some portions of the roof up to code. With the auditorium we don't intend to change the auditorium walls because the masonry on both sides is a key part to the experience of the building. In the administrative wing the glass system is the vast majority of the walls. Amy asked if there was anything else that could be done with the windows instead of replacing them to increase the R value. August said the windows are not that leaky and the seals could be better but that is about all you can do. The actual performance of the glass is single pane glass and there is nothing that you can do to make that glass better. Also the frames are a conducting nightmare and they would have to be replaced. One of the great things about double glazing is that it is applied to the interior surface of the glass. The low E coating and the air gap are the two things that make insulation. August also said one of the issues is that the windows are operable. Amy pointed out that this is not a noticed public hearing. Chairperson, Michael Hoffinan asked if anyone in the public wanted to make comments on the project. There where no public comments. Michael identified the issues: 1. Restudy the new walls (exterior) of the addition to be more sympathetic to the existing portion of the building. Ann said the plan presented is very successful in terms of the use of space. The soft windows work very nicely as they repeat what is going on with the rest of the building as does the overhead door. Jay said he would like to see the garage door bigger. Ann said with the eight foot door the end walls can match and if it was wider that couldn't occur. The board concurred with Ann's comments. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 2. Work on a landscape plan that is congruent to Herbert Bayer's designs. The plan has to be acceptable to the HPC. Jim Curtis said the only landscape is that there will be several trees removed around the building. Other than that we are not proposing to do anything other than to re-grass any disturbed areas and make the connection into the patio. Sarah said the success is connecting the courtyard to the building. The path that goes from the Institute and around the building seems disconnected and opening up the building will tie the path together to the building. Brian said the concept sketches address all the connections which are necessary to tie to the patio. Jim Curtis said their objective is to create ADA access from Paepcke to the Koch building and from Paepcke to the patio. 3. Existing trees to be retained as much as possible and if some need to be removed that we are informed and are part of that process. Trees to be removed should be indicated on a site plan. Michael said the board has already discussed trees and some elements of the landscape plan. Ann inquired about the pond. Jim Curtis said they need to accommodate about 300,000 gallons of water between depth and surface in the pond. The pond shown on the diagram is the appropriate scale. The existing pond would be integrated into the crescent pond. Ann said having the large body of water where currently there is a small pond would not be the right approach. An option would be having grasses and then integrate the pond as an art element. Sarah inquired about geothermal and ground source. August said they are the same thing. August said ground exchange is called geoexchange. Sarah said you could do ground heat without a pond. August said the only way to do the geo exchange without a pond or water'element is to lay pipe in the ground. The vertical bore holes that we would need would be 25,000 feet of pipe. That would be five plus miles of pipe drilled vertically. You are talking $400,000 to $500,000 dollars worth of drilling and we would have to ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 rip up the entire parking lot and re-asphalt it. To redo the pond would be about $90,000. Brian asked if the landscape around the pond is the original historic landscape. Amy Margerum said no, only Anderson Park is historic. Jim Curtis said the Institute has to look at the existing pond area and the second alternative to determine which one they like and then come back to the HPC. Amy Margerum said the SPA includes a landscape submittal. Brian said he would not out rule the expansion of the existing ponds if they are not the original historic configuration. Jay also agreed with Brian. Jay asked how the pond is kept from freezing in the winter. August explained that the thickest you will ever get built up is 8 to 10 inches. Once that happens you won't have evaporative loss. The pond will stay around 38 degree and the system can function with degrees as cold as 25 degree. Ann said she would encourage the Institute to keep exploring the geo exchange as opposed to mechanical heating and cooling. 4. That the cooler is not put in the proposed location. Michael said the applicant said the cooler is not going to be in the proposed location but they haven't decided where it will go. 5. No wall to be built on the walkway. Michael said the applicant has stated they will not install the walkway. 6. A model to be presented at final for us to really understand the mechanical implications. Michael said the model has been provided. 7. The new overhead door to the deck be looked at more closely and do a design that is more sensitive to the existing architecture. Michael said the applicant has succeeded in changing the architecture. 8. Restudy all existing materials and preserve them. Michael asked the board how they felt about the existing materials being preserved. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 Brian said if gaining certification requires changing out the windows that is something I can support as long as it is done within the character of the building. Sarah agreed. We are lucky that these windows can be replicated. Jay said in order to support changing out the windows he would like information on how the applicant came to that conclusion. Replacing original materials goes against our guidelines. Replacing the windows with a better material could be supported if the applicant provides documentation as to why they can't be saved. August said a single pane window can never get the performance of a double pane window. The existing frames are conductive nightmares. There are three things that go into calculating performance; center glass U value, the U value of the frame and the infiltration which is the air moving through the glass. You can't ad another layer and the only thing that can be done is a storm window. - Amy said with Victorian houses we require the windows to be preserved because they are examples of craftsmanship. Storm windows on the exterior have been used in the past. Sarah said the HPC has a responsibility to make buildings no rely on mechanized systems for heating and cooling. We have the opportunity to replicate these windows so the building can be used for another 50 years. 9. Do not remove any other exterior walls over those indicated on the plan tonight. Jim Curtis said no other walls have been removed. Brian addressed the air duct system on the roof. As seen from the front and back the systems fit in the symmetry of the building. The concern is seeing it above the fagade of the building. Greenwald Pavilion Amy said the HPC did a site visit and the Institute has researched tents. We need to address the landscape and hear the neighbors concerns. The applicant has found a company called Tent technology in which the tent has ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 a lot more peaked forms. The entry canopies proposed have been withdrawn from the application. We had previous discussions about the sides of the tent possibly being mesh which gives it a more open character. We also had discussions on the color to see if there are any other options other than white. Staff supports white for at least the roof because that is consistent with the white roofs across the campus. Maybe the rear elevation which faces the neighborhoods could be treated in another way. There has been discussion of landscaping the rear but staff is concerned because we do not want to create rows of trees that aren't typically used on the campus. The institute rents their chairs but they would like to purchase chairs and store them somewhere, possibly under the tent. What is proposed now is a separate tent structure and staff would like to discuss storing them under the tent. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Jim Curtis represents the Aspen Institute Jim said the existing tent is 60 x 120 and is not very attractive. We completely agree that the white canvas is too reflective and cold white. We also agree that the plastic walls are ugly and reflective and we would like those changed. We would like feedback on the general shape of the tent and the color. We are proposing a mosquito netting for the sides. The back sidewall could be a different color. The tent company out of British Columbia, Canada does tents on an international basis. They have off the shelf tents and can do custom tents. The discussion with the HPC should be how can we get a nicer tent and what constitutes a nicer tent. We also need to discuss how often the tent goes up and down and how long it stays up. In summation the tent proposed with the peaks and metal structure can come in any color. The tent is available in the same size as the existing tent. Sarah said the height is 23.2 feet to the peak. How does that relate to the existing tent? The existing height is 23 feet. Jay asked if the slab would increase the height. Jim said no. Michael asked if the. applicant had alternative locations. Amy clarified that possibly the tent could be oriented differently at the same location. Jim said from a zoning point of view we could use the Marble garden or Anderson Park but both are historic and would have substantial impacts. There really aren't any other appropriate locations. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 Michael asked if the applicant considered other orientations. Amy Margerum said there is the concern with the sage and we wanted to protect it. We want to use the pad that we have already created. Chairperson Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. Nancy Bryant wanted to know how many people complained about the color of the tent etc. Amy Margerum said we have had 5 to 10 people who live across the river that are concerned with the color. Nancy said we love this institute and we need it and we benefit from it. I am in complete favor of the tent. Paul Taddune, attorney representing the homeowner association for Pitkin Reserve. Exhibit I photograph of the tent. The tent presents a glaring sore thumb from their view plane. If in fact the institute is attempting to be responsive the tent is in people's back yard and hopefully something can be done to mitigate. This is a big box with no architectural treatment right there in the middle and the color is stark white and stands out. The Pitkin Reserve residents look at this every day. Michael said in the memo it was mentioned about taking the tent up and down. Amy said it might be questioned in the SPA which would involve Planning and Zoning and Council. Jim said if we took the tent down the steel structure would be up and the vinyl would come down. The institute at this point is not interested in taking the tent up and down. We need more technical information with the new design as to how complicated that would be. The tent will be in the range of $250,000. It is a nicer design and that is an incentive to keep it up. Taking it up and down has a lot more wear and tear on the tent. Gretchen Greenwood suggested lowering the tent in the ground. Jim Curtis said maybe we can look at lowering it a foot but the issue is as you bring it down in height the drainage problem becomes an issue. Fred Pierce, attorney representing one of the homeowners across the river, Helen Stone. With regard to taking the tent up and down during the course ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 of the summer the neighbors have been in communication with the Institute for the past three years. When the Institute came recently and discussed going with a permanent permit for the tent they offered and said they only need the tent for 3 to 6 events per year. They said they where willing to take it down. That will be addressed by P&Z. The concern is that the staff recommends a white roof. How does that white roof fit in with anything in the context of what the neighbors are looking at? It looks like a circus tent. If a less white color is used there will be less impact. Paul Taddune said this is a collaborative effort and the more you work at it you achieve a better result. There is a lot to be done and we can all work together to do something that benefits everyone. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman closed the public hearing. Michael said the board should limit the discussion to mass and scale. Color and reflectivity will be addressed at final. The issues are the height and shape of the roof line, location and the design of the tent. Amy pointed out that the applicant is proposing a temporary storage tent and staff is recommending putting the storage in some other area possibly under the floor of the tent. Jim Curtis said the Institute would like to hear the feedback on color of the tent from the board. Mass and scale of the roof line. Jay pointed out that the points of the tent are the same height of the current ridge line and then the points dip down so in essence you are decreasing the mass. Brian said one of the things that make this a stark contrast with the people living across the river is that it is very much a rectilinear structure and has very straight lines and appears hard and cold. It doesn't respond to the background in anyway. The proposed tent has more of an organic element and undulations. Sarah said her concern is that the height is 23.2 to the apex. Maybe there is away so that it doesn't have to be so peaked. As a suggestion maybe the tent company can work on the peaks so that they are somewhat blunted. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 Ann also agreed that the peaked roof works well. Once the landscaping is done it will help screen the back side of the tent. Michael said the length and width of the new tent is approximately the same as the existing tent. HPC members had no problems with the dimensions. Brian said possibly the width could be widened. Jay pointed out that there is a path behind the tent and that needs to betaken into consideration. Amy Margerum said they can look at the site and see if it can be tweaked. We are concerned about the impacts on the existing trees. Amy said they would be glad to restudy the rectilinear dimensions. Michael said the next suggestion was from Gretchen Greenwood about sinking the structure. Sarah said there are issues such as ramps and drainage. Presently this is a temporary structure and all of a sudden it becomes permanent. Brian agreed sinking the tent would require a lot of challenges. Ann said with the design presented and the additional spruce trees it is very acceptable without investigating lowering the structure. Jay said with the approval of the tent the cement pad will be poured and it might be worth studying to see if it is feasible for the Institute to sink it. Sarah said there are a lot of other issues such a footers etc. that would be involved with sinking a structure and then all of a sudden we have a permanent structure. Amy Margerum said the Institute would not be interested in sinking the tent. Ann said if you sink it and the tent goes down then you are dealing with negative space throughout the year. You will also have to have some kind of ramps installed. Michael said the consensus is that the HPC will not require the applicant to sink the structure. Michael said the next question is whether or not we are going to require them to include storage as part of the foundation. The board agreed that no additional structure is allowed for storage. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008 Michael said another issue is the landscape plan. Jim Curtis said in the application booklet we propose 14 additional spruce trees. Discussion on color and reflectivity. Jay pointed out that the concern is how this structure impacts the historic resource. That is probably the reason why staff suggested white because there is so much white at the Aspen Institute. Jay said he is open to the color and is sympathetic to the neighbors. Ann said her concern is the reflectivity. A range of whites could be acceptable. MOTION.• Jay made the motion to approve the tent, Greenwald Pavilion and restudy the length and width of the tent and placement on the existing location. The flat concrete pad is approved. The storage tent is not being approved due to lack of information; motion second by Brian. Discussion Amy said one suggestion was to restudy the north side that is visible from the Pitkin Green area. The other issue is the wires that come out from the tent as they might interfere with the trail. Amy Margerum pointed out that the decorative aspects of the tent change with each event. All in favor, motion carried. 1005 Waters Avenue, Ordinance #48 negotiation Nancy Bryant, owner Gretchen Greenwood, architect Amy said this is our first discussion under Ordinance #48. Any property that is listed can have a 90 day discussion to see what benefits can be offered regarding designation. The property owner brought in a remodel and staff reviewed it. HI'C is to review the project to determine its preservation. The property is on Waters Avenue and built in 1964. The building is an example of a modern chalet. The building has a shallow roof form and extending eaves. If the property where designated the benefits would be a reduction in the impact fees; setback variances; a potential FAR bonus and the possibility of transfer development rights. This property is zoned R-15 and the minimum lot size is 15,000 square feet and this lot is 9,000 square feet. It is 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Roll call vote: Brian, yes; .lay, yes; Ann, no; Nora, yes. Motion carried 3-1. 1000 N. Third Street -Aspen Institute -Greenwald Pavilion -Final Sarah was seated. Amy Guthrie said conceptual was granted in July. The institute looked at a tent that was more architectural for the site. There has been a tent on this site for four or five seasons. It is used for the Aspen Ideas Festival and other similar events. The tent is a seasonal tent. The applicant also has to go to the P&Z for an SPA amendment and part of that process was a DRC review. Recently that process has brought up requirements that the applicant was not anticipating. The Fire Dept. is requiring a paved access right up to the tent and a turnaround. There are also some significant utility lines crossing the area where the tent was proposed. Staff has determined that the project is not ready for final because there are additional things that need to be worked out with the other agencies. Jim Curtis, represented the Aspen Institute. Joede Schoeberlein, architect Jim Curtis said the tent is proposed to be up from June 30`h to August 20`h, that is seven weeks and three days. Based on the drawings that are up the design is much nicer. It seems like we are in a procedural loop. We need to get to P&Z and City Council and keep the project moving. Amy Margerum, Vice-president of the Aspen Institute Amy pointed out that they submitted for a tent in 2007. They got caught up in ordinance #48 and we have gone alon~ with everything. When HPC approved conceptual they asked us to look at alternative locations and we did and we have worked with various departments. We have put in the Fire Departments requirement of a turn around and it was no big deal. We then got a staff report today that indicates we need to go back to conceptual. From an HPC design this hasn't changed much. We feel you have all the information. The design hasn't changed and we would like to hear your input. We are trying to get this up for the Aspen Ideas Festival late in June. We need to order the tent in January in order to get it up. We are more than willing to invest in landscaping, address colors and screening. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Jay said he is in agreement with staff. It is not just relocating the tent. There have been alternations from the beginning and it should go back to conceptual. Sarah asked Amy and the applicant to clarify what changes occurred from conceptual. Amy Guthrie clarified that she is not suggesting that they have to do conceptual again; I'm suggesting we are not ready for final because some of the issues are not ironed out yet. There is a new DRC scheduled for this. I am suggesting final be continued until the DRC issues are worked out. Amy Margerum said we are fine with that as long as we don't get delayed. We want HPC feedback on the design of the tent. Jim Curtis said the drawing indicates the tent that was presented at conceptual. The other change is that the tent has been shifted to be outside the water and sanitation easements and we have incorporated the fire lanes and turnaround. Amy Guthrie said at conceptual we discussed moving the tent southward so there weren't so many conflicts with the little paths going behind the structure and in fact it is moving northward. There is also a more formalized terrace proposed. Jim Curtis said on the terrace we are proposing a crushed gravel. It would be the same kind of material that is in the Paepcke memorial garden. It is rather a gathering place or entry rather than a terrace. Having the entry makes the tent have a greater sense of entry where people can talk. This better defines the tent. Amy Guthrie also pointed out that DRC has requested three porta-potties be installed because it is too far to Koch seminar. Jim Curtis pointed out that the tent is treated as a structure by the Building Department even though it is only going to be up seven weeks. It is not the distance. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Joede S. said the distance isn't the issue it is the issue of maximum people in the building. The porta potties would be need for a very large event. Amy Guthrie said at conceptual the pad w,as approved and there was discussion of the wires that come but from; the tent. Brian said as he recalls the placement of the tent was a visual issue. It is helpful to listen to the public comments. Jay asked the applicant how we went from a small path to the tent to a 40 foot semicircle with two entrances. That is different from conceptual. Sarah pointed out that the entrance is a landscape issue that can be dealt with at final. Joede pointed out if the walls are closed we still need four entrances. Sarah asked if the height of the tent has remained at 23.2. Jim Curtis said the low points are ten inches higher than what were there and the peaks are higher. Y,, Amy Guthrie pointed out the requirements for conceptual. For the applicant to go back to conceptual HPC has to determine if the changes are substantial. Staff is recommending that we delay but not go back. Jay said the dipping down points are now at the previous ridge line and the points are six feet higher than they were. We are increasing the mass. Sarah said conceptual was approved July 23`d and it included the tent as we see it and the height have changed since that approval. Jay said he pointed out that the points of the tent where are the current height of the ridge line and he made the motion. Brian said it is three feet higher from conceptual. The top of the peaks are 23.2 and now we are talking 26 something. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Sarah said we approved that tent in July and why do we not have that same tent today and can we get that same tent. Jim Curtis said he will go back and do some more research. He cannot give us an exact answer. Sarah said there is a mistake here and they need to come back with the tent that was approved at conceptual. Vice-chair Sarah Broughton opened the public hearing. Paul Taddune, Pitkin Reserve Paul said his recollection is that HPC approved something in the abstract. Exhibit I -comments Exhibit II -Photograph from Paul Taddune Exhibit III - e-mail from Elyse Elliott regarding the difficult parking situation. Paul said the main issue is that the tent is being moved to the north and preventing the possibility of having sufficient landscaping to minimize the impact of the tent from the northern side of town. The additional height will create more intrusion. The main problems are the easements and if they are going to relocate the tent and create a concrete platform over the utilities. Amy Margerum said it is going to be asphalt. Paul said that might be a good argument to moving it south and you would have more room for landscaping. There is a concern that the fee through mesh would allow for more noise. The association also had a concern on the length. Mike Morgan, Pitkin Reserve: Mike said the tent when we bought was supposed to be temporary. The more you add to it, it seems to become permanent. The service cart is not a golf cart. With the cart going back and forth it is somewhat of an eye sore. The fire lane will also create more of an eye sore. The sidewalk they moved comes right up to the property line which means the service vehicle is more visible. The height difference is also an issue. Amy Margerum said we asked for a tent because we had so many different events going on. We are asking only for the pad to be permanent. It is 9. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12, 2008 difficult because we are dealing with so many different boards and the neighbors. The tent is up in the summer for 7 weeks. We have taken out the food service and the noise for the neighbors. We have agreed to the color and the mesh that you can see through. We have looked at every other location and there are none. Mike said the tent has been moved and there is only a small area to landscape for the tent. Brian asked who owned the adjacent property. Jim said the City owns the property between the river and the tent. If that is the case there is a lot of opportunity to work with the City of Aspen to allow additional landscaping between there and the river if that is appropriate. Amy Margerum said the Institute will be'willing to work with the neighbors on the landscaping plan and we will pay for the necessary cleaning. Patty Morgan, Pitkin Reserve Possibly the tent can move south again or it could stay in its original location. Fred Pierce reiterated two points. This has grown in size and on the west, North West corner of the building it has moved closer to the neighbors about 50 feet closer and three feet higher. The landscaping is an issue. The applicant has been very easy to work with and considerate to the neighbors. They recognize they have an impact on us. Jim Curtis said on a technical level Joede and I can work on some issues. Part of the reason the height changed at conceptual we showed you a typical tent that was 50 feet wide and it 200 feet long. When you increase the width to 60 feet to keep the same proportions requested of the original tent, the height or peaks changed. '~ Sarah asked if the board's concerns have been addressed. Jim True said it is up to the board to determine if there have been substantial changes to the conceptual approval. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12, 2008 Nora pointed out that tents have been a part of this property forever. Having a tent there is totally in context. This new tent has a much more new shape that fits in with what was there previously, Ann said she is inclined to accept this with some conditions. The proportions are basically the same and it really isn't a change. The location works better with the rest o the plan throughout the site. In terms of the landscaping with the neighbors, possibly we can work with the City to do some plantings on the other side of the path and come up with some large deciduous trees which would screen it during the summer. The fire lane is unfortunate and it will be required no matter where the tent is. The large terrace out front tends to add to the permanence and it somewhat becomes a scar on the landscape. It needs to be a smaller area. Sarah said the commission is divided and the applicant should come back with the height and mass of the proposed tent and work with the different agencies to find out if there are any other options or if we are committed to this one spot that would put some of the commissioners minds at ease in terms of approving this location. Brian also said we need clarification about the height difference and is it a necessary change due to the dimensions. Sarah said instead of being peaked maybe there is a softer ridge that lessens the height. Jay said he disagreed. The original tent should come back. One of the things I took into consideration when I made the motion was that the mass of the new tent design was less than the current tent that was used. With the new dimensions the mass has been increased. It is less sympathetic to the neighbors. We approved a tent 60 x 120 and the peaks were 23.2. Jim Curits said the tent that was there in 2005 and 2008 is 60 x 120 and had a support wing 20 x 40, that is 8,000 square feet. The proposed tent is 60 x 137-140 and the square footage 8,046. Sarah asked Jim to work with the tent company to bring the height down and get it back to the height that was approved at conceptual. 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 12, 2008 MOTION: Brian moved to continue 1000 N. Third Street, Aspen Institute, Greenwald Pavilion to January 14; second by Sarah. Roll call vote: Nora, yes; Ann, yes; Sarah, yes; Jay, no; Brian, yes. Motion carried 4-1. 1006 E. Cooper -work session - no minutes. Red Onion project monitoring issues - no minutes. MOTION: Sarah moved to adjourn; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk ..~,, 12' ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 14, 2009. help preserve the historic resources we have a better chance with a standing seam roof which is a higher quality. Dave said through the 90's rusted corrugated was the material of choice for metal roofs. Now we are having a glut of zinc and we like the copper because it is timeless. Copper is a ready available material throughout history and patinas to an innocuous brown. MOTION.• Sarah moved to amend the resolution approving 214 E. Bleeker with the following condition: 1. Brick stairs be removed and the stone stairs be replaced to match what was in our approved resolution. The stone should match the stone coursing on the foundation. 2. The copper standing seam roof remains on the new addition as currently proposed. 3. Realigned walkway approved as built per the Parks Department. The reclaimed brick is OK. Motion second by Brian. Brian, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, no. Ann, no. Motion failed 2-2. MOTION: Ann moved to continue 214 E. Bleeker until January 28`"; second by Michael. All in favor, motion carried. GREENWALD PAVILION -FINAL REVIEW -CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Nora was seated. Amy said at the last meeting there were a number of issues such as fire access and the discovery of a significant utility easement that would push the tent location back. There was discussion also about the tent size and that it had increased in height from conceptual. The meeting was continued until the issues were reviewed. In the staff memo the only condition of approval is related to the landscaping. There is a proposal to create a landscape barrier across the back of the tent to soften it from the neighbors across the way with a row of Aspen trees. Staff has concerns that the proposal is a little bit unnatural. Staff and monitor and the Parks Dept. can work with the applicant on the placement of the trees as a condition. Jim Curtis represented the Aspen Institute. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 14, 2009 Joede Schoeberlein, architect on the project. Jim Curtis said the new tent center of the roof is below what the old tent was and it is 20 feet even and the five points go up to 25.6. At P& Z there was a discussion about the location of the tent on or off the utility easement. Basically this would be a city council decision. We would also like to keep the tent color white with a white mesh. The critical issue is whether the tent is off the easement or on the easement. Planning & Zoning, the Water dept. and Sanitation District are in favor of the placement of the tent directly to the south of the main utility easement. The tent would be two feet behind the easement and the tent is located parallel to the easement and we have landscaped the back side. Joede said the existing tent is 20.3 feet. The new tent is 3 inches below that at 20 feet even and the five peaks go up to 25.6. We were able to accomplish the height reduction by reducing the width from 60 feet to 55 feet. P&Z recommended the location off the easement parallel to the easement. Nora said the Bayer landscaping is intentional throughout the campus and open to the community. The landscape'around the tent needs to be sensitive to the community and not hidden by a row of trees. Possibly use a berm as opposed to a wall of trees. The back side of the tent is an opportunity to do something unique. Jim said the Institute agrees with Nora's philosophy. Joede said originally the entire mesa area was tree free and the trees have grown naturally because of the irrigation. On the front side we would something similar to what was planted around the marble garden where aspen trees are used to form an edge and also that the irrigation ditches would be woven through them. It would be a simple arc of trees on the edge of the gravel entry area and the back would acknowledge a more natural condition on the back. Chairperson, Michael Hoffrnan opened the public hearing. Fred Pierce, attorney representing the neighbor across the river who looks at the back side of the tent. The existing tent sits on the easement. One proposal is to move it back and closer to my clients. We would like the 7 ASPEN ffiSTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 14, 2009 location on the easement with an asphalt pad. My client doesn't want a wall of vegetation but we do want landscaping that softens it. We are in no way suggesting that the tent not be there we just feel it should be pushed to the front of the property. A white tent might be stark and not fit in with the environment. Paul Taddune, attorney for Pitkin Reserve. Paul echoed Fred's remarks as their concerns are identical. Paul pointed out that the P& Z followed the recommendation of the Water Dept. Easements in the city are always getting tom up. Alternative A is off the easement. It would be helpful if you invited the neighbors to the table to discuss the landscaping. The front of the tent should be somewhat open. If the tent could be a little less white it wouldn't stand out as much. Chairperson Michael Hoffinan closed the public hearing. Ann pointed out that regarding the historic context either location works. Keeping it off the easement might avoid future problems. In terms of the landscaping the front design works very well. The lineup of trees in the back seems a little formal and you would be better off with a grove of aspens. Sarah concurred with Ann's comments. Maybe the berm becomes a nice place to sit. 'The white mesh is on the two end walls and the front and not the north facing on the back. Michael said he feels either location is OK. Nora said she would like to see a site plan of the landscaping. Sarah agreed. MOTION.• Ann moved to approve Resolution #2 for the Greenwald Pavilion with the representation that either location of the tent is acceptable. Staff and monitor will work with Jim Curtis on the landscape plan to be presented to the HPC. The neighbors will be invited to the meeting on the landscape plan. The proposed tent as represented in the plans Exhibit A is approved. Motion second by Sarah. All in favor, motion carried 5-0. Monitor for the tent -Ann Monitor for the Auditorium -Michael 8 __._... EXHIBIT G ..,, i ORDINANCE N0. 14 (Series 1991) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ASPEN MEADOWS SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SUBDIVISION APPROVAL, REZONING AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS, RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOT- MENT, EXCESS GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOTMENT, GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR ESSENTIAL.PUBLIC FACILITIES, CONDOMINIUM22ATION, AND VESTING OF .DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS. WHEREAS, that real property commonly ]mown and referred to as the "Aspen Meadows" has previously been designated a specially planned area (SPA) on the City of Aspen Official Zone District Map; and WHEREAS, a master plan for the Aspen Meadows was adopted as ?~ a component of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in September, `~~ ~=,~°~ 1990; and - WHERFnc, the City has received a comprehensive development plan for the Aspen Meadows known as the Aspen Meadows Final Specially Planned Area (SPA) Development Plan Submission (hereinafter the "Plan"); and WHEREAS, on December 20, 1990, after review and approval and upon recommendation of the Planning Depa_"tment and. the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, the Plan received conceptual approval, subject to conditions, by the City Council pursuant to the procedure set forth at Section 24-6-205(A)(8)(b) of the Municipal Code; .and WHEREAS, Savanah Limited Partnership, ].S1 conjunction with the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies (the "Institute°), the Music Associates of Aspen ("MAA"), and the Aspen Center for Physics ("Physics"), hereinafter jointly known as the "Developer", submitted an application for a residential Growth Management Quota System allotment as a component of the Plan on February 15, 1991; and WFIEREAS, on March 4, 1991, the Developer submitted to the Planning Department a proposed final SPA development plan for the Aspen Meadows incorporating requests for subdivision approval,, text amendments to the municipal land use code, requests for rezoning and .zoning map amendments, growth management exemption for essential public facilities, conditional use approvals for attached affordable housing units, and special review approval -~:~ for parking in an academic (A) zone district; and ~ WHEREAS, the Developer's proposed final SPA development plan has been subjected to review and comments by the Engineering, Water, Parks, and Environmental Health Departments for the City of Aspen, as well as review and comments by the Fire Marshal, Sanitation District and Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority; and F7HEREAg, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the Developer's development plan in accordance with those procedures set forth at Section 24-6-205(A)(8)(c) of the Municipal Code and did conduct public hearings thereon on April 2, 9 and 16, 1991; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the Plan, agency and public comment thereon, the review undertaken and comments of 2 the Plan as provided by the Historic Preservation Committee relevant to design, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division a of Article 7 (Specially Planned Area), Division 10 of Article 1 (Subdivision), Divisions 2,3 and 4 of Article 7 (Permitted, Conditional and Special Review Uses, respectively), Divisioa 11 of Article 7 (Text Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments), and Article 8 (Growth Management Quota System), the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended final approval of the Plan, subject to conditions, to the City Council; and WF~REAS, pursuant to the Growth Management Quota System the Planning and Zoning Commission evaluated and scored the~residen- ,_::: _~ ~, '~ tial component of the Plan, consisting of fourteen (14) units, at 33.85 points, thus, meeting minimum development approval threshold and, additionally, awarded the Plan 1.93 bonus points as allowed under Section 24-8-106(E)(6) of the Municipal Code, thus, giving the Plan a total GMQS score of 35.78 points; ani WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission further granted conditional use approvals-for four affordable housing units associated with the residential component of the Plan and special review approval for parking in an academic (A) zone district; and WHEREAS, on April 16, 1991, the Planning and Zoning ComRls - sion, after public hearing, incorporated its approvals, condi- tional approvals, and recommendations into Resolution No. 91.10 ,~ 3 ..~. and forwarded same to City Council in accordance with Section 24- 6-205(A)(8)(c) of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council-finds that the public interest would not. be served by affording phased GMQS development allot- ments under the Plan and that an excess GMQS development allat- went as permitted by Section 24-8-103 (B) of the Municipal Code is desirable and warranted; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommenda- tions and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning Com- -:~,., mission and the Historic Preservation Committee, and has taken ', and considered public comment at public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plan meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that approval of the Plan, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and the Aspen Meadows Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COIINCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1 Pursuant to Section 24-7-804B of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, J~ 4 the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's spe- cially planned area development component: 1. The Developer's final plan submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approv- al. 2. The Plan is compatible and enhances the mix of devel- opment in the immediate vicinity of the Aspen Meadows and the proposed land uses as approved hereinbelow are deemed to be appropriate and allowable in their under- lying zone districts as authorized by an SPA overlay. 3. The Plan incorporates and provides sufficient public facilities and roads for the requested development, and provides significant open space, trails and public .amenities for the residents and users of the develop- ment. 4. The Aspen Meadows is generally suitable for the requested development in terms of topography and the ~~;:,,~ Plan creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve view planes and avoid adverse environmental impacts. 5. The Plan will not require the expenditure of excessive public funds in order to provide public facilities for the development or its surrounding neighborhoods. 6. The Plan is•consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehen- sive Plan and the Aspen Meadows Master Plan. 7. The Plan demonstrates good and sufficient cause to remove the SPA designation for that portion of the Aspen Meadows property that is to be conveyed to the City and to adjust the current SPA boundary accord- ingly. Section 2 Pursuant to the findings as set forth in Section 1 above, the City Council grants final SPA development plan approval for the Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. A detailed construction timeline incorporating a ` specific construction schedule for the installation of _,,/] 5 the new Meadows Road shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning and Public Works Departments prior to staff approval of the final plat. Upon completion of the new Meadows Road, all construction traffic associ- ated with the development shall use and be rerouted to the new Meadows Road. ~~ ~ J 2. The applicant shall provide 97 parking spaces at the West Meadows facilities pending construction of the West Meadows parking structure. The Developer shall conduct a review and provide a written report of the development's traffic mitigation plan to the Planning Director on the anniversary date of the final passage of this Ordinance in years 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998 and 2000, and shall continue to con- duct and provide such reviews and reports every two (2) years thereafter unless deemed unnecessary by the City Council. Such report shall include, but not be limited to, traffic counts on Seventh Street, number of van trips pursuant to the development's traffic mitigation plan, charter vehicle use, passenger counts and desti- nations arising from the use of the Aspen Meadows facilities. The review and report shall also incorpo- rate data and information from the Roaring Fork Transit Authority (BETA) illustrating its service to the Aspen Meadows facilities. The City will review the report and may require modification to the development's traffic mitigation program, including the addition of reasonable new mitigation measures. All modifications of the traffic mitigation plan shall be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. 4. The shuttle van system as incorporated into the devel- opment's traffic mitigation plan shall be operated by that company or entity operating the lodge facility. 5. Delivery vehicles and delivery routes serving the restaurant facilities shall be limited to those hours of delivery and routes as delineated in the develop- ment's traffic mitigation plan, except when severe weather or circumstances beyond the control of the lodge/restaurant operator require a deviation there- from. The restaurant/lodge operator shall insure and enforce the delivery hours and routes by contractual obligation with its goods and services providers. 6. The thirteen foot (13') service access/emergency loop drive serving the chalets shall be constructed with an all weather surface adequate to support fire-fighting apparatus. Such access/emergency loop drive(s) shall be plowed, cleared and maintained to 13' widths at all times of the year and particularly during the winter ~ months. 7. A11 buildings to be served and accessed from the 13' access/emergency loop drive shall have interior sprin- kling fire protection/suppression systems as approved .~ by the Fire Marshal and such system(s) must be approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. ~z r._, .~ e. Specific fire hydrant locations for the development shall be established and approved in cooperation watri the Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of a building / permit. . 9. A detailed tree removal and replacement plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City Parks Department prior to staff approval of the final plat. Such plan shall indicate all trees to be moved or removed, their size, location, species, and time of planting, trans- planting, or removal. All tree replacement shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch basis with minimum size at 1 1/2" caliper. 10. The final plat shall depict all trails dedicated or conveyed to public use and all easements linking off- site trails to the development's trail system. The final plat shall particularly note (1) an easement for a trail link from the racetrack, and (2) the trail between the tennis townhouses and restaurant as depict- ed on the Master Plan. Exact trail locations must be approved by the Planning Director giving priority to those alignments which minimize damage or disruption to existing vegetation and landscape and which subordinate grade considerations and, thus, minimize switchbacks, to the preservation of existing topography. As-built easements shall be executed and conveyed after trail construction. il. There shall be no interconnection of non-treated water systems to potable water systems. 12. Pursuant to Section 23-53 (g) of the Municipal Code, the Developer shall convey all rights, titles, easements and interests to the Si Johnson Ditch and water right, water wells and appurtenant water rights on the Aspen Meadows property to the City. The City shall, in 7 r exchange, lease back to Developer, or its successor(s) in interest, raw water from those sources for irriga- tion use within the development in an amount equal to that amount of water reasonably necessary for the efficient irrigation of the lands historically irrigat- ed, not to exceed the amount of water conveyed to the City by the Developer. Developer shall pay to the City' its pro rata share of operation,. maintenance and repair costs, plus One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per year. The lease as noted above shall not subordinate the use of the water right to the emergency needs of the City for minimum stream flows, hydroelectric power, or municipal purposes. 13. The Developer shall install at its own cost a water distribution system for the development meeting no less than the minimum design, engineering, materials and construction standards of the City for domestic munici- pal and fire protection purposes and shall convey same to the City upon completion, inspection and acceptance by the City. Developer shall also convey to the City a perpetual twenty foot (20') as-built easement extending ten feet (1D ) from each side of the centerline of all newly constructed water lines, and a construction •, easement extending an additional five feet (5') on each r.~' side of the centerline, along with a similar twenty foot (20') easement and construction easement for the future installation of a connector main to the existing City water main i.n Black Birch Drive. 14. Drainage design for the development shall not inten- tionally direct run-off into irrigaticn ditches or ponds. 15. All residential units shall comply with fireplace regulations as contained in the Municipal Code and enforced by the Environmental Health Depar~~ment. No building permits shall be issued for residential units absent compliance with fireplace regulations. All disputes concerning the application or interpretation of fireplace regulations to the development shall be subject to review and determination by the Clean Air Board. 16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each component of the project, a drainage mitigation plan for that component for run-off during construction activity shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer so as to insure against or minimize run-off into Castle Creek and the Roaring Fork River. 17. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each component of the project, a fugitive dust control plan for that component must be submitted to and approved by the Environmental Health Department and such State agencies as having jurisdiction over same. 18. A fugitive dust plan must be submitted and approved by the Environmental Health Department for the MAA parking lot prior to issuance of a building permit for the MAA rehearsal facility. 19. All energy conservation and efficiency measures as represented by the Developer in its GMQS application regarding insulation, glazing, solar orientation, HVAC, and plumbing fixtures shall be incorporated into all residential units and the design(s) for same must be approved by the City prior to issuance of any building permit for residential construction. These measures shall be further incorporated into deed restrictions and/or covenants for all single family homes and condo- minium declarations. 20. Non-residential construction and facilities shall utilize state-of-the-art energy conservation and effi- `~. ciency measures as represented by the Developer. Accordingly,=detailed plans submitted for .building permits for the lodge structures and the MAA rehearsal hall must be accompanied by the energy information provided to staff in the Appropriate Technologies Associates' letter of May 3, 1991, and the MAA/Reheare- al Hall Energy Conservation Description document sub- mitted to Planning staff on May 20, 1991. The engi- neered thermal envelope calculation will be verified by the Building Department according to the Model Energy Code. 21. The Developer shall pay to the City an affordable housing mitigation impact fee for 16.69 low income v employees associated with ten new residential units, seven on Lot 6 and three on Lot 5,. in an amount to be calculated pursuant to those fee guidelines in effect at the time the fee is to be paid. The fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for any residential construction and shall be paid in amounts reflecting and corresponding to the number of residen- tial units sought to be permitted at any given time (1.66 per unit). -_ 22. Developer shall construct replacement and/or additional fox dens in a manner and at locations to be selected in the .field by the City, in consultation with the Direc- tor of the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies, prior to the issuance of any building permits for development under the Plan, or any other demolition or '~ construction within .the development area, to wit, the Aspen Meadows. 23. Revegetation of all areas developed pursuant to the Plan shall be implemented in accordance with those guidelines as set forth by Design workshop in its letter of 3/21/91, which letter is incorporated herein as if fully set forth. All revegetation shall be inspected and monitored by the City to ensure that revegetatian efforts and the protection of same are successful. 24. New manicured lawn areas shall be minimized to the maximum extent possible, except in those areas adjacent to the Music Tent, and such areas must be depicted and approved on the final plat. _~-~r 25. Prior to excavation, temporary construction barricades _+~' and or fencing shall be erected within five feet of the building envelopes of the tennis townhomes and trustee townhomes to prevent damage from falling debris to the slope bordering same unless unstable soils dictate alternative locations mutually agreed upon by the / owner, the Building Department and the Planning Office. Prior to issuance of building permits for individual buildings, the locations of all fencing and barricades shall be submitted to and approved by the Building Department and the Planning Office. All fencing and barricades shall remain in place throughout the con- struction process. 26. Financial assurances in amounts and in forms acceptable to Developer and City shall be provided by Developer to ensure the satisfactory installation and completion of the new Meadows Road, all utility infrastructure, including water lines, the trail along old Meadows c/ Road, and the..parking facility. That portion of the above-referenced financial assurances reasonably found by the Public Works Director to be related to the work for which a permit is sought must be in place prior to issuance of that building permit. ~_.! l0 ., 27. The following language shall be included in the SPA/Subdivision Agreement: "Any SPA or Master Plan amendment or future development applications submitted by any non-profit user of the Meadows property (Lots 1, 2, and 3) shall be applied for j_oi try by all non- profit property owners. This shall supersede prior requirements requiring SPA submittal approval by all property owners. Similarly any SPA Amendment proposed to be submitted by any residential owner or association thereof shall require, in addition to the consent of the association of owners of the residential component involved, the approval of the resident non-profits of the SPA." 28. Public pedestrian access, excluding access to build- ings, will continue to be allowed at reasonable hours throughout the entire academic (A), open space (OS), and wildlife preservation (WP) zone district areas of the Aspen Meadows development, subject to reasonable regulations as established by the owners thereof in order to protect their property, as well as the academ- ic privacy and serenity of the campus, its prog=ams and the health and safety of other users and visitors. ~. i _=r 29. The MAA parking lot shall be plowed and kept clear of snow during all wintertime performances or functions at MAA facilities. 30. Pursuant to Section 24-7-804(D)(4) of the Municipal Code, the final plat, which shall, at a minimum, con- sist of final drawings depicting the site plan, land- scape plan, utility plan and building elevations, and a specially planned area (SPA) agreement, shall be re- corded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and shall be binding upon the property owners subject to the development plan, their successors and assigns, and shall constitute the development regula- tions for the r~ron~-~~-~-~ e~--~-~sa. , snarl be lim3t~ed-ta-the uses, density, configuration, and all other elements an3"~conditi ns set forth on the final development plan, and in this ordinance and the SPA agreement. Failure on the part of the Developer to record the final development plan,-plat, and SPA agree- ment within a period of 180 days following the adoption date of this Ordinance shall render the development plan and plat~ir. valid. If the 180 days lapse, recon- sideration of the final development plan, plat and SPA agreement by the Planning and Zoning Commission and -~ 11 City Council will be required before its acceptance and recording. Section 3 Pursuant to and by reason of the findings and conditions of approval as set forth above in Sections land 2, specially planned area (SPA) designation for the portion of the Aspen Meadows property to be conveyed to the City is hereby removed and the City's Official Zone District Map shall be amended to reflect such removal. Section 4 Pursuant to Section 24-7-1004C of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's subdi- ~2 vision development component: 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with both the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and Aspen Mead- ows Master Plan and is, furthermore, consistent with the character of existing land uses in the adjoining areas. 2. The proposed subdivision will not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas and will be in substantial compliance with all re- quirements of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code. 3. The proposed subdivision is compatible and suit- able with the topography of the area and will not present or create a threat to the health, safety or welfare of the residents or neighbors of the subdivision. 4. The proposed subdivision does not create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities or unnec- essary public costs. ' 12 5. The proposed new Mead _ of providing access t carry through traffic, as "local street". Section 5 ows Road has the primary function o abutting property and will not thus, warranting its designation Pursuant to the findings as set forth in Section 4 above, ~' _~ the City Council grants final subdivision approval for the Plan subject to the following conditions: The new Meadows lic street from Street and North Lot 6. Right-of- design shall be by the City Engi the final plat. dicated as a pub- with Seventh outh boundary of s and intersection ction and approval off approval of 2. Irrevocable legal access to the new Meadows Road must be provided where necessary to all existing and future properties abutting that portion of the old Meadows Road that may be vacated and all ease- ments for such access shall be depicted on the final plat. 3. All property exchanges between the Savanah Limited Partnership, the Institute, the MAA, and Physics shall be effectuated simultaneously with the re- cording of the final plat. 4. All sanitary sewer improvements as installed in the development area shall be inspected and ap- proved to the satisfaction of the Aspen Sanitation District. 5. Complete and detailed utility plans, i.e., elec- tric, gas, cable T.V., and telephone, shall be provided to and approved by the Planning Director and City Engineer at or prior to submission for recording of the final plat. Additionally, all utilities shall approve utility design and loca- tion prior to staff approval of the subdivision agreement and final plat. 13 Road shall be de its intersection Street to the s way width, grade subject to inspe veer prior to st 6. The final plat shall accurately reflect all under- ground utility installations, particularly those along roadways, trailways and cultivated landscap- ed areas. 7. IItility facility installations shall kie restricted to roadway, trailway and cultivated landscaped corridors wherever possible. If utility facility installations must occur outside of these areas, such alternate utility corridors shall be fenced or barricaded to the narrowest width possible so as to minimize vegetation disturbance or destruc- tion from construction activities and machinery. All utility location corridors shall be inspected and approved by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to the. issuance of any excavation permit. 8. Vegetation replacement necessitated by utility installation shall utilize the same plant species as the species of vegetation disturbed or damaged. ~~s ° 9. All ditches, swales, intermediary ponds and detention areas shall be subject to appropriate easements for access and maintenance purposes and be depicted on the final plat. 10.. The Developer shall provide a digitized copy of the subdivision plat prior to recordation of the mylar copies. 11. Trench box construction methods shall be utilized for utility installations whenever possible so as to minimize site disturbance. 12. The Castle Creek sanitary trunkline shall be lined unless deemed otherwise by the Aspen Sanitation District. If sections of the trunkline must be replaced, such replacement locations shall be identified to the City Engineer and Planning De- partment and the least disruptive methods shall be identified and employed. 13. Detailed design drawings for the new Meadows Road and Seventh Street and Eighth Street intersections shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to staff approval of the final plat. All design drawings 14 shall be prepared by a professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado. 14. The speed limit for the new Meadows Road shall be reduced to a speed below thirty (30) miles per hour as determined by the City Engineer. 15. The existing old Meadows Road shall be converted to a pedestrian trial/bikeway with ownership thereto to remain in the City. 16. Pursuant to Section 24-7-1005E of the Municipal Code, the final subdivision plat and subdivision agreement shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within 180 days following the adop- tion date of this Ordinance. Failure to record the final plat and subdivision agreement within the 180 day time period shall render the subdivision aaprovals granted herein invalid. If the 180 days lapse, recon- sideration of the subdivision and subdivision agreement by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council will be required before acceptance and recording. ~ ~~ Section 6 Pursuant to Section 24-8-106 of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's residential Growth Management Quota System allotment component: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission has forwarded to City Council a residential development total score of 35.78 for the residential component of the Plan, such score exceeding the minimum scoring threshold. 2. The residential development component of the Plan was the only development project submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission for 1990 residen- tial GMQS allotments. 3. The GMQS residential scoring considered and reflected the waiver of the six-month minimum lease requirement as set forth in the applicable condominiumization regulations. ~l 15 4• A multi-year or phased development allotment would not serve the best interests of the Plan or the general public. 5. Section 24-8-103B of the Municipal Code permits the awarding of development allotments in excess of the maximum allotment level in any given year. 6• The Plan as presented by the Developer warrants an excess development allotment and the Planning Office has indicated excess development allotments are available. 7. No challenges to the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion's scoring or ranking of the Plan's residen- tial development component have been submitted as perruitted by Section 24-8-106I of the Municipal Code. Section 7 Pursuant to the findings as set forth in Section 6 above and •;<-;r in accordance with Section 24-8-106J of the Municipal Code, the City Council awards and grants the Developer six (6) residential development allotments from the GMQS allotment pool for 1990, and eight (8) excess residential development allotments to be off-set in future years in accordance with Section 24-8-103B of the Municipal Code. In accordance with Section 24-8-108(A)(1) of the Municipal Code, Developer, or its successor in interest, shall be eligible for exemption from the expiration of the GMQS allotments for residential Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 herein awarded upon proper demonstration that those conditions of final approval and the public improvements associated with Lots 7, 8, 9 and l0 have been satisfactorily completed. 16 Section 8 Pursuant to Section 24-8-104(C)(1)(b), as amended per Ordinance No. 13, (Series of .1991), of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Developer's request for Growth Management Quota System development exemption for essential public facilities: 1. The 2nstitute's proposed development of new lodge units, expansion of the existing health club, expansion of the restaurant, and expansion oP the tennis shop, including rest rooms, is essential for the revitalization of the Aspen Meadows prop- erty. a" 2. The MAA's proposed expansion of the Music Tent, the addition of a year-round. rehearsal/performance hall, and expansion of the Music Tent gift shop, is essential for the revitalization of the Aspen Meadows property. 3. The programs and activities sponsored and or host- ed by the Institute and the MAA at the Aspen Meadows facilities have historically provided intellectual and cultural enrichment to the citi- zens of the City of Aspen without which the City would not have attained its present character and standing in the national and international commu- nity. Furthermore, the Aspen Meadows facilities, and those of the Institute and MAA in particular, have served and continue to serve important commu- nity needs and proposed expansions of same will only enhance their value and accessibility to the citizens of the City of Aspen and the general public. 4. The Institute's and MAA's proposed development involves essential public facilities, will enhance existing essential public facilities, and is not- for-profit in nature. .~ 17 Section 9 Pursuant to Section 24-8-104(C)(1)(b), as amended per r -~ Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1991), of the Municipal Code, and the findings as set forth in Section a above, the City Council awards and grants Growth Management Quota System development exemptions from competition and affordable housing impact mitigation for the following Plan development on the basis that such development is for essential public facilities: 1. Fifty (50) new lodge units of 42,410 square feet, (Aspen Institute). 2. Health club expansion of 1,800 square feet, (Aspen Institute). 3. Restaurant expansion of 2,000 square feet, (Aspen Institute). 4. Tennis shop expansion, including rest rooms, of 980 square feet, (Aspen Institute). 5. Music Tent backstage expansion of 1,500 square feet, (MAA). 6. The new rehearsal/performance hall of 11,000 square feet, (MAA). 7. Music Tent gift shop expansion of 100 square feet (MAA). , Section 10 Pursuant to Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the zoning map amend- ments component of the Plan: 1. The proposed zoning amendments as set forth in the Plan are not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, the Aspen Area 18 Comprehensive Plan or the Aspen Meadows Master Plan. 2. The proposed zoning amendments are compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. 3. The proposed zoning amendments will not adversely impact traffic generation or road safety when taken into consideration with the other aspects of the Plan. 4. The proposed zoning amendments will not adversely impact demand for .public facilities or services nor adversely affect the environment. 5. The proposed zoning amendments will promote the public interest and character of the City of As- Pan Section 11 Pursuant to Sections 24-7-1102 and 24-7-1103, and Division 2 1"? of Article 5 of Chapter 24, as amended per Ordinance No. 13 ,~> (Series of 1991), of the Municipal Code, and the findings set forth in Section 10 above, the City Council does grant the following amendments to the official Zone District Map and does designate the following zone districts for the development subject to the conditions as specified below: 1. R-MF (Residential Multi-Family) shall be applied to Lots 5 and 6 (townhomes). 2. R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential) shall be ap- plied to Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 (single family lots). 3. WP (Wildlife Preservation) shall be applied to the 25 acres, more or less, of land conveyed to the City of Aspen (Lot 4)and to the racetrack area of the Aspen Meadows property as depicted in the final SPA development plan submittal. 19 4. oS (open Space) shall be applied to Anderson Park, the Marble Garden, and the Tent Meadow as depicted in the final SPA development plan submittal. 5. A (Academic) shall be applied to Lots 1, 2 and 3 within the Aspen Meadows owned by the Institute, MAA, and Physics, except where other zone dis- tricts have been designated as hereinabove provid- ed. 6. The zoning designations as specified in paragraphs 1 through 5 above are contingent upon the Develop- er providing precise survey boundaries of the zone districts prior to staff approval of the final plat. 7. Pending such time as the boundaries for the zone districts as described above are finalized and accepted, or no longer than six (6) months, which- ever period is shorter, no building permit shall be issued by the Chief Building Official for any development in the Aspen Meadows which would be ~,;.;::~, prohibited by the zoning districts herein desig- nated and authorized. Section 12 Pursuant to Sections 24-7-804B and D(2) of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Developer's requests for variations from subdivision and subdivi- sion improvement requirements, easement and utility requirements, design standards for streets and related improvements, and zone district dimensional and minimum lease requirements: 1• The proposed variations are compatible with exist- ing development and land uses in the area and surrounding neighborhoods and are not in conflict with the provisions or goals of the Aspen Meadows Master Plan. 2. The proposed variations will not adversely impact public facilities or public safety. !~ ~~ 20 Section 13 Pursuant to the findings as set forth in Section 12 above and in accordance with Section 24-7-804D(2), as amended per Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1991), of the Municipal Cade, the City Council grants the following variations from subdivision development standards and zone district dimensional and minimum lease requirements as set forth in the Plan: 1. Curbs, gutters. and sidewalks need not be provided within the development. 2. Alleys, paved or unpaved, do not need to be pro- vided. 3. Traffic control signs shall be installed at the intersection of the new Meadows Road and Seventh - and Eighth Streets, but no traffic signals need be provided. Speed zones shall be signed as deter- ~ mined by the City Engineer. 4. If determined to be necessary by the City Engi- veer, street lights need only be provided at the intersections of the new Meadows Road and Seventh and Eighth Streets. Ornamental street lights are desirable. 5. No street bridges need be provided. Culverts to accommodate irrigation ditches and drainage shall be installed. 6. Street right-of-way regarding new Meadows Road shall only be dedicated at lengths and widths as determined to be necessary by the City Engineer. 7. The minimum centerline curve radius for new Meadows Road may be reduced to 65-feet at and or near the intersection of Eighth Street, and right- of-way widths may be reduced to 4o feat. Maximum grade may be increased not to exceed 8$. All di- mensions shall be specified and confirmed on the final plat. e• No street-end dedications need be provided. 21 9. Cul-de-sac dimensions for Meadows Road may be increased to a maximum length of 2,000 feet with a turnaround diameter at the administration building of approximately 50 feet. -~ J 10. The new road alignment for Meadows Road shall remain "Meadows Road" in name. 11. Street trees lining new Meadows Road shall consist of cottonwoods of 2 inch caliper spaced every 30 feet along the east boundary beginning at the intersection of Eighth Street and extending north to the tennis courts . 12. Fire lane. and emergency vehicle access ease- ments may be reduced in width upon approval of the Fire Marshal. 13. Utility easement dimensional and location requirements on lots other than those associ- ates with the single family lots may be re- duced or modified-upon the approval of the City Engineer and easements need not be pro- vided in the absence of actual utility in- stallations. All proposed utility easements should be reflected on the final plat. 14. Fire hydrants shall and need only be situated within 350 feet of all structures. 15. The six (6) month minimum lease requirement for condominium units as contained at Section 24-'-1007 (Aj(1)(b)(1) of the Municipal Code is ::aived as to the condominium units as depicted in the Plan. 16. A dimensional height variation for the center portion of the Tennis Townhomes is allowed for up to 3 feet. 17. A dimensional height variation for the north- ernmost Trustee House is allowed for up to 8 feet. 18. Minimum R-15 zone district lot size per dwelling is reduced to .12,000 square feet for Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10. 22 19. Minimum R-15 zone district side yard setback requirements are reduced to zero (O) feet for the west side of Lot 7 and the east side of Lot 10. 20. Minimum RMF zone district front yard setback require- ments for accessory buildings may be reduced to zero (0) feet for Lots 5 and 6. 21. Minimum RMF zone district open space requirements are waived for Lots 5 and 6 in consideration of the open space otherwise provided in the SPA development plan. Section 14 Pursuant to Section 24-7-1007 B of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's condo- miniumization component: 1. The 8 existing and 3 proposed Trustee Houses (Lot 5) and 7 proposed townhomes (Lot 6) to .' be candominiumized are not presently leased ~ on a long term basis. 2. A variation in the six (6) month minimum lease requirement is warranted and has been authorized pursuant to Section 13 above. 3. The proposed condominiumization will not adversely impact the availability of afford- able housing. Section 15 Pursuant to the findings-set forth in Section 14 above, and in accordance with Section 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code, the City Council grants and awards condominiumization approval for the Plan as follows, subject to the conditions as specified herein: 1. For eight (8) existing and three (3) proposed Trustees Houses (Lot 5). `' ,'~ 1. 23 2. For seven (7) proposed townhomes (Lot 6). 3. Condominiumization as awarded in this Section is contingent upon the payment of an afford- able housing impact fee of $64,240.00, which fee shall be paid to the City Finance Direc- tor prior to recordation of as-built condo- minium plats and declarations. Section 16 ~ ;~• All material representations and commitments made by the Developer pursuant to the Plan approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or~documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, Historic Preservation Committee and or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific condi- tions. Section 17 The Official Zone District Map for the City of Aspen, Colorado, shall be and is hereby amended to reflect those zoning and rezonings actions as set forth in Section 11 above and such amendments shall be promptly entered on the Official Map in accordance with Section 24-5-103B of the Municipal Code. Section 18 Any development or proposed development in the Aspen Meadows not vested in accordance with law prior to the effective date of this Ordinance shall comply with the terms and provisions of the ~; 24 zone districts and conditions of this Ordinance. Section 19 development adopted pursuant to Pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code, City a :. ~~ Council does hereby grant Developer vested rights in the Plan as follows: 1. The rights granted in the site specific de- velopment plan approved by this Ordinance shall remain vested for three (3) years from the date of final adoption specified below. However, any failure to abide by the terms and conditions attendant,to this approval shall result in forfeiture of said vested rights. Failure to timely and properly re- cord all plats and agreements as specified herein and or. in the Municipal Code shall also result in the forfeiture of vested rights. 2. The approvals as granted herein are subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. 3. Nothing in the approvals provided in this Ordinance shall exempt the site specific development plan from subsequent reviews and or approvals"required by this Ordinance or the general rules, regulations or ordinances of the City provided that such reviews or ap- provals are not inconsistent with the approv- als granted and vested herein. 4. The establishment herein of a vested property right shall not preclude the application of ordinances or regulations which are general in nature and~•are applicable to all property subject to land use regulation by the City of Aspen including, but not limited to, build- ing, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechani- cal codes. In this regard, as a condition of this site development approval, the Developer shall abide by any and all such building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical j 25 codes, unless an exemption therefrom is granted in writing. Section 20 The City Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen no later than •fourteen (14) days following final adop- tion hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following-described property: The property shall be described in the notice and appended to said notice shall be the ordinance ~~ granting such approval. Section 21 The City Clerk is further directed to record a copy of this Ordinance in a timely manner after its final adoption with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 22 This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. 26 _ Section 23 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 24 Public hearing(s) on the Ordinance shall be held on the ~3 ~~ day of _7/',•'Q~., v 1991, in the City Council Cham- hers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISIs'ED as provided by law by ,. the Ci~uncil of the City of Aspen on the c~ 9 day of _' , 1991. /~~ William L. Stirling, Mayor ATTEST: _ka~iz.•4.`.x~ .' ~-~~-c~-.~ Kathryn S ' Rech, City Clerk FIEaLLF ADOPTED; passed and approved this,~(~^~ay of 1991. ~, William L. Stirling, Mayor 27 ,--->. ,~ ATTEST: ~~ ~~~ Kathryn Koch, City Clerk 28 -~_,,ou s~:: aE~ Fs 7so { i~43i Ot/24/9~ 16:1.= Re '~ Doc $.~- ;ilvia Davis, F'it4:in Cnty C1'- EXHIBITH provided always that such substituted financial assurance is satisfactory to the City Attorney. II. INDIVIDUAL PARCELS -THE ASPEN MEADOWS A. LOT 1 -THE ASPEN INSTITUTE: Lot 1 is the Institute Property and is zoned Academic (A), Open Space (OS) and Wildlife Preservation (WP), all according to and as shown on the Plat. New development on Lot 1 has been approved for 50 new lodge units totalling 78,360 gross interior square feet, for 110 new and renovated lodge units, a health club renovation and expansion of 1,800 gross interior square feet, a restaurant renovation and expansion of 2,000 gross interior squaze feet, a renovation and expansion of the tennis shop of 980 gross interior square feet and the creation of an underground pazking structure for 97 -cars below the reconfigured tennis courts. 1. Dimensional Requirements The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) Zone District are shown on the Plat. 2. Off-Street Pazkine The Institute shall maintain 97 off-street parking spaces on Lot 1 until completion of the underground pazking structure. 3. Site Im-provements (a) Utilities. All telephone, electric and cable lines on Lot 1 servicing the improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer lines shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards of the City and of the ACSD and as built easements will be provided as required. (b) LandscaQe Improvements. Institute shall abide by and substantially conform to the tree removal and landscape plans recorded as part of the Plat in Book ~ 8 at Page ~, et seq. of the Records. The landscape plans depict and describe the nature, extent and location of all plant materials in appropriate relation to scale, species and size of existing plant material, flower and shrub bed definition, a plant material schedule with common and botanical names, sizes and quantities, proposed treatment of all ground surfaces (e. g. ,paving, turf, gravel, terracing, etc. ), decorative water features, retaining walls, fencing, benches, and all other agreed- 16 _-.-~ 3G~i~g3r i!1!24/°2 1h:13 Fec~ 4UV.c~'-• rr.. oor ru roi t Cnt L1F Doc 3. up c via Davis. F'i F::in y upon landscape features. Such landscaping shall be completed in a logical sequence commensurate with the staging of improvements as contemplated in the Lot 1 Construction Schedule, but in no event later than one yeaz after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the fmal phase of improvements. It is the mutual understanding of the parties that Certificates of Occupancy may in fact issue for improvements even though the landscaping improvements related thereto have not yet been complet- ed, so long as that portion of the financial guaranty provided for in this agreement, which covers the estimated cost of such unfinished landscap- ing, remains available to the City pursuant to the terms of this agreement. All tree replacement shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch basis throughout the Project as a whole with minimum size at 1 1/2" caliper. 4. Trails The Plat depicts all trails dedicated or conveyed to public use and.all easements linidng off-site trails to the development's trail system, including (a) an easement for a trail link from Lot 3 (Physics), running behind Lots 7-10, to Meadows Road, and (b) the trail easement between the tennis townhouses and restaurant. Written easements shall be executed and conveyed after trail construction confirming the as-built location of each easement. The Consortium and City agree that the racetrack trails are not to be improved. While the Institute is granting the Easements it shall have no financial obligation whatsoever for any trail or related work on the trail azound the track or the trail between the Tennis Townhomes and the restaurant as shown on the Plat. 5. Financial Assurances In order to secure the construction of the site and landscape improvements in Paragraphs 3(a) and (b) above and to guarantee 100% of the estimated cost of such improvements, Institute shall guarantee by irrevocable bond, sight draft or letter of commitment or credit from a fmancially responsible lender that funds in the amount of such estimated costs aze held by it for the account of City for the construction and installation of the above-described improvements. As a condition for issuance of a building permit for a portion or all of the renovation and new construction anticipated herein, the Institute and City shall agree on that portion of the work outlined in Paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b) above reasonably necessary to complete the work for which a permit is being sought and the mutually agreed upon financial assurances shall be delivered to the City prior to issuance of the building permit. All financial assurances given by Institute to City, in all events, shall give the City the unconditional right, upon and following default by the Institute, notice thereof by the City, and a forty day right thereafter to cure, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any uncontested 17 l~ii437 O1/24/9~ 16: S.lvia Davis, F'itF:in 1^ q~ ;ci~p, C+i~ Bk:: 667 r'~ ral. Cnty C1 E , Dac ~.~~i? outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty zmount to be applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already constructed before the unused remainder (if any) of such guaranty is released to Institute. As portions of the required improvements are completed, the Public Works Director shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he shall authorize the release from the guaranty delivered by Institute of the agreed estimated cost for that portion of the improvements except that 10 % of the actual cost of the site or landscape improvements shall be retained until all proposed site or landscape improvements aze completed and approved by the Public Works Director. At anytime and from time to time, Institute shall have the right to substitute for the form of financial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall be subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney in his determination. 6. Employee Housine Under the terms of this Agreement the Ciry acknowledges it has granted the Institute a GMQS development exemption for essential public facilities from competition and affordable housing impact mitigation for the Institute's existing and new facilities. B. LOT 2 -MUSIC ASSOCIATES OF ASPEN: I.ot 2 is the MAA Property and is zoned Academic (A) and Open Space (OS) all according to and as shown on the Plat. Current development on Lot 2 consists of the performance tent, the back stage azea, a gift shop, a refreshment stand, a box office and a parking lot. Approved new development allows for a music tent back stage expansion of 1,500 gross interior square feet, a new rehearsal/performance hall of 11,000 square feet of floor azea and an expansion of 100 gross interior square feet to the existing gift shop. Additionally, approval has been granted for a re-configuring of the tent to increase tent seating to a total of 2,050 seats. FARs and the definitions thereof for the reheazs- al/performance hall shall remain as set forth and defined in the Aspen Land Use Regulations in effect as of Tune 10, 1991, notwithstanding and shall survive, for not less than the three year period next succeeding June 10, 1991, any subsequently adopted reduction in or change to the definition or calculation of FARs. 1. Dimensional Requirements The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) Zone District are established on the Plat. 18 #" `.~93r 01/<4/92 10:1.= R~. ~~ `~•~?~? HkC 667 F'G 753 S:. via Davis, F'it4::in Cnty C1E ~., Doc S.UO 2. Off-Street Parkine The parking lots at the South end of Lot 2 shall be reconfigured to allow for off street bus drop-off, a new pedestrian trail through the parking lot, the addition of bike racks for concert goers and parking for approximately 274 automobiles, as shown on the Plat. 3. Site Improvements (a) Utilities. All telephone, electric and cable lines on the Property servicing the improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer lines shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards of the City and of the ACSD and written easements confirming the. as-built location thereof will be provided if and as required. (b) Landscape.Improvements. MAA shall abide by and substantially conform to the tree removal and landscape plans as recorded as part of the Plat in Book ~ at Page ~, et seq. of the Records. The landscape plans depict and describe the nature, extent and location of all plant materials in appropriate relation to scale, species and size of existing plant material, flower and shrub bed defmition, a plant material schedule with common and botanical names, sizes and quantities, proposed treatment of all ground surfaces (e. g., paving, turf, gravel, terracing, etc.), decorative water features, retaining walls, fencing, benches, and all other agreed- upon landscape features. Such landscaping shall be completed in a logical sequence commensurate with the staging of improvements as contemplated in the Lot 2 Construction Schedule, but in no event later than one year after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the final phase of improvements. It is the mutual understanding of the parties that Certificates of Occupancy may in fact issue for improvements even though the landscaping improvements related thereto have not yet been complet~ ed, so long as the portion of the fmancial guaranty provided for in this agreement hereof which covers the estimated cost of such unfinished landscaping remains available to the City pursuant to the terms of [his agreement. All tree replacement shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch basis throughout the Project as a whole with minimum size a[ 1 1/2" caliper. 4. Financial Assurances In order to secure the construction of the site and landscape improvements in Paragraphs 3(a) and (b) above and to guarantee 100` of the esfimated cost of such improvements, MAA shall guarantee by irrevocable bond, sight draft or letter of commitment or credit from a financially responsible lender that funds in 19 #k._~-rJ9- 01/24/9C 16:13 Rec S4~w.0' 5k: 667 F'G 754 SilviaDavis, F'itk~:in Cnty Clerk::, Lac 2.OU the amount of such estimated costs aze held by it for the account of City for the construction and installation of the above-described improvements. As a condition for issuance of a building permit for a portion or all of the renovation and new construction anticipated herein, MAA and City shall agree on that portion of the work outlined in Paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b), above reasonably necessary to complete the work for which a permit is being sought and the mutually agreed upon financial assurances shall be delivered to the City prior to issuance of the building permit. All financial assurances given by MAA to City, in all events, shall give the City the unconditional right, upon and following default by the MAA, notice thereof by the City, and a forty day right thereafter to cure, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any uncontested outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty amount to be applied lust to additional administrative or legal costs associated with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already constructed before the unused remainder (if any) of such guaranty. is released to MAA. As portions of the required improvements are completed, the Public Works Director shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he shall authorize the release from the guaranty delivered by MAA of the agreed estimated cost for that portion of the improvements except that 10% of the actual cost of the site or landscape improvements shall be retained until all proposed site or landscape improvements are completed and approved by the Public Works Director. At anytime and from time to time, MAA shall have the right to substitute for the form of fmancial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall be subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney in his determination. 5. Employee Housine Under the terms of this Agreement the City acknowledges it has granted MAA a GMQS exemption for essential public facilities from competition and affordable housing impact mitigation for MAA's existing and new facilities. C. LOT 3 -THE ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS: Lot 3 is the Physics Property and is zoned Academic (A) and Wildlife Preservation (WP), all according to and as shown on the Plat. Development on Lot 3 consists of meeting facilities and library building for Physics. No new development is approved by this plan; however, new development with appropriate review is not precluded. 20 EXHIBIT I From: Jim Curtis <jcurtis@sopris.neb Subject: Greenwald Tent - Plan A & Plan B Date: December 9, 2008 12:12:46 PM MST To: Jason Lasser<Jason.Lasser@ci.aspen.co.us> Attached are updated plans for Greenwald Tent, Plan A & Plan B. As I've communicated to you & the Pitkin Green neighbors, the Institute is indifferent between the two plans & if the tent is located on or off the utilities easements. Each plan is briefly described below. Overall the Institute feels the New Tent is significantly more attractive & graceful than the box-like Existing Tent & would be a welcomed improvement. Plan A (off the easements) -The Tent is relocated to the north off the easements. The "ridge" height of the New Tent (20'-0") has been lowered to be slightly lower than the Existing Tent (20'-3") by reducing the width of the Tent from 60' to 55'. The 5 peak points of the New Tent are 25'-6". The Entry Area has been reduced in sized & is proposed to be crushed gravel fines. The interior floor of the Tent would probably be colored concrete. The cart path has been relocated slightly such that no development, grading or fill occurs within 15' of the top of slope. Extensive landscaping is proposed both on the Institute property & the City of Aspen property with the permission of the City. The Institute will pay for, maintain & replace landscaping on the City property. The Institute will want to work with the neighbors & with height poles to field locate the best, most effective placement for the new landscaping. Plan B (crossing the easements) - The Tent is relocated to the south & crossing the easements & rotated clockwise. Identical to Plan A, the ridge height has been lowered, the Entry Area is smaller & crushed grave fines, no development ,grading or fill occurs within the 15' setback from top of slope & extensive landscaping on both the Institute & City owned property. The interior floor of the Tent would be asphalt w/ a carpet overlay or other material approved by Water & Sant. Depts. The Institute would sign hold harmless agreements with the utilities. The Tent has been rotated clockwise for 2 reasons. 1. This gives significantly better open views from the Tent across Anderson Park & to Highlands, Maroon Bells, Tiehack. 2. By rotating the Tent, the homes on the western side of Pitkin Reserve & northwest of the Tent will have a less direct view of the back of the Tent. It will be less of a straight-on "backwall" view of the Tent. For the homes to the northeast of the Tent, their views to Aspen Mtn. are primarily to the east of the Tent & will not be impacted. Their views to the west towards Highlands, Maroon Bells, Tiehack will be impacted, but probably no more than with the Existing Tent. The Institute has not located the Tent to the southernly edge of the easements & directly on & parallel to the easements for several reasons. By locating the Tent this far south not enough entry or gathering space at the front of the Tent is created for the patrons using the Tent, the Tent feels very confined & enclosed with limited views this far south & two groves of young aspen trees to the east would be impacted. Feel free to email or call (970-319-0442 cell) on any questions or if you would like to it prior to P & Z. I'm out of town Fri. Dec. 12, but here otherwise. At their request,~l~e e~~l~an A & B drawings to several Pitkin Green neighbors. UEC u y 2008 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVEIOPMENI a&$gg ~ ~ ~ p o e a The Aspen Institute - Th pen Meadows ~ s w ~ ~gg~gl Greenwald Pavilion Tent - Proposed Plan "B" Aspen Meadows, As en, CO. o,., -j $~gp C ~ v ~ c F o o ~ 123 The Aspen Institute - Th en Meadows (F~ Greenwald Pavilion Tent Proposed Plan "A" ^ Aspen Meadows, pen, CO. Aspen Plannine & Zonine Meeti~ -Minutes -December 16, 2008 MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to make a recommendation to City Council to approve the consolidated development plan for a SPA amendment with conditions listed in Resolution#036-08 for the Pitkin County,lail; seconded by Cliff Weiss. Roll call vote: Wampler, yes; Gibbs, yes; Myrin, yes; Weiss, yes; Erspamer, yes. APPROVED S-0. EXHIBIT J PUBLIC HEARING: ASPEN INSTITUTE (GREENWALD PAVILIONI SPA AMENDMENT LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing. Notice was provided. Jason Lasser stated this was a review for the Greenwald Pavilion Tent consolidated SPA Amendment. Lasser stated the Greenwald Tent was a special events tent at the Institute; there were 400-600 seats and the dimensions were 60 by 120. Lasser stated they were operating under a temporary use permit from 2005 until now; that opens up the SPA for an amendment. Lasser said that the criteria is reviewed by P&Z for GMQS and SPA Amendment for an essential public facility to recommend to City Council. Lasser said the proposal that was originally submitted showed the tent in one location as the applicant explored further and realized there was a water main and sewer main that ran right underneath where the temporary use tent is located so in an effort to appease the referral agencies they located the new tent location off of these mains. Lasser said that another amendment from the applicant was received on December 9`" with a compromise with the homeowners on the other side of the river and the cart path. Staff has not reviewed that December 9`h application. Lasser said that this final conceptual approval was to go to HPC on January 14`". Lasser said that the staff criteria in the packet is Exhibit A and the applicant memo is Exhibit B; the employee generation from the applicant is Exhibit C; the transportation analysis is Exhibit D; DRC comments are Exhibit E; HPC minutes are Exhibit F; and the last two Exhibits are G and H. Lasser said that staff was asking the applicant to consolidate the proposal and staff was looking to Planning & Zoning for direction. Lasser said that the fire department turn around, moving the cart path, the terrace in front of that tent is in the proposal, connecting pedestrian paths to Anderson Park, a walk through to the Meadows, additional toilet facilities on a temporary use basis were part of the improvement with this application. Lasser said the height was increasing on the proposed tent. Jim Curtis, representing the Aspen Institute, introduced Jody Schoeberlein, architect. Curtis said the Institute has put up a tent for special events in the summer of 2005and 2008; that tent was approved under a temporary use permit. 8 Ashen Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Curtis said the Institute would like to make improvements to a nicer tent; make landscaping improvements to benefit the Pitkin Reserve neighbors and Red Mountain neighbors. Curtis said that they were considering an asphalt floor for the new tent not concrete not with rebar. Cutis said the Institute was completely indifferent on where the tent was located; based on initial comments on the water and sewer lines they realized that was a potential problem. Curtis said the San District and Water Department asked for a plan with the tent located off of those easements and they have done that. Curtis said the Pitkin Green and Pitkin Reserve neighbors have asked for the tent to be pushed the other way to the south and he had a power point presentation with "Plan A" and "Plan B". Curtis said the draft resolution was fine. The Institute would like to get the new tent in place for the summer season 2009. Curtis stated that HPC requested a new tent that was attractive and they have found a manufacturer in Canada to make the tent. Bert Myrin asked about page 34 in the staff memo that spoke about the essential public facility that the community development director determined. Jennifer Phelan responded the Aspen Institute has been considered an essential public facility and the tent on the site would be part of that essential public facility. Myrin asked about the affordable housing audit. Phelan replied that P&Z could determine that this does generate employees; that was the purpose of the essential public facilities review. Lasser stated that there was a statement from the applicant that said they were not generating any employees and was all that can be required. Curtis said the facility in 2007 and 2008 was used no more than 6 times and there is no catering of food; since 2005 they have not had to staff up to handle those 5 or 6 events. Curtis said that the Fire Marshall mandated the width of the access to the tent for a fire truck and the hammerhead to tum around. Curtis said that concerns from I-IPC about the size of the tent brought the tent down below the ridgeline of the old tent and the width from 60 feet to 55 feet. Myrin asked if there were alternatives to asphalt that would support fire trucks. Curtis replied there was an existing service road that goes back to a dumpster area and the Koch building so that road is being increased to 14 feet of asphalt with gravel on both sides; originally Ed VanWalraven discussed 20 feet of asphalt. Jody Schoeberlein clarified that the Fire Marshall was entitled by the code to and there was a certain axel weight that had to be met using a gravel road but what he said that he would prefer less asphalt, less overall width, so the disturbed area is less under what he offered; the Fire Marshall would not consider grass pavers. Lasser said that they were looking at 14 feet of asphalt with I foot of road base on either side, so it was 16 feet. 9 Aspen Planning & Zonine Meetine -Minutes -December 16 2008 Lasser said the newly created terrace paths were of concern. Curtis stated there were no new paths; there were existing crushed gravel paths which is the primary access through the Elizabeth Paecpke Memorial Garden into the tent and then there is an existing crushed gravel path that provides access to restroom facilities in the Koch Building. Curtis said those paths may have to be asphalt to comply with ADA regulations; he was still having discussions with the building department to see if there was any leeway to that interpretation. Myrin asked if they were looking to surfaces other than asphalt for the pathways. Curtis replied yes. Mike Wampler asked if the neighbors preferred one plan over the other. Wampler asked what the concerns were over colors. Curtis replied that the Institute wanted to continue with white for the new tent and HPC recommended white also. Lasser said the final at HPC will address the color and the finishes. Stan Gibbs asked how HPC figures into this SPA; he was trying to understand the P&Z role and the HPC role. Lasser said the historic component of the whole SPA is the reason why HPC has purview because of Anderson.Park, the historic elements and buildings; this is just one piece of the SPA agreement and there were overlapping reviews with the height, mass and bulk. Gibbs asked if HPC has seen Plan B. Curtis replied that they have not. Curtis said that all of the Aspen Institute property, which is 40 acres and both the grounds and the buildings are designated historic resources under Ordinance 48. Cliff Weiss asked if the new tent was not approved would they use the old tent. Curtis replied at least for the summer of 2009. Weiss asked the size of the new tent and how much more seating will it provide. Curtis replied both the old tent and the new tent can accommodate up to 750 people; the proposed new tent has less square footage under canvas. Public Comments: Paul Taddune, attorney representing Pitkin Reserve Homeowners Association, stated that they were interested in Plan B. Taddune said that Jim and the people from the Institute have listened and the asphalt over the easements allow the utilities to be accessed the same as they are in the road. Taddune said by moving the tent to the south with regards to using the easements and to participate in landscape along the ridge. Taddune said that the institute has been very good about modulating the roofline of the new tent but the homeowners association would still like to see the color blend in more because the tent could be seen from the north side of town; hopefully there would be more landscape mitigation. 10 Asuen Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Taddune noted that more people wanted to attend this meeting but couldn't because of the holiday. Fred Pearce, attorney representing a neighbor to the east of Pitkin Reserve, echoed what Pau] said about the applicant being very proactive and responsive. Pearce asked the applicant if there would be a restriction of using this tent only 5 or 6 events a summer. Curtis responded that the Institute is willing to limit the events but he did not know what the number is 5, 6 or 7; he said that he was not authorized to make that commitment but would communicate that to Amy Margerum. Pearce said in the past they have offered to take down the tent between events. Curtis said the Institute is very much in favor of the new tent; the Institute is not prepared to take the new tent up and down because of wear and tear on the tent. Pearce supported and encouraged the new location of the tent in Plan B. MOTION: Stan Gibbs moved to continue the hearing until 7.• I Spm; seconded by Bert Myrin. Adl in favor, APPROVED. Weiss asked if the tent was being dropped in the winter. Curtis replied yes; the tent is proposed to be up 7 weeks and 3 days in the summer. LJ Erspamer asked the attorneys, Paul and Fred, if the peaked tent made it look better. Paul Taddune answered that they did not know and didn't know if the design was even finalized. Curtis said that the Institute is perfectly fine with Plan B if that's what everybody would like. Erspamer said that he would agree with staff on this proposal. Myrin said that he usually agrees with staff but this was a tent. Myrin said that his concerns were the hammerhead, aspen grove and to use something other than asphalt for the pathways that was ADA compliant. Myrin said that if there was a way to landscape to help the Pitkin Green area for visual and audio that would be a good screen and no private events. Myrin said that he was not comfortable waiving the affordable housing mitigation. Weiss said that he did not have a problem with the height, style or design of this tent; his biggest concern was the river and mitigation and distances from the river. Weiss preferred Plan B. Stan Gibbs said between the two plans Plan B was more desirable and wanted to have the tent as far as possible from the top of slope. Gibbs said that he was leaning towards looking at this a second time; staff hasn't reviewed Plan B. Weiss asked if they were moving a lot of soil. Curtis replied that under either plan they were not proposing to cut down the natural grade. 11 Aspen Plannine & Zonine Meetin¢ -Minutes -December 16.2008 MOTION: CI~Weiss moved to continue the public hearing for the Aspen Institute (Greemvald Pavilion) SPA Amendment to January 6, 2009; seconded by Stan Gibbs. AIC in favor, APPROVED. Adjourned at 7:20 pm. 0 ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 12 Reg ular Meetine Aspen Plannine and Zonine January 6, 20 0 9 Asp en Institute Greenwald Pavilion SPA Amendment ' , ~ i e:~~~~,~~ f Erspamer opened the public hearing on the Aspen Institute Greenwald Pavilion. ~~ Jason Lasser, community development department, told the Commission there have been changes since the last public heazing. Lasser noted that the tent cannot be located on the utilities and pointed out where the utilities run. The tent is now north of the utilities. Another change is to reduce the width of the asphalt; there is a 6' wide asphalt cart path and a 16' gravel service truck area. Lasser said this reduces the amount of asphalt on the property. The cart path has been moved from the 15' top of slope strip. The applicant is working with the pazks department, who has approved the proposal with the idea it will be refined. Lasser said staff would like landscaping azound the temporary portapotties. In the winter both the tent and portapotties will be gone. Lasser reiterated the Board approved the concept of limiting the use of the pavilion to 8 events. The Aspen Ideas Festival, which is one week long, would be considered 1 event. Lasser said the resolution of approval has 8 conditions, one of which is limiting the number of events. Staff recommends approval; the changes have improved the application. Gibbs brought up Section 5, fire mitigation, and the width of the road. In the winter when there is no tent, fire trucks would have no reason to go out there. Gibbs suggested eliminating the sentence that states, be careful plowing to not rip out the pavers. Lasser agreed that could be eliminated. Myrin asked if there is a concern, under essential public facilities review, if there aze employees generated. Lasser said that is one of the reviews of the Boazd. The applicant provided an employee mitigation analysis and staff put a condition into the resolution that an audit should be done in 2 years to see if that is still the case. Myrin said his concern is going beyond 2 years and what happens and will employee mitigation be addressed. Jennifer Phelan, community development department, pointed out the applicants would have to apply for an SPA amendment to have more than 8 events. Myrin said his concern is that things grow over time and tents turn into permanent structures. Wampler asked about each event being 10 days long and that would take up almost the entire summer season and should this be limited to a number of days rather than a number of events. Lasser said the applicant requests an event can be counted as a week long; there needs to be some flexibility to develop new events or to phase out old events. Jim Curtis, representing the Aspen Institute, told P&Z the applicants have tried to respond to all the concerns heazd from the Board. Curtis noted page 2, item 3, the Institute is fine with the number of events. Curtis said from 2005 to 2008 events at the Institute, the Aspen Ideas Festival is a 7 day event and every event thereafter is a one day event, an afternoon lecture. Curtis said "events" seems a more straightforwazd way to define what is allowed at the tent. Curtis said the applicant agrees with limiting the number of events and the prohibition against private parties. Curtis told the Boazd that in 2008, the Institute spent, for 4 events, $104,000 for shuttles, bikes and transportation Reeular MeetinE Aspen Plannine and Zoning January 6, 2009 mitigation. Curtis said the management of the Dalai Lama event and the transportation plan caused less impact on the west end than other events. Curtis said told P&Z for the Paepcke Auditorium application and the affordable housing audit, the City Council eliminated the requirement to provide mitigation for any increase in employees after an audit in 2 years. Curtis said the applicants have no issue with providing an audit but request elimination the requirement to mitigate for any increased employees. Curtis said limiting this to 8 events and based on the past 3 years experience, no new employees were required. Curtis said the 1991 SPA, the original documents both the Institute and the Music Association were found to be essential public facilities and in subsequent approvals for the Institute's renovations, the Council consistently acknowledged the Institute should be considered an essential public facility and the mitigation provision was deleted. Curtis requested that provision be deleted in this resolution. Weiss asked if the Music Associates had a commitment to transportation when they received approval for their new tent. Curtis said in the 1991 SPA approval, there was exhibit B, the transportation plan, which listed things the parties agreed to and those plans have been implemented, except for the closure of Fourth street. Curtis said the buses travel down Third street and exit on Fifth street. Weiss asked what criteria staff is using to mitigate the traffic impacts. Tricia Aragon, city engineer, told P&Z she has worked with the Institute to develop an event mitigation plan, which will have the same goals as the 1991 Aspen Meadow traffic mitigation plan which is to mitigate the impacts on the west end through promoting alternate means of transportation, the pedestrian bikeways and traffic control for lazger events. Myrin asked how the letter from the housing authority ties into the applicant's request to change the housing mitigation. Curtis said the applicant has no problem providing employee counts to city staff in two yeazs or whenever is requested. Curtis said the applicant feels that it is just justified that they are an essential public facility and in recognition of that they should not have to provide mitigation for any increase in employees. Lasser said the housing office would like the data regardless and staff feels that is reasonable. Erspamer opened the public heazing. Paul Taddune, representing Pitkin Reserve homeowners, asked if any condition addresses the height of the tent. Curtis said the height is addressed on the drawings; it is 25'6" to the ridge. Ms. Phelan said the drawing with a specified height can be an exhibit to P&Z's resolution or to Council's ordinance. Taddune said the height and dimensions were discussed at HPC and are of significant concern to adjacent property owners. Taddune asked what happened to plan B and the statement that the utility department did not favor it. Lasser said there was a development review committee meeting and read from the utilities department, "If in your comments moving the tent south over the utilities, you are saying that the tent with the accompanying pad will be over the utilities and not just the entrance, which was discussed and approved by the water department at the DRC, it is 2 Re¢ular Meetin¢ Aspen Plannin¢ and Zonins January 6, 2009 unacceptable". Lasser said the staff will not allow the tent to be located over the utilities. Taddune said he feels the alternate location is a better solution and solves more problems. Lasser said plan B was not reviewed by DRC prior to having it submitted to P&Z at the last meeting. If staff had reviewed it, it would not have been up for consideration. Taddune said the neighbors would like to see the color of the tent more compatible with the surroundings. Erspamer closed the public hearing Weiss said he would like the limits of "events" changed to a number of days and suggested "not to exceed 20 days". Weiss agreed there needs to be a limit so that there are not 8 events lasting 75 days. Weiss said the limit is to address concerns about traffic and parking and overlapping with events atbther venues. Weiss said there is frustration over transportation; however, it has more to do with Music Associate events and what promises they may have made in 1991. Weiss said the Institute has done what they can to address transportation and those impacts. Weiss agreed he likes plan B; however, he will accept staff s recommendation. Wampler said there is give and take in all applications; the Institute is asking for approval and P&Z has to trust they have the community's best interest in mind. Wampler said for the surrounding property owners, there should be a prohibition against something happening every day. Wampler said he would accept 20 days. Myrin suggested adding "as an essential public facility" before no private events shall be held as an explanation. Myrin noted in Section 6, the sentence that "no structures shall be permitted over the utility easements", he would like to see the easements before accepting that condition. Curtis said the 1991 SPA recorded agreement shows the easements. Gibbs asked if an essential public facility is not allowed to have private events. Lasser said that was a condition because noise affected adjacent property owners, not because this was an essential public facility. Gibbs said that qualifier may not be necessary. Ms. Phelan said an essential public facility is one which serves an essential public service and is available for use by the public and meets the needs of the community. Ms. Phelan said the Institute does hold private events and it is not prohibited from doing so. Gibbs asked if the resolution defines the times during which the events are allowed. Curtis suggested this be the third Monday in June and ending the 4~' Friday in August. Curtis said he is comfortable with a limit of 20 days; he would like to confer with his clients on the time period. Gibbs agreed transportation is an issue; however, the larger impact is from the Music Associates. P&Z added the Aspen Institute transportations costs as an exhibit to the packet. Erspamer went through the conditions of approval in the resolution. P&Z amended conditions #3 to read "events at the Greenwald Pavilion shall be held on no more than 20 days per year". Weiss said if the applicants need to modify that in any one pazticulaz yeaz, they can apply to P&Z. Ms. Phelan pointed out this is a recommendation to Council and they can consider the event limit. Weiss asked about adding a condition on Regular Meetin¢ Aspen Plannine and Zonin¢ January 6, 2009 the allowed height of the tent. Ms. Phelan said the site section and elevations and plan with the height noted will be added as an exhibit. Weiss moved to approve Resolution #35, Series of 2008, approving an SPA amendment and growth management review for a summer-only tent at the Aspen Institute, as amended; seconded by Gibbs. Wampler, yes; Myrin, yes; Weiss, yes; Gibbs, yes; Erspamer, yes. Motion carried. VJ. b. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Errin Evans, Current Planner' %,~~/~jJ~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director(.~~/r~ DATE OF MEMO: January 28'h, 2009 MEETING DATE: February 23rd, 2009 RE: Pitkin County Jail - 485 Rio Grande Place -Specially Planned Area Amendment and Growth Management Review First Reading of Ordinance No. ~ Series of 2009 APPLICANT /OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Jodi Smith, Pitkin County Facilities Staff recommends that the Mayor and City Council Manager /Pitkin County approve the request to construct an addition to the County Jail Building with conditions. REPRESENTATIVE: Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. LOCATION: Pitkin County Jail - 485 Rio Grande Place; Legal Description - Pitkin County Center Lot 1 and Lot 5 of the Rio Grande Subdivision; Parcel Identification Number - 2735-182-19-002 CURRENT ZONING Rc USE Located in the Public (PUB) zone district with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay containing public buildings such as the County Court House and the County Jail. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant is requesting to construct an addition to house servers. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests of the Council to approve the SPA Amendment and Growth Management review in order to build an addition on the site. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 1 of 1 I Photo of the subject property BACKGROUND: Currently, some of the City and County servers and other data equipment are stored in the County Jail Building. The space where the equipment is housed is not large enough. The County would like to construct an addition to accommodate the equipment and future expansions of the equipment. The applicant proposes to add an addition to the Pitkin County Jail Building at 485 Rio Grande Place to accommodate data equipment and computer servers (See Application -Exhibit D). The subject property has a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay upon it and the SPA needs to be amended to incorporate the addition. On December 16`" and January 6`" the Planning and Zoning Commission approved resolutions to make a recommendation to Council to approve the SPA Amendment and the Growth Management Review respectively. LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the City Council: • SPA Amendment pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.440.050 A. This application does not qualify for an administrative amendment. All modifications shal] be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council. This proposal does qualify for Consolidated Review. In this case, the conceptual and final plans may be combined based on the scope of the project. The Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public Revised 1/30/2009 Page 2 of 11 higure !: Vicinity Map heazing, may make a recommendation to the City Council for approval, approval with conditions or disapproval of the SPA amendment. The City Council is the final authority. • Growth Management Quota System -Essential Public Facilities pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.090 4. Any development to an essential public facility requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, to make a recommendation to the City Council for approval, approval with conditions or disapproval of the Growth Management Review. The City Council is the final authority. PROJECT SUMMARY: The project consists of adding apre-fabricated structure to the north side of the County Jail building. The fagade of the structure will be covered with a brick treatment to match the existing building. The structure is approximately 10 feet high and 324 square feet (see Figure 2). SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA AMENDMENT REVIEW: Since the original Specially Planned Area, known as the Rio Grande SPA Plan, was approved in 1977, many amendments and changes to approvals have occurred on this site (see Exhibit C for a Revised 1/30/2009 Page 3 of 11 Figure 2: The new addition itt relation to the existing building. list). The SPA approval was not very detailed at that time. The property was designated for County use; however items that would now be required to be documented in a current SPA plan were not accounted for. Building elevations, allowable floor azea, open space and other dimensional standards that may be customized to accommodate the needs of an SPA were not outlined in the original approvals for this SPA. Later in 1993, the Rio Grande Master Plan was approved. That plan was designed to guide land use patterns for undeveloped land in the Rio Grande area. The County Jail pazcel is located just outside the scope of that plan. Ordinance No. 10 of Series of 1993 does indicate that the property north of the County building is intended for future additions to the County Jail. Since then, the Civic Master Plan was adopted, replacing the Rio Grande Master Plan. The Civic Master Plan was created to implement goals and principles azound the Civic Core, including Galena Plaza and the Rio Grande Park. The County Jail Building is located in the Civic Core; however this plan does not provide for specific building dimensions. Recently, a process was initiated to create the Zupancas-Galena Master Plan that includes the County buildings, but it does not appear that the plan will be finalized in the near future. None of the past plans or ordinances outline future details for additions to the County Jail, with one exception, Ordinance 10 of Series 1993. That Ordinance does make accommodations for future additions, though it is unclear whether or not those additions were the intended to be for the substantial construction that was approved in 1995. Staff Comments There are few items to review for this proposed addition because the current SPA is vague and does not define any future plans for buildings on the site. The underlying zone district for this SPA is the Public zone district. The dimensional requirements in this zone district are set by the adoption of the final development plan; however no dimensional requirements were set in any of the final plans or amendments to the plans. The building is proposed to be located over a lot line between Lot 1 and Lot 5. This is not permitted by the building code. If approved, the applicant will be required to apply for a lot line adjustment prior to applying for a building permit. This can be done administratively. Also the applicant will be required to work with the Parks Department to achieve an approved landscaping plan. The proposed addition will not require any mitigation for growth management. The addition will not create any new employees or create new net leasable space. Staff would prefer to see a master plan that encompasses the long term future goals and needs of the County buildings. Regardless, the Planning and Zoning Commission decided to recommend approval to Council. It !s preferable to see an addition that relates to the building and integrates into the location. Based on the information that was submitted with the application, it appears that the applicant has attempted to reduce the visual impacts that the addition may have on the surrounding properties. The applicant has added a matching roof line and added more landscaping to integrate the addition into the existing structure more effectively. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 4 of 11 GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW: The Planning and Zoning Commission adopted a resolution to recommend to Council to approve this application on January 6th for Growth Management Review. This addition will be used to store technical computer equipment. There will be no employees working in the unit except for routine equipment checks nor will the addition generate new employees. There will be no new net leasable commercial or office space created as defined by the Land Use Code: "Net leasable commercial and office space: Those areas within a commercial or office building which are, or which are designed to be, leased to a tenant and occupied for commercial or office purposes, exclusive of any area including, but not necessarily limited to, areas dedicated to bathrooms, stairways, circulation corridors, mechanical staging areas and storage areas provided, however, that these areas are used solely by tenants on the site." Staff Comments This application is required to undergo review under Growth Management because it is an addition to an essential public facility. Since no new net leasable area is created, there are no requirements for growth management mitigation. RECOMMENDATION: While reviewing the proposal, staff believes that the application is generally minor in nature. It appears to be consistent with the final development approvals of the various amendments to the SPA. It does not substantially change the exterior of the building and the same materials will be used on the fagade and the roof features will match the existing building. Staff prefers to see a Master Plan that addresses the long term needs for this site. Community Development Department staff recommends that the City Council approve the amendment to the SPA and approve the Growth Management Review. If the Council decides to approve the addition, it is advised that they do so with the following conditions: 1) The applicant will be required to apply for a lot line adjustment or otherwise remedy the building location proposed to be over a lot line. The Building Code does not permit buildings to span lot lines. 2) The applicant is required to remove snow or store accumulated snow on site. Snow is not permitted to be relocated to the Rio Grande Park to limit damage to the sprinkler heads. 3) The landscaping rocks must be removed from the right-of--way. 4) The building permit shall include a landscaping plan that provides for: tree protection, plant spacing, seed mix and irrigation, and weed management. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: Revised 1/30/2009 Page 5 of 11 RECOMMENDED MOTION: If the City Council chooses to approve the proposed amendment and owth management review, they may use this motion "I move to adopt Ordinance No. ~ ,Series of 2009 upon first reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Staff Findings Exhibit B -List of prior plans and approvals Exhibit C -SPA from 1977 Exhibit D -Application Revised 1/30/2009 Page 6 of 11 Ordinance No. 5 (SERIES OF 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, TO APPROVE A SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA AMENDMENT AND A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING AN ADDITION TO THE PITKIN COUNTY JAIL BUILDING LOCATED AT 485 RIO GRANDE PLACE, LEGALLY KNOWN AS LOTS 1 AND 5, PITKIN COUNTY CENTER, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel Identification Number 2737-073-47-851 & 2737-073-06-855 WHEREAS, Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. located at 412 North Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado on behalf of Pitkin County, 530 E. Main Street, Aspen, Colorado, submitted a request for a Specially Planned Area Amendment dated October 6th, 2008 to the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located at 485 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, the pazcels are identified as parcel numbers 2737-073-47-851 & 2737-073-06-855, and the legal description of the property is: Pitkin County Center, Lot 1 and 5, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, the Specially Planned Area approval for the Properly was originally approved by the Aspen City Council in 1977 and again for the Rio Grande Master Plan in Ordinance No. 10 Series of 1993; and WHEREAS, the current request is to receive approval from the City Counci( for a Specially Planned Area amendment to amend the SPA and Growth Management Review to permit the construction of a 324 squaze feet addition to allow for storage of data equipment and computer servers; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the application for a Specially Planned Area Amendment Review and Growth Management Review, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on December 16th, 2008 and January 6`s, 2009 respectively. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 36 of Series 2008 and Resolution No. 1 of Series 2009 to recommend that the City Council approve the application; and, WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the application for a Specially Planned Area Amendment Review pursuant to Code section 26.440.050 under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and Growth Management Review as pursuant to Code section 26.470.090, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing on December 16th, 2008; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval of the request; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO IN REGULAR MEETING ASSEMBLED, THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves the of the Specially Planned Area Amendment and Growth Management review as requested for the Property. The recommendation of approval granted herein is conditioned on the following: The applicant is required to remove snow or store accumulated snow on site. Snow is not permitted to be relocated to the Rio Grande Park to limit damage to the sprinkler heads. z 2. The applicant will be required to apply for a lot line adjustment or otherwise remedy the building location proposed to be over a lot line. The Building Code does not permit buildings to span lot lines. 3. Remove the landscaping rocks from the right-of--way as per the Engineering Department. 4. The Parks Department requires a landscaping plan be provided with the building permit that provides for: a. Tree Protection: A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site and their represented drip lines. A formal plan indicating the location of the tree protection will be required for the bldg permit set. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, and storage of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree remaining on site. This fence must be inspected by the city forester or his/her designee before any construction activities are to commence. b. Plant Spacing: Appropriate spacing will be required for all new plantings. Coniferous Trees will require adequate spacing between trees and distance from buildings or structures to allow for mature growth. Deciduous Trees will require adequate spacing from structures to accommodate mature growth in height. c. Seed Mix and Irrigation: Applicant shall use the City of Aspen approved native seed mix and a temporary or permanent irrigation system will be required for establishment. d. Weed Management: Applicant shall detail and define how it will manage noxious weeds during the seed establishment period. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4• 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. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 5: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held the 23`d day of March, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena, 15 days prior to which public notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. 3 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney EXHIBIT A 26.440.050 Review Standards for development in a Specially Planned Area In the review of a development application for a conceptual development plan and a final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission and CiTy Council must consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the pazcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, azchitecture, landscaping and open space. The addition to the County Jail is a fairly small structure, measuring 324 square feet and approximately 10 feet high. It is a pre fabricated structure that will be placed in the rear of the building facing Obermeyer Place and the Rio Grande Park. The addition will have a brick treatment to match the existing Jail Building and the roofline will be altered to match the existing building. The existing building is shown below in Figure A. The addition is proposed to be located where the picnic table is now sitting. Figure A -The existing building. The location was chosen because the County Buildings seem to be a stable use in the downtown campus area. The future of some other considered locations may change and require removal of the equipment. The equipment cannot be housed within the Court House, City Hall or other buildings for several reasons: the older buildings are not climate controlled, the wiring systems are too dated and the structures are nod able to support the weight. The SPA should be amended to reflect long term plans for the site prior to the approval of future additions. It is more efficient to look at the entire SPA site and determine how the long term needs could be met. The original SPA was created in 1977 and could now Revised 1/30/2009 Page 7 of 11 be amended to meet needs that may have changed since that time. Staff Ends this criterion to be met. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. The addition will be used to house data eguipment and computer servers. There will not be any plumbing or new staff created as a result. No increased impacts on the public facilities or roads are predicted. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. The parcel is suitable for development. It is mostly level. There are no environmental constraints that would limit the location of the addition. The parcel is not located in the jloodplain area or an area that is particularly steep. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public space. The proposed development consists of a prefabricated square unit that will be finished with an exterior treatment and roojline to match the existing building. The addition is located in the view plane from the pedestrian court at Obermeyer Place and the historically designated cabins located on the adjacent to the County Center parcel. Figure B below shows a 3-D view of the addition as it would appear from the pedestrian court at Obermeyer Place. With a creative landscaping plan the visual impacts from the surrounding properties is predicted to be minimal. It does not create significant adverse environmental impacts; however it does reduce the amount of open space that is currently on County Center. When the last amendment to the County Jail was approved in 1995, the applicant was required to replace any open space that was removed as a result of the addition. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address the County Jail Building or this addition. This proposal is relatively minor in nature; however staff emphasizes the need to have long term plans to address,future needs for each public service facility. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. This project is relatively small and not expected to require excessive public funds for the project itself or facilities for the parcel; however, the cost of the addition will come from public funds. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 8 of 11 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Section 26.445.040 (B)(2). There are no slopes in excess of twenty percent where the addition is to be located. Density will not be affected by the addition. Staff finds this criterion met. 8. Whether there aze sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. No new net leasable area will be created as a result of this project. No new employees will be required. This project will not require growth management mitigation. Staff finds this criterion met. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 9 of 11 EXHIBIT A 26.470.090 Review Standards for Development of Essentia- Public Facilities The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. The proposed addition is an accessory use to the County Jail and other County and City services. It will be used to facilitate a more efftcient network and computer server system. Currently, the existing facilities are inadequate and the new addition will accommodate all the current needs for space and allow for more growth of future computer equipment. Stafffnds this criterion to be met. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate or warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. The addition will be used to house data equipment and computer servers. There will not be any new net leasable commercial or office space created. There will not be any new staff generated as a result. No growth management mitigation is required for this proposed addition. Staff finds this criterion to be met Revised 1/30/2009 Page 10 of 11 EXHIBIT B List of Prior Approvals affective the Rio Grande Area 1977 -The Rio Grande Interim SPA plan was approved 1981 -The relocated the snow dump and set aside an unspecified parcel for a Performing Arts and Culture Center 1982 -The City and County exchanged the Aspen One, Oden and stable properties 1988 - A conceptual SPA Master Plan was approved that included the parking garage, the library, the Spring Street extension, the snow melt area, and an arts usage area 1989 - A final SPA plan was approved for the County Library and the parking garage 1991- A final SPA plan was approved for the Youth Center 1992 -Ordinance 26 of 2002 is SPA Amendment to install park spaces and landscaping. Snow storage must be on site and is not permitted on the r/w or on the path. 1992 -Intergovernmental Agreement for Resolution 29 of Series 1992 approving land exchanges and easements for the library, the parking garage, land north of the jail, trail and transit easements, and the youth center building. 1993 -Ordinance 10 of Series 1993 approved the Rio Grande Master Plan and specified that Lot 5 should be used for future expansions to the County Jail. (The Ordinance is included in the application) 1995 -SPA Review for an expansion to the County Jail 2006 -Civic Master Plan was approved Revised 1/30/2009 Page 11 of 11 ~IC_ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Council FROM: Errin Evans, Current Planner ~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director DATE OF MEMO: January 28`", 2009 MEETING DATE: February 23~d, 2009 RE: Aspen Ambulance Vehicular Tent Shelter - 401 Castle Creek Road -Growth Management Quota System Review First Reading of Ordinance No. ~, Series of 2009 APPLICANT /OWNER: Aspen Ambulance District REPRESENTATIVE: Leslie Lamont, Lamont Planning Services LOCATION: 401 Castle Creek Road; Legal Description -Parcel C, Aspen Valley Hospital District Subdivision; Parcel Identification Number - 273- 123-07- 801 CURRENT ZONING cot USE Located in the Public (PUB) zone district containing the Aspen Valley Hospital and associated buildings. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant is requesting to continue the use of a temporary vehicular tent shelter year round until the ambulances can be relocated to the new fire station downtown and the Aspen Valley Hospital carport which is proposed for Phase III of the AVH Master Facilities Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve the request for a Growth Management review for an essential public facility at this time to allow the continued use of the temporary vehicular shelter until a permanent building is constructed. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests of the Council to approve the request for growth management review of an essential public facility. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 1 of 6 Photo of the subject property BACKGROUND: On March 10`", 2008, the Aspen City Council approved a Temporary Use Permit to allow the Aspen Ambulance District to erect a vehiculaz tent shelter on an existing concrete pad on the Aspen Valley Hospital Campus. The shelter was requested afrer the Ambulance District acquired the assets, including two additional vehicles, from Mountain Ambulance services. The approved temporary use permit allows the tent to remain in place from October 15`", 2008 until April 16`", 2009. To remove the tent annually to accommodate restrictions for temporary use permits, it would cost the ambulance district approximately $12,000 each yeaz. The tent shelter protects ambulances that do not fit into the existing bam until the new fire station downtown and Phase III of the Master Facilities Plan that includes a permanent shelter for the ambulances are completed. Currently the Aspen Valley Hospital is undergoing a master facilities planning process. If approved, Phase III of the Master Facilities Plan includes a permanent shelter for the ambulances that do not fit into the existing barn, though it will not be constructed unti12013. The fire station that is currently under construction downtown will also be able to assist in accommodating the Ambulance District vehicles. A Temporary Use Permit is only valid for a period of six months within any one calendaz yeaz. To continue past the six month period, the Ambulance District is required to undergo Growth Management Review as it would no longer be considered a temporary use. The Planning and Zoning Commission adopted a resolution to make a recommendation to Council to approve the review for growth management on January 20`", 2009. LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The applicant is requesting the following land use approvals from the City Council: • Growth Management Ouota System -Essential Public Facilities pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.090 4. Any development to an essential public facility requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, to make a recommendation to the City Council for approval, approval with conditions or disapproval of the Growth Management Review. The City Council is the final authority. GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW: This application is required to undergo review under Growth Management because it is an addition to an essential public facility. Using the temporary vehicular tent shelter does not create any new employees or new net leasable space. The tent is not intended to be used for commercial or office purposes. The tent will be continued to be used for protecting ambulances from the elements. When Council reviewed the application for a Temporary Use Permit, the applicant made it known that they would be expecting to apply to use the shelter yeaz-round and to maintain use until 2013 when the Master Facility Plan anticipates the completion of the permanent shelter for the ambulances. The applicant intends to relocate two of the ambulances to Aspen Fire Protection locations when construction is completed near the end of 2010. Essential Public Facilities are required to mitigate for growth management on a case by case basis. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 2 of 6 Sta{f Comments The Ambulance District is a function of Pitkin County. They have a management contract with the Aspen Valley Hospital District. The Ambulance District has historically been established as a separate district. In the past, SkiCo contracted a private ambulance service from vazious entities over time. Approximately five years ago, the Ambulance District absorbed the private venture, Mountain Ambulance. The number of ambulances and drivers remains the same. Overall ambulance services in the community were not expanded and the amount of services provided did not change as a result of the amalgamation. RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends that the Council approve the request for Growth Management Review at this time with the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not be permitted to use the vehicular tent shelter after December 151, 2013. If a permanent shelter is constructed, then growth management review will occur at that time. 2. As requested in the temporary use permit, the applicant is required to plant two spruce trees that are four feet high and to work with Ron Moorhead, the adjacent property owner regazding their placement. These trees are required to be planted by June 15`, 2009. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If the Council chooses to recommend approval for the request, they may use this motion "I move to adopt Ordinance No. ~ Series of 2009, upon first reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Staff findings Exhibit B -Temporary Use Permit Resolution No. 20 of Series 2008 Exhibit C -Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 4 of Series 2009 Exhibit D -Application Revised 1/30/2009 Page 3 of 6 ORDINANCE NO. (SERIES 2009) A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, TO APPROVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING A VEHICULAR TENT SHELTER UNTIL 2013 TO PARK AMBULANCES AT THE ASPEN VALLEY HOSPTIAL COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 401 CASTLE CREEK ROAD, LEGALLY DESCIBED AS PARCEL C, ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT SUBDIVSION Parcel Identification Number 2735-123-07-801 WHEREAS, Leslie Lamont, located at 725 Melissa Lane, Cazbondale, Colorado on behalf of the Aspen Ambulance District, 401 Castle Creek Road, Aspen, Colorado, submitted a request for Growth Management Review dated December 24~', 2008 to the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located at 401 Castle Creek Road, Aspen, the pazcel is identified as pazcel number 2735-123-07-801, and the legal description of the property is: Pazcel C, Aspen Valley Hospital District Subdivision, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department determined affordable housing mitigation for growth management is not necessazy at this time. No new net leasable commercial or office space has been created nor have any new employees been generated; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January 20~', 2009, the Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation to Council to approve the request for Growth Management Review; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on Febniary 23`d, 2009, the Council to approved the request for Growth Management Review; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; 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 OF ASPEN COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves the request for exemptions For growth management mitigation. The growth management mitigation will be assessed during the Master Facilities Plan process. The applicant intends to use this vehicular tent shelter until 2013. The following conditions apply: 1. The applicant will not be permitted to use the vehiculaz tent shelter afrer December 151, 2013. If a permanent shelter is constructed, growth management review will occur at that time. As requested in the temporazy use permit, the applicant is required to plant two spruce trees that aze four feet high and to work with Ron Moorhead, the adjacent property owner regarding their placement. These trees aze required to be planted by June 151, 2009. All material representations made in the application and in the heazing by the Applicant and the Applicant's representative shall be considered conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awazded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held the 23`d day of March, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 130 S. Galena, 15 days prior to which public notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney EXHIBIT A 26.470.090 Review Standards for Development of Essential Public Facilities The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. The Aspen Valley Hospital Campus including the ambulance operation is considered to be an essential public facility. The proposed vehicular tent shelter is an accessory use to the existing ambulance barn and ambulance operations. It will be used to protect ambulances from foul weather and to keep onboard medicines from freezing in the winter and overheating in the summer seasons. The ambulances should have permanent housing whether on this site or combined with the Fire Protection sites by 2013. New employee generation mitigation will be reviewed for the permanent shelter during the Master Facilities Plan process. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate or warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. The vehicular tent shelter will be used to park ambulances. There will not be any new net leasable commercial or office space created. There will not be any new staff generated as a result. No growth management mitigation is necessary to be assessed at this time for this proposed addition. Stafffands this criterion to be met. ' Essential Public Facility - A facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use or by benefit of, the general public and serves the needs of the community. As defined by the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 4 of 6 EXHIBIT A (Continued) 26.470.100 Calculations. Emoloyee veneration and mitigation. Applicants may request an employee generation review with the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Growth management review procedure. In establishing employee generation the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the following: a. The expected employee generation of the use considering the employee generation pattern of the use or of a similar use within the City or a similaz resort economy. The Ambulance District is a function of Pitkin County. Until recently, SkiCo contracted private companies to provide ambulance services at the base of the mountain. Approximately five years ago, the Ambulance District acquired the assets of the private venture, Mountain Ambulance. Since then the number of ambulances and drivers remains the same. Overall ambulance services in the community were not expanded and the total amount of services provided did not change as a result of the amalgamation. Staffftnds this criterion to be met. b. Any unique employment characteristics of the operation. No employees will be occupying the tent shelter. Amore permanent shelter will be constructed during Phase III the Master Facilities Plan in 2013. At that time, the permanent shelter will undergo another review for growth management particular to that building. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. c. The extent to which employees of various uses within a mixed use building or of a related off-site operation will overlap or serve multiple functions. This is not a mixed use building. There are no longer any off-site operations now that the Ambulance District has acquired the assets of Mountain Ambulance. All Ambulance functions in Aspen operate from this site. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. d. A proposed restriction requiring full employee generation mitigation upon vacation of the type business acceptable to the Planning and Zoning Commission. It is not anticipated that the use will change prior to 2013. If the use of the tent changes, the applicant will be required to remove the vehicular tent shelter. When Phase III of the Master Facilities Plan is reviewed, the permanent shelter will undergo growth management mitigation at that time. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. e. Any proposed follow-up analysis of the project (e.g. an audit) to confirm actual employee generation. When Phase III of the Master Facilities Plan is reviewed, the permanent shelter will undergo growth management review at that time. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. f For lodge projects only: An efficiency or reduction in the number of employees required for the lodging component of the project may, at the discretion of the Commission as a means of incentivizing a project, be applied as a credit towards the mitigation requirement of the free-mazket residential component of the project. Any approved Revised 1/30/2009 Page 5 of 6 reduction shall require an audit to determine actual employee generation after two complete years of operation of the lodge. This is not a lodge project, so this item is not applicable. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Revised 1/30/2009 Page 6 of 6 RESOLUTION N0.20 (Series of 2008) ~X~I~grr ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, GRANTING A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A TENT AT THE ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL CAMPUS,301 CASTLE CREEK ROAD, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID 2735-121-29-809 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.450 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant, The Aspen Ambulance District, has submitted an application for a Temporary Use Permit to place a tent on the Aspen Valley Hospital campus adjacent to the existing ambulance "barn" near the southwest comer of the property; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests approval for a Temporary Use Permit to place a tent on the campus to shelter three ambulances for six months with a start date of no later than October I5, 2008; and, WHEREAS, Community Development Department reviewed the temporary use application and provided a referral review opportunity to standazd referral agencies resulting in the building department requiring a building permit and appropriate sub-permits to be applied for to install the tent; and, WHEREAS, City Council finds that the proposed temporary use is consistent with the character and existing land uses of the surrounding pazcels and neighborhood and that granting the temporary use will not adversely impact the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Mazch 10, 2008; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed and considered the temporary use request under the applicable provisions in the Municipal Code, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, City Council finds that the temporary use permit meets or exceed all applicable development standards; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. Resolution No. 20, Series of 2008 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO,THAT: Section l: In accordance with Section 26.450 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, does hereby grant the Aspen Ambulance District a Temporary Use Permit to place a tent at the Aspen Valley Hospital campus with the following conditions: 1. The temporary use is valid for six (6) months. 2. The Applicant shall erect the tent no later than October 15, 2008 to start the six (6) month period. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit and any required sub-permits before erecting the tent. 4. The temporary use shall allow for a tent of thirty-four (34) feet by twenty-six (26) feet with a ridge height oftwenty-two (22) feet and two (2) inches. 5. All material representations made in the application and in the hearing by the Applicant and the Applicant's representative shall be considered conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. Section 2: 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 construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3• 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 sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED, March 10, 2008, at a public hearing before the City Counci] of the City of Aspen, Colorado. Mic ael C. Tr land, May r John Worceste~Attorney S. I{,g6h, City Clerk ~XNtf~ITG RESOLUTION N0.4 (SERIES 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL TO COUNCIL FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING A VEHICULAR TENT SHELTER UNTIL 2013 TO PARK AMBULANCES AT THE ASPEN VALLEY HOSPTIAL COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 401 CASTLE CREEK ROAD, LEGALLY DESCIBED AS PARCEL C, ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT' SUBDIVSION Parcel Identification Number 2735-123-07-801 WHEREAS, Leslie Lamont, located at 725 Melissa Lane, Carbondale, Colorado on behalf of the Aspen Ambulance District, 401 Castle Creek Road, Aspen, Colorado, submitted a request for Growth Management Review dated December 24'", 2008 to the Planning and Zoning Commission; and WHEREAS, the subject property is located at 401 Castle Creek Road, Aspen, the parcel is identified as parcel number 2735-123-07-801, and the legal description of the property is: Pazcel C, Aspen Valley Hospital District Subdivision, City of Aspen, County of Pitldn, State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standazds, the Community Development Department determined mitigation for growth management is not necessary at this time. No new net leasable commercial or office space has been created nor have any new employees been generated; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January 20a', 2009, the Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation to Council to approve the request for Growth Management Review; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CTI'Y OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves the request for exemptions for growth management mitigation. The growth management mitigation will be assessed during the Master Facilities Plan process. The applicant intends to use this vehiculaz tent shelter unti12013. The following conditions apply: 1. The applicant will not be permitted to use the vehicular tent shelter after December 1", 2013. If a permanent shelter is constructed, growth management review will occur at that time. ' 2. As requested in the temporary use permit, the applicant is required to plant two spruce trees that are four feet high and to work with Ron Moorhead, the adjacent property owner regarding their placement. These trees are required to be planted by June lu, 2009. 3. All material representations made in the application and in the hearing by the Applicant and the Applicant's representative shall be considered conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, aze hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: 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 4: 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 Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 20'" day of January, 2009 with a 6 - 0 vote. Attest: /,i Kathy S and, Chief Deputy City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ames R. True, Special Counsel ~` g' ~ ~ Lamont Planning Services, LLc 725 Melissa Lane Carbondale, CO 81623 Transmittal Memo TO; Errin .Evans, City of Aspen Community Development Department From: Leslie Lamont, Lamont Planning Services, LLC ~~~ Date: February 5, 2009 Re; Aspen Ambulance District GMQS Review Notes; 12 copies of application for City Council review ~- ~,.. p:970.963.8434 e:llamont~~sopris.net c:970.948.1357 Dec 18 2008 18:25 \rr December ]9, Ms. Jennifer Phe Aspen Common 130 South Galen Aspen, CO 8161 Re: Crrowth Ambulance RSPEM RMBUIRMCE n, Deputy Director ~ Development Departrnent Street 970 5441978 went Application for an Essential Public Facility -Aspen Shelter Deaz Ms. Phelan, The Aspen Ambulance District (District) is asub-district of Pitkin County. The Board of County Commissioners is the Board of Directors but the County contracts with Aspen Valley Hospital t~ manage the service. The District's facilities are located on the Hospital Campus;and improvements aze coordinated with the Hospital. I Several yeazs agal the District acquired the assets of Mountain Ambulance service which increased the nru~pber of ambulances in ow fleet from four to six. The acquisition also requires us to tr sport injuries from Ule ski slopes increasing ow service calls. These changes necessltifte the need for better protection for our vehicles from the weather in order to maintainithem in a ready response mode. Ow barn is only large enough for three ambulancesi and last yeaz we gained the City's approval to install a temporary shelter over an existing pazking pad. Today, we seek ~ longer term of approval to keep the shelter in place until the hospital constructs Phase ~if of their Master Facilities Plan which will include a permanent ambulance sheltef< to house ow vehicles. However, in the event Phase III is not constructed by Aril of 2013 the District will look for funds to build a permanent garage in the same locatjon as the temporary shelter; obviously pending any City of Aspen approvals. j Please find attached to this cover letter our response to the standards of Section 26.470.090 (4) Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility. On behalf of the'4spen Ambulance District, Leslie Lamont of Lamont Planning Services, LLC is ow auth razed representative in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Leslie if you have any questions or need further information. Sincerely, j ~~~ -v Richard Walker,I'Director Aspen Ambulan$e District a.. p.l `'~` Section 26.470.090 GMQS City Council Application for an Essential Public Facility I. General Overview The Aspen Ambulance District seeks GMQS approval, as an essential public facility, for the long term use of an existing shelter for ambulances located on the Aspen Valley Hospital campus. The District received a temporary use permit and an 8040 Greenline approval to install a temporary shelter adjacent to the current ambulance barn to protect three ambulances from the weather. The temporary use permit was effective Mazch 23, 2008. The shelter has been installed and has proved critical in protecting vehicles from the weather. The temporary use is set to expire in April 16, 2009 at which time the shelter must be removed. The District would like to avoid setting up and taking down the shelter every winter until a permanent shelter can be constructed. It is estimated that this procedure would cost the District $12,000 per season (it cost $6,000 to set up the first time). Additionally, setting up and taking down the structure may damage the fabric and the current ambulance barn has very little storage space. Therefore the District seeks a GMQS approval to set up the shelter and keep the shelter up until April of 2013. Aspen Valley Hospital proposes a permanent carport shelter for ambulances in Phase III of the Master Facilities Plan which is anticipated to be constructed in 2013. In the event Phase III construction will not be completed by 2013 the District will look for funding to construct a permanent gazage at the location of the shelter. The installation of the shelter did not require site work, excavation, or the removal of any vegetation. The shelter is located in a paved parking azea that served as parking for the District's vehicles that are now sheltered. As a condition of the temporary use permit the District committed to installing two 4-6 foot evergreen trees on the hillside behind the shelter to help block the view of the shelter from the adjacent neighbor. The trees were not installed before the winter season this year but will be installed at the first opportunity in the spring of 2009. The adjacent property owner has agreed to this timeframe for installation of the trees. The shelter is necessary to provide protection from snow storms. When a large storm settles over Aspen, over a foot of snow, it typically takes at least a half day to remove snow from vehicles that are parked outside. The winter season is a very busy time for the District transporting injured people from the ski slopes, roughly 300 trips per year. Advanced life support calls are also handled by the District and total approximately 950 calls per year. Ideally, the ambulances also need protection from the harsh sun at this altitude. The District bases their operation out of a two story 3,830 square foot "barn." The second floor of the building consists of two bedrooms for employees (which serve as shift quarters), two offices, a training room and combination kitchen/living room space. The first floor is comprised of three bays for three ambulances, lockers and storage. Aspen Ambulance District GMQS Application for Shelter Page 1 December 2008 Until recently, the District's fleet consisted of four ambulances and one squad truck. The truck is ,~, primarily used for backcountry assistance. The gazage provided adequate shelter for the fleet until the District acquired the assets of Mountain Ambulance increasing the fleet from four to six ambulances. One ambulance has been relocated to the North 40 fire Station and two ambulances and the squad truck aze pazked in the temporary shelter. The shelter is proposed as a temporazy solution because one ambulance will be relocated to the new Fire District Headquarters in downtown Aspen. However, that will not occur until the end of 2010 when the station is finished. In addition, a permanent gazage for ambulances is proposed as part of the Hospital's MFP. This garage is proposed in Phase III of the Hospital's plan and is anticipated to be built in 2013. Completion of Phase III will provide enough sheltered space for the District's fleet. The location of this shelter is on an existing paved pazking pad next to the ambulance barn. The pad is tucked into the hillside and supported by a railroad tie wall. The pad is correctly sized to accommodate the shelter and required very little work for installation. The footprint of the shelter is 34' x 26' and two ambulances and the square truck are pazked inside. The shelter did not require a foundation. The opportunity to heat the shelter is still being explored. In the meantime the vehicles will be plugged into the freezing and to activate an engine block heater. Appendix. barn for heating purposes to keep drugs from Please refer to the shelter specifics found in the The shelter is located on the Aspen Valley Hospital's pazcel C. Pazcel C is currently in the land use review process as a Planned Unit Development proposal for a Master Facilities Plan. A GMQS review for the ambulance shelter to enable the shelter to remain in place until Phase III could not occur until the MFP conceptual PUD review was complete. Unfortunately, completion of that phase of review may not occur until the temporary use permit of the current shelter has expired. Although Phase III of the MFP includes a permanent carport shelter for ambulances that will support the current ambulance bam, Final PUD review of Phase III is not intended to occur until Phase II has been constructed II. Review Standards A. Sec. 26.470.090. City Council Applications. The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, all City Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotments and development ceiling levels. Aspen Ambulance District GMQS Application for Shelter Page 2 December 2008 Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria: a. The Community Development Director has determined the primary use and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may also be part of an essential public facility project. b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations. Response: Per Section 26.104.100. Definitions: an Essential public facility is a facility which serves an essential public purpose is available for use by or benefit of, the general public and serves the needs of the community. The Aspen Ambulance District is asub-district of Pitkin County and is supported by the tax payers of the Aspen Ambulance District. The District exists solely to service the general public and support the health and welfare of the general public. Currently the shelter is located on an existing parking pad. The shelter is not habitable space and no new employees will be generated by the shelter because the shelter is necessary to protect existing vehicles in the ambulance fleet. B. Section 26.710.250 Public The entire Aspen Valley Hospital Campus was annexed into the City of Aspen in 2003. The property was zoned Public. The Aspen Ambulance District is a land use that is consistent with the uses permitted in the public zone district such as "Public and Private non-profit uses providing a community service" or "Hospital." Response: The square footage of the shelter is 884 square feet. The Ambulance District is located on Aspen Valley Hospital's Pazcel C which includes the Hospital's CEO house, Whitcomb Terrace senior housing and community center, the Hospital facility and the ambulance bam. The total floor area of all structures on the site is 93,369 squaze feet. The proposed shelter adds 0.9% floor area to Parcel C. However, the shelter does add 22% more floor area to the ambulance operations. Aspen Ambulance District GMQS Application for Shelter Page 3 December 2008 ATTACHMENTS: `~ I. Signed Fee Agreement v 2. Land Use Application Form 3. Dimensional Requirements Form 4. Authorization Letters 5. Dimensions of Shelter 6. Photos of Existing Shelter 7. List of Neighbors for Public Notice 8. Site Plan of Shelter Location Aspen Ambulance District GMQS Application for Shelter Page 4 December 2008 ATTACHMENT l CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ~-- `.,.- A¢reement for Payment of City of Ascen Develoument Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafterC[TY)and Aspen Ambulance District (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: t. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application forGMQS Approval for an Essential Public Facility (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees [hat the City of Aspen has an adopted fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties [hat APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accme following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs [o process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that i[ is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient inforna[ion to the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required fmdings for project consideration, unless curtent billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $~ which is for ~ hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPL CIPL CITANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $235.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT _ 1. sy: By ~1~,- l Chris Bendon ~ ~ / ~ ~) ~ ~~ !Y Community Development Director Date: .r L_M `,f c \,~ `XJ Billing Address and Telep oae Number: `:~~ r Note: The fees for this application have been waived, per the pre-app. JMG vwr ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION Name: As en Ambulance District - GMQS A royal for Shelter Location: Aspen Valley Hospital Campus 0401 Castle Creek Road Indicate street address, lo[ & block number, le al descri tion where a ro riate ParcellD#(REOUIREDI PID #3039 Name: Aspen Ambulance District - Rich Walker, Director Address: 0401 Castle Creek Road, Aspen CO 81623 Phone #: 54 4 -15 S 0 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Leslie Lamont Address: 725 Melissa Lane, Carbondale, CO 81623 Phone#: 963-8434 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): © GMQS Exemption ^ GMQS Allotment ^ Special Review "~ ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane ^ Commercial Design Review ^ Residential Design Variance ^ Conditional Use ^ Conceptual PUD ^ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ^ Subdivision ^ Subdivision Exemption (includes condominiumization) ^ Lot Split ^ Lot Line Adjustment ^ Temporary Use ^ Text/Map Amendment ^ Conceptual SPA ^ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ^ Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion ^ Other: ExLSTtxG CONDITIONS: descri lion of existin buildin ,uses, revious a royals, etc. The District utilizes a two story "barn" for operations and shelter for 3 ambulances. A temporary shelter protects a squad truck and 2 more ambulance next to t e barn. PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildinQS, uses, modifications etc.) The District would like to extend the period of time for the use of the temp. shelter over the parking pad until April of 2013 to provide protection nave you ac[acuea me [ouowmg: N'EES 1)[lE: SU.W, per pre-app ^ Pre-Application Conference Summary ^X Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement ® Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Forth ® Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards ^ 3-D Model for large project All pleas that are larger than 8.5" X 11" must be folded. A disk with ao electric copy of all written teat rosoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the app6catiou. Large scale projects should include au e ouic 3-D modeL Your pre~appficatiou rnnference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. ATTACHMENT3 °"~ DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM "ur Project:~ulance Shelter Applicant: spen u ance is rict Location: 0401 Castle Creek Road, Aspen Valley Hospital Campus Zone District: Public Lot Size: 19.1 Acres Lot Area:~ss -tga Grt 1=r (for the purposes of calculafing Floor Area, Lo[ Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Number of residential units: Number of bedrooms: Existing.• NA Proposed: NA Existing: NA Proposed: NA Existing: NA Proposed.• NA Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): NA DIMENSIONS: The campus is zoned Public and dimensions are set via PUD Floor Area: Existing:93,369 Allowable: PUD Proposed: 884 sq. ft. Principal bldg. height: Existin$:25 ft. Allowable: pUpProposed: Access. bldg. height: Existing: Allowable: Proposed: 22 ' 3 " On-Site parking: Existing: Required: __Proposed: Site coverage: Existing: _ _ Required: Proposed: Open Space: Existing: Required: Proposed: Front Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Rear Setback: Existing: Required: Proposed: Combined F/R: Existing: Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required.• Proposed: Side Setback: Existing. Required: Proposed.• Combined Sides: Existing: Required.• _Proposed: Distance Between Existing Required: Proposed: Buildings Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: ATTACHMENT 4 -, 530 E Main Sueet ~ Aspen, Colorado 81611-1948 December 17, 2008 Ms. Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Director Aspen Community Development Department 130'South Galena . Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Aspen Ambulance District Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility -.0401 Castle Creek Road Deaz Jennifer, Pitkin County is in support of a Growth Management Application which the Aspen Ambulance District is applying for with the City of Aspeh. We believe that this is an appropriate use of this property until ambulances can be relocated to the new fire station Headquarters downtown and the Aspen Valley Hospital carport which is - proposed in Phase III of the Master Facilities Plan. Sincerely, PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF'COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ~~ k Hatfield, Chauman +... AdministraUOn Count Commissioner i 301 S y i S 301 u te (970) 920.5200 u te ~ (970) 920.5200 ~ ax 920-5198 Coumy Attorney Finance and Use Tax Suke 302 Suke 201 (970) 9245190 (970) 920-5220 , fax 920.5198 hx 920.5196 !ax 920.5230 ~- A S P I: N V A L L E Y H O S P I T A L Small crwu~;h to can, large enough w heal December 17, 2008 Ms. Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Director Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 8161 I Re: Application for Growth Management for an Essential Public Facility -0401 Castle Creek Road Dear Ms. Phelan, Aspen Valley Hospital is in support of the Growth Management application for the long-term use of a temporary cover as shelter for Aspen Ambulance District vehicles. We believe that this is an appropriate use of this property until an ambulance can be relocated to the downtown fire station headquarters and until Phase III of the hospital master plan is completed. At the time, permanent shelter will be provided for the rest of the vehicles that do not fit into the current ambulance bam. Sincerely, David Ressler CEO Cc: Rich Walker, Leslie Lamont oa01 CnSr~E CREEK ROAD ASPEN, COLORA00 81671 970.925.1120 WWW.AVHASPEN.ORG 1 i t K tp m I~~ P i W (' I` W < ~: I~ N Oa ~ 0~ ~` V ATTACHMENT 5 I~,J A N ~ W ~ b ~ u w w 0 n ~... ', ~~.nr { „t .(-~~ ATT~a.~~I--ii%ENT 8 Y'^~ ~~ .~ =~ ~~"~ +: t~ -~ ~ ~c +' y5 ~ hi cyf'3= ... ~ ~.. ^.~. ~ ~ -~• ;~ n~. ~ ~ . ~, ~ ^~ x ~t r x ~+ ' s Sx* vA '~ ~ 3~ _ n' F '.} ~+~ yY G.. e ~3`F ~ ' y^~ :~ F ._. .xyw't''r' <` f': - !€ F e~ I __ nntlna vJ-uVif-~ worl~ane•mnnM uu~y~naasui,p alpna; el zallnsuo~ 1NGUS CKAIG M & KAREN S PO BOX 7965 aSYEN, CO 81611 'TTY OF ASPEN 1T7'N FINANCF, DEPT 130 S GALENA S"r ASPF,N, CO 81611 >F.SGF,ORGES JOHN !02 GROVE CT ASPEN, CO 816] 1 IARDF.R DEBORAH H 09 TWIN RIDGE DR CSPEN, CO 81611 CELEHER JOHN G & LINDA B X202 MEADOWOOD DR ASPEN, CO 81611 4AC'CEAN ARCHIBALD JR & ANNE '0 TWIN RIDGE DR ASPEN. CO 87611 4OREHF.AD RONALD L & ERLINDA 4 28 TWINRIDGE CT .SPEN, CO 81611 1NF,IL DENNiS & SHARON 01 GROVE CT ,SPEN, CO 81611-3134 ODHURST AARON S & DOROTHY .TRUSTEES 5 W FLAGLER S't' IIAM1, FL 33130 ROASKA JUDITH F.LI,EN 78 N RIDGE LN SPEN, CO 81611 luawa6aey~ ap < ATTACHMENT 7 ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL DISTRICT 0401 CASTLE CREF,K Rll ASPEN, CO 81611 CRIMMEL WILLIAM & PETRA 323 GROVE CT ASPEN, CO 81611 DILBF,CK JASON GIBSONF, ALEXANDF,R SCOTT PO BOX 8321 ASPEN, CO 81612 HEATHER LANE LLC 5379 LYNBROOK DR HOUSTON, TX 77056-2004 KIERNAN MARC 161 GROVE CT ASPEN, CO 8161 ] MF.ADOWOOD ;METROPOLITAN DIST PO BOX 8774 ASPF,N, CO 81612 MOUNTAIN OAKS EMPLOYEE HOLBING ASPEN VALLEY iIOSPITAL 200 CASTLE CREEK RD ASPEN, CO 81611 _ PATTERSON PAUL T & PATRICIA O 499 MEADOWOOD DR ASPEN, CO 81611 POLOVIN DAVID L PO BOX 4382 ASPEN, CO 81612 RINTOUL .AMY V 161 CROVE CT ASPEN, CO 81611 I ®09LS®/1L13AV~ ~ laameail~ad6se3m; . r ~ hays uaan~lsul aas BLOF.VISMA PHILIP 0074 TWIN R1DGF DR ASPEN, CO 816ll CROSS SUSAN K 242 GRO VF. C'I ASPEN, CO 81611-3139 FRIAS RAYMOND C & MARILYN F 100 MEADOWOOD DR ASPEN, CO 81611 HEGF.R FRANK & CARLA 222 GROVE CT ASPEN, CO 81611-3139 LF,E BRUCE LANDON 141 GROVE CT ASPF,N,CO 816]2 MEANS GRAEMF, DONALD & ELIZABETH C 189 MEADOWOOD DR ASPF,N, CO 81611-3341 ODONOVAN DENTS 262 GROVE CT ASPF,N, CO 81611 PITKIN COUNTY 530 E MATN ST #302 ASPEN, CO 81611 PRINCE OF PEACF, CHAPF,L 77 MEADOWOOD DR ASPEN, CO 81611 RYMAN KAREN L 343 GROVE CT ASPEN, CO 81611 laded paadl ®0975 31V'IdW31 ~~V as11 ~ i .,~ slaoetlaad/Ise3 .. ._..__ ..__.._ _____. --:.:.._.:_;-r_.. _____ . . {uawao~ey~ap sua5 ®U9GS® .. ww•d~ane•nnmm spina; e~ zal~nsuo~ ~ ia~ad ~ sa~he; sauanbil~ SIDLEY DtILTON & SARALA'N THISSELL ~1ARINA L C 1l2 T7~7N RIDGE HOA 10550 wILSHIKE BLVD #103 HOOD JEFFKEY 311/2 363 GROVE CT LOS a~~GELES. CA 90024 721 (GROVE CT ASPEN. CO 81611 ASPEN. CO 8161 I ~~ vANDINE FAMILY TRCST WALLA JOHN D & JEAN D ~VF,INKLF, JliLIAN & MARY NOR,VIA 1132 PASEO DEL MAR PO BOY 161 6] PKI;VIROSE PATH PALOS VERDES. CA 90274 .ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 IVESTERN LIFE LLC 188 MF,ADOWOOD DR ASPEN, CO 81611 ~ ®o9ts~/~3AV~ ~aln3ea~ ~aad ~(se3 ~o; jaded paa~T ~ ®0915 31V1dW31®~V as11 ..~ ~ iaaus uataruuul ass ~ . ~ ~ ~7 sreget laad /~se~ ____ ATTACHMENT 8 v.,. ® ID -~~ ~~ m , ~* ~"A , me a {} ~ a / © ~ ~~ o a ,, ,, e ~ // ,, ~' _ ~ ~/~/ ~~~.~~~an ~ - i ] ~ /~] ~~~ i t5 tea,,.=iii ~~ ~ J 1 <° ~ i }Y~/ / 1 ~: ! i # / a~ / Va 2 i ~ y ~ P O / K ~ b Vii' ~ ;} } / 7 / B _'-.fir.-. ~ ' +~ .; ~ 1_ . A. ~ /~~ f ~ '~~ t_ ,...i I tC.a ~_ ~ i o °n ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL NO. REV1510N BV DATE OPRIS NGQiESRII~iG, LLC. m m m ~ o - CITY OP ASPEN, COLORADO C1VII. coNSm.Texrs 502 MAIN STREET o ~ ~ EXISTING AMBULANCE BARN EXHIBfT CARBONDALE, CO 81823 (9]0)]61-0311 EXHIBR ONIV FAX: (9]0}]040313 III a. ~~~~ ~Y~ Memorandum TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: James R. True THRU: John Worcester DATE: February 19, 2009 RE: IRV Election A Charter amendment passed in a November 2007 requires City Council to adopt procedures to implement Instant Runoff Voting. Following the Charter amendment, the City Council designated a committee to consider recommendations for such procedures. The committee recommended various rules for the instant runoff election and a tabulation procedure. Those rules as set forth in the proposed Instant Runoff Voting Procedures Manual were attached to the ordinance presented at first reading. At first reading, the council addressed several questions regazding the various methods of tabulation. Following such discussions, Council requested that staff prepare two alternative tabulation methods for consideration at second reading. Attached hereto is the "Primer" prepared by Kathryn Koch and presented at first reading. This explains various rules that have been proposed for the election. Such rules apply to the election regardless of the tabulation method. Also attached is the proposed ordinance, which if adopted would incorporate and adopt the proposed Instant Runoff Voting Procedures Manual and by reference the Colorado Secretary of State's election manual. The Instant Runoff Voting Procedures Manual that is attached to the proposed ordinance contains genera] rules regarding the election and will ultimately designate the chosen tabulation method for City Council. Thus, as you will note, Section 6 of the Manual refers the reader to the alternatives for the tabulation of the City Council seats. There have been other changes in the manual to address i minor concerns that have been raised since first reading. However, no other substantive changes have been made. Specifically, the rules regarding the Mayoral election has not been modified. The two alternatives for the election of the City Council are also attached. Both alternatives involve ranking candidates by preference first to last. All voters may rank all or as few candidates as he or she wishes. Alternative One, is designated as the Two Votes Counted -Batch Elimination method. This is the method proposed by the committee and included in the manual at first reading. This tabulation method counts the highest two votes on each ballot in the initial round and in subsequent rounds if more than two candidates move into the subsequent rounds. The batch elimination, which is designed to emulate the most recent City runoff system simply means that if no one receives the threshold in the initial count, the top four vote getters move on. The bottom four, assuming eight candidates, are eliminated in a batch. All votes are then reassigned giving the highest two votes to those candidates remaining in the runoff. The rules set forth in this Alternative One attempt to address all conditions that can be encountered, particularly ties at various stages. Alternative Two, is designated as One Vote Counted, Sequential Elimination. This method, contemplates an initial count of the highest vote for each candidate. After that tabulation, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and those votes are reassigned to the candidate with the highest ranking who is continuing in the runoff. The elimination of the candidate with the fewest votes continues until a candidate reaches the threshold. That candidate is deemed elected and the voting for the second seat is commenced. In tabulating the voting for the second seat, the winner of the first seat is eliminated and all votes are recounted with any vote given to that candidate then given to the candidate with the next highest ranking. After this tabulation, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and those votes reassigned to the next highest ranked candidate who is continuing in the runoff. This sequential elimination of the candidate with the fewest votes continues until a candidate reaches the threshold. There are supporting arguments and criticisms of each method. And, in various test ballots, the different methods have led to different results. On Wednesday, February 18, 2009, staff conducted a public session to demonstrate the two tabulation methods. Approximately twenty citizens, and several members of the press attended. Although no recommendations were submitted by this group, numerous questions were answered and at least one other method was suggested and promoted. That method, which will likely be presented at council, involves counting two votes initially, then conducting a sequential elimination rather than a batch elimination. Further explanation of this method can be provided if necessary. Based on comments received at this meeting and further consideration of the various methods of tabulation, including some other proposed alternatives and compromises, there is strong possibility that staff will recommend to Council at second reading a compromise for the City Council election. z Finally, the Clerk proposes that a computer specialist be utilized who will provide a program that scans all ballots then tabulates the count using the rules that are chosen by Council. The Clerk will certify this process consistent with State Statute prior to the election. It is anticipated that members of the public will request the Council to require that the votes be hand counted, either solely or in addition to the computer count. Staff opposes this request. Certification of the counting method if electronic tabulation is used is a standard process and staff believes that it will be conducted fairly and openly. ACTION REQUESTED: A Motion to approve Ordinance No. _, Series of 2009. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: cc: City Manager IRV Primer INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING PRIMER Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) is a voting system used in elections in which voters can rank candidates in order of preference. In an IRV election, if no candidate receives a majority of first choices, the candidate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated and ballots cast for that candidate are redistributed to the surviving candidates according to the voters' indicated preference. This process is repeated until one candidate obtains a majority. A ballot question in November 2007 changed Aspen's voting system from a regular election and runoff and directed Council to adopt procedures for Instant runoff voting before the May 2009 election. The Charter change also requires a candidate for Council to receive 50% plus of the vote in order to be elected. Staff and a committee of citizens have worked on these procedures over the past several months. Council approved that committee in September 2008. At your February 9`h meeting, staff will forward an ordinance for 15` reading to adopt these procedures. We scheduled this work session to give Council time to review the procedures and ask questions. Runoff elections approved by the voters in 2000 and held in 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2007. We have structured Aspen's election procedures to be similar to the elections plus runoff as used in the past. Mayor Race The ballot for the Mayor's race will look like this: MAYOR Two Year Te rm, Vote for OnelColumn tst 2"d 3m 4th Choice choice choice choice Fill in one oval per choice Your 2nd or 3rd choice will be considered if your 1't choice Loses Mark. only one circle per column or per row Colonel Mustard O O O O Scarlett O'Hara O O O O Nicholas Nickleby O O O O Eleanor Rigby O O O O -1- Before, if there were 4 candidates for Mayor in a May election and no candidate received a majority, in June there would have been 2 candidates. In IRV, if there are 4 candidates for Mayor and no candidate receives a majority, the two candidates with the lowest vote IRV Primer totals are eliminated and the votes are recounted reassigning the votes of the candidates who were eliminated to their highest remaining candidate, if there is one. Colonel Mustard 22 Scarlett O'Hara 42* Nicholas Nickleby 25 Eleanor Rigby 27* Round 1 119 voters - 3 spoiled ballots = 116 votes for Mayor X .50 = 58 plus 1 = 59 votes needed to win and there is no candidate who meets the threshold in this round. Round 2 The top two vote getters enter Round 2. Each ballot is recounted as follows: Everyone who voted for the Colonel and Nickleby will have their second choice votes added to the candidate remaining in the race. Scarlett O'Hara 63 Eleanor Rigby 47 Scarlett O'Hara is elected. Council Race The ballot for City Council will look like this: -2- No community has exactly the same parameters for Council seat as Aspen. While a single seat contest is straightforward, the Council race in Aspen is for two seats and each candidate must garner 50% plus 1 vote to be elected. IRV Primer CITY COUNCIL (four year term) Two City Council Members will be elected for 4-year [enns . Rank your chdces i n cdumns 1 through 8. Your fir st and second choices will be count etl in the first round of tallies. Do NOT tluplicete your chdces. `~" Vde far Vde for Vde for Vde far Vde for Vde for E'"' `i~~ ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE ONE ~ :lY.rv~s: s~ '3" = n ~ ' .3r0 4th Stli G.M 7th 8th s . . :3s~!':~iril~ju68' ~ Mark onl one circle er colu p l~ sii3l$ ~ `~~~~ ~.! Jack B. Nimble p ,. ~1 ['~ ~ n n n n n n ~ ~__ Greta Greenwood `~'i ~`I"1_`___= n n n n n n ~3 David Crockett #`~......___...I'~C...m..= n n n n n n ..,E ~ L:!,r.,:~` a Travis Thompson I`'I ' n n n n n n Che Guevara ~_ 1,~" '' 1'° n n n n n n s:a John O. Adams L't n n n n n n r:~:,: - i4 wibur Mies tl n n n n n n Peter Romanov t"1 ~, . n n n n n n s~-. A two-seat race where each candidate has to receive 50% plus 1 vote to be elected is much more challenging. The committee went through several different ways to count the Council runoff, choosing to emulate the previous elections and have batch elimination. If there were 8 candidates running for two seats, al] first and second choices on a ballot would be counted (as in previous elections, electors were able to vote for two Council candidates). SCENARIO A Round 1 In this example 115 ballots were cast with the following results after counting the 1st and 2"d choices on each ballot. Jack B. Nimble 42* Greta Greenwood 50* David Crockett 36* Travis Thompson 17 Che Guevara 26* John Q. Adams 21 Wilbur Mills 13 Peter Romanov 25 3- IRV Primer With 115 ballots cast, i.e. 115 voters participated in this Round 1, the threshold is 115 X 50% = 57.5 plus 1 = 58. No candidates in round 1 received the required 50% plus 1 so the 4 candidates with the highest votes continued to round 2. All the votes for the 4 candidates being eliminated are now allocated to the remaining candidates with the highest votes according to their second choices. Round 2 Two Winners Jack B. Nimble 57* Greta Greenwood 67* David Crockett 55 Che Guevara 46 In this case, 113 ballots were counted. Thus, the threshold is 113 X 50% plus 1 = 57. Two candidates met the threshold in round 2 and are elected. The threshold is lower because two voters did not cast any votes for candidates still in the race. Those ballots are deemed blank. Scenario A-2 Round 2 One Winner In the following example, the threshold is sti1157 and the two highest votes are counted; however, in this case, one candidate, Greta Greenwood reaches the threshold and is elected. Jack B. Nimble 55 Greta Greenwood 67* David Crockett 53 Che Guevara 48 Since one candidate is elected, the next two highest vote getters move into Round 3. Round 3 In this Round 3, all ballots are recounted, giving the highest vote cast to the candidate remaining in the election. This yields the following result: Jack B. Nimble 57 David Crocket 53 -4- At this point, the candidate with the most votes will have a majority of the votes cast and will be elected. IRV Primer Scenario A-3 In this scenario no candidate meets threshold in Round 2, above, the lowest vote getter is eliminated. The two highest rankings for the candidates remaining are counted. This yields the following results: Jack B. Nimble 55 Greta Greenwood 67 David Crockett 53 In this example Greta Greenwood is elected and Jack B. Nimble and David Crockett are recounted as Round 3, above. SCENARIO B Round 1 In this example, as in Scenario A, 115 ballots were cast with the following results after the count of the ls` and 2"d choices on each ballot: Jack B. Nimble 42 Greta Greenwood 60* David Crockett 36 Travis Thom son 15 Che Guevara 24 John Q. Adams 21 Wilbur Mills 10 Peter Romanov 22 With 115 ballots cast, i.e. 115 voters participated in this Round 1, the threshold is 115 X 50% = 57.5 plus 1 = 58. This threshold is needed to be elected. In this case Greta Greenwood is elected. The next two highest vote getters enter Round 2. Round 2 All ballots are recounted giving the highest ranking to the candidate who is still in the race. -5- Jack B. Nimble 57 David Crockett 53 IRV Primer -6- In this example, 110 ballots are cast for one of these two candidates. Thus, the threshold is 56. Jack B. Nimble wins. In all cases, the threshold will be met unless there is a tie. Ties are broken pursuant to set procedures. ORDINANCE NO. 3 Series of 2009 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING TITLE 2 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADOPTION OF A NEW CHAPTER 2.26, INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING PROCEDURES. WHEREAS, Article XX, Section 6(d) of the Colorado State Constitution grants to Home Rule municipalities the power to legislate in "all matters pertaining to municipal elections;" and WHEREAS, on September 4, 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 38, Series of 2007, to amend Sections 2.7 and 3.2 of the Aspen City Home Rule Charter to require the City Council to adopt and implement instant run-off voting procedures for the election of Mayor and members of Council, and to require members of Council to be elected by majority vote; and WHEREAS, on November 6, 2007, the electorate of the City of Aspen did approve Ordinance No. 38, Series of 2007; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has met with a number of citizens of the City of Aspen for the purpose of formulating instant run-off voting procedures and said committee of citizens has recommended the adoption of this ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Title 2 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new Chapter 2.26, Instant Runoff Voting Procedures, which Chapter shall read as follows: Chapter 2.26 INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING PROCEDURES Sec. 2.26.010 Applicability. This Chapter shall apply to all elections conducted using instant runoff voting to elect the Mayor and Councilmembers. All other provisions of the Colorado Municipal Election Code, Sections 31-10-101, et seq., C.R.S., and Section 1-7-1003, C.R.S., shall apply to the extent they are not inconsistent with this Chapter. Sec. 2.26.020 Definitions. (a) Instant runoff voting -means ranked voting for single and multiple winner contests. Instant runoff voting simulates a series of runoff elections in a single election. In each round of "instant runoff," the last place candidates with no chance of winning are eliminated. Voters for those candidates have their ballots count towards their next choice in the following round. (b) Ciry Clerk -means the City Clerk of the City of Aspen or his or her designee. Sec. 2.26.030 Adoption of a Procedure Manual. A "City of Aspen -Instant Runoff Voting Procedures Manual," appended as Exhibit A to this ordinance, is hereby adopted to implement procedures for instant runoff and choice voting elections consistent with the requirements of this Chapter. The Procedural Manual shall incorporate, to the extent not incompatible with this Chapter, the rules set forth in the latest version of the "Election Rules of the Colorado Secretary of State." Three (3) copies of the Procedure Manual, all certified to be true copies by the Mayor, and three (3) copies of the "Election Rules of the Colorado Secretary of State" shall be on file with the City Clerk and shall be open for public inspection in his or her office at City Hall, any weekday between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Sec. 2.26.040 Amendments to the Procedure Manual. The Procedures Manual may be amended from time to time by the City Clerk upon the passage of a resolution by the City Council evidencing its approval and the conduct of a public hearing. Sec. 2.26.050 Voting Tabulation Center. The City Clerk shall designate one location within the City of Aspen to serve as the Voting Tabulation Center prior to each election. The center shall be reasonably accessible to the public for the purpose of observing the vote tabulation. At a minimum, the City Clerk shall arrange the counting of ballots so that the candidates and their representatives may observe the ballots as they are counted. The City Clerk shall ensure that public observation does not interfere with the counting of the ballots. Tabulation of votes shall be conducted as described in this Chapter and the Procedure Manual referenced in Section 2.26.030. Sec. 2.26.060 Tabulation of Votes. The City Clerk shall conduct the tabulation of votes as required by this Chapter as soon as possible after the close of the polls. The City Clerk may adjourn the tabulation of votes at any time he or she believes in his or her sole discretion a need to recess the tabulation of votes, including a recess over night. No single recess period called by the City Clerk shall extend beyond 12 continuous hours. At any time the tabulation of votes is discontinued for a recess period, all ballots shall be safely secured in a combination safe. The Procedures Manual referenced at Section 2.26.030 shall include provisions to ensure the safekeeping of ballots during all recess periods. Sec. 2.26.070 Reporting Results. A. The City Clerk shall issue the following reports: (i) A summary report listing the total number of votes for each candidate in each round; (ii) A ballot image report listing for each ballot the order in which the elector ranked the candidates, the precinct of the ballot, and whether the ballot is a mail-in ballot or early voting ballot; and (iii) A comprehensive report listing the results in the summary report by precinct. B. The City Clerk maybe required to establish additional requirements for the reports issued pursuant to this Section as set forth in the Procedure Manual referenced in Section 2.26.030. C. Preliminary versions of the summary report and ballot image report shall be made available to the public as soon as possible after the commencement of the official tabulation of votes. Sec. 2.26.080 Voter Education. The City Clerk shall conduct an education and outreach campaign prior to each election to familiarize electors with ranked choice voting. Section 2: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. A public hearing on the ordinance shall beheld on the 23`d day of February, 2009 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 9`h day of February_ 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY ADOPTED and ordered published this day of 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk City of Aspen Instant Runoff Voting Procedures Manual City Clerk's Office City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 January 2009 MAYOR'S CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, as Mayor of the City of Aspen, pursuant to Section 2.26.030, of the Aspen Municipal Code, do hereby certify that this "Instant Runoff Procedures Manual" (version: February 2009) is a true and correct copy of the latest version of said Manual reviewed and approved by the City Council by Ordinance No. ,Series or 2009. Dated this _ day of By: Mayor, City of Aspen Attest City Clerk of the City of Aspen 2 1 Introduction 1.1 Background On September 4, 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 38, Series of 2007, amending Sections 2.7 and 3.2 of the Aspen City Home Rule Charter to require the City Council to adopt and implement instant runoff voting procedures for the election of Mayor and Councilmembers, and to require Councilmembers to be elected by majority vote. On November 6, 2007, the electorate of the City of Aspen did approve Ordinance No. 38, Series of 2007. On 2009, the City Council did adopt Ordinance No. _, Series of 2009, for the adoption of a new Chapter 2.26 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishing procedures for the conduct of instant runoff voting elections. That ordinance requires that the City Clerk adopt a Procedural Manual to guide the conduct of instant runoff voting elections. The City Clerk has met with a number of citizens of the City of Aspen for the purpose of formulating instant runoff voting procedures and said committee of citizens has assisted in the development of this manual of procedural guidelines for conducting elections using instant runoff voting methods for the election of Mayor and Councilmembers for the City of Aspen. 1.2 Instant Runoff Voting Instant runoff voting (IRV) is used for both single and multiple seat contests. In Aspen, IRV is used to select the office of Mayor and Councilmembers. IRV is a majoritarian voting method because, in the end, over 50% of participating voters elect the winner. IRV simulates a series of runoff elections in a single election. 1.3 Voter Intent. The City of Aspen hereby adopts and incorporates herein the Voter Intent - A Guide to the Determination of Voter Intent for Colorado Elections (2008), adopted by the Colorado Secretary of State (hereinafter "State Voter Intent Guide"), attached hereto as Attachment 3. 2 Definitions. To the extent not contrary to the definitions set forth in the State Voter Intent Guide, Attachment 3 ,the following definitions shall apply to this document: Blank ballot - Blank ballots shall also include ballots that cast no vote for a continuing candidate. (See, also, "Undervote', Attachment 1.) City Clerk -means the City Clerk of the City of Aspen or his or her designee. 3 Continuing candidate - means a candidate who has not been eliminated. Damaged ballot - means a ballot that has been torn, bent, or otherwise mutilated or rendered unreadable, so that it cannot be processed by an optical scanner ballot reader. Duplicated ballot - means a true copy of a ballot that is made in order to be properly processed and counted due to damage, improper marking or some other reason which would prevent a ballot tabulating machine from accurately reading the ballot (if such a machine is used.) Defective ranking - means a ballot in which more than one candidate is given the same ranking. (See "Defective Ranking", Attachment 1.) Duplicate ranking -describes the process by which a voter ranks the same candidate at multiple rankings. (See "Duplicate Ranking", Attachment 1.) Exhausted ballot- means a ballot that cannot be counted for a lower ranked candidate because the next rankings are blank or there is more than one candidate given the next ranking. (See "Exhausted Ballot", Attachment 1.) Majority - as used in the mayoral election, shall mean the next whole number greater than fifty percent (SO%) of the votes cast. Overvote - describes a race or ballot which contains votes for more than the maximum number of candidates or responses for a ballot measure allowed. (See "Overvote", Attachment 1.) Tabulation center -means the place selected where a central count electronic voting system is used for the automatic or hand processing and tabulation of ballots. Ranked-choice voting - means a method of casting and tabulating votes that allows electors to rank candidates for an office in order of preference and uses these preferences to determine the winner of the election. Round - means a stage of the tabulation of a ranked voting contest in which votes may be counted, and candidates elected or eliminated. Skipped ranking -describes the process by which a voter leaves a ranking blank and ranks a candidate at a subsequent ranking. (See "Skipped Ranking", Attachment 1.) 4 Threshold -means the minimum number of votes that a candidate must receive in order to be elected to the City Council. The threshold amount may change as voting continues. See 6.2.1, below. Undervote -means the occurrence when the voter does not vote for a candidate in a race, or for or against a ballot measure, or, when more than one person in a race is available, the voter does not vote the maximum number of votes allowed. Write-in Vote - means a vote on a ballot on which the voter physically writes in the name of a legally qualified write-in candidate in the space reserved on the ballot for write-in votes and properly marks the oval or connects the arrow on optical scan ballots according to the directions provided to the voter. 3 Ballots 3.1 Ballot Format. Ballots shall be designed to allow a voter to rank as many choices as there are candidates. Ballots shall be designed to allow the voter to rank no fewer than two write-in candidates. 3.2 Ballot Instructions All ballots shall include instructions to voters that substantially instruct voters as follows: INSTRUCTIONS: Mark your first choice in the first column by completely filling in the oval next to your choice, as shown in the picture. To indicate a second choice, select a different candidate in the second column. To indicate a third choice, select a different candidate in the third column. Proceed in the same manner to rank all of your choices in the order of your preference. 1. Rank candidates in order of preference. 2. You may rank as few candidates as you wish or as many as are allowed. 3. Do not skip rankings. 4. Do not give the same ranking to more than one candidate. 5. Do not rank the same candidate more than once. (See Example Ballot, Attachment 2.) 5 3.3 Uniformity across ballot types If more than one type of voting equipment or ballot will be used in a ranked voting contest, all equipment and ballot types used shall provide substantially similar instructions and shall allow voters to rank the same number of candidates and write-ins. 4 General Tabulation Provisions 4.1 Determination of winners To determine the winners of a ranked voting contest, the tabulation method of Section 5 or Section 6 shall be used, depending on whether the number of seats to fill is one or more than one, respectively. 4.2 Summary reports The City Clerk shall issue the following reports as soon as feasible: (i) A summary report listing the total number of votes for each candidate in each round; (ii) A comprehensive report listing the results in the summary report by precinct. Preliminary versions of the summary report shall be made available to the public as soon as possible after the commencement of the official tabulation of votes. Preliminary reports shall be clearly marked as "Preliminary." 4.5 Publicizing tabulation procedures In advance of the election, the City Clerk shall conduct an education and outreach campaign prior to each election to familiarize electors with ranked choice voting. The education and outreach program shall include sample ballots. 5 Instant Runoff Voting - Sinsle Seat Contest (Ranked Choice) 5.1 OVERVIEW Instant Runoff voting for Mayor is a majoritarian voting method using ranked choice voting designed to accommodate more than two candidates seeking the office of the mayor. Each voter may rank candidates by preference from first choice to last choice. All ballots are counted. Votes are tabulated in rounds until one candidate has a majority of the votes cast. That candidate shall be declared the winner. 6 It should be noted that as in any election there is a mathematical possibility, albeit slight, that voting could be completed following all rounds of voting with two or more candidates tied without achieving a majority. A tie break system is set forth in Section 5.2.4, below. 5.2 TABULATION OF VOTES FOR MAYOR 5.2.1. Round One, Initial Tabulation of Votes In the initial ballot tabulation, all first ranked votes that are cast shall be counted for the candidate who received that vote. If a candidate receives a majority of all of the first ranked votes cast in the election, then that candidate shall be declared the winner. In the event that no candidate receives a majority of the first ranked votes cast, then the instant runoff procedure set forth below shall be commenced. 5.2.2 Commencement Of Instant Runoff Vote Round Two In the event that no candidate receives a majority of the total of the first ranked votes, then the two candidates with the highest vote total shall enter the instant runoff tabulation. In the event that the lowest vote total of the candidate that would enter the instant runoff tabulation is tied between or among two or more candidates, then all candidates with that vote total shall enter the instant runoff tabulation. (In the unlikely event that the number of candidates in the second position equal the remaining number of candidates, then the tie break procedure shall be employed so that only two candidates move forward into this round.) In this Round Two tabulation, all ballots shall be recounted giving the highest ranked vote for a continuing candidate to that candidate.. By way of example, if a ballot contains a first ranked vote for candidate A, a second ranked vote for candidate B, a third ranked vote for candidate C and a fourth ranked vote for candidate D, but candidates A and B are not in the runoff because of the failure to be one of the top two vote getters in a preceding round, then the third ranked vote for candidate C shall be counted. Following a count of all the ballots, the candidate who receives the most votes shall be declared the winner. In the event there were three or more candidates in this round due to a tie in the initial tabulation, the candidate with the most votes shall be declared the winner, so long as the candidate has received a majority of the votes cast in this round. In the event that the candidate who has received the most votes does not have a majority, then the candidates with the two highest vote totals shall enter Round Three. In the event of a tie between the two candidates with the second highest vote totals, then the tie- breakprocedure set forth below shall be used so that only two candidates enter Round Three. Round Three In the event that no candidate receives a majority in Round Two, then the two candidates with the highest vote total shall proceed into this Round Three. The counting procedure shall remain the same for Round Three as in Round Two. After completion of the tabulation in Round Three, the candidate with the most votes shall be declared the winner and the election shall be completed. 5.2.4 Determination of Tie Votes. In the event that a tie exists at any level of the proceeding that would prevent moving forward without a resolution of the tie, the tie shall be resolved pursuant to this section. The first tie-breaker shall be based upon the number first ranked votes, with the candidate with the largest number of first ranked votes being determined the winner of the tie breaker. In the event that number shall be tied, then the winner shall be determined by lot pursuant to Colorado State Statute, C.R.S. Section 31-10-1204, 6 Instant Runoff Votine -Multiple Seat Contest (Ranked Choice) See Alternatives attached. 7 Tabulation Center. The City Clerk shall designate one location within the City of Aspen to serve as the ranked- choice voting tabulation center prior to each election. The center shall be reasonably accessible to the public for the purpose of observing the vote tabulation. At a minimum, the City Clerk shall arrange the counting of ballots so that the candidates and their representatives may observe the ballots as they are counted. The City Clerk shall ensure that public observation does not interfere with the counting of the ballots. 8 Miscellaneous Tabulation Provisions. 8.1 General Provisions. This section shall apply only to ranked voting contests tabulated by hand or computer. 8 8.2 Uniform Counting Standards. Pursuant to Section 1-7309, C.R.S., in counting or examining ballots the intent of the voter shall be taken into consideration. To the extent not contrary to the rules set forth in the State Voter Intent Guide, Attachment 3, the following rules shall apply: a. When a defective ranking is encountered during the tabulation the column containing the defective ranking shall be deemed an overvote. No votes in that ranking column nor any vote in a subsequent ranking column shall be counted and the ballot is deemed blank at that point. b. When a duplicate ranking is encountered, the first ranking and any ranking before the duplication shall be counted. No further rankings on the ballot shall be counted. 8.3 Ballots not Counted. Ballots not counted because of election judges' inability to determine the elector's intent for all candidates shall be marked "defective' on the back, banded together and separated from the other ballots, returned to the ballot box, and preserved by the City Clerk pursuant to Section 1- 7-801, C.R.S. 8.4 Recounts Recount shall be permitted in accordance with state laws and conducted in accordance with the rules set forth in the latest version of the "Election Rules of the Colorado Secretary of State." 9 Chaneesto Procedures The City Clerk may change the procedures described in this document to accommodate any voting equipment that may be available for processing votes or for tabulating votes, provided that the new procedures are insubstantial compliance with the procedures described here, the smallest feasible number of changes is made, and the changes to the tabulation procedures are made public in accordance with this document. 10 Recess in Tabulations. The City Clerk may in his or her sole discretion call for a recess in the tabulation of ballots for a period of no more than twelve (12) hours, including a period of time to include over night. In 9 the event that the City Clerk calls for a recess all ballots shall be secured during the period of the recess. The process of securing the ballots shall include the following: a. The City Clerk shall place all ballots in a combination safe capable of protecting the ballots from theft, fire, and water damage. b. The combination to the safe shall be known only to the City Clerk, the Chief of Police and the Finance Director. c. Each time the ballots are placed in the safe or taken out of the safe, at least two witnesses shall be present and shall sign the following statement under oath: I, the undersigned, do swear, under penalty of law, that I witnessed (remove/place) all of the ballots (into/out) of a combination safe on this day of at approximately o'clock _.m. and securely locked the same in my presence (with the ballots inside the combination safe/after removing all of the ballots.) Witness 10 Instant Runoff Alternative One Two Votes Counted -Batch Elimination 6.1 OVERVIEW Instant Runoff voting for City Council is also a majoritarian voting method using ranked choice voting designed to accommodate multiple candidates seeking two open seats. If necessary, the ballots are counted in a series of rounds. Each voter may rank candidates by preference from first choice to last choice. All ballots are counted. Votes are tabulated in Rounds until two candidates who have the most votes also receive the threshold number of votes to be declared the winner. It should be noted that as in any election there is a mathematical possibility, albeit slight, that voting could be completed following all rounds of voting with two or more candidates tied without achieving the threshold. A tie-break system that is consistent with Colorado State Statute is set forth herein. 6.2 TABULATION OF VOTES FOR CITY COUNCIL 6.2.1 Commencement of Tabulation/Threshold Calculation 6.2.1 a. Initial Threshold. At the commencement of the vote tabulation, the City Clerk shall certify the total number of votes cast for City Council and the number required to be elected to a seat on the City Council, which by Charter is defined as fifty percent (50%) of the total ballots casts for city council plus one vote. All ballots with a counted first (1~`) or second (2"d) ranking for a candidate for City Council shall be counted in the total number of votes cast. Blank ballots for City Council shall not be counted in this total. By way of example, if 2000 ballots are cast in the election, including four blank ballots for City Council, then a candidate will need the highest number or second highest number of votes of all the candidates and at least 999 votes in order to be deemed a winner of a council seat. (((2000-4) +2) + 1 = 999). This number shall be referred to below as the "initial threshold". 6.2.1 b. Instant Runoff Thresholds. If the instant runoff is necessary, the threshold shall be recalculated for each Round of the Instant Runoff. The Clerk shall count all of the ballots that cast a vote for any candidate who is remaining in the Instant Runoff. If a ballot does not cast a vote in the appropriate rounds for any candidate remaining in the Instant Runoff that ballot shall be deemed a blank ballot. Blank ballots for shall not be counted in this threshold total. By way of example, if 2000 votes were cast in the election with four blank votes for City Council, then the threshold is 999, asset forth above. If after the initial tabulation, 6 additional ballots did not rank any of the remaining candidates for the round being counted, those ballots shall also be deemed blank. Thus, the threshold would be 996. (((2000-4-6)+2) + 1= 996). 6.2.1 c. Miscellaneous Threshold Rules. In the event that the number of ballots cast is odd, fifty percent is a fraction. The next whole number shall be deemed the threshold. By way of example. If 2000 votes are cast and five are deemed blank ballots the threshold shall be 998. ((2000-5) =2 = 997.5. The next whole number is 998.) 6.2.2. Round One -Initial Tabulation of Votes All votes cast for first and second ranked candidates shall be counted in Round One, the initial ballot tabulation. The two candidates who receive the most votes among the first and second ranked votes casts shall be declared the winners, so long as the candidate has received the initial threshold determined by the Clerk pursuant to 6.2.1.a., above. In the event that the two candidates who have received the most votes have both reached the initial threshold in the Round One ballot tabulation, then both candidates shall be declared winners and the election shall be deemed completed. In the event that one or more of the candidates who have received the highest vote total in the initial tabulation have not reached the initial threshold, then the instant runoff voting procedures set forth below shall commence. 6.2.3 Commencement of Instant Runoff Vote Instant Runoff Vote shall be conducted under the following circumstances: 1. The candidate with the most votes does not achieve the initial threshold, thus, no candidate is elected in Round One, the initial vote tabulation (See, 6.2.3. a., below.); 2. The candidate with the most votes reaches the initial threshold but the candidate with the next highest vote does not reach the initial threshold; thus, only one candidate is elected in Round One, the initial vote tabulation (See 6.2.3. b., below); 3. The candidate with the most votes achieves the initial threshold, but two candidates with an equal number of votes also achieve the initial threshold, thus, only the one candidate who has the most votes is elected in Round One, the initial vote tabulation (See 6.2.3. c., below); 4. Three candidates achieve the initial threshold but all three have an equal number of votes in the initial tabulation, thus, no candidate is elected in Round One, the initial vote tabulation (See 6.2.3. c., below). 6.2.3. a. Procedure If No Candidate Receives the Initial Threshold in Round One In the event that no candidate receives the initial threshold set forth above, and there are more than four candidates in the election, the following instant runoff procedure shall be implemented: Round Two In the event that no candidate receives the initial threshold in Round One, then the four candidates with the highest vote total shall enter Round Two. In the event that the lowest vote total of the candidates who would enter the instant runoff tabulation is tied, then all candidates with that vote total shall enter the instant runoff tabulation. (In the unlikely event that the number of candidates in the fourth position equal the remaining number of candidates, then the tie break procedure set forth in Section 6.2.4, below, shall be employed so that only one of the candidates with the lowest vote total moves forward into this round.) In this Round Two tabulation, all ballots shall be recounted giving the two highest ranked votes to those candidates who remain in the runoff. By way of example, if a ballot contains a first ranked vote for candidate A, a second ranked vote for candidate e, a third ranked vote for candidate C and a fourth ranked vote for candidate D, but candidates A and C are not in the runoff because of the failure to be one of the top four vote getters in Round One, candidate B and D each receive one vote. In this example if A, 8 and C have been eliminated then Candidate D receives one vote and the candidate ranked fifth receives a vote. Following a count of all the ballots, the two candidates who receive the most votes shall be declared the winners, so long as the candidate has received the threshold determined by the Clerk pursuant to 6.2.1.b., above. In the event that both of the two candidates who have received the most votes have reached the threshold in this Round Two, then both candidates shall be declared winners and the election shall be deemed completed. In the event that one or more of the candidates who have received the highest vote total in this Round Two have not reached the threshold, then Round Three shall be commenced. Round Three a. Round Three -Three Candidates. In the event that no candidate receives the threshold set forth above for Round Two of the instant runoff tabulation, then the candidate with the least highest vote total shall be eliminated. In Round Three, if three candidates remain, the votes shall be counted so that the two highest rankings shall be counted. By way of example, if a ballot contains a first ranked vote for candidate A, a second ranked vote for candidate B, a third ranked vote for candidate C and a fourth ranked vote for candidate D, but candidates A and B have been eliminated, then candidates C and D each receive a vote. After completion of the tabulation in Round Three, if the candidate or candidates with the most votes receive the threshold calculated for this Round Three, then that candidate or those candidates shall be deemed the winner or winners. If the two candidates with the highest votes both achieve the threshold, then both shall be deemed the winners and the election shall be completed. If the candidate with the second highest vote total does not achieve the threshold for this Round Three, then the two remaining candidates shall enter Round Four. b. Round Three -Two Candidates. In the event that one candidate achieves the threshold set forth in paragraph 6.2.i.b., above, in Round Two of the instant runoff tabulation, then the two candidates with the next highest vote totals shall enter Round Three of the instant runoff tabulation. In the event that the lowest vote total of these positions is tied, then all candidates with that vote total shall enter the instant runoff tabulation. In this Round Three only the highest ranked vote for a candidate still in Round Three shall be counted. By way of example, if candidates A and B are the only candidates remaining in the Round and an elector ranked A as his or her third choice and B as the fourth choice, then A shall receive a vote. The candidate who receives the highest number of votes and achieves the threshold shall be declared the winner of this tabulation and the election shall be deemed completed. If there were more than two candidates in this Round Three, due to a previous tie, if no one is elected in this Round Three, the candidate with the lowest total shall be eliminated and the counting procedure with the recipients of the two highest vote totals shall be conducted in Round Four. In the event of a tie vote between the final two remaining candidates, then the winner shall be determined pursuant to paragraph 6.2.4, below. Round Four If a fourth or fifth round is required, the same procedure shall be utilized until the candidate with the highest vote total achieves the threshold set forth for that round. 6.2.3. b. Procedure If One Candidate Is Elected In Round One In the event that the candidate who receives the most votes also receives the initial threshold in Round One, the initial vote tabulation, then that candidate shall be deemed the winner of one city council seat. The two candidates with the next highest vote totals shall enter the instant runoff tabulation. In the event that the lowest vote total of these two positions is tied, then all candidates with that vote total shall enter Round Two. The voting procedure set forth in Section 6.2.3.a., Round Three -Two Candidates, above shall continue until the candidate with the highest vote total achieves the threshold for this instant runoff round. That candidate shall be declared the winner of the second council seat. In this case, a third round or subsequent round of voting would only be required in the event that there was a tie between or among one or more candidates with the lowest vote total needed to move on from one round to another. In the event of a tie vote between the final two remaining candidates, then the winner shall be determined pursuant to Section 6.2.4., below. 6.2.3. c. Procedure If Three Candidates Achieve Threshold In Initial Vote Tabulation but All Have Received An Equal Number Of Votes or the Two Candidates with the Lowest Vote Totals have an Equal Number of Votes. Round Two -Three Candidates In the event that three candidates have received the threshold but all three have received an equal number of votes in the initial tabulation (Round One, above) then Round Two shall be conducted among the three candidates, with the two highest ranked votes on all ballots counted. Since all candidates met the initial threshold, the two candidates with the highest vote totals in this Round shall be elected. In the event of a tie between the two lowest vote getters, then the Candidate with the highest vote total shall be deemed elected. The two remaining candidates shall enter Round Three. Round Two -Two Candidates In the event that three candidates reach the threshold with the candidates with the lower vote total tied, the candidate with the highest vote total shall be deemed the winner. The two other candidates shall enter Round Two, where all votes are recounted with the highest ranked vote for these two remaining candidates counted. If after this count the vote is still tied, then the tie break procedure set forth in Section 6.2.4 below shall determine the winner. Round Three. If a Round Three is required due to tie in Round Two -Three Candidates, the procedure set forth for Round Two -Two Candidates shall be conducted. 6.2.4. Determination of Tie Votes. In the event that a tie exists at any level of the proceeding that would prevent moving forward without a resolution of the tie, the tie shall be resolved pursuant to this section. The first tie-breaker shall be based upon the number first ranked votes, with the candidate with the largest number of first ranked votes being determined the winner of the tie breaker. In the event that that number shall be tied, then the winner shall be determined by lot pursuant to Colorado State Statute, C.R.S. Section 31-10-1204. Instant Runoff Alternative Two One Vote Counted -Sequential Elimination 6.1 OVERVIEW Instant Runoff voting for City Council is also a majoritarian voting method using ranked choice voting designed to accommodate multiple candidates seeking two open seats. The ballots are counted in two consecutive instant runoff voting elections. Each voter may rank candidates by preference from first choice to last choice. Using the rules set forth herein, the first seat is elected. A second instant runoff voting tally is held to elect the second seat, following the procedures detailed below. 6.2 THRESHOLD. 6.2.1 a. Initial Threshold. At the commencement of the vote tabulation, the City Clerk shall certify the total number of votes cast for City Council and the number required to be elected to a seat on the City Council, which by Charter is defined as fifty percent (50%) of the total ballots casts for city council plus one vote. All ballots with a counted first (1St) ranking for a candidate for, City Council shall be counted in the total number of votes cast. Blank ballots for City Council shall not be counted in this total. By way of example, if 2000 ballots are cast in the election, including four blank ballots for City Council, then a candidate will need the highest number or second highest number of votes of all the candidates and at least 999 votes in order to be deemed a winner of a council seat. (((2000-4) +2) + 1 = 999). This number shall be referred to below as the "initial threshold". 6.2.1 b. Subsequent Rounds. The threshold shall be recalculated for each Round of the tabulation. The Clerk shall count all of the ballots that cast a vote for any candidate who is remaining in a round. If a ballot does not cast a vote for any candidate remaining in a round that ballot shall be deemed a blank ballot. Blank ballots for shall not be counted in this threshold total. By way of example, if 2000 votes were cast in the election with four blank votes for City Council, then the threshold is 999, as set forth above. If after the initial tabulation, 6 additional ballots did not rank any of the remaining candidates for the round being counted, those ballots shall also be deemed blank. Thus, the threshold would be 996. (((2000-4-6) 2) + 1 = 996). 6.2.1 c. Miscellaneous Threshold Rules. In the event that the number of ballots cast is odd, fifty percent is a fraction. The next whole number shall be deemed the threshold. By way of example. If 2000 votes are cast and five are deemed blank ballots the threshold shall be 998. ((2000-5) =2 = 997.5. The next whole number is 998.) 6.3 TABULATION OF VOTES FOR FIRST COUNCIL SEAT All first choice rankings that are cast shall be counted as one vote for the candidate who received that vote. The candidate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated, and all ballots are recounted as one vote for each voter's highest-ranked continuing candidate. This process of eliminating last-place candidates and recounting ballots continues until one candidate has reached the threshold set forth herein. In the event that there are two or more candidates with the lowest vote total, all such candidates shall be eliminated, so long as the tabulation can continue. In the event such tie leaves only one candidate continuing but such candidate has not reached the threshold, then the tie must be resolved pursuant to the tie breaker set forth below so that at least two candidates continue. The candidate who reaches the threshold set forth herein shall be deemed elected to one City Council seat. The tabulation shall then continue to determine the winner of the second City Council seat, as set forth below. 6.4 TABULATION OF VOTES FOR SECOND COUNCIL SEAT Upon determining the winner of the first city council seat, the winner of the first seat is eliminated and any ballot with that candidate ranked first shall be counted as a first choice ranking for the candidate ranked second on the ballot. All first choice rankings then are counted as one vote for the candidate who received that vote. The candidate with the fewest number of votes is eliminated, and all ballots are recounted as one vote for each voter's highest-ranked continuing candidate. This process of eliminating last- place candidates and recounting ballots continues until one candidate receives the threshold set forth herein. The candidate who reaches the threshold set forth herein shall be deemed elected to the second City Council seat and the election shall be completed. 6.5 DETERMINATION OF TIE VOTES. In the event that a tie exists at any level of the proceeding that would prevent moving forward without a resolution of the tie, the tie shall be resolved pursuant to this section. The first tie-breaker shall be based upon the number of first choice rankings, with the candidate with the largest number of first choice rankings being determined the winner of the tie breaker. In the event that that number shall be tied, then the winner shall be determined by lot pursuant to Colorado State Statute, C.R.S. Section 31-10-1204. Quick Reference Guide Voter Intent Definitions [Bute 27.1] Blank ballot: A ballot on which the voter has made no marks in any voting position, of a ballot that has been marked with an unreadable marker, or a ballot that has been consistently marked outside the area thaf an optical scanner can read Damaged ballot: A ballot that cannot be processed because it has been tom, bent, otherwise mutilated, or rendered umeadable. Overvote: A race or ballot measure which watains votes for more than the maximum number of candidates or responses for a ballot measure provided. Undervote: Occurs when the voter does not vote for any candidate or ballot selection; or, when more than one person in a race is available, the voter does not vote the maximum number of selections allowed. Target Area [Rule 21.1.8] The target area is the oval, square, or incomplete arrow opposite a candidate's name or ballot response. All votes wiYLin the target area will be considered valid and will count, so long as the voter has not overvoted of made an obvious stray mark. Determination of Voter Iutent [Rule 27.7] Elections officials may only consider voter intent in three situations: (1) when a county is hand-counting paper ballots; (2) duringl~a~rlecount ofvotes cast for any voting system; and,. (3). ~aapc ballot, an overvopte~~a~lot~, of contaains igne o more vbi~iite din votes~on board m a antral location to detemvne if a ballot is a Defective or Incomplete Marks [Rule 27.7] A defective or incomplete mark ba any ballot is a proper place should be counted if no other cross mark appears oa Ure ballot indicating an inten- tion to vote for some other candidate or ballot issue. Exceptions where defective or incomplete mazks should not be counted: (]) obvious stray mazks (2) hesitant marks (3) parts of written notes (4) corrected votes If a voter marks outside the targeted area, their vote may only be considered valid if the voter ores a consistent pattern or method of marking. In order to count mazkings outside the target area, the markings must follow the same pattern of method Inconsistent mazks throughout the ballot that aze outside of the target area must not be counted. If the voter displays inconsistent marks outside the target area only the voter's responses when the target area is mazked maybe counted. A ballot containing incorrect but consistent mazidngs must be duplicated for counting purposes when ballots ere counted by optical scanning equipment. A voter who marks their votes correctly in the target area, but extends markings into another target area has made valid markings, and their seleo- lions should be counted as votes for the clearly indicated candidate or ballot response mazked. A defective or an incomplete mark on any ballot in the tazget area may be counted if no other mark is on the ballot indicating the voter's intent Voter Inteut Guide For examples and illustrations of voter intentandwrite-in candidate issues, please see the 2008 Vokr Iutent Guide. P48 Overvotes [Rules 27.1 & 27.7] No overvote may be counted unless the voter corrects the marks by providing an explanation of his or her desired choice. If a voter provides instmo- tions correcting thew vote, the wrrected vote is valid. If ballots are counted using an optical scan machine, overvoted races are rejected by the voting system. Voter intent should not be considered upon initial count and the ballot should not be duplicated, unless the ballot is being reviewed by a resolution board at a central count location. If voter has marked more than one choice the voter's intent may still be determined. If a voter mazks more than one choice but crosses out or strikes one of the choices, then the second choice, or the choice that has not been crossed out or stricken should be counted as a valid vote. ):n every sitva- tioq if the intent of the voter cannot be determined then the vote must not be counted. If a voter coaects a vote and provides written instructions as to their intent, then the selection should be counted as the voter instructed Written instructions may include but are no4limited W words, circles, arrows, or striking out a candidate's name. Determination of Improperly Marked Ballots [C.RS. §I-7-508] No ballot may be counted unless it has the official endorsement required. If election judges aze unable to determine a voter's intent for all of the selections on the ballot then the ballot is defective. 'lire ballot must be mazked "defective" on the back, banded together, separated from other ballots and preserved. Duplication of Ballots [Role 27.6] If any ballot is damaged or defective so that it cannot be properly counted by the electronic vote-wonting equipment, a true duplicate copy mw-t be made of the damaged ballot so long as the voter's intent is cleaz. The duplication of a ballot must be made is the preseaw of two judges. Using the damaged ballot as the guide a blank ballot should be mazked by a duplicating team so that the votes recorded are identical to those indicated on the damaged ballot After the duplicate ballot is marked it must be proofed to insure that it is marked properly and accurately. The duplicate ballot should then be substituted for the damaged ballot Every duplicate ballot must be cleazly labeled as a duplicate. The damaged or unreadable original ballot must be mazked "DUPLICATED" to indicate that the ballot has been duplicated and the duplication is wmpleted Both the duplicate and the original ballot must beaz the same serial number. The serial number is a unique number assigned to both the original and the duplicate. This will reference the ballots together and provide an audit trail. Once marked, the duplicate ballot must be placed with all other ballots to be counted All duplicated original ballots aze to be placed in an envelope and clearly marked "BALLOTS THAT HAVE SEEN DUPLI- CATED." R'rite-In Votes sad Voter Ioteot [C.RS. §§1-7-114,1-4-1101, Rules 27.1.9 & 27.7.4] A write-in vote is when the voter physically writes in the name of a legally qualified write-in candidate in the span reserved on the ballot forwrite- in votes and properly marks the oval, square, or wnnects the arrow on optical scan ballots acwrding to the directions provided to the voter. If a voter designates a vote for a candidate named oa the ballot and then writes in the name of the same candidate is the vmte-in area the vote must be wonted as a vote for the candidate named oa the ballot If a voter fails to complete the tazgeted azea but does write i¢ the name of a qualified candidate the write-in vote is counted when mounting is wn- ; ducted by hand and/or during shy remount If a voter designates a named candidate on the ballot and writes is the name of a different candidate is the write-in area, the vote is an overvote for that office so long as the number of chosen candidates exceeds the number permitted th be voted for in that office. If a voter has overvoted no vote for that office may wont Votes for a vrzite-ia candidate may only be counted when a voter selects an eligible write-in candidate. In order for a tvrife-in candidate to be eligi- ble, the candidate must fill out an affidavit of intent of write-in candidacy. A voter must write the last name of en eligible write-ia candidate is order for their selection to wont If the voter incorrectly spells the write-in candidate's name, the vote may still wont if the voter's intent m vote for an eligible write in candidate is cleaz. A voter that writes only the first name or nickname of an eligrble candidate has failed to make a valid selection. Questions? Contact the Elections Division Customer Support 888-271-2007 elections(rdsos.state. co. us Revised October 2008 Voter Intent A GUIDE TO THE DETERMINATION OF VOTER INTENT FOR COLORADO ELECTIONS Published by Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman 2008 DETERMINATION OF VOTER INTENT This Guide is intended to assist election officials and election judges with determining the intent of a voter when such intent may not be immediately cleaz. It supplements and illustrates the legal requirements for determining voter intent that aze contained in Election Rule 27, "Rules Concerning Uniform Ballot Counting Standazds". Although it is intended that this Guide be consistent with Rule 27, in the event of a conflict between this Guide and Rule 27, the requirements of Rule 27 must be followed. This guide provides instructions for a variety of different scenarios, but there is no way to address every situation that may arise. Therefore, election officials are strongly encouraged to refer to Rule 27 when deciding how and when to determine a voter's intent. When to Review Voter Intent It is very important to remember that election officials only consider voter intent in three situations: 1) when a county is hand-counting paper ballots; 2) during a recount of votes cast for any voting system; and, 3) when ballots are being examined by the resolution board in a central location to determine if a ballot is a blank ballot, an overvoted ballot, or contains one or more write-in votes. Under Colorado law and Secretary of State Rules, voter interit should not be reviewed or considered during the initial count of ballots for those counties using polling place optical scan equipment. Please refer to Rule 27 for more information. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Chapter 1: Target Area. a. Obvious Stray Marks b. Hesitant Marks c. Parts of Written Notes d. Corrected Vote 2. Chapter 2: Consistent Patterns ............................... 3. Chapter 3: Overvotes and Corrected Votes .......... 4. Chapter 4: Written Instructions ............................. 5. Chapter 5: Write-In Candidates ............................. -2- Elections Division Colorado Secretary of State's Office ................................... 3 .............................................. 122 ................................................ 16 .............................................. 188 Approved October 2008 Chapter 1 Target Area The Target Area is the oval, square, or incomplete arrow opposite a candidate's name or ballot response. Example 1: TazQet Areas aze Circled: STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 6rOtq Q andy L. Baumgardner Daniel L. Korkowsld All votes within the target area will be considered valid and will count provided there are not more votes than the maximum number of candidates or responses for a ballot measure allowed (see Chapter 4). Example 2: Valid Tazeet Area Mazlcines: STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (VaebrONq Randy L. Baumgardner Q Daniel L. KaHwwsld STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (Vale ror oNEI O Randy L. Baumgardner Daniel L. Korkowski 3- Elections Division Colorado Secretary of State's Office Approved October 2008 A defective or incomplete mark on any ballot in a proper place should be counted if no other cross mark appears on the ballot indicating an intention to vote for some other candidate or ballot issue. Example 3: Incomplete Marks that Count as a Valid Vote: ~ Joyce Foster Alice Borodkin « STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (Vote for ONE) Q Randy L. Baumgardner Q Daniel L. Korkowski Exceptions Marks made in the target area are not counted as valid votes if one or more of the following apply: a. Obvious stray marks b. Hesitant marks c. Parts of written notes d. Corrected vote (see Chapter 3) -4- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office a. Obvious stray marks The mazk neaz Joyce Foster's name is a stray mazk that should not be counted. Even though it partially extends into the tazget azea of the candidate, it is not primarily concentrated in that azea. The same is true of the mazk neaz Catherine "Kit" Roupe's name. Because the mazk is considered stray, it is not counted. Example 4: Obvious Strav Mazks Outside the Tazeet Area: Joyce Foster Alice Borodkin Example 5: Obvious Strav Mazks Throueh the Tazeet Area: Both aze examples of stray mazks and should not be counted, even though they extend through the tazget azeas. -5- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 6: Stray Mazks Extending Outside TazQet Area -Into Another Tazeet Area: While the mazk extends outside the tazget azea of one candidate and into another tazget azea, it cleazly indicates a preference for one candidate. This ballot would be counted as a vote for Sheila Anne Hicks. Cetherine'fGP Sheila Anne Flicks Example 7: Candidate's Name Stricken: In this example, the voter has stricken the name of candidate Catherine "Kit" Roupe. Part of this mazk extends into the tazget azea, but it is considered a stray mark and no vote is counted for the candidate. This would be considered an undervote. I Q'~OAD9YP9' I ~ Sheila Anne Fkcks b. Hesitant Marks Example S: Hesitant Marks: While there is a mark in the tazget azea for both candidates; the smaller mazk seems the result of a hesitation and can be disregazded. This ballot would count as a vote for Catherine "Kit" Roupe. The same is true of the second ballot, which represents a vote for Joyce Foster. Calherine'iGl' Roupe Sheba Anne Fkcks Joyce Foster Alice Borodkin ~- 6- Elections Division Colorado Secretary of State's Office Approved October 2008 G Parts of Written Notes Example 9: Notes Written Outside the Tazeet Area: The mazks on this ballot that extend into the target azeas aze part of written notes. ' None of the written remazks would be considered a valid vote for Joyce Foster. Example 10: Mazks Inside the Tazget Area as Written Comments; The mazlcs that extend into the target azeas aze parts of written comments on the ballot. This should not be counted as a vote for Randy L. Baumgazdner. STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (V e ar O ) ~~~dy L. Baumgardner Daniei L. Korkowski Example 11: Mazks Outside the TazQet Area as Written Instructions: In this example, a vote would be counted for Sheila Anne Hicks. d. Corrected Vote Please see Chapter 3 for an explanation and examples of this exception. -~- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Chapter 2 i Consistent Patterns If a voter marks outside the target area, those votes shall be considered valid if the voter uses a consistent pattern or method of marking. All marks must follow the same pattern or method. Example 1(a): Consistent Mazkine Patterns Outside the Tazeet Area: ~1A~A F~mndina~ y Jame E JoMson, Jr. ~ y Rpnp~nhlly~ klp '" i:nm:a.iemdo a - , „I'Mbae/VSR.~ . __ Amm L McGe~on ~ y STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 rv~~a+v andy L. Balmtgar. ne Daniel L. Korlrowski - DISTRICTATTORNEY v 141h JUDICIAL DISTRICT N~ b of~l lizabeth Oldham COUNTYCOMMISSIONER - 615TRICT 1 Na+k~GNE) om ra COUNTYCOMMISSIONER -DISTRICT 2 N~~o~ aetl F. Tayyar Example l(b): Consistent Mazking Outside the Taz eg t Area: The voter used a consistent set of mazks throughout the ballot. Even though the mazks do not fall within the tazget azea, each ballot would count as a valid vote for Jeanne Labuda, James E. Johnson, Jr., and Anne L. McGihon. 022 a ~ ~' ' to del Estero _ (voeta_parvoka«Unoj_ Mark Ferrandino ~ ay __ ames E. Johnson, Jr. ~ ly tatsRaprasaritaHve ~Yrlet'3 ", ~ ~~ . •-~:: a dal Edado tfM 3 ' Nile krOre rYde por lhwl L. McGihon ~ y Elections Division Colorado Secretary of State's Office tat4 RepSesen abler 1: . ;,, _ ~! , _ .. fate Rep ` .,~~ ~ ", <: taro del Estado `. ..~ ~ (Vole tar one r vote pa thnj Mark Ferrandlno ~ ~ James E. Johnson, Jr. ~ y tat4 Represartatlve `' " 3 °': ~ del Eetede i 9 , ' (Vde IorOrie IVOIe pd.Ihw) ^ v Anne L. McGihon • a>• 8- Approved October 2008 Example 1(c): Consistent Mazkine Outside the Taz2et Area: In this example, the voter has made the same mazk throughout the ballot that falls outside the target azeas. Because the mazks aze all the same, all the votes on this ballot are valid. However, if the voter marks ~ choices with an X, check, or other mark in the target area, only the responses where the target area is marked shall be counted. Example 2: Inconsistent Mazkine Patterns: On the left, a valid vote would only be counted for Jeanne Labuda. On the right, only valid votes for Elizabeth Oldham and Tom Gray would be counted. STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (Vole [or ONE Randy L. Baumgardner Daniel L. Korkowski DISTRICT ATTORNEY -14th JUDICIAL DISTRICT (Vole ra ONES Elizabeth Oldham COUNTY COMMISSIONER -DISTRICT t (Vde ot~ Tom Gray COUNTYCOMMISSIONER -DISTRICT 2 (Vote for ONE) Saed F. Tayyata~ -9- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 3(a): Inconsistent Mazkine Outside the Tazget Area: In this example, the voter made mazks outside the tazget azeas but did not make them in a consistent manner. As there aze no mazks in any tazget azea, there aze no valid votes on this ballot. Example 3(b): Inconsistent Mazkine Inside and Outside the Tazeet Area: While the voter has made the same marks throughout the ballot, some but not all are outside the tazget azeas. Tn this scenario, only the mazks within the tazget azeas count as valid votes for Randy L. Baumgazdner, Elizabeth Oldham, and Saed F. Tayyaza. STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (Vote for ONE) Randy 1. Baumgardner Daniel L. Korkowski DISTRICT ATTORNEY -14th JUDICIAL DISTRICT (Vole for ONEI EI¢abeth Oldham COUNTY COMMISSIONER -DISTRICT 7 (Vde for ONE) Tom Gray( COUNTYCOMMISSIONER -DISTRICT 2 (Vote for ONEt Saed F. Tayyara tD- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 3(c): Inconsistent Mazking Inside and Outside the Tar eg t Area: In this example, there aze mazks outside the tazget azeas, but not in a consistent manner throughout the whole ballot. Also, because some tazget azeas aze mazked, only those votes aze valid. In this example, the votes for Jeanne Labuda and Anne L. McGihon aze valid. -11- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Chapter 3 Overvotes and Corrected Votes An overvote is a race or ballot measure which contains votes for more than the maximum number of candidates or responses for a ballot measure allowed. No votes for that race or issue shall be counted unless the voter corrects the marks by providing an explanation of his or her desired choice. If a voter has corrected the vote, the indicated vote shall be considered valid. If ballots aze counted using an optical scan machine, overvoted races aze rejected by the voting system. When ballots are being examined by the resolution boazd in a central location, election judges consider voter intent to determine if a ballot is a blank ballot, an overvoted ballot, or contains one or more write-in votes. Other than ballots being examined by the resolution boazd, voter intent should not be considered upon initial count and the ballot should not be duplicated. If a recount is required, voter intent would then be taken into consideration. Example 1: An Overvote: ~ Cafhe~e 1Ct' Roupe ~ ShelaAnneHicks -12- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Invalid Correction of Votes Example 2: Second Choice Mazked: Pursuant to C.R.S. § 1-7-508(2), when it is impossible to determine the voter's choice of candidate or vote, the vote shall not be counted. 1n this instance it is uncleaz if the X is a vote or an attempt to strike a vote. As a result of both tazget areas being mazked the voter's intent is uncleaz. Here, the voter has overvoted and a vote for neither candidate should count. Example 3: In this example, the vote should not count as a valid vote for either candidate, as the voter's intentcannot be determined. Joyce Foster Alice Borodkin Valid Correction of Votes If a voter has marked more than one target area, the vote that has been crossed out shall be stricken and the second choice that has not been stricken shall be counted as a valid vote. Example 4(a): Valid Corrections: Here the voter has indicated a willingness to correct their vote, and vote for Daniel. L. Korkowski would be counted on this ballot. The strike through here amounts to written instructions. STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (Vole for ONE) ~R ®Daniel L. Korkowski 13- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 4(b): Valid Corrections: By drawing aline through the name of a candidate, the voter indicates he or she wishes to correct his vote. This ballot would count as a vote for Sheila Anne Hicks. Sheila Anne Hicks Example 4(c): Valid Corrections: In this example, the voter may have made an initial X to mazk a vote for Randy L. Baumgazdner. The voter then filled in the entire tazget azea, attempting to clearly iridicate their vote. This is a valid vote for Randy L. Baumgardner. STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 ote for ONE) Randy L. Baumgardner Q Daniel L. Korkowski Example 5: Corrections without Second Choices: In this example, the voter corrected the vote but did not make a second choice. The race is thus undervoted, and neither candidate receives a valid vote. The voter's intent in this example would only be discovered during ahand-count or recount.. STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (Vote for ONE) Q Daniel L. Korkowski 14- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 6: A Write-In Vote to Correct the Voter's Previous Selection: In this example, the write-in vote for John Doe is the valid vote because the X serves to correct the voter's previous selection, and the voter has provided written inshvctions by writing-in a candidate. Elaine t3antz Berman _..._.. _ __._ ..__ -_Y _ . Example 7: Both Candidates Cancelled: Both votes on this ballot have been cancelled by lines through the names. Because no candidate is selected, this race is undervoted. -15- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Chapter 4 Written Instructions If a voter corrects a vote and provides written instruction on his or her intent, it shall be counted as the voter instructed. Written instructions may include words, circles, or arrows. Note: If ballots aze counted using an optical scan machine, overvoted races, even those that may have written instructions, aze rejected by the voting system. Voter intent should not be considered upon initial count, except for when ballots aze being examined by the resolution boazd at a central count location, and the ballot should not be duplicated. However, if a recount is required, voter intent would then be taken into consideration. Voter intent is always considered during ahand-count. Example 1: Voter's Written Correction: """°"~* ~y~oyce Foster Alice Borodkin Example 2: Valid Written Instructions: STATE REPRESENTATIVE -DISTRICT 57 (Vote for ONE) ®Randy L. Baumgardner N O ®Daniei L. Korkowski X25 Elaine Gantz Berman ~r~r~ 16- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 3: Valid Written Instructions Cancelling a Vote: In this example, the voter selected a candidate and then drew an X through both tazget areas to indicate he or she did not want to vote for either. Based on the "none" comment on the left, this race is undervoted, and neither candidate should receive a vote. Joyce Foster Alice Borodkin Example 4: All Tazeeted Areas Mazked and Voter Provides Instructions or Indications: While both-tazget areas aze mazked, the line through Sheila Anne Hicks' name and the circle azound Catherine "Kit" Roupe indicate that a valid vote should be counted for Catherine "Kit" Roupe. 17- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Chapter 5 Write-In Candidates A properly marked write-in vote is a vote where the voter physically writes in the name of a lesally qualified write-in candidate in the space reserved and correctly marks the oval or square,~or connects the arrow. Example 1: A Valid Vote for aWrite-In Candidate: Elaine Gantx Berman ~ ly // ~ NfM-LNY~SL~Y.-\~ Note: According to Rule 27.7.4.3, if a voter fails to complete the target area but does write in the name of a qualified candidate, the voter's write-in selection is counted only during the initial count for hand-counted ballots or during any recount. Example 2: Write-In Votes without the Tazeet Area Mazked: °rimet Di'sM~ E19ai Par~iib'ntarlo ; ____~.._.;_. Nd?farthiel~oiepo-Uocj_ Elaine Gantz Berman ~ y __ _.. _ ]g_ Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 3: Write-ln Candidate's Name Misspelled: In this scenario, the voter intended to write in John Smith as the candidate. Although the name is misspelled, it is recognized as an alternative spelling of a declazed candidate's name and should be counted as a valid vote. Section 1-7- 114, C.R.S., allows "reasonably correct spelling" of the names of write-in candidates. Example 4: Repeat of a Candidate's Name: Because the name of a candidate who is ah-eady printed on the ballot is written in, the vote should not be tallied as an overvote, but should instead be counted as a valid vote for Elaine Gantz Berman and not as an overvote. This is pursuant to Rule 27.7.4.1, and applies even if both target azeas aze mazked or no tazget azeas aze mazked. In this particulaz example, counties who use optical scan voting equipment would have the ballot rejected as an overvote. The ballot would require duplication in this instance because the voter has not overvoted according to the Rules. ___ (Yofz torQne 1ll0~ pa Uno) Elaine Gantz Berman ~~ __w__ __ -.._~ _...____v__. _. _-_-- G ~: 8_.~-ter 19- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 5: No Write-In Candidate Provided: In this example, the write-in tazget azea is mazked, but no name is written on the line. This should not be counted as a valid vote for any candidate because no name is listed for a qualified write-in candidate. Example 6: Both Tazget Areas Mazked: The voter mazked the tazget azeas for both the candidate and the write-in candidate. Because there is no name written for awrite-in candidate, this should not be tallied as an overvote but instead a valid vote for Elaine Lantz Berman. Should .this occur when using an opfical scan system, the ballot must be duplicated. «-.>; Elaine Lantz Barman ~t -zo- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorndo Secretary of State's Office Example 7: Both Tazget Areas Marked and aWrite-In Candidate Listed: Because the tazget azea of a candidate is mazked and a name other than that candidate's appeazs in the write-in response azea, the race should be tallied as an overvote. Regazdless of whether or not the tazget azea next to the write-in response azea is mazked, neither candidate should receive a valid vote. Elaine Ciantz Hannan ~~ Example S: Voter Fails to List a Qualified Candidate: Voters may only cast awrite-in vote for a candidate who has filed an affidavit of intent of write-in candidacy pursuant to section 1-4-1101, C.R.S. This ballot would not count as vote for the write-in candidate. -21- Elections Division Approved October 2008 Colorado Secretary of State's Office Example 9: Voter Fails to List a Candidate's Last Name: Pursuant to section 1-7-7-114(1), C.R.S., a voter must include the last name of a candidate, that has filled out an affidavit of intent of write-in candidacy, in order for the selection of a write-in candidate to count. This ballot would not count as a valid vote for any candidate as Johnny is a first name. This vote would not count even if there was only one candidate that had filled out a write in candidacy affidavit named John or even Johnny. 22 - Elections Division Colorado Secretary of State's Office Approved October 2008 ~llCb 1~~~ o~te Memorandum TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: James R. True DATE: January 20, 2009 RE: Buckhorn Arms LLC Attached for your consideration and review is a proposed Ordinance which, if adopted, would release an obligation on the part of the owner of the Buckhorn Lodge to file a deed restriction that limits the Floor Area Ratio on the property. This is submitted pursuant to a Petition filed on November 20, 2008, by representatives of The Buckhorn Arms LLC, tenants of the owner. The obligation to file a deed restriction dates back to an ordinance passed by the City Council in 1983. That ordinance, Ordinance 27 (Series 1983), rezoned the property from Office to Commercial Lodge (CL). However, the rezoning was conditioned upon the recording of a deed restriction that provided an additional limitation on the floor area ratio. That deed restriction was never recorded and the ordinance itself was not recorded. The petition of the present tenants on the property, submitted by Mitch Haas for The Buckhorn Arms LLC, to release the restriction is attached hereto. Attached to the petition is a copy of Ordinance 27 (Series 1983). These documents set forth the terms of the deed restriction and the present restrictions contained in the CL zone. Planning staff reviewed the case files and record related to the Buckhorn Lodge. Staff was able to go back to 1964 and track the history of zoning since then. The Zoning Map of 1964 indicates that the parcel was zoned Commercial C-1. In 1974, the parcel was re-zoned to Office (O) as part of a larger rezoning of town. This created anon-conformity on the Buckhorn Lodge parcel because the building included commercial spaces and nine (9) lodge rooms, and lodge uses were non- confirming inthe Office zone district. The commercial space was conforming. In 1981/1982, the City began efforts to preserve lodges in town, and created the Lodge Preservation zone district (at the time this was L-3, it is now known as LP). Many properties in town were rezoned to this L-3 district, but the Buckhorn Lodge decided not to rezone to the L-3 zone district because it would have made the commercial uses on the property non-conforming (essentially switching one non-conformity for another). Instead, in 1983, the owners Simon and Norma Kelly submitted a request to rezone the property to the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district. Ordinance 27, Series of 1983 officially rezoned the property to CL, with a limit on the FAR to L• 1 (the CL district pemutted 2:1 at the time), and a requirement to retain parking. The FAR limit was placed on the pazcel in response to concerns from the Planning and Zoning Commission that a 2:1 FAR would be out of character with the surrounding properties. In 1995, the owners requested a rezoning to C-1. The land use application from 1995 indicates the owners intended to keep the commercial uses on the ground floor and convert the nine (9) second floor lodge uses to office uses. That application was tabled and no official action appears to have been taken on the application. The attached ordinance would release the obligation on the part of the owner of the Buckhorn Lodge property to file a deed restriction that limits the Floor Area Ratio on the property. The decision to adopt this ordinance is entirely within the discretion of the Council. The petition was submitted by owners of the building and the tenants of the landowner. Since the present landowner is the same owner who agreed to the deed restriction in 1983, the petitioner's have not set forth, and I do not believe they could argue, any detrimental reliance on the failure to record the deed restriction. Their issue is with their landlord. Thus, if the Council does not wish to release the limitation, then the Council could still direct the landlord to record the deed restriction and seek enforcement of that in Court. It has been suggested that the Council could simply undo the rezoning that took place in 1983. Although the Office zone no longer exists, the present iteration of that zone does exists. If the rezoning is undone, then this property becomes zoned "mixed use". Staff does not express an opinion one way or another on whether the obligation to record the deed restriction should be released. This is within the discretion of the Council. At first reading, Council asked for clarification on the zoning options at the Buckhom Lodge. The existing zoning is Commercial Lodge (CL). The CL zone district was applied to the property in 1983. It is the only zone district that permits both commercial uses and lodging uses. City Mazket is located across the street, and is zoned neighborhood Commercial (NC). This zone district would not allow a lodging use on the property. The other property on the block, Bell Mountain Lodge, is zoned Residential Multi-Family (R/MF) with a Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) and a PUD Overlay. Other properties in the area aze zoned Mixed-Use (MU) and Residential Multi-Family (R/NIF'). As noted above, in 1983, the Buckhorn Lodge was zoned Office, which is now the Mixed-Use zone district. This rezoning required the deed restriction. The MU zone district would not allow the existing commercial uses (Johnny McGuire's and Dominos). The Land Use Code permits the application of a PUD on parcels less than 27,000 square feet intended for multi-family residential, commercial, or lodging uses if "the Community Development Director determines the development of the property may have the ability to further the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan and that the provisions of the Planned Unit z Development land use review process will best serve the interests of the community." (Section 26.445.020, Applicability) A PUD would establish dimensional requirements for the property. Even if the deed restriction is kept, a PUD process could lift the deed restriction and then establish new dimensional requirements. If the deed restriction were lifted, the allowed Floor Area for the property would increase from 1:1 to 2.5:1. At first reading Council also inquired as to whether there would be any precedential affect of releasing the deed restriction. As I noted above, the applicant is not taking the position that the limits that would be set by the recorded deed restriction are not in place. Whether or not it has been recorded, the decision to release the deed restriction or the limit created by obligation to record the deed restriction is totally discretionary. If Council feels that it is appropriate to lift the deed restriction it is for reasons other than the fact that the original deed restriction was not recorded. ACTION REQUESTED: A Motion to approve Ordinance No. ~, Series of 2009. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: cc: City Manager Community Development 3 ORDINANCE NO.~ (SERIES OF 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL RELEASING OBLIGATION TO ENTER A DEED RESTRICTION REGARDING FLOOR AREA RATIO RESTRICTIONS ON THE EASTERLY 9.27 FEET OF LOT Q, ALL OF LOTS R & S, BLOCK 105 CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 27 (Series of 1983), the Aspen City Council approved the application to rezone the following described property from "O" (Office) to "CL" (Commercial Lodge): THE EASTERLY 9.27 FEET OF LOT Q, ALL OF LOTS R & S, BLOCK 105 CTI'Y AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO and, WHEREAS, the owner of the property above-described, as an inducement to the City Council to grant his rezoning application voluntarily agreed to maintain a 1 to 1 external floor area ratio on the site; and, WHEREAS, as a condition of the approval the owner of the property was to prepare and record a deed restriction approved by the City Attorney; and, WHEREAS, the owner never recorded such deed restriction; and, WHEREAS, the "O" (Office) zone is now known as Mixed Use; and WHEREAS, the CL zone district in its present status is an appropriate zone designation for this property; and, WHEREAS, the circumstances which led to the requirement of the deed restriction are no longer applicable; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed release of the obligation of the owner to provide a deed restriction 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 RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The Aspen City Council hereby releases the obligation of the owner of the property to prepare and record a deed restriction on the property limiting the external floor area ratio to 1:1. Page 1 Section 2: The number of parking spaces required by Ordinance 27, Series of 1983, shall remain in effect. However, no additional restrictions other than those set forth in the zone district shall be applicable to the property. Section 3: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4: This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6. A public hearing on this Ordinance will be held on the 23'~ day of February 2009 in the city Counci] Chambers, 130 South Galena, INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26~' day of January 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2009. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Page 2 ~,~ A ~ ~ A.1~ ~ P ~.,q A,1~ ~t i N t~ ~ I.w, ~„t November 20, 2008 Mayor Ireland and the Aspen City Council c/o Mr. James R True, Assistant CityAttomey 130 South Galena Street . Aspen, CO 81611 Via email to: Jirn.True ci.aspen.co.us RE: Buckhorn Ames Zoning Restrictions Dear Jim, Mayor Ireland and Councilpersons I am writing this letter on behalf of The Buckhom Amps, LLC ("Petitioner"). The Petitioner owns the Buckhom Arms building located on the northwest comer of Cooper Avenue and Original Street in Aspen and has a 99-year ground lease on the land underlying-this building. The Petitioner bought the Buckhom Arms building and entered into the ground ]ease in 2000. The members of Petitioner are Mazk Campisi (the owner of the local Dominos Pizza franchise) and John Hoffman and Terrence McGuire (the owners of Johnny McGuire's Deli). They joined together in extending themselves and buying the Buckhom Am>s building to be able to control their destiny as local small business owners. The Buckhom Amts partners recently began planning for a redevelopment of the Buckhom Arms property into a small 14-unit condominium lodge with new ground floor spaces for their existing businesses (leaving enough ground floor space for one additional business). In working on their plan, they were recently advised of along-forgotten, unrecorded ordinance from 1983 that the City's Historic Preservation Planner discovered. Ordinance 29, Series of 1983 ("Ordinance 29"), was adopted to rezone the Buckhom Arms property from Office (O) zoning to Commercial Lodge (CL) zoning. A copy of Ordinance 29 is enclosed with this letter. To the surprise of both City Planning staff and the Buckhom Amps partners, Ordinance 29, in addition to rezoning the Buckhom Arms property, contains a special provision purporting to limit the Floor Area Ratio ("FAR") on the property to a 1:1 ratio. Ordinance 29 also required that a special notation be placed on the City's official zoning map and that the owner of the property work with the City Attorney to record a covenant limiting the FAR The discovery of these special provisions in Ordinance 29 was shocking because the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district currently pemvts a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) ratio of up to 2.5:1 and nothing to the contrary has ever been recorded. Not only was the covenant contemplated by Ordinance 29 never recorded, even Ordinance 29 itself was not recorded (as is the City's current practice for such ordinances). What's more, there is nothing on the City's official zoning map to indicate that there are any special restrictions applicable to the Buckhorn Arms property. Instead, the.>official zoning map 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 ASPEN, COLORADO 81 61 1 - PHONE: (970) 925.7819 FAX: (970) 925-7395 November 20, 2008 Buckborn Arms Zoning Petition Page Z merely indicates the property is within the Commercial Lodge (CL) Zone District. The Petitioner believes that the FAR limitation included in Ordinance 29, to the extent it might have ever been in effect, is no longer in effect and has been superseded. For this reason. the Petitioner is petitionin¢ the City Council to take action to recognize and/or declaze that the FAR limitation in Ordinance 29 is no longer in effect. To this end, the Petitioner requests that the City Council coordinate with City staff to take up this matter at its next available City Council meeting following whatever public notices aze determined to be needed. At the time that the City Council takes up this request, the partners in Petitioner will be prepared to ma'_~e a presentation supporting their requested action en Orduzance 29. In the meantiae, they respectfully ask City Couacn to consider the following key facts: • Before buyng the Buckhom Arms binding and entering into a 99-yeaz ground lease for the property in 2000, the Buckhom Arms partners engaged in significant due diligence. John Homan and Terrence McGuire met with the City's planning staff to confirm the zoning as being Commercial Lodge (CL) with athen-allowed FAR of 2:1. They also checked the City's ofl5cial zoning map and noted the property was designated as being in the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district. No hint of Crdinance 29 emerged in these investigations and it is appazent that it was long- forgotten by all concerned untn it recently tamed up again. • The Petitioner is not looking to get any new entitlement. Instead, the Petitioner is just asking for confirmation of what both the City Councn and the City's planning staff have already believed to be the case for some time. In 2005, the City Councn co.npletely rewrote the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district regulations (Section 26.710.200 of the Land Use Code) to allow an FAR of 3:1 (s:~zce reduced in 2007 to the current 2.5:1). The stated purpose of this change was "to provide for the establishment of mixed-use commercial and lodge development by permitting commercial uses on the ground floor with lodging development above." (Ordinance 9, Series of 2005.) At thi, time (as is still the case today), there were only three properties located in the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district. These were the Buckhom Arms property, the North of Nell building, and the Aspen Squaze building. In rewriting the Commercial Lodge (CL) re~alations, the City Council concluded that an FAR of 3:1 for these properties was "consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan." (Ordinance 9, Series of 2005.) The City staff supported this conclusion. Neither the staff report, the minutes of the City Council deliberations, nor the City Councn zction itself from 2005 include any hint that the new FAR for one of the three Commercial Lodge (CL) properties would be irrelevant or moot because of the 1983 restriction. City Councn cleazly understood its zoning action in 2005 to be having the effect of establishing an FAR of 3:1 for the Buckhom Arms property. Though the City Council later acted in 2007 to reduce the allowable November 20, 2008 Buckhorn Arms Zoning Petition Page 3 FAR in the Commercial Lodge (CL) district to 2.5:1 (see Ordinance 10, Series of 2007), there is again nothing in the relevant staff report or City Council minutes to suggest that the new 2.5:1 FAR would not apply the Buckhorn Arms property The simple fact is that as recently as 2007 the City Council was quite comfortable with and found it appropriate to establish an FAR of 2.5:1 for the Buckhorn Arms property. Nothing has changed since 2007 except for the discovery of an ordinance that no one realized existed. • The current iteration of the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district regulations include incentives for lodging development with smaller average room sizes for the purpose of encouraging "a continued vitality and long-term sustainability of the local economy." (Ordinance 10, Series of 2007.) These incentives, which aze implemented through the GMQS special review procedures, are impossible to achieve if an FAR limit of 1:1 is imposed on the Buckhom Arms property. To achieve the incentives for at least 14 lodge rooms (one lodge unit for every 500 squaze feet of lot area, as required) at 500 sq. ft. per room would require 7,000 sq. ft. of floor azea not even counting circulation or a lobby azea, not to mention ground floor commercial space. Yet the Buckhorn Arms property has only 6,927 sq. ft. of land azea. Even with 400 sq. ft. average room sizes, the minimum required 14 lodging rooms would use 5,600 sq. ft. of floor azea, leaving essentially nothing for other uses, especially after the necessary circulation and other miscellaneous azeas aze incorporated into the design. Thank you very much for your consideration of this request. Should you have any questions or desire any additional information, please contact me at (970) 925-7819 or by email at mhaas@sopris.net. We look forwazd to reviewing this matter with you in person at a public meeting. Very truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC ,~ U`~ ~~ Mitcls~I Owner/Manager Attachment: Ordinance No. 27 (Series of 1983) C:/MY Documents/CiTy ApplicationsBuckhom I.odgelCouncil Zoning Petition_l 1-20-08 __ _. _. i ~-, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves u,"n ~... ~.. ORDINANCB NO. 27 (Series of 1983) AN ORDINANCE RE20NING THE EASTERLY 9.27 FEET OF IAT Q, ALL OF LOTS R & S, BLOCK 105, IN AND TO THE CITY AND TOWNSI TE OF ASPEN, PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO, FROM "0" (OFFICE) TO "CL° (COMMERCIAL-LODGE) WHEREAS, an application has been submitted to rezone the fol- lowing described property from "O"(Office) to "CL" (Commercial Lodge): The Easterly 9.27 feet of Lot Q, all of Lots R & S, Block 105 City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and, WHEREAS, the property owner as an inducement to the City Council to grant his rezoning application has agreed on behalf o£ himself, his heirs, successors and assigns to the est ablishmentof a restriction of 1 to 1 external floor area ratio permanently on the site, and WHEREAS, the City Council Finds the requested rezoning to °CL" (Commercial Lodge) to be compatible with surrounding zone - districts and land use in the vicinity of the site, and WHEREAS, the "CL" (Commercial Lodge) zone is a proper zone for this sitedue to its proximity to both commercial and lodging uses and because the current use of the site is commercial and lodge, and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the site not be rezoned and has expressed a concern that a "CL" (Commercial Lodge) zone designation would allow an exces- sively large structure to be placed on the site, and WHEREAS, the property owner has voluntarily agreed to main- tain at to 1 external floor area ratio permanently on the site, and i ~. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves µWHEREAS, having considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Coxes fission the City Council desires that the easterly 9'.27 feet of Lot q, all of Lots R and S, 91ock 705, in and to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitk in County, Colorado, be rezoned from 'O" (Office) to "CL" (Commercial-Lodge), NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TAE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That it does hereby rezone to use the following described property from "0" (Office) to "CL" (Commercial-Lodge), subject to + the regulations applicable to said zone district as described in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, as now exists or may hereafter be amended: Easterly 9.27 feet of Lot q, all of Lots R and S, Block 105, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. and that, as. agreed to by tte owner oi. the property on behalf of himself, his successors and assigns, as~ an inducement to the City Council to grant such rezoning, the owner shall restrict the external floor area ratio governing said property to a maximum of 7:1 and retain the present number of legal parking spaces, which restrictions shall be evidenced by a deed restriction approved as to form by the City Attorney and recorded by the owner. Section 2 That the Zoning District Map be and hereby is amended to reflect the rezoning described in Section 7 and that the City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to amend said map to reflect the aforesaid rezoning. Section 3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any mart of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deeme8 a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. ~ ~~ ,., ~. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Section 4 A public hearing on t//h~~e ordinance shall be held on the ~3 day of ~i~-P.~ 1983, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, 15 days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published on ee 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 jj . 1983. %~'// i~~~E '"mil _ Herman Edel, Mayor ATTEST: athryn.5. och, City Clerk p+ FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this O day of 1983. ATTEST:. Kathryn S. och, City Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ~.., 100 Leaves STATE OF COLORADO ) ss CERTIFICATE COUNTY OF PITKZN ) I, Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado-, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was introduced, read in full, and passed on reading at a regular~- m/e~,eting ofnthe City ouncil of the City of Aspen on / /~Q-(may % 19~, and publishe3 in the Aspen Times a weekly newspaper o£general circulation pu~l((is~h~_ed in the~lCity of Aspen, Colorado, in its issue of _ //'(l2.rs ~~f , 19~, and was finally adopted and a/pa]roved zt a~~ regpular meetpi2ng of the City .Council on <~L'! c., -L~/ 0 , 19 0 / ,~ an dy+.ordered published as Ordinance 3ia. ~, Series of 19 U ~_, of said City, as provided by law. IN WITNESS WEEREOF, I hate hereunto set my hand and the seal of ~szid City of Aspen, Colorado this ~_ day of 19,3 ~i Kathryn Koch, City Clerk S E A L ~~ ~ ~ ~ _ -~ DeFaty City Clerk I I i' i li ~~. `r MEMORANDUM ~a TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director~~~ MEETING DATE: February 23, 2009 RE: Subdivision Agreement Amendment for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision (300 Spring Street) - Resolution ~, Series 2009 APPLICANT /OWNER: Snowmass Corporation REPRESENTATIVE: David Mylar, The Mylar Law Firm, P.C. LOCATION: 300 Spring Street and 707 Hyman Avenue CURRENT ZONING .Sc USE Mixed Use (MU) zone district. Existing building with commercial uses with a residential addition under construction. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests an amendment to the subdivision improvements agreement associated with the approved development. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. Subject property. REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to grant an amendment to the subdivision agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No.16 (Series of 2006) (Exhibit E) approved the development of an additional 2,440 sq. fr. of net leasable commercial office space, two (2) free-market units and Subdivision Amendment for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Staff Report, Page I of 4 three (3) affordable housing units on a lot that had an existing commercial building upon it. A Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision was executed in September of 2006 (Exhibit C) to memorialize requirements associated with the development approval. Subsequent to the development approval the property owner condominiumized the property into two interests and sold each interest to different purchasers. The two interests can be generalized as the Commercial interest and the Residential interest, as the Commercial interest contains the existing commercial building as well as the approved commercial addition and one (1) affordable housing unit. The Residential interest contains the two (2) free-market units and two (2) affordable housing units as shown in Figure 1, below. Figure 1: Hannah Dustin's Ownership Interests Commercial Interest Residential Interest Existing Net leasable space, EAST HYMA AVENU Two free-market residential w plus 2,440 sq. ft of new net Ma ~~ dwellings and two affordable z leasable and an affordable housine units ~ housing unit „~°,„°,,,, .: x I .a _ .; .M.:a E~,,, b i `8 ~'.. ® m,ar .. 3; P . -- .. M I I i H B J i --~ _ -. I 9 _-, _ ~ ~ I I_ + n~ ;: :'>. -- -- ~; ~ O PUBLIC pMENlfl6 EBPT 3.ODB,56. F. ~~~ / V ~~ / ALLEY LOCK 105 ' As a result of having two ownership interests in the property and realizing that the timing of construction may be different for each ownership interest (potentially affecting provisions within the subdivision agreement), the owners requested that the agreement be amended. An amendment to Che original subdivision agreement was recorded on November 9, 2006 (Exhibit D). The amendment memorialized the property interests as the Residential Phase and Subdivision Amendment for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Staff Report, Page 2 of 4 Commercial Phase. As noted previously, the Residential Phase contains two (2) free-market units and two (2) affordable housing units while the Commercial Phase contains the commercial addition and one (1) affordable housing unit. The agreement acknowledged that each phase may be constructed independently; however, the agreement required an unfinished phase be fifty percent complete (framing inspection approval) prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued for the other phase. The agreement also required that assurances be provided showing that the incomplete phase have the necessary funding to be completed. Since the amendment to the subdivision agreement, the construction of the Residential Phase has been undertaken; however, the Commercial Phase has not begun construction, although a building permit application is under review by the building department. The Residential Phase is close to completion but the Commercial Phase is not ready to start construction and will not meet the requirement of being fifty percent complete for the Residential Phase to receive a Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.). PROPOSAL: The Applicant is requesting a second amendment (Exhibit A) to the subdivision agreement to allow for the issuance of C.O.s for the Residential Phase, prior to the fifty percent completion of the Commercial Phase. Specifically, the Applicant is proposing to provide a deposit of $500,807.25 that will be forfeited to the city if the building permit for the Commercial Phase has been approved for issuance but has not been issued (due to failure to pay any outstanding fees) by July 31, 2009. If the building permit is issued on or prior to July 3151, the Applicant will be available for a refund of the deposit; although the refund is phased and tied to attaining certain construction inspection approvals. Deposit Amount: The deposit amount of $500,807.25 is equivalent to the current cash-in-lieu fee for a two bedroom Category 2 affordable housing unit. The Applicant is proposing that if the vesting expires and additional mitigation is required to complete construction of the approved project, then the forfeited deposit can be used to offset any additional requirements. Commencement Deadline: July 31, 2009, is the date the vested rights expire and is proposed to be considered the commencement deadline to have had the building permit for the Commercial Phase issued. The Applicant has the ability to request an extension of the vested rights through City Council. As currently proposed, if the vesting period is extended then the commencement deadline will become the new expiration date of the project's vested rights. A separate land use application would need to be submitted and approved by the City Council to extend the vested rights associated with this property. Refund of the Deposit: Once a building permit is issued a builder has a year to attain his first inspection. The first inspection is the footing inspection. Assuming the applicant meets the commencement deadline, the amendment has been crafted to link the release of the deposit to completing certain phases of construction. Twenty-five percent of the deposit is available to be refunded to the Applicant once footing inspection approval has been attained. The remainder of the deposit is available when the framing inspection approval has been attained. DISCUSSION: The Hannah Dustin Subdivision was approved as a single project with a mix of uses: commercial, free-market residential and affordable housing. This project has been approved as a Subdivision Amendment for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Staff Report, Page 3 of 4 whole and should not be treated as an a la carte development; however, staff recognizes the economic climate the community is experiencing and understands why the request has been submitted. Staff has worked with the Applicant to come up with a deposit amount that is substantial enough that it should create enough incentive for the Applicant to begin construction of the commercial net leasable space and the remaining affordable housing unit while linking the release of the deposit upon attaining certain field inspection approvals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the second amendment to the subdivision improvements agreement to the Hannah Dustin Subdivision. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. J 3, Series of 2009, approving the requested Second Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Proposed Second Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Exhibit B - Cover letter from David Mylar dated February 9, 2009and proposed second Exhibit C - Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Exhibit D - Amendment to Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Exhibit E - Ordinance No. 16 (Series of 2006) Subdivision Amendment for [he Hannah Dustin Subdivision Staff Report, Page 4 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. { 3 (Series of 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, GRANTING A SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE SUBDIVSION AGREEMENT FOR THE HANNAH DUSTIN SUBDIVISION, 300 S. SPRING STREET AND 707 E. HYMAN AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ParcelID:273718227101 and 273718227102 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision, successors and assigns of the agreement may "on its own initiative petition the City Council For an amendment to the final plat or....subdivision agreement;" and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests approval to a second amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision to allow for the issuance of Certificates of Occupancies for portions of the completed project; and, WHEREAS, Community Development Department reviewed the request and suggested changes to the draft agreement that were incorporated into the draft; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed and considered the subdivision agreement amendment request and has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution allowing for approval of the proposed amendments furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO,THAT: Section 1: In accordance with the provisions of Article 7.4 of the Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, does hereby grant the Second Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision. Section 2: 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 construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Resolution No., Series of 2009 Page 2 Section 3: 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, February 23, 2009, at a public meeting before the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado. Michael C Ireland, Mayor City Attorney ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Exhibit A Second Amendment to the Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision DRAFT 02/13/09 SECOND AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT FOR THE HANNAH DUSTIN SUBDIVISION This Second Amendment to Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision (the "Second Amendment") is made this day of , 2009, by and among the CITYOF ASPEN, a municipal corporation (the "City"), the SNOWMASS CORPORATION, a Colorado corporation ("Snowmass"), and HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("Brownstones"). RECITALS: A. The City entered into a Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision with Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, the predecessor in interest to Snowmass and Brownstones, on September 25, 2006 (the "Subdivision Agreement"). B. The Subdivision Agreement was amended by a document entitled "Amendment to Subdivision for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision" on November 7, 2006 (the "First Amendment"). C. The City, Snowmass and Brownstones desire to further amend the Subdivision Agreement and the First Amendment as set forth in this Second Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Waiver of Com letion Re uirement. Upon satisfaction of the requirements of Section 2, below, the provisions of Section 8.1(iii) of the First Amendment, which require the Commercial Phase to be 50% complete in order For the Residential Phase to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy shall be waived. 2. Denosit. As consideration for the waiver described in Section 1, above, Snowmass shall deposit the sum of $500,807.25 with the City, either in cash or in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Residential Phase. The deposit is intended to provide a reasonable financial assurance that Snowmass will undertake construction of the Commercial Phase and, in particular, the affordable housing unit which is required as a condition of Commercial Phase approval. To that end, the deposit shall be forfeited and may be retained and utilized by the City for affordable housing purposes if a building permit for the Commercial Phase has been approved but not issued by July 31, 2009, which is the date on which vested property rights are due to expire (the "Commencement Deadline"). If the vested property rights period is extended, the Commencement Deadline shall automatically be extended to the new date on which the vested property rights for the Commercial Phase are to expire. If a building permit for the Commercial Phase is issued by the Commencement Deadline, Snowmass may request and the City shall refund the deposit based upon the following schedule. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the deposit shall be refunded after the footing inspection approval has been attained. The remainder of the deposit shall be refunded after the framing inspection approval has been attained. 3. Completion of Residential Phase. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Residential Phase is, on the date hereof, more than 50% complete. 4. Assurance of Financing. In satisfaction of the requirements of Section 8.1(iii) of the First Amendment, Snowmass shall provide the City with a written confirmation of its construction loan from Bank of America, to be delivered to the City along with the Deposit. 5. Housing Mitigation Credit. If construction of the Commercial Phase has not begun prior to the Commencement Deadline referred to Section 2, above, and as a result the Deposit is forfeited, Snowmass may, nevertheless, be entitled to a credit, up to $500,807.25, to be applied against affordable housing mitigation requirements associated with development of the Commercial Phase, if any, which are in addition to the requirement for construction of atwo-bedroom Category II housing unit within the Commercial Phase. The credit shall only be available, however, if such unit is actually constructed within the Commercial Phase and if, as a result of expired vested property rights, additional affordable housing mitigation is required. CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk SNOWMASS CORPORATION, a Colorado corporation James W. Light, President HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company John A. Elmore, II, Manager STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2009, by Michael C. Ireland, Mayor, and Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk, of the City of Aspen, Colorado, a Colorado municipal corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF ) Notary Public The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2009, by James W. Light, as President of Snowmass Corporation, a Colorado corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF ) Notary Public The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2009, by John A. Elmore, II, as Manager of Hyman Street Brownstones, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public ~~g~-r ~' DAVm J, MrLEx' RoarN J. Mn.Ers"' THE MYLER LAW FIRM, P.C. A Colorado Professional Corporation TELEPHONE (910)927.Og56 FACSIMILE (970) 92]-03]9 ADMRr®M CO', NY', R' RNONDA E. NEFP, LEGAL ASSISTANT CONN~ A. WOOD, LEGAL ASSISTANT 211 MIDLAND AVENUE SurrE 201 BASALT, COLORADO 81621 February 9, 2009 Aspen City Council 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Second Amendment to Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Ladies and Gentlemen: EMAILS dmylerQmylerlawpc.eom rmyler®mylerlewpc. com meR'®mylerlewpccom cwoodQmylerlawpc.com Pursuant to Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005, the City Council approved a mixed use development known as Hannah Dustin. The project consists of a Residential Phase and a Commercial Phase. The Residential Phase contains two (2) free market units, two (2) deed restricted units and ten (10) underground parking spaces, eight (8) of which are to be available for us by the owners or tenants of the Commercial Phase. The Commercial Phase consists of 2,440 square feet of office space and one (1) deed restricted unit. In 2006, the initial developer conveyed the pazcels on which the Residential Phase and the Commercial Phase are to be developed to sepazate developers. Hyman Street Brownstones, LLC purchased the property on which the Residential Phase was to be developed and the Snowmass Corporation purchased the property on which the Commercial Phase was to be developed. Contemplating that the phases would not be undertaken and completed simultaneously, but recognizing that certain community benefits (in particular, affordable housing and structured parking) for the entire project were located in each of the phases, the owners and the City amended the initial Subdivision Agreement to provide that a Certificate of Occupancy for one phase would not be issued until the other phase was at least 50% complete and that the owner of the incomplete phase was able to provide evidence of financing sufficient to complete that phase. The Residential Phase, including two (2) affordable housing units and all of the underground parking, is nearing completion. However, the Snowmass Corporation has not been able to begin construction of the Commercial Phase and, thus, will not be able to satisfy the 50% completion requirement by the time that the Residential Phase will be eligible for a Certificate of Occupancy. THE MYLER LAW FIItM, P.C. Aspen City Council February 9, 2009 Page 2 The Snowmass Corporation spent several months last summer and fall processing its application for a building permit. The process was substantially delayed in order to work with the Building Department to redesign significant elements of the office addition to accommodate new requirements and requests relating to handicap access. That process has been completed and the Building Department is prepared to issue a permit for construction of the Commercial Phase at any time. In addition, Snowmass Corporation obtained, last fall, a commitment from Bank of America for construction financing sufficient to complete the Commercial Phase. Snowmass Corporation was prepared to commence construction with the expectation that they could achieve 50% completion prior to the time that the Residential Phase would be eligible for a Certificate of Occupancy when the financial climate began to change for the worse. Although the financing remains available, it was not considered prudent to commence construction last fall or at the present. We approached the Community Development Department and the City Attorney with a request to amend the Subdivision Agreement in order to remove the 50% completion requirement. Our objective was to obtain additional time to commence and complete the Commercial Phase in order to better understand the economic situation, while at the same time removing obstacles to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Residential Phase. We proposed to establish a new deadline for commencement ofthe Commercial Phase and to provide security to address the shortfall in affordable housing mitigation should the Commercial Phase not proceed. After a series of discussions with Jennifer Phelan and John Worcester, we agreed to provide a deposit in the amount of $500,807.25, either in cash or in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, that will be forfeited if Snowmass Corporation does not commence construction of the Commercial Phase, including atwo-bedroom Category II affordable housing unit, by July 31, 2009. The amount of the deposit is equal to the cash-in-lieu fee for the number of employees to be housed by the Commercial Phase and, thus, will provide the City with the full mitigation required by the project if the Commercial Phase is not constructed. Please note that the deadline corresponds with the expiration of the vested rights period for the Commercial Phase. If the vested rights period is extended, which may be the subject of a separate application to the City, the deadline for commencement of construction will also be extended. Snowmass Corporation fully intends to begin construction of the Commercial Phase as soon as financial and market conditions permit. If we begin before the deadline, the deposit will be refunded. If not, the deposit will be forfeited. If the Commercial Phase is developed after the deadline and if atwo-bedroom Category II unit is constructed on site, Snowmass Corporation will, however, be entitled a credit up to the forfeited deposit for any a itional mitigation that may be required by the City's housing regulations then in place. We believe that the credit arrangement is fair and appropriate since it only comes into play if atwo-bedroom Category II unit is actually constructed on site and is only applied to affordable housing mitigation which may be required in THE MYLER LAW FIItM, P.C. Aspen City Council February 9, 2009 Page 3 addition to that unit. Such additional mitigation would only be required if development of the Commercial Phase occurs after the expiration of vested rights and if the City has amended its housing mitigation regulations to require additional housing. In short, Snowmass Corporation is attempting to achieve some flexibility in determining when to begin its project, to remove an impediment to completion and occupancy of the Residential Phase and, at the same time, to provide financial assurances that the project's mitigation requirements will be satisfied. We do not perceive that the City has any risk. Two (2) of the three (3) affordable housing units and all ten (10) ofthe parking spaces will be complete in the next month or so. The third affordable housing unit will be constructed when the Commercial Phase is completed and, in the meantime, the City will have an adequate financial assurance that the project's housing mitigation requirements will be satisfied even if the Commercial Phase is not constructed. We appreciate your consideration of this matter and ask that you accommodate our request for some degree of flexibility in these uncertain times. Very truly yours, THE MYLE FIRM, P.C. sy: ~ "` David J. Myler SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT FOR THE HANNAH DUSTIN SUBDIVISION THIS SUBDIVISIONAGREEMENT is made and entered into this I°'~ t dayof 2006, by and between THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, a municipal corporation (hereina er referred to as the "Cit}~') and Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC a Colorado limited liability company (hereinafter referred to sometimes as the "Applicant" and sometimes as "Hyman Avenue Holdings"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Hyma~] Avenue Holdings has submitted to the Cityan "Application" consisting of a request for approval from subdivision, various growth management reviews, commercial design revie and condominiumizaton to add 2,440 square feet of net leaseable space, two (2) free market residential units, and three (3) affordable housing units to be consolidated, platted and known] as the Hannah Dustin Subdivision (the "Property'), which Application requested the approval, execution and recordation of a Final Subdivision Plat of the Property (the "Final Plat"); and WHEREAS, the City has fully considered and approved the Application, Final Plat, and the proposed development and improvement of the Property pursuant to Ordinance No. 16 (Series of 2006) ,and the effects of the proposed development and improvements of said Property on adjoining or neighboring properties and property owners; and WHEREAS, the City has imposed certain conditions and requirements in connection v~ith its approval of the Application, and its execution and recordation of the Final Plat, such matters being necessary to promote, protect, and enhance the public health, safety, and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Hyman Avenue Holdings is willing to acknowledge, accept, abide by, and faithfully perform the conditions and requirements imposed by the City in approving the Application, and the Final Plat; and WHEREAS, under the authority of Sections 26.445.070 (C and D) and 26.480.070 (C and D) of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City is entitled to certain financial guarantees to ensure that the required public facilities are installed and Hyman Avenue Holdings is prepared to provide such guarantees that hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, contemporaneously with the execution and recording of this Subdivision Agreement the City and H man Avenue Holdings have executed and recorded the Final Plat in Plat Book ~ ~ at Page, Reception No.Sag~ in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the approval, execution, and acceptance of this Subdivision Agreement for recordation by the City, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: v~1 {~OD036009.DOC/1} Illilllf~lllllll~illllrll~~llrlllllllllll lll~IIIIIIiIIEI~ 09r/P~5 2006 09: 12~ co R 51.00 D 0.00 ARTICLE PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 1.1 Pumose. The purpose of this Subdivision Agreement is to, along with the Final Plat, set forth the complete and comprehensive understanding and agreement of the parties with respect to the development of the Hannah Dustin Subdivision and to enumerate all terms and conditions under which such development may occur. 1.2 Effect. It is the intent ofthe parties that this Subdivision Agreement and the Final Plat shall effectively supersede and replace in their entirety all previously recorded and unrecorded subdivision, condominium, and other land use approvals and related plats, maps, declarations, and other documents and agreements encumbering the Property, including and without limitation those matters identified in Article V below (collectively, the "Prior Approvals and Instruments"), but ex~~~~sly excluding the following which shall not be superseded and replaced by this Subdivision Agreement: (a) The terms and conditions of City of Aspen Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2006, recorded on July 12, 2006 as Reception No. 526319, Pitkin County, Colorado; (b) The terms and conditions of the Amended and Restated Condominium Declaration of Hannah Dustin, a Condominium, recorded on August 29, 2006 as Reception No. 527925, Pitkin County, Colorado (including any subsequent amendments thereto); and (c) The terms and conditions of the First Amended Plat of the Hannah Dustin Condominiums, recorded on August 29, 2006 in Plat Book 80 at Page 3, Reception No. 627927, Pitkin County, Colorado (including any subsequent amendments thereto). ARTICLE II ZONING AND REGULATORY APPROVALS 2.1 Approval Ordinances. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 16 (Series of 2006), the Aspen City Council granted Subdivision approvals, providing for the development an additional 2,440 s. f. of net leasable space, two (2) free-market residential units, and three (3) deed-restricted affordable housing units, on the Property located at 300 South Spring Street, Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado (collectively, the "Project"). This Subdivision Agreement and the Final Plat incorporate all of the pertinent provisions of Ordinance No. 16 (Series of 2006). In the event of any inconsistencies between the provisions of Ordinance No. 16 (Series of 2006) and the provisions of this Subdivision Agreement and the Final Plat, the provisions of this Subdivision Agreement and the Final Plat shall control. 2.2 Dimensional Requirements. Ordinance No. 16 (Series of 2006) established and approved amulti-family building consisting of two (2) free-market residential units and three (3) deed-restricted affordable housing units of the Hannah Dustin Subdivision. The redevelopment of the building as presented complies with the dimensional requirements of the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District. The structure shall meet all of the required Commercial Design Standards applicable to a multi-family building. Compliance with these requirements will be verified by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer at the time of building permit review. 2.3Off-street Parking. The project shall provide sixteen (16) off-street parking spaces, four (4) of which shall be designated for the use of the free market residential units, three (3) of which {00036009.DOC/1} 2 ~IIIIIIIIIiIIIIIiIIIIII~IIIII~IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII III) 099g~006 09:121 JRNICE K VOS CRUDILL PI?KIN COUNTY CO R 51.00 D 0.00 shall be designated for use by the affordable housing units, and nine (9) required spaces which shall be for the use of the commercial space and guest parking. 2.4 Affordable Housing. The affordable housing units shall be in compliance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority's Employee Housing Guidelines. The Applicant shall record a deed restriction on each of the affordable housing units at the time of recordation of the condominium map and prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the building, classifying the units as Category 2 units. Included in the governing documents shall be language reflecting the potential for the units to become ownership units. If the Applicant chooses to deed restrict the affordable housing units as rental units, the Applicant shall convey a 1/10 of a percent, undivided interest in the units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any portion of the building. The units may bedeed-restricted as rental units, but the units shall become ownership units at such time as the owners would request a change to "for-sale" units or at such time as the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority deems the units to be out of compliance with the rental occupancy requirements in the Affordable Housing Guidelines for a period of more than year. ARTICLE III APPROVALS AND EXEMPTIONS 3.1 Sidewalk and Landscaping Improvements. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any portion of the development, the Applicant shall have installed a sidewalk with a parkway strip meeting the City Engineer's design requirements-along the entire lot frontage abutting East Hyman Avenue. Appropriate street tree plantings shall occur in the parkway strip along the propertyfrontage on both East Hyman Avenue and South Spring Street. The Applicant shall submit a landscaping plan for plantings in the right-of-way for review and approval by the City Parks Department prior to installation of right-of-way plantings. 3.2 Trash/Utility Service Area. A trash/utility service area with a linear footage of fourteen (14) feet and a depth of ten (10) feet shall be provided between the existing building and the alleyway. A trash compactor shall be installed to justify the reduction in the trash/utility/recycling area. 3.3 School Lands Dedication Fee. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, the Applicant shall pay afee-in-lieu of land dedication in conjunction with any residential development in the subdivision. The Applicant shall pay the school lands dedication fee associated with the subdivision as calculated by the City Zoning Officer using the dedication schedule prior to building permit issuance as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.630.030, School Lands Dedication: Dedication Schedule. The Applicant shall provide the market value of the land including site improvements, but excluding the value of structures on the site. 3.4 Park Development Impact Fee. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fee, the Applicant shall pay a park development fee in the amount of $19,176.20 prior to building permit issuance. The fee is assessed based on the following calculation: Proposed Commercial: 2,440 s. f. of new net leasable square feet multiplied by $1,530.00 per 1,000 s.f. _ $3,733.20 {00036009.DOC/ 1 } 3 II~III ~~f~~ Ili 1 ~~1~ ~~~~~I III ~I~ I~I ~II it~~I III i~~I 0592~5/~2006 09:121 JRNICE K VOS CRUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 51.00 D 0.00 Proposed Residential: 2 (four-bedroom) Free Market Residential Units multiplied by $3,634 per unit = $7,268.00 3 (two-bedroom) Residential Units multiplied by $2,725 per unit = $8,175.00 Total: $19,176.20 3.5 Impact Fees. The Applicant will pay all impact fees shall be paid prior to the issuance to the issuance of a building permit. 3.6 Employee Housing Mitigation. The development shall contain gross affordable housing floor area equal to or greater than 30%free-market residential floor area. This percentage shall be verified by the City Zoning Officer prior to building permit issuance. 3.7 Water Department Standards. Hyman Avenue Holdings shall comply-with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, and with applicable standards of Title 8 of the City's Municipal Code (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code), as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Each of the units within the building shall have individual water meters. 3.8 Sanitation District Standards. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations with respect to the Project: (a) Sanitation service is contingent upon Hyman Avenue Holdings compliance with ACSD rules, regulations, and specifications at the time of construction; (b) All clear water connections are prohibited, i.e., ground water (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains), including entrances to underground parking garages (if any); (c) All improvements below grade development shall require installation of a pumping station; (d) Shared service line agreements are required where more than one unit is served by a single service line; (e) All ACSD total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3.9 Electrical Department Requirements. The Applicant shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician in order to determine if the existing transformer on the neighboring property has sufficient capacity for the Hannah Dustin Redevelopment. If a new supplemental transformer is required to be installed on the subject property, the Applicant shall provide for a new transformer and its location shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to installation. The Applicant shall dedicate an easement to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the supplemental transformer for maintenance purposes, if a supplemental transformer is installed. 3.10 Subdivision Plat. The Final Plat shall be recorded in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado within 180 days after City Council's final approval of Ordinance No. 16(Series of 2006). 3.11 Subdivision Agreement. This Subdivision Agreement shall be recorded within 180 (00036009.DOC/ 4 I ~IIIII II!!I II~I.l~ III I~II~ I(Il II~III~ I IIII~ ICI III ~ /2~5/~2006 09: 12i JRIJICE K 'JCS CLiUDi LL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 51 .00 D 0.00 days after the Citys grant of final approval of the Project (Ordinance No. 16, Series 2006). 3.12 Fire Department Reauirements. The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system and alarm system that meets the requirements of the Fire Marshal. 3.13 Building Permit Reauirements. Any building permit application for the Project shall include and/or depict the following information: (a) A signed copy of Resolution No. 09 (Series of 2006) and Ordinance No. 16 (Series of 2006) granting final land use approval. (b) The conditions of approval of Ordinance No. 16(Series of 2006) shall be printed on the cover page of the building permit set. (c) A completed tap permit for sewer service from ACSD. (d) A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. 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. (e) Construction Management Plan pursuant to the Building Department's requirements. The Construction Management Plan shall include an identification of construction hauling routes, construction phasing, and a Construction Traffic and Parking plan for review and approval by the City Engineer and Streets Department Superintendent. The Construction Management Plan shall conform to the standards and requirements for constnaction management plans in effect at the time of building permit submission. (f) A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. (g) A detailed excavation plan that utilizes vertical soil stabilization techniques for review and approval by the City Engineer. 3.14 Vested Rights. The development approvals granted by the City pursuant to Ordinance No. 16(Series of 2006) shall constitute a site~pecific development plan, which is vested for a period three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order by the City. Article IV Prior Approvals and Instruments There are no recorded prior approvals for this Subdivision. Article V Subdivision Improvements 50036009.DOC/1} IIIIIII~~II~II~~II~IIIIIIIiI~II~IIIIIIIIII IliIIIIII~~~~ 5989 as os~lzi dRNICE K v05 CRUDILL P1TK IId COUNTY CO R 51.00 0 0.00 Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy with respect to the Project, Hyman Avenue Holdings shall accomplish the following subdivision improvements (collectively, the "Subdivision Improvements"), all as further depicted and described on the Final Plat: (1) installation of a detached sidewalk, location of the existing driveway entrance, with a parkway strip meeting the City Engineer's design requirements along the entire lotfrontage abutting East Hyman Avenue, along with two ANSI-conforming handicapped ramps at the Hyman and Spring intersection, and curb replacement forthe existing driveway cut on Hyman Avenue, at an estimated cost of , (2) installation of appropriate parkway plantings, including trees, grass, and irrigation, in the arkway strip along the property frontage on both East Hyman Avenue, at an estimated cost of In order to ensure construction and installation of the Subdivision Improvements (1) and (2) described immediately above, Hyman Avenue Holdings shall provide to the City either an irrevocable standby letter of credit from a financially responsible lender or a bond in the amount of Said letter of credit or bond shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of a grading or access permit with respect to the Project, shall be in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, and shall give the City the unconditional right, upon default hereof by Hyman Avenue Holdings, subject to the provisions of Article VI below, to draw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any outstanding and delinquent bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess letter of credit or bond amount to be applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in Subdivision Improvements already constructed before the unused remainder, if any, of such letter of credit or bond is released to Hyman Avenue Holdings. Notwithstanding the foregoing, delays or other problems resulting from acts of God or other events beyond the reasonable control of Hyman Avenue Holdings shall not constitute a default hereunder so long as a good faith effort is being made to remedy the problem and the problem is in fact resolved within a reasonable period for time following its occurrence. As portions of the Subdivision Improvements are completed, the City Engineer shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he shall authorize a reduction in the outstanding amount of the letter of credit or bond equal to an agreed upon estimated cost for the completed portion of the Subdivision Improvements; provided, however that ten percent (10%) of the estimated costs shall be v~ithheld until all of the Subdivision Improvements are completed and approved by the City of Aspen Public Works Director. It is the express understanding of the parties that compliance with the procedures set forth in Article VI below pertaining to the procedure for default and amendment to this Subdivision Agreement shall be required with respect to the enforcement and implementation of these financial assurances and guarantees to be provided by Hyman Avenue Holdings as set forth above.. Article VI Non-Compliance and Request for Amendments or Extensions In the event that the City determines that Hyman Avenue Holdings is not acting in ~~c~~~~~~~mpliance with the terms of this Subdivision Agreement or the Final Plat, the City 6 ~I I ~~~I~ ~~ill) III ~~~~II ~IlI ~III~~I ~~~ ~CII~ III ~~~~ 099 S93 c 09:121 JRNICE K VOS CRUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 51.00 D 0.00 shall notify Hyman Avenue Holdings in writing specifying the alleged noncompliance and asking that Hyman Avenue Holdings remedy the alleged non-compliance within such reasonable time as the City may determine, but not less than 30 days. If the City determines that Hyman Avenue Holdings has not complied within such time, the City may issue and serve upon Hyman Avenue Holdings a written order specifying the alleged noncompliance and requiring Hyman Avenue Holdings to remedy the same within thirty (30) days. Within twenty (20) days of the receipt of such order, Hyman Avenue Holdings may file with the City Engineering Department either a notice advising the City that it is in compliance or a written request to determine any one or both of the following matters: (a) Whether fhe alleged noncompliance exists or did exist; or (b) Whether a variance, extension of time or amendment to the Final Plat orthis Subdivision Agreement should be granted with respect to any such non-compliance which is determined to exist. Upon the receipt of such request, the City shall promptly schedule a meeting of the parties to consider the matters set forth in the order of noncompliance. The meeting of the parties shall be convened and conducted pursuant to the procedures normally established by the City. If the City determines that a noncompliance exists which has not been remedied, it may issue such orders as may be appropriate, including the imposition of daily fines until such non-compliance has been remedied, the withholding of permits and/or certificates of occupancy, as applicable; provided, however no order shall terminate any land use approval. The City may also grant such variances, extensions of time or amendments to the Final Plat orto this Subdivision Agreement as it may deem appropriate under the circumstances. The parties expressly acknowledge and agree that the City shall not unreasonably refuse to extend the time periods for performance hereunder if Hyman Avenue Holdings demonstrates that the reasons for the delay(s) which necessitate said extension(s) result from acts of God or other events beyond the reasonable control of Hyman Avenue Holdings, despite good faith efforts on its part to perform in a timely manner. Article VII General Provisions 7. 1 Successors and Assigns. The provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inu2 to the benefit of Hyman Avenue Holdings and the City and their respective successors and assigns. 7.2 Governing Law. This Subdivision Agreement shall be subject to and constnaed in accordance with the lauds of the State of Colorado. 7.3 Inconsistency. If any of the provisions of this Subdivision Agreement or any paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section or the application thereof in any circumstance is invalidated, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Subdivision Agreement, and the application ofany such provision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, word, or section in any other circumstance shall not be affected thereby. 7.4 Integration. This Subdivision Agreement and any exhibits attached hereto contains the entire understanding between the parties hereto with respect to the transactions {00036009.DOC/ 1 } 7 III-I IIII~ Ilf~li III {I~~II III) I~I!II~ !II ~~Ifl ~~~I !IE~I 099 g/~26 6 03: 12i JRNI.E K VCS CRUDIIL PITKIN CW4TY CO R 51.00 D 0.00 contemplated hereunder. Hyman Avenue Holdings and its successors and assigns may on its own initiative petition the City Council for an amendment to the Final Plat orthis Subdivision Agreement or for an extension of one or more of the time periods required for the performance hereunder. The City Council shall not unreasonably deny such petition for amendment or extension after considering all appropriate circumstances. Any such amendment or extension of time shall only become effective upon the execution by all parties hereto that are affected by the proposed amendment. 7.5 Headings. Numerical and title headings contained in this Subdivision Agreement are for convenience only, and shall not be deemed determinative of the substance contained herein. As used herein, where the context requires, the use of the singular shall include the plural and the use of any gender shall include all genders. 7.6 Acceptance and Recordation of Final Plat. Upon execution of this Subdivision Agreement by both parties hereto, the City agrees to approve and execute and the Final Plat and to accept the same for recordation in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado, upon payment of the recordation fees by Hyman Avenue Holdings. 7.7 Notice. Notices to be given to the parties to this Subdivision Agreement shall be considered to be given if delivered by facsimile, if hand delivered, or if delivered to the parties by registered or certified mail at the addresses indicated below, or such other addresses as may be substituted upon written notice by the parties or their successors or assigns: The City: City of Aspen City Manager; Community Development Director 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Hyman Avenue Holdings: With a copy to: Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC c/o Peter Fornell 402 Midland Park Place Aspen, CO 81611 Facsimile: (970) 925-6767 Curtis Sanders, Esq. Krabacher & Sanders, PC 201 North Mill Street Aspen, CO 81611 Facsimile: (970) 925-1181 1111111111-IIIIIIII~IIIiIIII~I~IEIIIIIIiiIIIIIIIIiiIlEl.6 99890 00 9:121 JRA.CE K VOS .R (00036009.DOC/ 1} 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above vmtten. CITY: CITY OF ASPEN DO, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Hel K anderud, r Attest- _ ~=~~~~ Kathryn S. Koc , ity Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: '„John orce r, City Attorney Hyman Avenue Holdings: By: By: Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, as owner of Unit A, Hannah Dustin Condominiums, according to the First Amended Plat of the Hannah D ti Condominiums, recorded on August 29, 2006 in P ook 80 at Page ~2eception No. 627927, Pitkin C _Colorado. / / Managing Member Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, as owner of Unit A, Hannah Dustin Condominiums, according to the First Amended Plat of the Hannah Dtondominiugms ordPd on August 29, 2006 in a Pa ce tion No. 627927, Pitkin C tv ~o orad as its Managing Member t IIIIII IIIII ~~~~~~ IIII ICIIII IIII IIIIIII I{I IIIfI IIII III{ 0 9g 8~ 006009 : 12i JRNIC~ K VOS ..F {00036009.DOC/ 1} 9 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) h The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day Helen Klanderud as Mayor of the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corps Witness my hand and official seal, My commission expires: Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) by r Q C: n ~ e 4. ~~ ~° ' • ° ~1 . ,: °`~~ ~ ^~ ~ ~~ fe4yComriia~~,;~;: ,sa;;412512009 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thisday of y Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk of the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corpor io`n..°,°. ~!~00 Witness my hand and official seal, r..`~`>' ~' °•'3 _. 7 My commission expires: 7i~J` a r 'r ~ Y~ Notary Public ~. _ ` STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) "dw 8or.,ti;>e!s C;:oiros 09/292009 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2006 by Peter Fornell, Managing Member of Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. Witness my hand and official seal, My commission expires: 13randi-L. Jepson /Notary Public ~~~j~ ~ ,~, My Commission Expires 07/25/2009 Notary Public --~=~Lt 601 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 Q~pRY PUe II II` I I```I` f f! `I` i ~•'~ ~i~ I~L~IIIlIII~II~~~~~~iI111~!IIIIIIIIII~II~IIII~~I~~~~ilLeO 9g~O s c+0 9slZ~ N• ' B~$ON :. JHNICE K VOS CRUDILL PITKIN COUNTY ~. 10036009.DOC/1} FOR COQ-OAP ,- -~x~~ ~r~ ~ ru~ AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT FOR THE ~,.i,i~~yV~z~,~G~ HANNAH DUSTIN SUBDIVISION This AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVLSION AGREEMENT FOR THE HANNAH DUSTIN SUBDIVISION (this "Amendment") is made this ~- day of November, 2006 by and among the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation (the "City'; Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, a Colorado limited liabi]ity company ("HAH'7 and The Snowmass Corporation, a Colorado corporation ("TSC'. RECITALS A. HAH and the City are parties to that certain Subdivision Agreement for the Hannah Dustin Subdivision recorded in the real estate records of Pitkin County, Colorado on September 25, 2006 undo Reception No, 528933 (the "Subdivision Agreemcnt'~. B. The SIA appliesto certain real property in Pitkin County, Colorado known as the Hannah Dustin Subdivision, according to the Plat recorded in Plat Book 81 at Page 44 as Reception No. 528934 (the "Subdivisioa'~. C. Subsequent to the recordation of the Subdivision Agreement, HAH conveyed to TSC a portion of the Subdivision legally described as Unit A, Hannah-Dustin Condominiums, according to the Plat thereof recorded October 2, 1985 in Plat Book 17 at Page 78 as Reception No. 271969 and Fvst Amended Plat of the Hannah Dustin Condominiums recorded August 29, 2006 in Plat Book 80 at Page 3 as Reception No. 527927, and as defined and described by the Amended and Restated Condominium Declaration of Hannah-Dustin, a condominium recorded August 29, 2006 as Reception No. 527925 and as shown on the Hannah Dustin Subdivision Plat, recorded September 25, 2006 in Plat Book 81 at Page 44 as Reception No. 528934 ("Unit "A"). D. The City, HAH and TSC desire to amend the Subdivision Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. AGREEMENT Now therefore, for good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby confessed and acknowledged, the City, HAH and TSC hereby amend the Subdivision Agreement as follows: 1. There is hereby added to the Subdivision Agreement a new Article VIII captioned "Project Phasing/Certificates of Occupancy" as follows: Article VIII Project Phasing/Certificates of Occupancy 8.1 Residential and Commercial Phases. The parties acknowledge that the Project may be constructed in phases: The residential phase (the `Residential Phase', consisting of two (2) free-mazY.et residential units, two (2) affordable housing units, and ten (10) parking spaces in an underground parking garage (the "Garage"); and the commercial phase (the "Commercial Phase"), consisting of 2,440 square feet of office space and one (])affordable housing unit. The Residential Phase will be constructed on Unit B of the Hannah Dustin Condominiums according to the First Amended Plat thereof recorded. August 29, I I~iI~ VIII IIII IIII ~IIIIItIIIIII IIII III IIII IIII IIII 0 S 9 0S 006009:53 20D6, as Reception No. 627927 in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County (the "Condominium Plat"). The Commercial Phase will be corishmcted on the westuly half of the property described as Unit A of the Hannah Dustin Condomm~ums on the Condominium Plat. It is also acknowledged thaz each phase contains elements (affordable housing units and parking) that are required to serve and mitigate impactr for the enfve Project The City agrees thaz each of the Residential Phase and Commercial Phase may be undertaken and completed separately and independently of the other aad that a Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for each phase, independently of the other, provided thaz (i) construction for which a Certificate of Occupancy is being requested has bean. completed in accordance with relevant building permitr to the extent thaz it qualifies for a Certificate of Occupancy pursuant to the City's building regulations, (ii) no defauit exists under the terms of this Agreement and, (iii) the other phase of the Project has obtained a building permit, is az least fifty percent (50%) complete and thaz the City has roceivrd reasonable assurances from the deve]opu of the incomplete phase that such developer has or can obtain adequate funds to complete that phase. For purposes of this Agreement, a phase of the Project shall be deemed to be fifty percent (50%) complete when the framing inspection approval has been attained. The parties also understand that a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued for any phase of the Project if the physical access to such phase is provided through or across areas of the other unfinished phase that are dangerous due to ongoing construction. 8.2 Garaec. Upon completion of construction of the Garage to the extent necessary for the Garage to function as a parking garage (and prior to completion of the remandcr of the Residential Phase, including other elements of the Residential Phase that may be located in the Garage such as mechanical rooms) and provided that (i) construction of the Garage has been completed in accordance with relevant building permits to the extent that it qualifies for a Certificate of Occupancy pursuant to the City's building regulations, and (ii) no default exists under the terms of this Agreement, a Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for the Garage (but not the remainder of the Residential Phase). Upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the Garage, the owner of the Residential Phase shall be entitled to condominiumiae the parking spaces in the Garage. 2. HAH signed the Subdivision Agreement in two places and thus is a typographical error in HAH's second signaturo block. The reference in the second signature block for HAH to "Unit A, Hannah Dustin Condominiums..." is heroby corrected to make reference to "Unit B, Hannah Dustin Condominums...." 3, The Subdivision Agreement, as amended by this Amendment, remains in full force and effect. pl WITNESS WHEREOF, the partes have hereunto set their hands as of the day and year first above written. City of Aspc C br o, olorado municipal corporation sy: ~~ Helen Klanderud, ayor u N fN'~1 NII 530875 Attest: ' ~IIIINIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIII VIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII.001/09o bay :53 ay: ~/~~ K hryn S. Koc Clerk [Signatures Continue on Following Page] '' ,uI n~ nN 530875 III~~I,IIIIIIIII~uTI~I ~IIII II~,I~IIIII IIN I~II.00 t009D D0 D09:53 Approved as to Form: Attomcy Peter LLC, a Colorado limited liability company Member The Snowmass Corporate Colorado corporation Ey: U . Title. ~~ir L/H' STATE OF l.~'^~'r-'-f'P' ) ~ ss COUNTY OF ~.(,~'i~+~v ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this~day ~ Helen Klanderud as Mayor, and byKathryn S. Koch as Clerk, on behalf of the Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: 04'1~/?.~} 4 ~ _ ~~~ _ STATE OF . ~aclo ) } ss. COUNTY OF 1 ~Y~ ~ r1 ) ~GK{E The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~. day of ~m~ Fornell as Managing Member of Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC. l ~ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Sj~.f90 1; STATE OF ) ~~, L~i, _ ) ss. COUNTY OF ~L.~t/~ ) by a ~~td~ f~K before me LSis ~ day of 2006, by _ of The Snowmass Corporation. Wit ~ 'y h •d ~cial seal. My ~iEes "s i3i.UEKAMP= d5,~, _ _. 08 Notary Public 3 ORDINANCE N0. 16 (SERIES OF 2006) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CTTY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS THE HANNAH DUSTIN BUILDING SUBDIVISION TO ADD 2,440 SQUARE FEET OF NET LEASABLE SPACE, TWO FREE MARKET RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND THREE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-27-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Hyman Avenue Holdings, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, requesting approval of subdivision, various growth management reviews, commercial design review, and condominiumization to add 2,440 squaze feet of net leasable space, two (2) free-mazket residential units, and three (3) affordable housing units to the Hannah-Dusting Building located at 300 S. Spring Street; and, WHEREAS, the subject property contains 12,000 squaze feet and is zoned MU (Mixed Use); and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval, with conditions, of the proposed subdivision and associated land use requests; and, WHEREAS, during a public hearing on April 4, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 09, Series of 2006, by a six to zero (6-0) vote, approving a growth management review for expansion of mixed use development, a growth management review for free-market residential units within a mixed use development, a growth management review for affordable housing, commercial design review, a wmmercial design standard variance, special review to vary the utility/trash/recycling azea, and recommending that City Council approve with conditions, the proposed Subdivision and condominiumization to add 2,440 square feet of net leasable space, two (2) free- mazket residential units, and three (3) affordable housing units to the Hannah-Dusting Building located at 300 S. Spring Street; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen 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 Plamting and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIII IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII 5963em9 ea:ss JpNICE K VOS CBUDtLL PI7KIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, (and whereas the Planning and Zoning Commission approved with conditions, a growth management review for expansion of mixed use development, a growth management review for free-market residential units within a mixed use development, a growth management review for affordable housing, commercial design review, a commercial design review variance, and special review to vary the utility/trashlrecycling azea dimensions), the City Council approves, the proposed Subdivision and condominiumization to add 2,440 square feet of net leasable space, two (2) free-mazket residential units, and three (3) affordable housing units to the Hannah- Dusting Building located at 300 S. Spring Street, with the conditions contained herein. Section 2: Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall record a subdivision plat and agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480, SubditZSion, within 180 days of approval. Section 3: Building Permit Aoolication The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final City Council Ordinance and P&Z Rosolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the wver page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepazed by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground rechazge 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. e. A construction management plan pursuant to the Building Department's requirements. The construction management plan shall include an identification of construction hauling routes for review and approval by the City Engineer and Streets Department Superintendent. f. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. g. A detailed excavation plan that utilizes vertical soil stabilization techniques for review and approval by the City Engineer. III~IIII,IIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIII00 91~Y~20i9008 5S Section 4: Dimensional Reaairemeots The Hannah-Dustin building shall continue to be in compliance with the dimensional requirements of the Mixed Use (MU) Zone District. The City of Aspen Zoning Officer shall verify compliance with the allowed dimensional requirements at the time of building pemut submittal. Section 5: Off-street Parkin The project shall provide sixteen (16) off-street parking spaces, four (4) of which shall be designated for the use of the free mazket residential units, three (3) of which shall be designated for use by the affordable housing units, and nine (9) of which shall be designated for the use of the commercial space and guest parking. Section 6: Sidewalk and Landscaping Improvements T'he Applicant shall install a sidewalk detached from the curb with a pazkway strip along East Hyman Avenue for the length of the property frontage that meets the City Engineer's standards prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any portion of the development. Appropriate street tree plantings shall occur in the pazkway strip along the property frontage on both East Hyman Avenue and South Spring Street. The Applicant shall submit a landscaping plan for plantings in the right-of--way for review and approval by the City Parks Department prior to installation ofright-of--way plantings. Section 7: Trasb/Utility Service Area A trash/utility service area with a linear footage of fourteen (14) feet and a depth of ten (]0) feet shall be provided between the existing building and the alleyway. A trash compactor shall be installed to justify the reduction in the trash/utility/recycling area. Section 8: Affordable Housing Unit The Applicant shall record a deed restriction on each of the affordable housing units prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the building classifying the units as Category 2 units. If the Applicant chooses to deed restrict the affordable housing units as rental units, the Applicant shall convey a 1/10 of a percent, undivided interest in the units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any portion of the building. The units may be deed-restricted as rental units, but the units shall become ownership units at such time as the owners would request a change to "for-sale" units or at such time as the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority deems the units to be out of compliance with the rental occupancy requirements in the Affordable Housing Guidelines for a period of more than year. Section 9: Fire Mitigation The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system and alarm system that meets the requirements of the Fire Mazshal in the entire building, including existing spaces. Section 10: Water Department Reapirements 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 II~III VIII II~II IIII IIII III~II I~III NI III IIII NII 5263 09 ea : sr, JRNICE K VOS CRUOILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 31.00 D 0.00 Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Each of the units within the building shall have individual water meters. Section 11: Sanitation District Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No cleaz water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. All improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. If more than one unit is to be served by a single service line, the Applicant shall enter into a shared service line agreement. Section 12: Electrical Department Requirements The Applicant shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician in order to determine if the existing transformer on the neighboring property has sufficient capacity for the Hannah-Dustin Redevelopment. If a new supplemental transformer is required to be installed on the Hannah-Dustin property, the Applicant shall provide for a new transformer and its location shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to installation. The Applicant shall dedicate an easement to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the supplemental transformer for maintenance purposes, if a supplemental transformer is installed. Sectiog 13: Exterior Li Mine 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 l4: School Lands Dedication Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School lands dedication, the Applicant shall pay afee-in-lieu of ]and dedication prior to building permit issuance. The City of Aspen Zoning Officer shall calculate the amount due using the calculation methodology and fee schedule in affect at the time of building permit submittal. The Applicant shall provide the mazket value of the land including site improvements, but excluding the value of structures on the site. Section 15: Park Development Imnact Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fee, the Applicant shall pay a pazk development impact fee in the amount of $19,176.20 prior to building permit issuance. The fee is assessed based on the following calculation: Proposed Commercial: 2,440 SF of new net leasable squaze feet multiplied by $1,530.00 per 1,000 SF=$3,733.20 Proposed Residential 2 (four-bedroom) Free Market Residential Unit multiplied by $3,634 per unit= $7,268.00 3 (two-bedroom) Residential Units multiplied by $2,725 per unit= 8 175.00 Total: $19,176.20 IIIIIIIfII~II~IIIIIIII~I~INllllllflflllll~lllllllllll 5g z3ee90s~s ~Tr ~~ R 31.00 D 0.00 5 Section 16: Impact Fees All other impact fees, as applicable, at the time of building permit submission shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Section 17: Emnlovee Housia Mitieation The development shall contain gross affordable housing floor azea equal to or greater than 30 /o of the gross free-mazket residential floor azea. This percentage shall be verified by the City Zoning Officer prior to building permit issuance. Section 18- All material representations and commihnents made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awazded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 19: This ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 20: 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. Section 21: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 12s' day of June, 2006, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen days prior to which, a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED asp ided by law, by the City Council of the City ofAspen on the 24s' day ofApril, 200 ~/C ed He n Mayor FINALLY, a ted, passed and approv this 26`" day of June, 2006. Att t: ICathrn S. h, C Clerk Helen lin ayor Ilulllllll~hllllllllllllllllllllllllllVIIIIIIIIIII 0 96D 09 08.5•. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jehff'R'orcester,Gty Attorney IIIIIII IIIIIIII~III~IIIII~IIIII~IIIIIN III~IIN 59 6 6 ~ 9 6 l PI7KIN COUNTY CO RIII,II00 7'IZDZB00 08:$$ 0