The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.council.regular.20060410 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA April 1 0, 2006 5:00 P.M. I. Call to Order II. RollCall III. Scheduled Public Appearances a) Green Tree Award IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) VI. Special Orders of the Day a) Mayor's Comments b) Concilmembers' Comments c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VII. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Resolution #20, 2006 - Automatic Meter Reading Mountain States Pipe & Supply Contract b) c) d) e) Resolution #21, 2006 - Main Street Transit Lane Signing & Striping Contract Resolution #22, 2006 - 2 Ford Small SUV Hybrids Contract Resolution #23, 2006 - Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Planning Contract Minutes - February 14, March 27, 28, 2006 VIII. First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #14,2006 - Supplemental Appropriation P.H. 4/24 IX. Public Hearings a) Resolution #19, 2006 - Eligibility of Recycle Center for COWOP b) Ordinance #50-A, 2005 - Miscellaneous Land Use Code Amendments c) Ordinance #53, 2005 - Brumder Plat Vacation (Reconsidered) d) Ordinance #54, 2005 - Brumder Lot Split (Reconsidered) e) Ordinance #2,2006 - 202 North Monarch Blue Vic (Reconsidered) f) Ordinance #10.2006 - Housing Guidelines g) Ordinance #6, 2006 - Boomerang Vacant Parcel Rezoning and Lot Split X. Action Items XI. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting April 24. 2006 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. MEMORANDUM ~~~/I' a... TO: Mayor and Council CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager FROM: Lee Ledesma, Utilities Operations Manager' CC: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Director' CC: John Worcester, City Attorney DATE: April 3, 2006 RE: Pilot Program for Automated Meter Reading System -- Contract with Mountain States Pipe and Supply for Hexagram Fixed Area Network SUMMARY: City of Aspen Utilities department desires to implement a pilot program for an automated meter-reading program that would encompass 200 electric accounts and 200 water accounts. The cost of this pilot program, after existing technology credits, is $69,138. One half of the pilot program is proposed to take place at Burlingame Ranch and the other half of the program would occur in Aspen's downtown core. This pilot program would involve the installation of two Data Collection Units (DCUs), one placed at the community center of the new Burlingame Ranch and the other placed at the city's Aspen Mountain tank site. The technology involved in this pilot program would involve a Hexagram fixed area network that embraces the most current automatic meter reading technology, which the city Utilities department has deemed a more appropriate direction for a city pilot program, rather than looking at handheld upgrades or reading by vans, which is technology that is slowing being phased out. Additionally, the Hexagram system transmits all data on a secure channel, using frequencies that would be licensed to us by the FCC. Low power, unlicensed frequencies are never used by this system. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Appropriated budget exists for 2006 in both Water and Electric funds for meter upgrades. See "Financial Implications" section for details. DISCUSSION: The Mountain States Pipe and Supply contract specifically includes the installation of 200 Hexagram modules in place of Badger water meter remotes outside structures served by city water, as well as the installation of Invenys Electric meters on the outside of structures served by city electric. Also included in this contract is a programmer for the individual Meter Transmitter Units, as well as the FCC application fee. Mountain States Pipe and Supply has also agreed to give us a credit for existing, uninstalled AMR technology the city currently owns. 1 A main benefit of the Hexagram technology it that it does not require access into individual properties in order to retrofit water and electric meters from the current manual reading system to the new automatic reading system. The burden on our customers in not having to set up an appointment with our field staff and be at home for the retrofit is a major factor in our choice of this type of technology. Additionally, this technology will provide savings oflabor costs associated with our staff setting up those same appointments. Other benefits ofthis technology are the removal of access problems for our meter readers involving dogs, snow, reader safety, and customer pnvacy. In the automatic meter reading (AMR) field, there is only one product that utilizes a fixed area network system that functions with both water and electric meters, and that is technology created by Hexagram Inc. out of Cleveland, Ohio. Mountain States Pipe and Supply, out of Colorado Springs, CO is the only representative of this new Hexagram technology in the states of Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas, Arizona and California. CURRENT ISSUES: AMR technology has matured over the last few years. Previous AMR technology has included upgrading handhelds for radio reads to be used on the hard-to-read meters, as well as drive-by reading with vans for larger sections of utility service areas. City utilities has researched both these options, as well as the fixed area networks. Fixed area networks have been regarded as the best and most proficient way to acquire data, but have been seen as too expensive until now. Hexagram is not encumbered with legacy products that are approaching their "end of life" cycle and are a burden to profits. Hexagram is focused on one product-fixed area networks-and as such all of their engineering talents and manufacturing efforts are focused on providing the most cost effective solution for reading meters worldwide. As the utility industry embraces the variables that will drive directional change, there is one assumption the remains true: the organizations that retain the capability to control and distribute data and information gathered from their customers will be positioned to control their own destiny. Fixed area networks allow for constant information gathering. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 2006 Water and Electric capital budgets contain the following associated funding. Water Fund Capital project entitled "Meter Reading Upgrades" as part of the IS Plan contains $65,000. Water Fund Capital project entitled "Meter Replacement Program" contains $21,000. Electric Fund Capital project entitled "Meter Replacement Program" contains $10,000. It is our request to utilize the $65,000 contained in the Water Fund under our IS Plan to fund the majority ofthis program with the balance of$4,138 being funded from the Electric "Meter Replacement Program" capital project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS: First, a fixed area network system is the only true way to provide virtually real time data on water and electric usage. Conservation of our energy and water resources is critical to the economic survival of utilities and their customers. Secondly, reduction in fuel expenditure and the resulting green house gases triggered by the need to manually read these four hundred meters will be eliminated thus conserving non-renewable resources, as well as provided a greener solution to data collection. Conservation of our energy and water resources is critical to the economic survival of today' s utilities and their customers. This is why Hexagram offers the ability to read meters during a 2 variety of intervals-from 2 readings per day for residential customers to every 15 minutes for high value commercial customers. Armed with this information, energy theft, meter tampering and water flow analysis leads to increased savings and reduced costs. Accurate trending and consumption pattern analysis can also be performed allowing for create competitive rate programs. Essentially, each of our customer's meter can become part of our system management and marketing toolbox resulting in greater asset utilization, enhanced operating efficiencies and increased customer satisfaction overall. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Mountain States Pipe and Supply contract in the amount of $69,138 for the Hexagram Fixed Area Network Automatic Meter Reading Pilot Program. ALTERNATIVES: Rejecting of this contract award will result in the continuation of our existing manual meter reading program for 100 percent of the city's utility meters. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve the contract resolutions, thereby authorizing the City Manager to sign the above-mentioned contract for the Hexagram Fixed Area Network Automatic Meter Reading Pilot Program. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ,~ ~ oy 'Its ~ 3 RESOLUTION # to (Series of 2006) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND MOUNTAIN STATES PIPE AND SUPPLY, SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING EXPANDED HEXAGRAM FIXED AREA NETWORK AUTOMATIC METER READING PILOT PROGRAM 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 Mountain States Pipe and Supply, 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 Mountain States Pipe and Supply, regarding Hexagram Fixed Area Network Automatic Meter Reading Pilot Program, 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: Helen Kalin Klanderud, 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 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 MOUNTAIN STATES PIPE AND SUPPLY, ("Professional"). For and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 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. 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 care and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to this agreement shall be completed no later than September 1, 2006. 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. 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 SIXTY-NINE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED THIRTY-EIGHT ($69,138.00). Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. Non-Assignability. 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 payor be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub-contractor. Termination. The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefore, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 1 or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepared 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 may be determined. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Professional warrants that slhe 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 slhe 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. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and 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. 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 are 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 subcontrac- tor 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 City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 2 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 incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the 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. 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) Wotker.s' Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employer.s' 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 paragraph. (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 City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 3 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 severability of interests provision. (iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) 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. (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 insurance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried 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 the 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, terminated 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 minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 4 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 Govemmentallmmunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.RS., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its employees. City'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. 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. 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: City Manager City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Professional: Jerry Uhlman Mountain States Pipe and Supply 111 West Las Vegas Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903 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. 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 City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 5 the written consent of the City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence. 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. 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] City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 6 ATTESTED BY: WITNESSED BY: W~'8~~ City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: By: Title: Date: PROFESSIONAL: Mountain States Pipe and Supply 111 West Las Vegas Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903 Date: Page: 7 EXHIBIT" A" to Professional Services Agreement Scope of Work Mountain States Pipe and Supply Jerry Uhlman 111 West Las Vegas Colorado Springs, CO 80903 800. 777. 7173 Hexagram MfU Interface Units Hexagram MfU for cormect to Badger Remote MIU Generator Residential Water Meter 200 $115.00 $23,000.00 Electric Meters Electric Meters with Invensys ICON Solid State 2S Electric Meter for 2. Hexagram MIU Residential Use equipped with Hexagram MIU 100 $155.00 $15,500.00 Electric Meters with Invensys ICON Solid State 12S Electric Meter for 2b Hexagram MIU Residential Use equipped with Hexagram MIU 100 $210.00 $21,000.00 Data Collection and Installation Hardware and Software Cell Control Unit (CCll); Base Unit, 120V (GSM/GPRS); Includes DCU Installation; Electric Service to be provided by Utility; Cell Phone Service to 3 DCU - Hexagram bo provided by Utility 2 $7,500.00 $15,000.00 MfU Programmer 4 PSION Psion Programmer $2,200.00 $2,200.00 Fixed Network Hosting Service 5 Hosting Service Hosting Service Provided by USM&T; See Note 1 0 $100.00 6 Customer Support Customer Support (Starts 2nd Year) 0 $1,000.00 City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 8 FCC Licensing Fee 7 FCC Application Fee $400.00 $400.00 Implementation During this implementation of the initial system, MSPS will provide all reporting of readings to Aspen. MSPS will provide an Upload file in MVRS fonnal to Aspen 8 for uploading purposes. Meter Installation Water Meter Install Hexagram Module in place of Badger Meter 9 Installation Remote Readout on outside of home 200 $25.00 $5,000.00 Electric Meter Install Invensys Electric Meter in place of existing meter 10 Installation in residentia12S and 12S applications 200 $25.00 $5,000.00 Itron Credit II Water Meters Badger Water Meters with Itron ERT 96 $120.00 ($11,520.00) 12 Electric Meters ScWwnberger Electric Meters with AMR 96 $52.00 ($4,992.00) 13 ReadOne Pro ReadOne Pro Progranuner $1,450.00 ($1,450.00) Hosting Service US Metering and Technology will provide: (1) A daily reading file 10 the Utility; (2) Upload file in MVRS Upload Fonnal with end of the Month Readings; (3) Monthly Report of Readings. First Year of Readings Provided at No Charge. City of Aspen Agreement for Professional Services MSPS_Hexagram AMR Solution Page: 9 '"'' b MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John D. Krueger, Director of Transportation THRU: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager DATE OF MEMO: March 31,2006 MEETING DATE: April 10, 2006 RE: SH 82/ MAIN STREET TRANSIT LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING CONTRACT SUMMARY Attached is a contract between the City of Aspen and Kolbe Striping Inc. for the SH 82/ Main Street Transit Lane Signing and Striping Project in the amount $109,335.00. This project has been approved for EOTC funding and will be managed by the City of Aspen Transportation Department. Aspen Funds will not be used for this contract. The EOTC as an advisory committee cannot enter into a contract. Therefore, the City of Aspen as an EOTC member will enter into the contract with Kolbe Striping Incorporated. If the contract is approved by Council, a Notice to Proceed will be issued to the contractor and work can begin shortly. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council has approved the SH 82 / Main Street Transit Lane Signing and Striping Project at previous work sessions and has directed staff to implement the project. Recently, Council directed staff to submit a funding request to the Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) for this project. The EOTC approved the funding request at its February 2, 2006 meeting. As EOTC protocol requires, the funding request was then subsequently approved by all three of the EOTC member jurisdictions at their respective board or council meetings. 1 BACKGROUND: In the summer and fall of 2003, a 13-member citizen task force collaborated to develop recommendations on immediate improvements to the existing s-curves aligrunent. The group presented their recommendations to Council in December of 2003. Council supported the implementation of various street closures as well as the construction of a peak-period outbound transit lane. The EOTC approved an expenditure of $308,000 for the purpose of implementing the transit lane as well as the permanent closures. DISCUSSION: If the contract between the City and Kolbe Striping Inc. is approved by Council, the SH 82 / Main Street Transit Lane Signing and Striping Project will begin this spring with an estimated completion date of June 1. The transit lane will be operational for the peak summer season. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no direct financial implications to the City as this contract will be funded by the EOTC. At $109,335.00, Kolbe Striping Inc. was the low bidder on this project. This contract is within the amount budgeted by the EOTC for S-Curves improvements. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS: The construction of the SH 82 / Main Street Transit Lane will help reduce the travel times ofbuses leaving town during the afternoon peak period. This in turn should help to increase ridership of mass transit, reduce the number of single occupant vehicle traffic and reduce pollution caused by vehicle emissions and PM-l O. RECCOMENDA TIONS: City Staff recommends the approval of the contract between the City of Aspen and Kolbe Striping Inc. for the SH 82/ Main Street Transit Lane Signing and Striping Project. 2 ALTERNATIVES: Council could decide not to approve the contract. If the contract is not approved, the project will not move forward and the transit lane will not be constructed. Council could decide to rebid the project. If this occurs, the project will be delayed and may not be constructed in time for the peak summer season. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move the approval of Resolution no.oil to approve the contract between the City of Aspen and Kolbe Striping Inc. for the State Highway 82 / Main Street Transit Lane Signing and Striping proj ect." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ~~~~:~~:~<;J~ ;;r:-;~ ~~~'J(h-7J ~ ~?f.. ~ljh./i, -, -..J,:f-. J 3 RESOLUTION # .:1..( (Series of 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND KOLBE STRIPING INC. SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SH 82 / MAIN STREET TRANSIT LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING PROJECT 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 Kolbe Striping Inc., 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 the contract for construction between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Kolbe Striping Inc. regarding the SH 82/ Main Street Transit Lane Signing and Striping Project, 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: Helen Kalin Klanderud, 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 April 10, 2005. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk C:\Documents and Settings\lynnb\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKB\Kolbe contract reso (2).doc . CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION The Cily of O,pen mn' OPorne\'~ Olli"e THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on Colorado, hereinafter called the "City", and , hereinafter called the "Contractor". , by and between the CITY OF ASPEN, Kolbe Striping, Incorporated WHEREAS, the City has caused to be prepared, in accordance with the law, specifications and other Contract Documents for the work herein described, and has approved and adopted said documents, and has caused to be published, in the manner and for the time required by law, an advertisement, for the project: 2006-018 S-Curve Safety Imp. WHEREAS, the Contractor, in response to such advertisement, or in response to direct invitation, has submitted to the City, in the manner and at the time specified, a sealed Bid in accordance with the terms of said Invitation for Bids; and, WHEREAS, the City, in the manner prescribed by law, has publicly opened, examined, and canvassed the Bids submitted in response to the published Invitation for Bids therefore, and as a result of such canvass has determined and declared the Contractor to be the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for the said Work and has duly awarded to the Contractor a Contract For Construction therefore, for the sum or sums set forth herein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the payments and Contract for Construction herein mentioned: 1. The Contractor shall commence and complete the construction of the Work as fully described in the Contract Documents. 2. The Contractor shall furnish all of the materials, supplies, tools, equipment, labor and other services necessary for the construction and completion of the Work described herein. 3. The Contractor shall commence the work required by the Contract Documents within seven (7) consecutive calendar days after the date of "Notice To Proceed" and will complete the same by the date and time indicated in the Special Conditions unless the time is extended in accordance with appropriate provisions in the Contract Documents. 4. The Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work described in the Contract Documents and comply with the terms therein for a sum not to exceed One Hundred Nine Thousand Three Hundred Thirty FiVE> ($ 10g",S 00 ) DOLLARS oras shown on the BID proposal. 5. The term "Contract Documents" means and includes the documents listed in the City of Aspen General Conditions to Contracts for Construction (version GC97-2) and in the CC1-971.doc Page 1 '.CC1 Special Conditions. The Contract Documents are included herein by this reference and made a part hereof as if fully set forth here. 6. The City shall pay to the Contractor in the manner and at such time as set forth in the General Conditions, unless modified by the Special Conditions, such amounts as required by the Documents. 7. This Contract For Construction shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein or in the Contract Documents, this Contract For Construction shall be subject to the City of Aspen Procurement Code, Title 4 of the Municipal Code, including the approval requirements of Section 4-08-040. This agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the City Manager or the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his/her absence) following a resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor or City Manager (or a duly authorized official in his/her absence) to execute the same. 8. This agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Contractor respectively and their agents, representatives, employees. Successors, assigns, and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Contractor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet his or her interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 9. This agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom the Contractor or the City may assign this Contract For Construction in accordance with the specific written consent, any rights to claim damages or to bring suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or the Contractor because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 10. No waiver of default by either party of any terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 11. The parties agree that this Contract For Construction was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be kept exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 12. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Contract for Construction, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 13. This Contract For Construction was reviewed and accepted through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto, and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of this Contract For Construction. CC1-971.doc Page 2 "CC1 14. The undersigned representative of the Contractor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Contract For Construction, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of the Contractor for the purposes of executing this Contract For Construction and that helshe has full and complete authority to enter into this Contract For Construction for the terms and conditions specified herein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties agree hereto have executed this Contract For Construction on the date first above written. ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO By: Title: RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Engineering Department City Attorney CONTRACTOR, J1.J B~D..~ Title: President Note: Certification of Incorporation shall be executed if Contractor is a Corporation. If a partnership, the Contract shall be signed by a Principal and indicate title. .........,.. CC1-971.doc Page 3 "CC1 City of Aspen S - CURVE SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS STATE HIGHWAY 82 / MAIN STREET TRANSIT LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING ....Vyy...yyv...Vyy...yyv...yVy City Project Number: 2006 - 018 Scope of Work The STATE HIGHWAY 82 / MAIN STREET TRANSIT LANE SIGNING AND STRIPING project is scheduled to begin in mid April 2006, with a completion date and be completed no later than May 26, 2006. Scope of Work: The intent of this project is to stripe an outbound transit lane on State Highway 82/ Main Street for the purpose of facilitating the exit of outbound RFT A buses during the peak afternoon traffic hours of 3:00-6:00pm. The work for this project will consist ofthe following and other minor incidentals concurrent with road construction: the removal, replacement, and resetting of existing signs from Seventh Street to Aspen street in conformance with the plans and specifications; re-configuring striping on Main Street within the limits of the project to confonn to the project striping plan; and the trimming of trees along the corridor as specified by the plans and/or engineers' representative and the City of Aspen's Transportation and Parks departments. IL IL Ci ...J ~ o f- W o _it: 00.. W...J ~<( f- o f- W o wit: III 0.. ...J...J 0<( ~f- o f- f-IL -IL z_ ::::lC 06SSo 00000 Lcicici..oo ..."'<0....0 ~t;:.........~"lt_ ~ - SaSSo 0 00000 0 daddc:i 0 OMOOO .... LO.....O"ltO ,..., ..q.NNcON N ----C\I fhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhER-fhfhfhilt 0000000000000 0000000000000 u'icicicicic:iciocicic::ici.,; LOOvLOOa:lOLOOooa.... .....Il)ON"ltNMCOOLOOOO r--:r-:NNNLri'cDoMoL6ciN' ................C"').......... - fhfhfhfhfhfhEA-fhfhfhfhWilt 0000000000000 0000000000000 cidciaric::icic::icidcic::ici.,; OLOONocoorooaooM LONNCOONCO....O<>>OOM f'o.- ai -.q. N......~ a.6 ci N Ll'i 05 M ci a) ..............................0 - fhfhfhfhfhfhEltEA-fhfhfhfhM- SG'SSa aNooe LriciciLriLci "It -CJ)NM e -- SSSSea caoace u:icicicicici N.....aaoa --0 N 0 a N"-NO ~ "'- fhfhfhfhfhfn'fhfhfhfhfhfh 000000000000 W OLOooaaaaaaoa o ..oNLric::iciciaricidcicici (30:: ~ cx)~CDM(I')L08~gg wo.. ,...: ri Llici ~~ M..... Z ::::l W w!:1 III It: ...Jo.. Of- ~- Z ::::l fhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfh OLOooaaaaaoo 0......000000000 oC'JLriLciaricicicicicic::i a ........NMCDCOOl.OO L().......... avo ,...: L6 ri - fhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfhfh ~ Z z <( ::::l a .....OvLOO<OOM.....C\I.......... ON..... V...... co..... ''It a ...........N '" f- Z ::::l J:J: ...J o C,) <( cnL1..<(<(U.LLU.L1..LL"ClJcn ...JClJWW(f.lCl)...J...J...J ...J...J z o i= 0.. it: o III W C ::E W ~ C iii 00 Cl zz Z ::::l::::l 52 00 It: It:It: Cl III <(z J::I: ~ z ::ECl 00 ~ Q f-iii ~~ It: III Z C _N N c( :> Wz ==NN ::IE w ilj::::l...JIIlIll!!:.!!:. f- It: ~li!!lj~~liilii ifigti ~O"Cl<(o..ooOOz::EWf-i2 -lLLL --11.0..0 z ::EOOZ...J...JZZ-~O!Z ::E...J...JClwWClClf-o..OO it:~~iii~~iiiiii;5>-oo .... 0 0"" a. a....J..J::iXU:: D:::.J W::E::EWzzWWiiiO~O~ Iliwwffl!2!2l!!l!!o~lt:~o f-1t:1t:1t:1Il1ll1ll1ll::EWf-::Ef- MEMORANDUM Vile- TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Jerry Nye THRU: Phil Overeynder THRU: Randy Ready DATE: April 3, 2006 RE: Contract Approva12006-5FM Fleet Purchase of2 small hybrid SUVs SUMMARY: Staff recommends approval ofthe contract 2006-5FM for the purchase oftwo (2) Ford Escape Hybrid compact SUV'S for the Street and Parks Departments. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approved this purchase in the 2006 Fleet Replacement Plan as part of the Asset Management Plan. BACKGROUND: This purchase is the result of Colorado State Bid process in which Sill- Terhar Motors, Inc. was the awarded vendor for the Ford Escape Hybrid compact SUVs. DISCUSSION: As part of this year's fleet replacement program we will be replacing two l4-ton Ford Ranger pickups. One of these replacements is for the Parks Department and the other Ford Ranger pickup replacement is for the Street Department. Staff will be replacing these 2 pickups with Ford Escape Hybrid vehicles. By doing this we will be getting 20 to 30 % better fuel economy and these new replacements will be lower emission vehicles. Staff feels comfortable that these vehicles will be suitable for each department's use. The Street Department's Ford Ranger is a 2000 model year with over 115,000 miles. The Parks Department's Ford Ranger is a 2001 model year with over 80,000 miles. The Roaring Fork Valley Vehicles car share program (RFVV) is asking to purchase the newer Ford Ranger 2001 model year with the lower mileage from the Parks Department. RFVV is in need of a small pickup to fulfill its customers' requests for small pickup-type vehicles at times. Council approval of this procurement would authorize the Street Department to sell the 2001 Ford Ranger to RFVV when the new Ford Escape Hybrid vehicles arrive. RFVV has funds available to purchase this vehicle for its current value. The pickup that the Street Department will be replacing will be included in a public auction since this state bid winner doesn't want to accept trade-in vehicles. The total contract price for the two Ford Escape Hybrid SUV's including delivery is $54,328.00. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The 2006 Asset Management Fleet Replacement Plan contains the approved budget for this purchase. The 2006 Fleet Replacement Plan will be reimbursed by the $7,000.00 sale proceeds of one vehicle to RFVV. Funds from the residual value ($3,500) of the second pick-up will be added back to the Fleet Replacement fund once the auction is completed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the purchase of the two (2) Ford Escapes outlined above and the sale of one of the pickups being replaced to RFVV. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # 2.2... On the consent calendar of Monday ~ 10 2006 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ~( ~.-( of2006 RESOLUTION NO. 22- Series of 2006 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND Sill- Terhar Motors, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID DOCUMENT(S) ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a CONTRACT between the City of Aspen, Colorado and Sill- Terhar Motors a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section One That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that CONTRACT between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Sill-Terhar Motors a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: ,2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ~lI. 1 ~ JAGUA--R SUI- TerHar Motors, Inc. . .-.-".'., ...7lrlo.....7lrlo ~ "~~-~';~'~~:'.;:'~':$J,1~':='7- W' ..........,." ~ II8ZII8 City of Aspen An: Willie QUOTE Mar 17,2006 F oed Escape Hybrid Compact SUV 4X4 Per StatelColo price Agreement 07048YYY60M White with Grey interior Safety Pkg Side Air Bags $26269 595 Total 26864 ~ I 2006 model year closed out; two above vehicles available in inventory, presently Delivery to Aspen: $300 ea vehicle (trucked) Delivery to Glcnwood Spgs $200 ea vehicle (meet truck, pre-arranged) ;4ty4A- /~ Boysen Loesch Sill- TerHar Ford Dircct 720-291-1873 ~ P.O.'''' 344 . 150 Alter 5tICCt Broomfleld. (U 8003B . 30].469.1801 . W\\oW,peopleforo.com 2 d 8960999089 'oN/80: 6 '18/60: 6 9002 L I ~vw (I ~j) WO~j , CoIoradoS_ FIeol Mo_nt 2llCl1 VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS _Invltllllon 10 BId "" on 8/21120OI ClaM: SW 4>04 Rep_ Modola: 1: FORD 3: Bodv Code: JSIl ESCAPE PASS UnL HYBRID (tll..ICLECl AX 2: DODGE 4: DURANGO MAKE: ~ IIODEL: ~ OEIIIIOOEL.: ~ TRIll LEVEL: d~ ~r,cJ DEM CODE: t.f(){)11 STANIlARD SPECIFICATIONS: OEM CODE /NOICATE ACTUAL DEALER SPECIFICATIONS 103 PASS: 5 PERSONS MIN. V- III DOORS: 4 FULL SIZE SIDE DOORS V t;111~.:~~) ~11 ;~.~~r- 1<10 TlAI!S: ALL SEAS ru.s RADIAL V 148 FULL SIZE SPARE TIRE NA 151 DA.SHIIOARD GUAGES V 173 WHULBASE: 103.0 IN. MIN V I O_~ . , 195 LiNG MIN CYL: 4 V I--""'- Y d,j l- V"" 201 ENG MtN DISP:2.2L f-- 221 FUEL TANK: 14 GAL MIN V IS r;,oJ.. r---- ~ AXLE RATIO (MIH.)3.20 V f--- 2S8 CRUISE CONTROUflL T V f--- ~ AIR CONDITIONING. RI34a V ~ RADIO: AMlFM V 3f1T I'O'NER IIRAKIS & POWER STEERING V- i--=- V 308 A8S IlRAKIiS -- ,,/ 30lI CONSOLE BElWEEN BUCKET SEATS - V ~ SEATS: CLOTH SEATS ~ FLOORING: RUBBER ~ ~OOi'~ "" tI.D( (MiS ~ AIR BAG. DRIVER & PASSENGER V ~ MIRRORS: RIGHT AND LEFT V ~ REAR WIPER -!7- 403 REAR WINDOW DEFROSTER -, V 404 INTERMrrn:NTWlPERS 410 TRANSMISSION: AUTOMATIC ,/ 415 FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE v' 418 AUTOMATIC LOCKING FRONT HUBS V- 800 FLOOR MArs FRONT AND REAR V 910 PRIMARY FUEL: UNlI!ADED V- 991 STANDARD WARRANTY - BUMPER TO BUMPEF V STANDARD VEHICLE BASE PRICE $ ~~df1'f, II -,~,},..:-;:: ,- C1_: SUV4x-4 Rep-.tallve Mod"'" 1: FORO 3: MAKE: IIODEL: OEM IIODEL /I: . ,'-,"~.~'"' ."--> .. .. ~ ""'. ._'._.~..~-_.,'_.-_"-+---,,, ..~_~. ~_~,_._ ~_.",.", .'"_......_..~._...'.'.....n ....-"-"--'.~"...~:.,..,,:.'__,' CoI....do _ FINt Mon_nt 20CMI VEHICLE SPECIFICATIONS Du_lnvIllItJon to BId Bodv Code: ISI:l ESCAPE PASS UTlL HYBRID It:!l...... Eel .X 2: DODGE 4: DURANGO "- 2013 112112005 AVAIlABLE OPTIONS: 143 TIRES: OPTION 11, UST SIZE: 249 AXLE RATIO OPTION: SPECIFY 32Q FlOORING: CARPI!T 413 l'IIoO-WHEEL DRIVE: FRONT 440 PACKAOE:OFF ROAD (AtlocllmenQ 443 PKQ: STROlE UGHT (Altacl1m8nt) 520 POWER LOCKS All POWER WINDOWS 5119 AMIFM CD Pl.AYER 7'Z1 CARGO COVER OEMCODEAC~fCOMMENTS l i ~ 1M:) TRIM LEVEL: OEM CODE: ,',.rAvld. " ... PRICE -- Ne...- (-J )LJ3o - aol NL 1ft: 7~ 2;;';';;:/~~:"'-:;<.:'. '~ . , CoIonlda ... RIM:" l\.lment _ VEHICLE SPEClFtCATION8 _ h.._.108ld "- 3 on -- C_ SW 4><4 ~_: l:FORO 3: BodvI"'.-I..JStl PASS lmL HYBRID IIUAID CI'!\ 4X ESCAPE 2: DODGE 4: llURANGO _: fori MODI!L: OEM MODEL., T_LEVEL: OEM CODe: AVAIlA8lECOLORS: ___owcolotcll8rt OTHER VEHIClE SPEClFICAT~ I OPTIONS (P- _ __.- W.-...y) ~.~l~,~ - ~~,Sl, ~1~~~~A;~,:e:.5.~r"'~~~ l;TANllAAO FACTORY WARRANTY (AIIach _lied deoc:tIpIJon): MILES ~"2,(/) /L ~ IOUlL PRICE --!k . ~ Bumper 10 Bumper MONTliS 3b a (, '.I Od, ..f,r" }lf1)",tI..&~1 ~ilf1:\S:tMl b,,,I,,.-r,.r DrlVeTnolrI other OPTIOIIAL FACTORY WARRANTY (AtI8dI_ deocrfption): MILES MONTHS PRICE EPA FUEL RATING: 33 M.P.G CITY, CJq M.P.G HIGHWAY OEM MINIMUM FUEL RATED OCTANE: <'tJ1 OEUVERY: qO'f'JO DAYS FROM DEALER RECEIPT DFORDER FROM STATE (E.G. flODAYS)l!;ftiTtJ INIAl' ~J,i },-'1''1 IDENTIFY Nf'( EXCEPTIONS TO SPECIFICATIONS: DEALERNAME:~--re".~n1b1Dt"!> .:t'r1C.. . DEALER PHONE: 1iJ o-~'i 1- If 13 ~-~ ~i.z SIGIU\TURE: ~ :,';;::'_;:;,:~:c','~'. , , Sill- TerHar Motors, Inc. PACKAGES, PAGE 7 of 24 ~.T ...... e ~ JAGUAR006Stai~'~Jhi6IeBid VOLVO _ #443 . STROBE LIGHT Attach one copy of this form to each body code specification sheet that has an Available Option #443 including the following body codes: All C's, D's, E's, F's G's H's & K's The STROBE LIGHT PACKAGE must include the fOllowing: Roof mount of strobe on truck, van or sport utility vehicle Dual flash strobe with amber shield Class 2 light, SAE spec: J1318 or DFS75Q-A North American Signal spec or equivalent. Minimum: 15 joules Minimum of 60 double flashes per minute Base must be aluminum, not plastic. Switch in cab Height: between 3 1/2 inches to 6 inches, measured to top of light housing Warranty: 1-year parts and labor Complete installation with locations as follows: Location for strobe light on DlckuDS: on the roof of the pickup cab the light must be centered between the front of the roof and the rear of the roof. the light must be also centered from one side to the other side of the roof. Location for strobe light on vans and soort utilities: on the roof of the van or sport utmty the light must be centered from one side to the other side of the roof the light must also be two feet from the r!lar of the roof. List the make and model of strobe that is bid: Make ftUJ Model tJ it 1 0 List any additions and/or deletions of your bid from the STROBE LIGHT PACKAGE specs listed above: Total Price for STROBE LIGHT PACKAGE: $ 301." For Body Code: ~ ~ P.O. Box 344 . 150 After Street, Broomfield, CO 80038 . 303.469.1801 . www.peopleford.com 7 SUPPLY PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT CITY OF ASPEN BID NO. 2006 - 5FM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into, this 20th dav of March of 2006, by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereinafter referred to. as the "City" and SiII- Terhar Motors. . hereinafter referred to as the ''Vendor.'' WITNESSETH, that whereas the City wishes to purchase~ Two (2) Ford Escape Hvbrids Compact 4x4 SUV'S Hereinafter called the UNIT(S), in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in the Contract Documents and any associated Specifications, and Vendor wishes to sell said UNIT to the City as specified in its Bid. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Vendor, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: 1. Purchase. Vendor agrees to sell and City agrees to purchase the UNIT(S) as described in the Contract Documents and more specifically in Vendor's Bid for the sum of Fiftv Four Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Eiaht and no cents dollars ($ 54.328.00) 2. Deliverv. (FOB 1080 POWER PLANT RD. ASPEN, CO.) 3. Contract Documents. This Agreement shall include all Contract Documents as the same are listed in the Invitation to Bid and said Contract Documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement as if fully set out at length herein. 4. Warranties. A full description of all warranties associated with this purchase shall accompany this contract document. 5. Successors and Assians. This Agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Vendor respectively and their agents, representatives, employee, successors, assigns and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Vendor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 6. Third Parties. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom Vendor or City may assign this Agreement in accordance with the specific written permission, any rights to claim damages or to bring any suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or Vendor because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 7. Waivers. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 7-PURCH.DOC 8. Aareement Made in Colorado. The parties agree that this Agreement was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 9. Attomev's Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's fees. 10. Waiver of Presumption. This Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of the Agreement. 11. Certification Reoardina Debarment. Suspension, Ineliaibilitv, and Voluntarv Exclusion. Vendor certifies, by acceptance of this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further certifies that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that vendor or any lower tier participant was unable to certify to this statement, an explanation was attached to the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory to the City. 12. Warranties Aaainst Continaent Fees. Gratuities. Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. Vendor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established Commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Vendor for the purpose of securing business. Vendor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. Vendor represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. 7-PURCH.DOC In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a vendor, contractor or sub-contractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Vendor; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 13. Termination for Default or for Convenience of City. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be cancelled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellatioh is in its best interests and convenience. 14. Fund Availabilitv. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 15. Citv Council Approval. If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $10,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. 16. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform under this Agreement. Vendor agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, section 13-98, pertaining to non- discrimination in employment. Vendor further agrees to comply with the letter and the spirit of the Colorado Antidiscrimination ACt of 1957, as amended, and other applicable state and federal laws respecting discrimination and unfair employment practices. 17. Inteoration and Modification. This written Agreement along with all Contract Documents shall constitute the contract between the parties and supersedes or incorporates any prior written and oral agreements of the parties. In addition, vendor understands that no City official. or employee, other than the Mayor and City Council acting as a body at a council meeting, has authority to enter into an Agreement or to modify the terms of the Agreement on behalf of the City. Any such Agreement or modification to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the parties hereto. 18. Authorized Representative. The undersigned representative of Vendor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Agreement, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of Vendor for the purposes of executing this Agreement and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Agreement for the terms and conditions specified herein. 7-PURCH.DOC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City and the Vendor, respectively have caused this Agreement to be duly executed the day and year first herein written in three (3) copies, all of which, to all intents and purposes, shall be considered as the original. FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN: By: City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk VENDOR: ~ ~/)~ -;;;4w- drfrl'5 J0c 1 By, kti1fr ;z!4nL Net~) kdl Slv~( Title. 7-PURCH.DOC VI'd MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Phil Overeynder, Utilities Director CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE: April 4, 2006 RE: Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant Project Planning Contract Award SUMMARY: Approval of this contract with Smart Mahoney Associates for Project Planning ofthe Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant will begin the first steps in development of the new hydroelectric plant. Construction of hydroelectric power plant utilizing the tail water from the Aspen Water Treatment plant has been a forward thinking idea for several years in the City of Aspen. With the increased cost for energy and inclusion of this project as part of the Canary Initiative, this project has become a high priority. The Castle Creek Hydroelectric plant will produce green energy, increase utilization of senior water rights, help the city be self sufficient in electric power, and restore a part of the historical perspective of the original power house. The energy input from the plant will be completely utilized by the City of Aspen electric utility. This project needs to be planned from the ground up. In order to determine the necessary items and tasks to be performed, a team of experts in the field will be assembled to complete project planning before initiating design of the facility. The phase one workshop will assemble a team to address the necessary items and list the items that are necessary for the detailed design (Phase II). Phases III and IV include project construction and acceptance. Phases II through IV are subject to later City Council action and future appropriation of funds. The cost of the facility will be amortized through purchased power sales to municipal electric customers. It is not anticipated that the project will affect electric rates, since it will offset costs of existing power purchased for resale to retail customers. A detailed financial plan will be developed along with Phase I ofthe project. 1 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council included construction of a new Castle Creek hydroelectric facility as part of the Canary Initiative. Council appropriated 2005 funds for design work on the hydroelectric plant and water plant. Council also approved a 2006 appropriation to alter the electrical connections to the Holy Cross Energy (HCE) system DISCUSSION: The Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant has been discussed over the years as a facility that could be re-established below the water treatment facility. Power generation would be produced utilizing the residual overflow water from the Thomas Reservoir and the treatment plants. The water rights for hydroelectric production date from the 1890's and are senior to all other uses in these stream reaches. Due to soil types and land ownership, a site is in the immediate vicinity of the City Shop is being considered. Thomas Reservoir receives water from both Castle and Maroon creeks. The reservoir will be the storage facility for both the water treatment plant, the Thomas Raw Water System, and the Castle Creek hydroelectric plant. Through the SCADA system we can control the flow of water to the hydroelectric facility and flow needed by the plants. We can make best use of the water through utilizing the storage of the reservoir to produce electricity during peak demand while relying on storage in the water distribution system to reduce output of the plants simultaneously. The benefit from this project is full use of the Maroon Creek and the Castle Creek water rights while providing for electric production by the city electric utility. CURRENT ISSUES: The Water Department has a return flow of unused water primarily from Castle Creek and some times Maroon Creek. This water is delivered to the treatment plant site on a 24 hour basis. This water returns to Castle Creek approximately 100 yards downstream of the Holden Ditch head gate. During the summer this flow has been used to supplement the Holden Ditch water to the Golf course with a structure constructed in 1992. With our control system, it is possible to operate a new hydroelectric facility, make use of the stored water in the reservoir and draw our full water right from Castle and Maroon creeks to deliver water to the facility. Completion of the reclaimed water project will also increase the available stream flow for hydroelectric production, due to reducing direct diversion on Castle Creek. The preferred alignment for the pipeline is primarily on City land through the Marolt Open Space and Water Plant property if we use the historic penstock route. The elevation drop of this water from the Leonard Thomas Reservoir high water level to Castle Creek at this site is 8160 to 7840 ( 320 feet), allowing for 138 psi of head. We have advertised for Phase 1 and selected Smart Mahoney and Associates, LLC for the workshop. They have a strong background in developing small community based hydroelectric facilities. Results from the workshop are anticipated to identify the elements needed to come up with a strategic plan. Project planning decisions will be based on alternate penstock routes, alternate plant locations, permits, design, construction, Castle Creek head gate modifications and operational considerations. The participants will be disciplined in electric engineering, hydrology, civil engineering, construction management and hydroelectric operations. 2 The Water Department presently buys power from (HCE). The penstock construction from the Water plant to the Hydroelectric plant will allow for a conduit to be incorporated for transmitting Aspen electric power to the water plant property. The HCE franchise agreement permits direct use of City power to the water plant, resulting in future cost savings due to lower energy costs. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Phase I contract costs are to exceed $29,000. The remaining available funds in the 200512006 appropriations (see previous Council Action discussion) are estimated at $44,400. Other uses ofthe funds include permitting the facility through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and development of hydroelectric data ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS: This facility will impact the flow regime in Castle Creek having greatest impact during the winter months. As in present operations, Castle Creek will be maintained at minimum stream flow of 12 cubic feet per second from the Castle Creek dam diversion to a point below the Castle Creek Bridge on Highway 82. The workshop will address the necessary means to keep the flow measurement below the diversion at the desired amount. There is a potential to make use of additional Maroon Creek water rights not presently being used with out infringement on the minimum stream flow. The Phase I contract will identifY the feasibility of a 'pump back' system utilizing residual minimum stream flow water from the Maroon Creek Headgate by pumping it into the raw water line below the return water from the Maroon Creek Hydroelectric plant. RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends adoption of the Resolution #2,;; approving the Phase I contract for the Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant. ALTERNATIVES: Electing not to move forward with the proposed contract will reduce the full use of the City's water rights, reduce the use of green power available to the City, and negate the opportunity for the water department to buy it's electricity from the Aspen electric utility. PROPOSED MOTION: I move to adopt Resolution # 2:3 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ~O ~ 3 RESOLUTION # ~ (Series of 2006) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND SMART MAHONEY ASSOCIATES, LLC, SETTING FORTH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS REGARDING 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 Smart Mahoney Associates, LL., 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 ofthe City of Aspen hereby approves that contract between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Smart Mahoney Associates, LLC, regarding Phase I Project Planning Services for the proposed Castle Creek Hydroelectric Plant, 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: Helen Kalin Klanderud, 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 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk EXIllBIT "A" CITY OF ASPEN GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR SERVICE AGREEMENTS These General Conditions have been prepared by the City of Aspen to be incorporated by reference into Service Agreements entered into between service providers ("Contractor") and the City of Aspen ("City"). The provisions herein may be interrelated with standard provisions of the Service Agreement customarily used by the City of Aspen to contract for services. A change in one document may necessitate a change in the other. Any amendments to the following terms and conditions mutuaIly agreed to by the Contractor and the City shaIl be specifically noted on the Service Agreement. 1. Completion. Contractor shall commence the provision of services as described in the Service Agreement in a timely manner. Upon request of the City, Contractor shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Contractor's services which shall be adjusted as required. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be altered by the Contractor. 2. Payment. In consideration of the services provided, City shall pay Contractor the amounts set forth in the Service Agreement. Contractor shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for services performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they are considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Contractor within ten days from receipt of the Contractor's billing. Contractor's invoice shall be for the period ending the last day of each month and submitted to the City no later than the 5th day of each month. 3. Non-Assil!llllbilitv. 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 Contractor of any of the responsibilities or obligations under this agreement. Contractor shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractor's officers, agents and employees, each of whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Contractor to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to payor be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any subcontractor unless agreed to in writing beforehand by the City. 4. Termination. The Contractor or the City may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days notice, without specifying the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. The City shall have the right to terminate the Service Agreement upon three (3) days notice if Contractor fails to comply with the terms and conditions set forth in Sections 1,3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, 16, 19 or 21. For breach of any other term and condition of the Service Agreement, City may terminate the Service Agreement with ten (10) days prior notice to cure and failure by Contractor to so cure. No compensation shall be eamed after the effective date of the termination. Notwithstanding the above, Contractor 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 Contractor, and the City may withhold any payments to the Contractor for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Contractor may be determined. 5. Covenant Ae:ainst Contine:ent Fees. The Contractor warrants that slhe has not been employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the Contractor, to solicit or secure this contract, that slhe 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. 6. BJuipment. Materials and SUPDlies. Unless otherwise agreed to by the City, Contractor shall acquire, provide, maintain, and repair at Contractor's expense such equipment, materials, supplies, etc., as necessary for the proper conduct of the services to be provided in accordance with the Service Agreement. 7. Contract Monitorinl!. Contractor agrees to allow City to reasonably monitor the services to be provided in accordance with the Service Agreement. 8. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Contractor 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 Contractor shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Contractor. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Contractor. Contractor shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Contractor's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Contractor 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 Contractor and/or Contractor's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. 9. Indemnification. Contractor 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 are in any manner connected with this Service Agreement, 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 Contractor, any subcontractor of the Contractor, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Contractor or of any subcontractor of the Contractor, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Contractor or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Contractor. The Contractor 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 Contractor, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. The Contractor also agrees to bear all other costs and expenses related thereto, including court costs and attorney fees, whether or not any such liability, claims, or demands alleged are groundless, false, or fraudulent. lf it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Contractor for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or employees. 10. Contractor's Insurance. (a) Contractor agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Contractor pursuant to Section 9 above. Such insurance shall 3 be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by the Service Agreement or by law. The Contractor shaH not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to Section 9 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) Contractor shaH procure and maintain Workmen's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under the Service Agreement, and Employers' liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOU- SAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - policy limit, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Workmen's Compensation requirements of this paragraph. (c) If the Service Agreement requires any insurance in addition to that referenced above at subsections (a) and (b), or a particular type of coverage, Contractor shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Contractor to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages referenced in the Service Agreement All insurance 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 Contractor pursuant to Section 9 above. In the case of any claims-made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods sba1l be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (d) 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 insurance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Contractor. No additional insured endorsement to the policies required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage arising from completed operations. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (e) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Contractor'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 the Service Agreement and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. (f) Failure on the part of the Contractor to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may terminate the Service Agreement as provided by Section 4 above, 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 Contractor to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Contractor from City. 4 (g) City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. (h) 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 protection provided by the Colorado Governmental hnmunity 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. 11. City'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 Contractor for inspection during normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by CIRSA. City shall provide Contractor reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. 12. Waiver of Presumotion. The Service Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of the Service Agreement. 13. Certification Rel!ardinl! Debarment. Susoension. Inelicibilitv. and Voluntary Exclusion. Contractor certifies. by acceptance of the Service Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further certifies that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that vendor or any lower tier participant was unable to certify to this statement, an explanation was attached to the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory w the City. 14. Warranties Al!ainst Continl!ent Fees. Gratuities. Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. Contractor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission. percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee. excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Contractor for the purpose of securing business. Contractor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. Contractor represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of the Service Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or 5 indirect, in the Service Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of the Service Agreement. In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to : 1. Cancel the Service Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a Contractor, vendor, or sub-contractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Contractor; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 15. Termination for Default or for Convenience of Citv. The services contemplated by the Service Agreement may be canceled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 16. Fund Availabilitv. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that pwpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If the Service Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, the Service Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of the Service Agreement. 17. City Council A!l1ll'Oval. If the Service Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $25,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. 18. Notices. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered or mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested to the respective person or address listed for the Contractor in the Service Agreement. 19. Non-Discrimination: penalty. 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. Contractor agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment. 20. Citv of Aspen Procurement Code. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein or in the Contract Documents, the Service Agreement shall be subject to the City of Aspen Procurement Code, Chapter 3 of the Aspen Municipal Code. 21. Comoliance With All Laws and Relrulations. Contractor shall give all notices and comply with all laws, regulations, and ordinances applicable to the provision of the services contemplated by the Service Agreement. Contractor shall obtain all necessary business licenses and permits, and shall pay all requisite occupation taxes levied by the City of Aspen upon persons engaged in business within the City limits. 6 22. 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 the Service Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition tu be performed by Contractor tu which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Contractor of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled tu invoke any remedy available to it under the Service Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence. 23. Execution of Service A=ment bv City. The Service Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the Service Agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the City Manager of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his or her absence). 24. General Tenus. (a) It is agreed that neither the Service 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 the Service 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 altemtion, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) The Service Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. 7 SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this3A! day of..Am:i!, 2006, by and between the City of Aspen ("City") and the Contractor identified hereinbelow. WITNESSETH, that whereas the City wishes to purchase the services described hereinbelow and Contractor wishes to provide said services to the City as specified herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the following covenants, the parties agree as follows: CONTRACfOR NUll: 9Iaart, IIaboney , AaI.oaiat:e., LLC ADDRBSS: P.O. Box 2122 Fort Collins, CO 80522-2122 COII"1'ACl' PBIlSOM': Richard .BluZt: PHONE IItJIIIIDS B<*B: 'l,o-n, - 4-\l7lf ~: 970-218-709! SOCIAL szcmu'!Y JItDIBBR OR rBmRAL 1.0. JroMBD.: 20-137-4531 DFSCRlPTION OF SERVICE Development and implementation of a three day work shop to formulate a strategic plan for the Castle Creek Hydroelectric plant. The tasks for this are outlined in the proposal NCastle Creek Hydroelectric Project Planning WorkshopN submitted by Smart Mahoney & Associates, LLC March 28, 2006. DURATION OF AGREEMENT AND SCHEDULE OF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED Planning phase will begin with the approval from Council and issuance of a Purchase order for the work. Anticipated timing for the process shall conclude by the second week of July as outlined in the proposal #Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project Planninq Workshop" submitted by Smart Mahoney & Associates, LLC March 28, 2006. DFSCRWrION OF AMOUNT, METHOD OR MANNER OF COMPENSATION Total cost of services are not to exceed $29,000 for completion of all tasks as out lined in the proposal "Castle Creek Hydroelectric Project Planning Workshop" submitted by Smart Mahoney & Associates, LLC March 28, 2006. Please invoice usinq Ci!Y's Purchase Order Number: 8 AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL CONDITIONS The following amendments concern the schedule for payment of compensation, conditions for withholding final payment and insurance requirements and are made a part of this agreement. 1. Amount and method of compensation: The City shall . pay the contractor an initial advance of $5,000 for mobilization . make monthly progress payments for expenses and services . withhold a final payment of $5,000 - pending receipt of the final report 2. Insurance Requirements: The Contractor shall . obtain and maintain Workman's Compensation insurance if and when the contractor has employees The parties acknowledge and understand that this Service Agreement is, except as specifically amended hereinabove, subject to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the City of Aspen General Conditions for Service Agreements, a copy of which is appended hereto as Appendix "A" and by this reference made a part hereof. Having agreed to the above and foregoing, the parties hereto do affIX their signatures. City of Aspen: Contractor: By: BY:(l;.~~ ' Title: P~uf,..t'l ~,~t~~A..,>wd.t, LLc..- Serv-981.doc . "'"a MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor & City Council THRU: FROM: Paul Menter, Finance Director DATE: Don Pergande, Budget Analyst April4tl1, 2006 Adoption of Budget Supplemental- Ordinance NO.!! (Series 2006) This item will be discussed on Monday, April1ltth, 2006 RE: SUMMARY: Staff is requesting an amendment to the City's 2006 budget that increases the city-wide total expenditure appropriation from $102.4 to $131.5 million, (See Attachment A). Net of inter fund transfers, budget authority increases from $85.3 to $114.4 million. Interfund transfers are required appropriations between City funds that do not reflect the true cost of operations. Attachment E provides a detailed listing of budgeted 2006 interfund transfers. The exhibit below outlines the supplemental request's impact on the City's overall appropriation authority. The reference attachments provide itemized listings of requested supplemental budget authority. CITY OF ASPEN - 2006 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET Description Amount Reference 2006 Adopted budget: $102,435,689 See Attachment A Total New Requests: $1,655,224 See Attachment B Total Managers Savings: $274,612 See Attachment C Total Carry Forward Savings: $1,893,424 See Attachment C Total 100% Carry Forwards: $27,316,991 See Attachment D Technical Adjustments: $(2,048,922) See Attachment F Total Supplemental $29 091 329 Reouests: TOTAL ORDINANCE: $131,527,018 See Attachment A Less Interfund Transfers: ($17.063.044) See Attachment E NET APPROPRIATIONS: $114,463,974 See Attachment A II As noted in the chart above, this supplemental is substantially comprised of annual carry-forward appropriations. These requests are for projects previously appropriated, and for which cash reserves are set aside. Different categories of requests include: . Attachment B: "New Requests" of $1,655,224 include requests for formal appropriation of funding issues previously reviewed by Council during this fiscal year, and capital requests that have gone beyond the two year automatic re-appropriation time frame provided by the City's Asset Management process. Narrative justification of each new request is provided as part of this memorandum below. · Attachment C: "Manager 10% Carry-forward Savings" of $274,612, which represent 10% of operating budget savings from all departments of the City in previous years. These one-time appropriations are allocated the City Manager's office (See Attachment C) for use in addressing mid-year issues with citywide implications. · Attachment C: "Departmental 50% Carry-forward Savings" of $1,893,424, which represent 50% of previous year operating budget savings for individual departments. Departments are allocated these amounts as a reward to finding efficiencies in tneir operations that allow them.to meet their operating goals while spending less than their total appropriations. These one-time appropriations can be spent on items related to the department's mission (See Attachment C). · Attachment D: "Departmental "100% Carry-forward Requests": These requests are for operating items and capital improvement projects budgeted in 2005 that require completion in 2006. Requests total $27,316,991. This category includes the City's personal computer and workstation replacement programs - which keeps the City's computer technology new and efficient, and significant re-appropriation of ongoing capital projects. Attachment D details these requests by department. Note: There are some adjustments to the calculations for the personal computer and workstation replacement program that will be submitted for the second reading. . Attachment E: This attachment details all budgeted interfund transfers of the City for 2006 of $17,063,044, in total. · Attachment F: This attachment details all of the technical adjustments in 2006 of ($2,048,922), in total. New Reauests: In the General Fund, new requests to be reviewed by City Council, total $299,779. These requests are made up of the following: Community Development- The Community Development Department is requesting $80,000 in total. $80,000 is for a construction manager position. This request will be funded from General Fund cash reserves. Building Inspection- The Building Inspection Department is requesting $8,000, in total. $8,000 is for a one time vehicle cost for the Burlingame Ranch inspector. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves Police- The Police Department is requesting ($676), in total net reduction of their budget appropriations. ($15,361) is a one time reduction to the Police Departments base budget. The towing responsibility has been moved to the Transportation/Parking fund. Concurrently, the revenue will be moved from the General Fund to the Transportation/Parking fund. $14,685 is for the disbursement of grant funding received and deposited in the General Fund. These funds were intended to be shared between the Aspen Police Department, Snowmass Village Police Department, and the Pitkin County Sheriffs Office for increased DUI patrol overtime. The Police Department is requesting additional budget authority to enable the distribution of these funds to Snowmass and Pitkin County. This request will be funded by State grant funds. Special Events- The Special Events Department is requesting $40,000, in total. $30,000 of this request is for a change in structure of the salaries for the Special Events Coordinator and the Marketing Coordinator. These changes occurred in late fall of 2005 when the budget process was complete (see memo for details). $10,000 of this request is for a part-time position to help with special events and marking administration duties to ensure full time staff can concentrate on increasing revenues for the city facilities. These requests will be funded from the General Fund cash reserves. Ice Garden- The Aspen Ice Garden Department is requesting $44,720, in total. $44,720 is for the retirement cash out for the Ice Garden employee on 01/08/2006. The request is for the retirement bonus, accumulated sick and vacation payout. The payout was funded from the operational budget of the AIG. This request is to restore the operational budget back to the approved based of 2006. This type of payout is not budgeted for in the normal budget process. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. Asset Management- The Asset Management Department is requesting $127,735, in total. $50,000 of this request is for the Durrant lawsuit expenses. This law suit is ongoing for the fiscal 2006 year. Resolution could come as early as August of 2006. This request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves. $23,000 of this request is for New Animal Shelter utilities expenses of the rental units. This request will be offset 100% by the revenues collected from the tenants. $54,735 is for the additional space needs for the City of Aspen employees at Holtz Plaza and all associated costs. This request will be funded from the General Fund cash reserves. Parks Operational Fund- The Parks Fund is requesting $38,000, in total. $20,000 is for expanded snow removal in the downtown alley system in order to provide safer passage for pedestrians. $4,000 is for the Parks Department to comply with the IRS regulations surrounding the City owned vehicle carpooling. These two requests will be funded by the cash reserves in the Parks Fund. The Finance Department has determined that the Parks Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. $14,000 is for a permanent increase to the annual payroll budget to cover the cost of providing administrative support to the Recreation and Golf Divisions. This request will be funded by transfers from the Recreation and Golf divisions existing budget authority. Wheeler Opera House- The Wheeler Opera House Fund is requesting $5,000, in total. $5,000 is for annual inspections of the electric chain hoist that is required by law to occur once a year. The Wheeler staff was informed of this in March by the rigging inspection firm. This request will be funded by cash reserves in the Wheeler Fund. The Finance Department has determined that the Wheeler Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. Housing Development Fund- The Housing Development Fund is requesting $28,500, in total. $28,500 is administrative costs for projects that Council has asked for items to be dealt with where there is no budget authority allocated for staff time to be charged against. (See supplemental for details) This request will be funded by the Housing Development Fund cash reserves. The Finance Department has determined that the Housing Development Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. Parks Capital Fund- The Parks Capital Fund is requesting $204,000 in total. $35,000 is for the Aley Park project. This project will be funded by the Fox Crossing Development revenue received and deposited into the Parks Capital Project in January of 2006. (See supplemental for details) $169,000 is for the Post Office Phase II project. Council provided direction to move forward with this critical connection between the Rio Grande Trailhead and the Post Office/Clarks Market areas. The Finance Department has determined that the Parks Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support this request. Water Fund- The Water Fund is requesting $150,000, in total. $150,000 is for the Water Conservation programs Council gave direction on. February 13, 2006, City Council chose new Water rates that are designed to generate an additional $150,000 worth of funds for the Water Conservation program. This request will be funded by the revenue the new rates generate. II Transportation and Parking Fund- The Transportation and Parking Fund is requesting $805,000, in total. . $15,361 is for towing charges moved from the Police Department's budget to the Parking Department. This request will be offset by revenue generated from the towing of vehicles now collected in Transportation and Parking Fund. $40,000 for converting all service vehicle permits to an in-car-meter program. (See memo for details) This request will be funded from the cash reserves of the Transportation and Parking Fund. $750,000 is for the one time funding of the purchase of parking meters in the residential areas, installation of the meters, marketing, and education. This request will be funded from the cash reserves in the Transportation and Parking Fund. Staff is estimating that the new meters will generate approximately $260,000 annually of new revenues. :f; Ol, -1 'N Asset Management Capital- The Asset Management Capital fund is requesting $.024,:564, in total. $6,744 is for rental property maintenance - ongoing request of $5,000 and $1,744 carry forward from 2005. (See suppiemental for details) t7. ~.~.. , .... .. N ., , . . ... r . . , '.' . " ...... - . " 1~' l $40,000 is for energy saving improvements to the Red Brick. (See memo for details) $56,000 is for the property tax collection fees paid on a yearly basis to the County. This amount was not included in the 2006 budget process. This request will correct the oversight. The Finance Department has determined that the Asset Management Fund has sufficient prior year cash balances to support these requests. 'l I "f6JJ /11~l!)...~ ~: LAJA- ~ ~ .." ~~cl ~~ rr-nR.<~ ~ /U' P€~ rt,.. ~4~ ~.rz.Q ~ ~ ~;,~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~\.jL~~ ..t.V-VU ~~5~~t~~ [a.4 "~:;r:::;' ~~ .~ r ~ t:: ~~) ~~. ,~~ Of. y-/}. ~ ~_ O~'ui ok- ~ r--; ~-t.W ~ ~ ~ mw~ L~ R 5~u. ~-ep7' ~.~ 0] .Y:&- ~~ ~C..f ~~..&- ~~ ~~. ORDINANCE No.1 ~ (Series of 2006) AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE IN THE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND EXPENDITURES OF $1,994,658, AN INCREASE IN THE GENERAL FUND OF $2,100,242, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKS FUND OF $126,872, AN INCREASE IN THE WHEELER FUND OF $480,540, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKING IMPROVEMENT FUND OF $293,411, AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND OF $12,336,777, AN INCREASE IN THE EARLY CHILDHOOD FUND OF $48,300, AN INCREASE IN THE KIDS FIRST FUND OF $118,204, A DECREASE IN THE DEBT SERVICE FUND OF ($2,071,753), AN INCREASE IN THE PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND OF $8,105,973, AN INCREASE IN THE WATER FUND OF $2,956,700, AN INCREAE IN THE ELECTRIC FUND OF $1,105,387, AN INCREASE IN THE STORMW ATER FUND OF $12,908, AN INCREASE IN THE RUEDI FUND OF $10,157, AN INCREASE IN THE TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING FUND OF $1,345,352, AN INCREASE IN THE GOLF FUND OF $25,300, AN INCREASE IN THE TRUSCOTT FUND OF $1,331, AN INCREASE IN THE MAROLT FUND OF $97,269, AND AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND OF $3,700. WHEREAS, by virtue of Section 9.12 of the Home Rule Charter, the City Council may make supplemental appropriations; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has certified that the City has unappropriated current year revenues and/or unappropriated prior year fund balance available for appropriations in the following fund: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS FUND, WHEELER FUND, PARKING IMPROVEMENT FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, EARLY CHILDHOOD FUND, KIDS FIRST FUND, DEBT SERVICE FUND, PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, STORMWATER FUND, RUEDI FUND, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING FUND, GOLF FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, MAROLT FUND, AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND. WHEREAS, the City Council is advised that certain expenditures, revenue and transfers must be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 Upon the City Manager's certification that there are current year revenues and/or prior year fund balances available for appropriation in the: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS FUND, WHEELER FUND, PARKING IMPROVEMENT FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, EARLY CHILDHOOD FUND, KlDS FIRST FUND, DEBT SERVICE FUND, PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, STORMW ATER FUND, RUEDI FUND, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING FUND, GOLF FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, MAROLT FUND, AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND: the City Council hereby makes supplemental appropriations as itemized in the Attachment A. II Section 2 If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason invalid or unconstitutional by any court or competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED AND/OR POSTED ON FIRST READING on the day of 2006. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY ADOPTED AFTER PUBLIC HEARING on the _ day of ,2006. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Approved as to Form: John Worcestor, City Attorney Total City of Aspen 2006 Appropriations by Fund - Appendix A ~UUij Amencec 2006 AmenCeC Expenditure 2006 Expenditure Fund # Fund Name Budget Supplemental #2 Budget General Government Funds 000 Asset Management Plan $4,052,826 $1,994,658 $6,047,484 001 General Fund $20 675 692 $2100242 $22 77 5 934 'Subtotal General Gov't Funds: $24,728,518 $4,094,900 $28,823,418 Scedal Revenue Funds 100 ParKs and Open Space $8.711,877 $126,872 $8,838,749 120 Wheeler Opera House $3.690.741 $480.540 $4,171,281 130 Lodging Tax Fund $995,087 $0 $995,087 140 ParKing Improvement Fund $1.743,583 $293,411 $2,036,994 150 Housing Development $26,973,025 $12,336,777 $39,309,802 EaMy Chiidhood Educ. Initiative - 151 AVCF $180,922 $48,300 $229,222 152 Kids First! Yellow BMck $1417,766 $118204 $1 535 970 Subtotal, Special Rev. Funds: $43,713,001 $13,404,104 $57,117,105 Debt Service Funds 250 Debt Service Fund $5 925 000 ($2 071 753\ $3853247 Subtotal, Debt Service Funds: $5,925,000 ($2,071,753) $3,853,247 340 Parks Capital Improvement Fund $1,946,088 $8,106,973 $10,052,061 enterprise FuClOs 421 Water Utility $6,890.064 $2.956,700 $9.846,764 431 Electric Utility $6.016.443 $1.105,387 $7.121,830 441 Stormwater $0 $12,908 $12.908 444 Ruedi HydroeiectMc Facility $283,453 $10,157 $293,610 450 Transportation Fund $4,768,208 $1,345,352 $6,113.560 471 Municipal Golf Course $1,123,759 $25.300 $1.149.059 491 Truscott Housing $2.074,264 $1,331 $2,075.595 492 Maralt Housing $1 068099 $97 269 $1 165368 Subtotal, Enterprise Funds: $22,224,290 $5,554,404 $27,778,694 501 Health Ins. Internal Service Fund $2,875,000 $0 $2,875,000 i rust & Agency Funds 620 620 Housing Authority $942.832 $3,700 $946,532 622 622 Smuggler Mountain Fund $80 960 iQ $80 960 Subtotal, Trust & Agency Funds: $1,023,792 $3,700 $1,027,492 ALL FUNDS: $102,435,689 $29,091,329 $131,527,017 Less Interfund Transfers $17,101,924 $0 $17,063,044 EQUALS NET ALL FUNDS APPROPRIA nONS: $85,333,765 $29,091,329 $114,463,974 A II City of Aspen Attachment B 2006 Supplemental Budget New Funding Requests De artment New Recuest Decriotion Amount Subtotal b De t. Communitv Development Approved .construction Manager Position $80,000 Subtotal, Community Development, $80 000 Buildina Inspection One time request for vehicle costs - Burlingame Ranch Inspector. $8.000 Subtotal, Building Inspections: $8 000 Towing Charges. One time reduction - responsibility moved to Parking Fund - 001.31.31200.82920: revenue will move from the General Fund to 1$15,361 Police the Transportation and Parking Fund # 450 LEAF Grant - City portion - Offset by Grant Revenue for CUI enforcement OT costs. 001.31.31700.82900 $14,685 Subtotal, Police Oepartmen $676 Special Events New PT Position and Salary Increases 001.70 $40,000 Subtotal, Special Events $40,000 Ice Garden One time - Retirement Cash out funding - per personnel rules: $44,720 u tota, ce a en epartmen $44 720 Asset Mana.:;-ement Durrant Lawsuit. One time request for legal fees: 001.91.56002 $50,000 Animal Shelter Utliity Expenses for Rental units 100% offset by revenue: 001.91.82001.82222 $23.000 Rental and Operations Budget. Asie Office Space: 001.91.55115 $54.735 Subtotal, AssetManaoemen $127735 SUBTOTAL, GENERAL FUND: $299 n9 Parks Onerations: Expanded Snow Removal in Downtown Alleys: 001.55.55000 $20.000 IRS Compliance - take home vehicles: 001.55.55000 . $4,000 Administrative Payrolllncrese - ARC and Golfs portion - Ongoing increase 100.55.55000.80012 funded with transfers from ARC and the Golf Course. $14.000 u tota I a' un : $38,000 Wheeler Onera House Electric Chain Hoist - to comply with legal requirements - this is an annual compliance inspection - ongoing request $5 000 Subtotal, Wheeler Fund $5,000 Housin" Develo"ment Tech Adjustment, Administration Costs for Project Admininstration approved in 2005 as an ongoing supplemental: 150.23.23200.80. $28,500 Subtotal, Housing Development Fund;i $28 500 '""C Aley Park Development, Appropriate Developer Contribution to tAe City of Parks Capital Aspen of $100.000: 340.94.82056 $35,000 Post Office Trail Phase II: 340.94.82075.86000 $169000 Subtotal, Parks and Open. Space Capital Fund: $204 000 City Council's approval of the Water Rate increases on February 13, 2006 Water Fund to fund water conservation programs $150,000 Subtotal, Water Fund: $150 000 Transportation Towing Expenses ~ Resp. moved from PO 450.32.32000.82920 $15361 The City Council approved converting all service vehicle permits to an in car meter program. this will require 750 new in car meters $40 000 Parking meters in resid areas: 450.32.32000.82999 $70.000 Parking meters in resid areas: 450.94.00000.B6000 $680 000 Subtotal, Transportation Fund: $805361 Asset Manaaement Canital Rental Property Maintenenance - ongoing request $5k new and $1,744 carryforward . $6,744 Red Brick. Energy Saving Improvements - concurrent with West End Expansion project: 000.71. $40,000 Pitkin County. Property Tax Collection Fee: 000.91.03000.82990 $56 000 Subtotal, Asset Management Capital Fu-nd: $12Uf1f% Total New Requests All FUMS: $1,666,224 $1,655,224 !l' /OZ//'f'( AttB.N_RlIlquests Page 1 ATTACHMENT C City of Aspen . 2006 Supplemental Budget Request 10% and 50% Carryforward Requests City Manager "10%" Operating Budget 50% Department Carryforward Savings Carryforward Savings Council $1,647 $24,837 City Manager $238,110 $47,398 Human Resources $816, . $11,841 City Clerk $3,538 $134,174 City Attorny $0 $6,088 Risk Management $710 $10,354 Finance Department $3,876 $64,941 Community Development $550 $12,817 Engineering $332 $30,046 Building Inspection $0 $24,839 Enviromental Health $0 $13,787 Police Department $6,840 $191,869 Public Safety Records $744 $8,559 Streets Department . $0 $323,240 Goeographic Information Systems $418 $2,088 Information Systems $1,098 $65,529 Aspen ReceationCenter $0 $72,416 Ice Garden $0 $11,952 Asset Management Fund $0 $69,425 Parks Department Fund $3,907 $81,765 Wheeler Opera House Fund $0 $171,029 Parking Garage Fund $1,604 $28,187 Kids First Fund $2,387 . " $55,929 Water Utility Fund $0 $128,778 Electric Utility Fund $0 $90,231 Transportation Fund $8,035 $211,305 Totals $274,6121 $1,893.424 Att.C - 10% & 50% Savings Page 1 II City of Aspen . ATTACHMENT 0 2006 Supplemental Budget 100% Carry forward Appropriation Request Subtotal by Oen.rtment OescriDtion Amount Oeo.rtment Cltv Council Growth Summit, Carried forward from 2005 Continaencv remainina balance 5,000 Subtotal, City Council:, $5.000 City Manager PC Replacement Carry forward. 2004 forward includes 2006 not budgeted 14.502 Workstation Replacement Carry forward ~ Includes 2006 not previously budgeted 10,577 , Subtotal, City Manager: $25.079 Human Resources PC Replacement Carry forward - 2004 forward: 1.110 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 8,103 Subtotal, Human Resources: $9,213 City Clorl< PC Replacement Carry forward: 1,856 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 903 Design Contract for Council Chambers. Unexpended portion: 18,475 Subtotal, City Clerk:, $21,234 City Attorney PC Replacement Carry forward: incl..2006 am!, not prevo budgeted. 2.223 Workstation Replacement Carry forward - 2006 amount not previously budgeted 540 Subtotal, City Attorney: $2.763 Risk Management PC Replacement Carry forward: - 2006 amt not prev. budgeted 370 Workstation Replacement Carry forward - 2006 amt not prev. budgeted 180 Subtotal, Risk Management, $550 Finance DepL PC Replacement Carry forward: 4.440 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 2.160 Subtotal, Finance Department $6.500 Community Devel. PC Replacement Carry forward: 2,D42 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 1.625 Economic Sustainabiiity 001.13.13312.82999 65.534 Impact Fee Analysis 29.345 Zupancis Property Analysis 20,000 . Civic Center Project 12,515 Eq. Mnt & Repair 100% Carry forward 8.024 Subtotal, Community Development $139.085 Engineering PC Replacement Carry forward: 1.856 Works~tion Replacement Carry forward 902 $2.758 Building Inspection PC Replacement Carry forward: 1,264 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 7,152 . Subtotal, Building Inspection: $8.416 Environmental Health PC Replacement Carry forward: 1.113 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 542 Scientific Impact Study Carry Forward 66,661 Subtotal, Environmental Health: $68.316 Pollee PC Replacement Carry forward 5,055 Equipment Maintenance 44,755 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 8,496 Subtotal, Police Departmentl $58.306 Public Safety Records Workstation Replacement Carry forward I 01 $0 Att D 100% Cfwd Page 1 City of Aspen ATTACHMENT 0 2006 Supplemental Budget 100% Carry forward Appropriation Request Subtotal by Cenartment Descriotion Amount DeDartment Streets Department PC Replacement Carry fOrNard 370 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 180 Subtotal, Streets Departmentl $550 Geographic Info Sys. PC Replacement Carry forward: I 1,113 Workstation Replacement Carry forward I 541 Subtotal. GIS:! $1,654 Information Systems Workstation Replacement 1,805 PC Replacement Carry forward: 3.711 Subtotal, J.S. Department $5.516 Special.Events Capt: Workstation Replacement - 2006 amount not previously budgeted 540 PC Replacement Carry forward: - 2006 amt not previously budgeted 1.110 Subtotal, Special Events:, $1,650 Max Marolt Scholarship funds - unexpended 2005 amount: Recreation Depart 001.71.71000.84133 2,000 Workstation Replacement, 2006 amount not prev. budgeted 1,260 PC Replacement Carry forward:, 2006 amount not prevo budgeted 2,590 Subtotal, Recreation: $5,850 Aspen Ree. Center PC. Replacement Carry forward:, 0 Workstation Replacement Carry forward, 2006 amt not prevo budgeted 2,520 Youth Center Air conditioning Improvements: Punch Ust items: 001.72.72600.86000: 26,792 Subtotal, ARC: $29.312 Ice Garden PC Replacement Carry forward: 2,876 Workstation Replacement Carry forward 2,166 Subtotal, Ice Garden: $5.042 SUBTOTAL, GENERAL FUND: $399,652 Parks & Open Space Fund: PC Replacement Carry forward 4.430 Workstation Replacement 2,155 Stormwater Project Mgmt funding 100.55.44414.82999 5.000 Color the CORE 2005 Carry forward funding 100.55.03010.83999 1,835 Subtotal, Parks and Open Space Fund: $13,420 Wheeler Opera House Fund: . PC Replacement Carry forward 28.280 Equipment Maintenance 49.641 Workstation Replacement 1.090 Interior Painting Project 120.94.81057.86000 10,000 Dry Ice Fogger: 120.94.83035.86000 9,000 HVAC Maint. Contract: 120.94.81006.86000 3,750 Dimmer Racks and Circuits 120.94.83033.86000 2,500 Puppy Smith Housing - Wheeler Portion 120.94.81040.86000 32,000 MBC Housing - Wheeler Portion 120.94.82054.86000 138.250 21st century master plan: 120.93.93150.82900 30,000 Subtotal, Wheeler Opera House Fund: $304,511 Att 0 100% Cfwd Page 2 II , City of Aspen ATTACHMENT D 2006 Suoplemental Budget 100% Carry forward Appropriation Request De"artment Subtotal by OescriDtion Amount OeDartment Parking Garage Fund: PC Replacement Carry forward 370 Equipment Maintenance 11.060 . Workstation Replacement 180 Repair and Replacement. Gutters and down spouts 140.94.81042.86000 14,158 Parking Garage Stairs; 140.94.82046.86000 216,596, Fleet Ranger Plow and Steiner Implement Rep!. 140.94.83005.86000 $12.187 IS Plan Phone System Improvements: 140.94.83006.86000 $7,765 Subtotal, Parking Garage Fund:, $262,316 Housing Development Fund: Little Ajax Subsidy :150.23.23118.82999 2,573.672 , Annie Mitchell Homestead: 150.23.23120.86000 500.00P Burlingame Ranch Carry forward Supplemental: 150.23. ??? 9.234.605 Subtotal, Housing Development Fund: $12,308,277 Early Childhood 151 DOE Grant Revenue forHural Resort Region Childcare Council Quality Improvement Funding: 151.24.24303 48,300 Subtotal, Early Childhood Development Initiative: $48,300 Kids First Day Care AVMF Funds - Carry forward from 2005 for Early Childhood Mental health Fund consulting: 152.24.24100.84725 23.165 Contribution to Early Learning Center Grant Funds from 2005: 152.24.24100.84701 4.330 Cfwd: Grant funds - Professional Development, 152.24.24100.84031 27,000 Yellow Brick Facility Improvements Cfwd: 152.96.24211.86000 7.780 Subtotal, Kids First Day Care Fund: $62,275 Parks & Open Space Capital Castle Creek Trail Development. 2005 B Bonds funds 340.94.82064.86000 350,000 ' Rio Grande Trail Improvements . 2005 B Bond funds: 340.94.82069.86000 350.000 Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) Open Space Improvements 340.94.81053.86000 60.000 Tree Program Carry forward. Dedicated funds for tree replacement 340.94.81012.86000 1.550 Wetlands - Natural Areas Carry forward 340.94.81013.86000 711 Cozy Point Carry forward. Planning Project 340.94.81014.86000 13,690 Nordic Improvements 340.94.81018.86000 568 Smuggler Mtn Purchase Carry forward. Legal and staff time: 340.94.81026.86000 19,266 Dwell Time Improvements Carry forward 340.94.81048.86000 130,579 Post Office Trail Phase I Carry forward 340.94.82044.86000 37,871 Entrance to Aspen Carry forward: 340.94.82047.86000 128,000 Francis Whitaker Park. Impr Carry forward 340.94.82048.86000 52,283 Aley Property Carry forward 340.94.82056.86000 65,000 Castle Creek Trail Design Carry forward: 340.94.82064.86000 20,155 Golf Course Water Reclamation Project Cfwd 340.94.82067.86000 3,159.050 Anderson Parcel Planning Cfwd: 340.94.83007.86000 20.000 Puppy Smith Housing. Parks Capital portion 340.84.81040.86000 32,000 MBC Housing - Parks portion 340.94.82054.86000 61,250 Smuggler Mountain SRA LLC Purchases: 340.94.82073.86000 3,400.000 Subtotal, Parks and Open Space Capital Fund: $7,901,973 Att D 100% Cfwd Page 3 City of Aspen I ATTACHMENT 0 2006 Supplemental Budae! 100% Carry forward Appropriation Request Sub!otal by Denartmen! Descriotion Amount Deoartmen! Water Utility Puppy Smith Housing. Water portion 421.94.81040.86000 192,000 AABC Housing - Water Portion 421.94.82054.86000 215.250 421.94.44101.86000 SITE IMPROVEMENTS. INFRASTRUCTURE 13,100 421.94.44103.86000 EAST TREATMENT PLANT 266.350 421.94.44104.86000 WEST TREATMENT PLANT 83.285 421.94.44105.86000 ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING 5.000 421.94.44107.86000 STORAGE BUilDING 1,000 421.94.44301.86000 MAROON CREEK HYDRO 507,230 421.94.44302.86000 CASTLE CREEK HYDRO 12,825 421.94.44401.86000 WATER RIGHTS ACTIVITIES 40.000 421.94.44402.66000 CASTLE CREEK DAM & HEADGATE 6,340 421.94.44407.86000 GAUGING STATIONS 5,000 421.94.44408.85000 RECLAMATION PROJECT 31,552 421.94.44413.86000 UTILITY BUSINESS PLAN 5.725 421.94.44414.88000 STORMWATER RATE STUDY 30.621 421.94.44501.86000 RAW WATER DISTRIBUTION 33.015 421.94.44601.86000 MAINLINE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 111,649 421.94.44602.86000 HYDRANT REPLACEMENT PROGRAM 86,563 421.94.44701.86000 PUMP STATION 9,994 421.94.44702.86000 PRESSURE REDUCING VALVES 12.000 421.94.44903.86000 RIO GRANDE WELL 125,509 421.94.44907.86000 GENERAL GROUNDWATER FACILITIES 66,084 421.94.45001.86000 WATER ACQUISITIONS 30,000 421.94.45001.86101 l.S. PLAN - SCADAlSYSTEM TELEMETRY 15.329 421.94.45001.86103 1.5. PLAN. WATER PLANT OPERATIONS 2.500 421.95.00000.95340 Water Reuse Contribution - Water Utility 770,000 Subtotal, Water UtlUty: $2,677,922 Electric Utlllty 431.94.45924.86300 ELECTRIC ACQUISITIONS 105,143 . 431.94.46001.86000 STREET LIGHT REPLACEMENT & PAINTING 50,000 431.94.46103.86000 EXPAND ELECTRICAL STORAGE BUILDING 40.000 431.94.48202.86000 BURLINGAME ELECTRIC DIST. SYSTEM 99,513 431.94.46402.86000 MAROON CREEK BRIDGE CONDUIT PROJECT 161.000 431.94.46404.86000 ENERGY CONSERVATION 21,500 431.94.46405.86000 SYSTEM TELEMETRY 36,000 431.94,46406.86000 RIDGWAY DAM & HYDRO 20,QOO 431.94,81040.86000 PUppy SMITH HOUSING 352,000 431.95.00000.95340 WATER REUSE CONTRIBUTION - ELECTRIC UTILITY 130,000 Subtotal, Electric Utility: I $1,015,156 Stormwater STORM WATER CONSERVATION 12,908 $12,908 Reudi Hydro Fund 444.94.43504.86000 RUEDI MAINTENANCE 5,000 444.94.43505.86000 RUEDI SITE IMPROVEMENTS 5,157 Subtotal, Reudi:i $10,157 Transportation Fund Work Station Replacement - 100% Carry forward 16,692 PC Replacement 100% Carry forward 25.554 Rubey Park Facility Imp. 450.94.83055.86000 10,200 S Curve Improvements: 450.94.83064.86000 74,000 Pedestrian Improvements 450.32.32100.83900 38.000 Fleet. Purchase 2 Eldorado Aerotech Buses 450.94.83021.86000 153,418 New Radios for Parking officers 450.94.83050.86000 2.922 IS Systems Equipment 450.94.83006.86000 7,900 Subtotal, Transportation Fund:: I $328,686 Att D 100% Cfwd Page 4 II City of Aspen ATTACHMENT 0 2006 Supolemental Budget 100% Carry forward Appropriation Request Subtotal by DeDartment Descriotion Amount Deoartment Marolt Seasonal Housing Tool Cat Replacement: 492.94.83005.86000 7.728 Boiler Repl. Project 492.94.45051.86000 88,732 Subtotal, Marolt Seasonal Houslng:~ $96,460 Housing Authority Operations PC Replacement Carry fOlWard 3.700 Work Station Replacement Carry forward 0 $3.700 Asset Management Capital Fund: : Community Development - 3rd Floor Remodel: 000.13.82024.86000 54.158 I Streets . City Shop Restoration, 000.41.81047.86000 295.049 -I Streets - Power Plan Restoration 000.41.81047.86001 155.584 : Streets - Pave road to snow dump and animal shelter 000.41.82054.86000 27,501 Streets - City Shop Air Reels 000.4 1.83062.86000 8,000 Streets, Fleet Carry fOlWarcl to finalize purchase of PO Detective Vehicles: 000.41.83005.86000 11.244 Information Systems: Core Network Switch Rep!. & Public Safety Records system 000.61.82057.86000 361,916 Information Systems: Telephone System self-warranty funds: , 000.61.83060.86000: 19.451 Recreation, Red Brick Improvements - Unexpended 2005 budget authority: 000.71.83004.86000: 1.194 ARC, Roof Extension Project Carryforward 000.72.72633.86000 18.353 ARC: Maintenance & Management Cost Software: 000.72.72634.86000 806 ARC: Priority 1 Energy Efficiency Projects: 000.72.82061.86000 35,000 ARC: Priority 2 Energy Efficiency Projects: 000.72.82062.86000 35,000 ARC: Drop Slide Project carry forward: 000.72.72606.86000 30,000 Ice Garclen, Rubber Flooring repl. forfrontlobby, 000.74.81045.86000 19,000 AMP - City Hall HVAC Design Carry forward: 000.91.81006.86000 14.200 AMP - City Hall Lighting - Council Chambers 000.91.81023.86000 79.212 AMP - Final Animal Shelter Costs 000.91.82001.86000 54.485 AMP City Hall Repairs - 000.91.81001 37,698 AMP - Cemetery Lane Homes. Ongoing repairs 59.425 AMP - Puppy Smith Housing - General Fund portion: 000.91.81040.86000 143,996 AMP - AABC Housing - General Fund portion: 000.91.82054.86000 410,005 O. SUbtotal, ASset Management t,;aj)ftal:l $1,871.277 I Total 100 % Carry forward Supplemental Requests: I I $27.316,991 Att 0 100% Cfwd Page 5 CITY OF ASPEN I Attachment E 2006 Interfund Transfer Transfer From Fund Transfer T'O Fund Amount of Transfer Puroose of Interfund Transfer . I Asset Manaoement : Wheeler Ooera House $186,468 :Transfer to Wheeler Opera House Kids First Fund $181,690 iTransfer to Recav Streets Loan Debt Service Fund -11:455 395 Transfer to Debt Service Fund Subtotal, Transfers From Asset Manage $823,553 General Fund: Parks and Ooen Saace Fund: $81,960 Annual Partial SubSidy of Food Tax Refund HousinQ Oevelonment Fund $1,126.848 Transfer. Zupancis prooertv Re-aurchase Transoortation Fund "40 000 Operations Subsidy Subtotal, Transfers from General Fund: $1,348,808 Parks and Qoen Soace Fund: Parks and One" Soace Canital Fund Transfer to fund budgeted 340 Capital $2,039,364 i improvement proiects. Parks Caoital Facilities SPAC $250,000 SPARC Inter Fund Loan Interest Debt Service Fund $893,873 Parks 2005 Open Space Bonds Debt Service Fund $856,188: Parks Portion, 2001 Sales Tax Revenue Bonds Debt Service Fund J~005 Parks and Open Space Revenue Bonds- $954,506;refundina 1999 bonds '1:1=: Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund 633 944.Suooort of Fund Operations Subtotal, Transfers from Parks and $5,627,875' Open Space Fund: Wheeler Opera House Fund '226 148 Overhead Payment ~ General Government General Fund Suooort of Fund Ooerations Subtotal, Wheeler Opera House: $226,148, Parklna Garage Fund Transportation Fund $100,000 Operations Subsidy 2004 Certificate of Participation (Refunded, Originally issued in 1989 to construct Rio Debt Service Fund $694,488IGrande Parking Garage Transportation Fund $76,79510verhead, Transportation Administration '125190 Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund Support of Fund Onerations Subtotal,Parkino Garaoe Fund: $996,473, Housin!:l Develooment Fund 450 Transportation Fund $2,000.000 Burlingame.mitigation Truscott I Rental Housino Fund $1,091.192 Truscott I, 2001 Housina Bonds Subsidy Marolt Ranch Seasonal Housing, Subsidy for Marolt Ranch Seasonal Housina Fund $38.500 Budgeted Caoitallmorovements APCHA Housing Office, Operations Subsidy HousinQ Office Ooerations Fund $170.255 (50% of total SubsidY, solit with Pitkin COUl1tv .'1:.4 Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund 469208' Suoport of Fund Ooerations Subtotal. Housinn OevelonmentFund: $3,769,155, Day Care fKids First !Yellow Brick Fund General Fund $30,000 Transfer - New Prooertv Manaaer Position 'I:~ Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund 59 850 Suoport of Fund Operations $89,850 Parks and Open $Dace Capital Fund T General Fund .1 ?verhead Payment ~ General Government $29,367; Support of Fund Operations j" t" r (. ~: f t' t r, i , ( ~, !. 1.1 CITY OF ASPEN Attachment E 2006 Interiund Transfer Transfer from fund Transfer To fund Amount of Transfer Purnose of Interfund Transfer Water Utility Fund Return on Investment Payment, General Fund Sale of Land to Water Utility for Operations General Fund $1,000.000 Facilities General Fund $92,567! 1/3 olobal wannino.EH Parks and ODen Sases Fund $150,OOOIWater usaae Conservation Proarams Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund <614189 Suooort of Fund Ooerations Subtotal, Water Utilitv Fund:: I $1,856,756, Electric Utility Fund I General Fund $364,QOOIFranchise Fee Transfer to General Fund General Fund ~! ~verhead Payment - General Government $296,536' Sunnort of Fund Onerations Purchase of Hydroelectric power from City. Reudi Hvdroelectric Fund $406,000 owned Generatina Facilltv . General Fund $92.567 1/3 Global Warmina-EH Water Utility Fund $148 3091 Electric Utilitv oortion of Utilitv BiUino Services Subtotal, Electric Utilitv Fund: .! $1,307,412, Reudi Hydroelectric Fund , ..I ?verhead Payment - General Govemment General Fund $10,760;Support of Fund Ooerations Transportation Fund Overhead Payment. General Government General Fund $351,266 Suooort of Fund Ooerations Contribution for Mall Rubey Park Mall Parks and Ooen 5aace Fund $318,054 Maintenance Subtotal, TransDortation Fund $669,320 Golf Course Fund Overhead Payment - General Govemment General Fund $115,721 SUODort of Fund ODerations Parks and Onen Snace Fund $10 000 Grounds Maintenance Services Subtotal, Golf Course Fund: $125,7211 Truscott Rental Housina Fund Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund $35,054 SUDport of Fund ODerations Overhead Payment - Housing Operations Housina ODerations Fund $48,849 SUDDort of Fund ODerations Subtotal, Truscott Housina Fund: $83,903 Marolt Ranch Seasonal Housina Fund Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund $16,716' SUDDort of Fund Ooerations Overhead Payment - Housing Operations HousinQ Ooerations Fund $24,650 Sunnort of Fund Onerations Subtotal. Marolt Ranch Fund: . $41,366' Houslna Office ODerations Fund I General Fund: ~!?verhead Payment - General Government $49,880~SunDnrt of Fund Ooerations Smuaaler Houslna Fund Overhead Payment - General Government General Fund $3.382 Suonort of Fund Ooerations Housina Onerations Fund $3315 Housina Overhead Subtotal, Smunnler Fund $6,697 2005 TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS $17,063,044, City Of Aspen I Attachment F 2006 Technical Adjustments DenartmentlFund Technical Ad1ustment DescrTntion Amount Subtotal bu Dent Reduce 100.95.31055.97250 to reflect the correct calculations for payment of the 2001 Parks and Open Parks Fund # 100 Spce Bonds ($8,812.00) Increase 100.95.31064.97250 to reflect the correct calculations for payment of the 2005 Open Space Bond $1,493.19 Increase 100.95.31065.97250 to reflect the correct caiculations for payment of the 2005 STRR Bond $1,006.00 . 1$6,312.81 Increase 140.95.00000.97250 to reflect the correct I calculation for the debt service transfer for the 2004 Parking Garaae Fund # 140 COPS Bonds $2,907.50, 1 $2.907.50 Reduce the debt service fund to accurately reflect the ($2,071.753.31)1 Debt Service Fund # 250 debt service budqet in 2006 Subtotal, Debt Service: I 1$2,071,753.31 Increase 471.98.31065.82001 to to reflect the correct I calculations for the payment of the 2005 Sales Tax Golf Fund # 471 Revenue Refunding bonds $173.001 Increase 471.98.31065.89610 to to reflect the correct calculations for the payment of the 2005 Sales Tax Revenue Refundinq bonds $26,156.00 Increase 471.98.31065.89630 to to reflect the correct calculations for the payment of the 2005 Saies Tax Revenue Refundinq bonds ($1,029.00 $25,300.00 Increase 491.98.31059.82001 to reflect the trustee Truscott Fund # 491 fees for the 2001 HouS.in9 GO Bonds $999.00 Increase 491.98.31062.82001 to reflect the trustee fees for the 2003 GO Refundina Bonds $332.00 $1,331.00 Increase 492.98.31062.82001 to reflect the trustee Marolt Fund # 492 fees for the 2003 GO Refundin9 Bonds $809.00 $809 00 Reduce 000.95.31065.97250 to reflect the correct ($1,202.9J calculations far the payment of the 2005 Sales Tax Asset Manaoement # 000 Revenue Refunding bonds Subtotal, Asset Manaoement I ($1,202.96' Total Technical Adiustment IAII Funds: I 1$2,048,921.58)' 1$2,048,921.58) lXa. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council (] ~. Chris Bendon, Community Development Director lJA \^/) Sarah Laverty, Environmental Project Coordinator THRU: FROM: RE: Rio Grande Recycle Center COWOP - Public Hearing Determination of COWOP Review Eligibility Resolution No. _19_, Series of 2006 DATE: April 10, 2006 SUMMARY: City of Aspen and Obermeyer Redevelopment Company have submitted a request for the redevelopment of the Rio Grande Recycle Center to be determined eligible for the City's Convenience and Welfare of the Public (COWOP) review process. The existing Rio Grande Recycle Center, and proposed location for the redeveloped Rio Grande Recycle Center, is located on the north side of Rio Grande Place, directly east of the skate park. The zoning is Public Specially Planned Area (PUB SA). As part ofthe Obermeyer construction project, the City of Aspen and Obermeyer Redevelopment Company agreed that compensation for leased lands by Obermeyer during construction will be made in form of improvements to recycle/snowmelt center parcel, as well as other Permanent Improvements. (See Attachment A: Land Lease Agreement) Construction on the Obermeyer Project is nearing completion, and the redevelopment ofthe recycle center can begin. Staff believes the City's Convenience and Welfare of the Public (COWOP) (See Attachment B: COWOP process explanation) process is best suited for this type of project where greater public participation is integral in designing a recycle center that best suits the needs of multiple interested parties. The COWOP process allows a more flexible and integrated way to develop a design that includes the participation of neighbors and other affected parties. (See Attachment C: Eligibility Letters) Staff recommends City Council determine this project eligible for the City's COWOP review and establish a COWOP Task Force Team, as outlined in Resolution No._19-, Series of 2006. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council passed Ordinance No. 18 (series of 2003) on April 14, 2003 granting Land Use approval and a Development Order for the Obermeyer Place COWOP project. Section 13 of Ordinance No. 18: Recycling Center, identifies funds, provided by the Project Developer, for the purpose of I RESOLUTION NO. _19_ (SERIES OF 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL DETERMINING THE ELIGIBILITY OF DEVELOPMENT REASONABLY NECESSARY FOR THE CONVENIENCE AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC (COWOP), TO BE KNOWN AS THE "RIO GRANDE RECYCLE CENTER COWOP," ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RIO GRANDE PLACE ON THE EASTERN EDGE OF RIO GRANDE PARK, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 1 OF THR RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community. Development Department received a completed application from Obermeyer Redevelopment C~mpany, for a determination of eligibility for development reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public (COWOP) for a redevelopment ofthe Rio Grande Recycle Center; and, WHEREAS, the property is located on the north side of Rio Grande Place at the eastern edge of the Rio Grande Park Parcel and is legally described as Lot I of the Rio Grande Subdivision as shown on the plat thereof recorded in book 32 at page 84 of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.500.050 of the Land Use Code, the City Council may make a determination whether a proposed development is reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public by applying the standards of Section 26.500.040 during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and a recommendation from the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director determined that the proposed development may be eligible for consideration as a project reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public, and notified in writing the Planning and Zoning Commission of the public hearing before the City Council at which time a determination is to be made concerning eligibility of the proposed development; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds the Standards for Determination, Section 26.500.040, for the following reasons: I. The City of Aspen, as owner ofthe land, is a co-applicant 2. Improvement to the Recycle Center is a "public infrastructure improvement" and will be a "public building" or "structure." 3. As part of Rio Grande Park, redevelopment of the Recycle Center constitutes "park and recreational facilities development" 4. The Recycle Center is a public facility that provides service to the general public 5. The integrative approach of a diverse COWOP task team, including neighbors and other individuals with special interest in the recycle center, allows the redevelopment of the CC Reso. No _19_, Series of 2006 Rio Grande Recycle Center Eligibility Page 1 recycle center to account for the needs of a general public with multiple interests. WHEREAS, the City Council adopts the findings of the Task Force charged with pursuing alternate locations for the recycle center, and finds that the Rio Grande location is the best location for the recycle center, and shall be the location of the redeveloped recycle center; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution 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, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to Section 26.500.040 of the Land Use Code, the Rio Grande Recycle Center COWOP project, as described herein, is determined to be eligible development necessary for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public. Section 2 Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(b), the procedure and standards for review of the project shall be (also see timeline): Process: I. Task Force Team convenes and establishes its role, meeting schedule, meeting procedural protocol and meeting rules for the conduct of business of the Rio Grande Recycle Center COWOP Task Force Team. 2. Task Force Team Chair shall be the City's Director of Community Development. 3. Task Force Team shall develop the Program Description 4. Community Development and Interdepartmental Technical Staff Review. 5. Task Force Team conducts project development and review. Task Force Team and Staff provide a recommendation to City Council. 6. Formal final approval decision shall be the responsibility of City Council and shall require adoption of an Ordinance. City Council may, by resolution, determine the project no longer qualifies for the COWOP process, at any time, and discontinue the COWOP Task Force Team. Standards: 1. Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Planned Unit Development. To be used as a guide in reviewing the project and to inform the Task Force Team during the project review. 2. Section 26.480, Subdivision, if determined to be necessary during project development and review. 3. Any necessary technical design standards of utility providers shall be considered and the COWOP decision shall not supercede any non-city utility provider. 4. Any necessary operational consideration of the Aspen Police and Pitkin County Sheriff Offices. 5. Any necessary or desired technical design considerations for the proper design and operation of a recycle center and architecture of a civic building. 6. The Aspen Area Community Plan shall be considered a policy guide and the final recommendation shall include an analysis of conformance with this adopted plan. CC Reso. No _19_, Series of 2006 Rio Grande Recycle Center Eligibility Page 2 Section 3 Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(c), the Task Force Team to review the development proposal shall include representatives from the following: Obermeyer Redevelopment Company - Tim Belinski, Dwayne Romero, Jack Donovan Aspen City Council- To be determined Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission - To be determined Neighbors - To be determined Recycling Representatives - Kristine Crandall Skate Park User - Pat Jones Citizen-at-large - Two positions to be determined. (An ad is running in the local paper seeking volunteers. Ifmore than two people respond staff will bring the selection to City Council.) Pitkin County - Chris Hoofuagle Task Force Team Chair - Chris Bendon, Community Development Director Environmental Health Staff - Sarah Laverty Parks Department - Scott Chism Architects - Robin Schiller, CCY Architects, Ltd. CORE - Gary Goodson It is acknowledged through this resolution that it will be beneficial for many interested parties beyond those identified in the above noted list to be involved in the COWOP process and that the opportunity for involvement is created through this process. Additional interested parties will be able to attend all meetings of the COWOP Task Force Team and may be provided with email notice of meeting schedules at their request. All meetings of the Task Force Team will be conducted in a public hearing format. It is also acknowledged through this resolution that numerous City Departments, other governmental or district agencies and consultants will provide technical assistance and analysis as determined to be necessary and/or as required by the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Section 4 Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(d), the proposed timeframe for the procedures to be used to review the proposed development are anticipated to be completed within approximately one (I) month from the date of this resolution. The following schedule is subject to change: March 15, 2006 Provisional Meeting with Development Review Committee (DRC) CC Reso. No _ 19_, Series of 2006 Rio Grande Recycle Center Eligibility Page 3 II March 27, 2006 April 10, 2006 April 13, 2006 April 14, 2006 April 17, 2006 April 21, 2006 April 28, 2006 May 5, 2006 Determination of Eligibility for COWOP review. City Council Resolution No. 19, Series of2006 - Continue to April 10, 2006 Determination of Eligibility for COWOP review. City Council Resolution No. 19, Series of 2006 COWOP #1. Introductions, background, project overview, scheduling, parameters for development. COWOP #IA (if needed). Continuation of parameters for development. Work Session with Council: Recycle Center design, 5pm COWOP #2. Direction on Physical and Financial Issues, incorporate direction from Council work session. COWOP #3. Ifready, review of Final Plan and recommendations to City Council. COWOP #4 (if needed). Review of Final Plan and recommendations to City Council. Meeting with DRC (needs to be scheduled) First reading of approval Ordinance (needs to be scheduled) Second reading of approval Ordinance (needs to be scheduled) FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this lOth day of April, 2006. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: Helen Kalin Klanderud John P. Worcester, City Attorney CC Reso. No _19_, Series of 2006 Rio Grande Recycle Center Eligibility Page 4 At+a."''''.....e'''':..,- f\: L~".l ~e.A<;L ~ r~e '\I\e "~A-- !Sc.\U,t-e'" -P"'je'>) J LAND LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LAND LEASE AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into by and between THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO Lessor (hereinafter "Lessor" or "the City"), and Obermeyer Redevelopment Company, Lessee (hereinafter "Lessee" or "Obermeyer"), to be effective on the date on which the parties actually affix their signatures hereto. WIT N E SSE T H: WHEREAS, the City owns the two parcels subject to this Agreement (hereinafter "Zupancis Parcel" and "Recycle/Snowmelter Center Parcel", together called "Leased Parcels"), located in Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Obermeyer Redevelopment Company, the Lessee, is a Colorado S-Corporation authorized to do business in the State of Colorado and primarily engaged in the business of developing real estate; and WHEREAS, the City has the rights, title and interest in and to the real property and. public facilities on the Leased Parcels, together with the rights, licenses, and privileges hereinafter granted; and WHEREAS, the City has full power and authority to enter into this Agreement in respect thereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen granted a development order for the Obermeyer Place COWOP Project as evidenced by the City of Aspen Ordinance No. 18, Series 2003, specifically approving the temporary use of the Lease Parcels; and WHEREAS, Lessee desires to lease certain property with the intent of installing certain small business operations in temporary and existing structures on site, along with construction-related operations thereon upon the terms and conditions hereinafter stated. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein the parties agree as follows: SECTION I LEASED PARCELS A. Leased Parcels: Included Areas Lessor hereby leases unto Lessee, for the term and upon the rentals, fees, charges and conditions hereinafter stated, two parcels ofland. The Zupancis Parcel is located at 540 East Main Street The Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel is located adjacent to Rio Grande Place on the eastern side of Rio Grande Park. Both parcels are described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (collectively referred to herein as "Leased Parcels"). B. Lease Parcels: Excluded Areas 1. Snowmelter Overational Area. The area within the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel devoted to the operations, traffic circulation, and maintenance of the City's snow dumping and snow melting operations is specifically excluded from the defmition of Leased Parcels for the purposes of this Agreement. 2. Recvcle Ooerational Area. The area within the relocated Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel devoted to the operations, traffic circulation, and maintenance of the Pitkin County recycle operations is specifically excluded from the defmition of Lease Parcels for purposes of this Agreement. Page 1 of17 II SECTION II INITIAL IMPROVEMENTS, USE OF PREMISES AND FINAL IMPROVEMENTS A. Initial Improvements Descriotion. Lessee, at its sole expense, shall be responsible for construction ofthe following "Initial Improvements" on the Leased Premises. Any and all such changes shall comply with the City's Building Department requirements. Relating to both the Zupancis Parcel and the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel: a.) To accommodate the temporary relocation ofa number of small businesses included in the Obermeyer Place project, project management, and for construction-related activities, Lessee shall install temporary buildings and structures of varying sizes and dimensions on both sites. All such temporary structures shall be limited in height to 25' from existing grade (a height that is less than that allowed by current zoning). Structures shall be skirted and may be interconnected with adjoining pathways and decking to allow for pedestrian access. b.) Utilities necessary for such stated uses may be extended and upgraded for service to the Leased Parcels. Such upgrade, including potential realignment or relocation of services, shall be the responsibility of Obermeyer and shall be performed in conjunction with the applicable agencies and all such work shall be performed in accordance with applicable building code requirements. c.) Exterior lighting shall be added to the existing and added structures in accordance with City of Aspen lighting requirements and with sensitivity to Concept 600 Building residents. d.) Lessee shall site grade as appropriate to accommodate such changes and may add a road base topping surface in areas that are appropriate for traffic circulation and parking for the two parcels. In addition, existing sidewalks may be repaired and a concrete surface may be added to the site to allow for a covered storage facility not to exceed 100 s.f. ('\ ...." Relating solely to the Zupancis Parcel: e.) The existing one-story house structure on the Zupancis Parcel on East Main Street and the two existing garages to the north of the house shall be modified to accommodate small business operations. Such modifications may include the removal of internal walls, replacement of current roofs to accommodate higher interior heights inside the garages up to 12 feet, and other such changes in accordance with current zoning. The existing buildings may be painted and window awnings may be added. The existing fence along East Main Street may be removed. f.) Clearing of brush and ground vegetation may be necessary to allow pedestrian access, traffic circulation, and parking within the site. Any such changes shall be performed in accordance with City Municipal Code. g.) Public signage in the form of a general business directory within the site, individual business signs, and directional signs shall be installed in accordance with the City's sign code provisions. h.) Under no event shall the three historically designated structures located on the northern end of the Zupancis parcel be disturbed or removed by Lessee. Such structures shall be either fenced or otherwise secured by Lessee to ensure they are undisturbed during the term of this Agreement. Page 2 of17 i.) All exterior changes to the Zupancis structures shall be subject to review and approval of the City's Historic Preservation Officer and/or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable. Relating solely to the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel: j.) The continuous dirt berm located along the north and east edges of the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel shall be partially removed to provide additional traffic circulation and parking for the site. Such berm may be reshaped and regraded to a height not to exceed 5 feet from existing grade. Once reshaped, the berm shall be revegetated and maintained with appropriate ground cover plant materials for the duration of this lease. Obermeyer shall, upon termination of this Agreement, work cooperatively with the City to either leave the berm as modified or re-establish the dirt berm to its substantially former condition, inclusive of its original height and its former state oflandscape vegetation. k.) The dirt berm located adjacent to Rio Grande Place along the southern edge of the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel shall be removed entirely in order to provide additional traffic circulation and parking for the site. 1.) A 6' tall protection and screening fence made of wood shall be installed alongside the current sidewalk, between the two existing entry points to the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel in accordance with Building Department regulations. m.) Public signage in the form of a general business directory within the site, individual business signs, and directional signs shall be installed in accordance with the City's sign code provisions. Title to such improvements shall remain with Obermeyer until expiration or other termination of this Agreement, as provided for in Section XIII, below. Such Initial Improvements contained in this Section II shall be completed during the term of this Agreement. B. Permanent Imorovements , Descriotion. Lessee, at its sole expense, shall be responsible for construction of the "Permanent Improvements" described in Exhibit B herein. Any and all such changes shall comply with the City's Building Department requirements and all other relevant provisions of the Aspen Municipal Code. C. CooDeration With Existing Uses Adioining the Recvcle/Snowmelt Center Parcel I. Snowmelt ODerations. Obermeyer agrees to work in good faith with the City to ensure the snowmelt operations remain accessible for their operations continuously through the term of this Agreement. 2. Recvcle ODerations. Obermeyer understands the importance of the continued use by the public of the Pitkin County recycling program and shall work with the County to ensure the operations remain accessible to the public through the term of this Agreement. The recycle dumpsters shall be relocated to the northern edge of the parcel and the traffic circulation and access to the area shall be routed to a one-way route. Obermeyer shall install accompanying signage within the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel to assist the public with directional and way-finding questions. D. Authorized Uses I. Small Business Ooerations. It is understood by both parties that Obermeyer shall sublease spaces on the Leased Premises to a number of the small businesses currently located within the Obermeyer Place project boundary. Such operations, on both the Zupancis Parcel and the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel, shall occupy either current non-historic structures or temporary job trailers. Page 3 of 17 II 2. Proiect Management Operations. It is understood by both parties that Obermeyer shall manage the Obermeyer Place construction project, the tenant relocation work, and the continuing sales and leasing operations for the proje~t from a location within the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel. g'",.~ .,,~,' " :';:::;:;:::.' ;~(~:::;. E. Unauthorized Uses 1. Equioment. Construction Vehicle Storage. Portable Restrooms. Obermeyer shall not store on the Zupancis Parcel any construction equipment or construction vehicles or any portable restrooms that may be visible from any point along East Main Street. 2. Non-residential Property. Obermeyer shall not permit anyone to reside on the Leased Parcels. F. Sublease/Use/License/Storage Agreements Obermeyer may rent out portions of the Leased Parcels and enter into agreements with third parties to use the Leased Parcels. The base rents per square foot of the subleases shall not exceed current lease rates for the tenants currently located on the Obermeyer Place site. In addition, each tenant shall receive one rent-free month to defray relocation costs. SECTION III TERM A. Base Term The initial term of this Agreement is for a period of time beginning on the date of execution and ending June 30, 2006 ("Base Term"). Obermeyer shall have the right to extend the term for one (1) three month period of time, in accordance with Subsections B and C, below. During the Base Term and extension term, lease rates shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section IV, Subsection B, below. B. Ootions to Extend 1. Extension Ootion. Obermeyer shall have the right to extend the Base Term of this Agreement for one (1) three-month period oftime, as follows: From July 1, 2006 through September 30,2006 In the event of unforeseen exigent circumstances, at Obermeyer's request and with the written approval of the City, additional three-month extension(s) may be granted. Such extensions may be exercised so long as Obermeyer is not in default under terms of this Agreement. 2. Option Exercise. Lessee shall notify Lessor in writing of its intention to exercise the option for each extension term no later than ninety (90) days prior to the otherwise expiry date of the then current term. 3. Title Convevance and Surrender of Possession. Upon the ending of the Base Term or upon ending of the last and final exercised Extension Options, Obermeyer shall peacefully surrender possession of the Leased Parcels and remove all personal property, inclusive of all temporary structures and any constructed buildings or occupied structures that were not included within the Leased Parcels prior to occupancy under this Agreement, without further requirement of notice by the City or opportunity to cure by Obermeyer, under terms of Section XII, below, or otherwise. Title to the associated improvements shall vest in the City. C. Lessor's Notice of Failure to Exercise Should Obermeyer fail to exercise an option to extend the term of this Agreement within the time provided, as defined in Subsection B above, Obermeyer shall not be deemed to have forfeited the option until such time as the City shall give Obermeyer written notice of failure to timely exercise the option, Page 4 of 17 together with notice ofa period of five (5) days, after the date of said notice, within which Obermeyer shall continue to have the right to exercise the option to extend the relevant term of this Agreement ("Notice of Failure to Exercise"). If Obermeyer shall not have exercised the option, by written notice to the City, within the five (5) day period provided in the City's Notice of Failure to Exercise, the option shall be forfeited and Obermeyer shall have no further right to extend the relevant term of this Agreement. D. Holdinl! Over Should Obermeyer or any of its subtenants hold over the use of or continue to occupy the Leased Parcels with express written approval of the City after expiration of the Base Term or any extended term, such holding over shall be deemed a month to month tenancy upon the existing conditions and agreements provided for in this Agreement. It is expressly understood that no title to the temporary structures, inclusive of installed structures commonly known as job trailers or any constructed building or structure not included on the Leased Parcels prior to occupancy under this Agreement, shall pass to the City if Obermeyer or any subtenant becomes a hold-over tenant. SECTION IV RENTS, FEES AND CHARGES A. Base Term Ground Rent I. Recognition and compensation to the City of Aspen for the use and occupancy of the Leased Premises by Obermeyer as described in this Agreement shall be made in the form of improvements to the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel, plus certain adjacent areas, herein referred to as the Permanent Improvements denoted in Exhibit B, Section II, and Section V of this Agreement. 2. Permanent Improvements as approved through the City's land use approval process shall be completed no later than nine months following the vacation of the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel as described in Section III, paragraph B, of the Agreement. If, at the time of completion, Obermeyer's audited actual incurred costs (not including developer profit) for the Permanent Improvements approved by the City and denoted in Exhibit B are less than $475,000, Obermeyer shall pay to the City the difference between the actual incurred costs and $475,000. If, at the time of completion, Obermeyer's audited actual incurred costs (not including developer profit) for the Permanent Improvements approveQ by the City and denoted in Exhibit B are more than $475,000, the City shall reimburse to Obermeyer the difference between $475,000 and the higher actual incurred cost. B. Extension Options Ground Rental Rates I. Date of Execution throul!h June 30. 2006. The rental rates specified in Subsection A, above, shall be the rent charged during the Base Term of this Agreement. 2. Julv I. 2006 Rental Rate. Beginning July I, 2006, the first extension period of this Agreement, if a buyer other than the City has the Zupancis property under contract, the rental amounts shall be paid in monthly installments of $10,000 for both parcels, or $2,000 per month for the Recycle/Snowmelter Center parcel and $8,000 for the Zupancis parcel. If the property is not under contract, the rental amounts shall be paid in monthly installments of $4,000 for both parcels, or $1,000 per month for the Recycle/Snowmelter Center parcel and $3,000 for the Zupancis parcel. The monthly rental amounts under either scenario for each approved successive extension period shall be increased by 1%. C. Pavrnent Dates I. Monthlv Rents. During the Extension Option periods, rent shall be payable in monthly installments beginning on the first day of each month. 2. First Pavrnent of Rents and Prorata Rents. If any partial month rent is due, such rents shall be calculated on a daily basis from the date of execution through to the end of the month. Page 5 of17 II LAND LEASE AGREEMENT PERMANENT IMPROVEMENTS EXHmIT B This Exhibit B is an accompanying and integral document to the Land Lease Agreement between the City of Aspen and Obermeyer Redevelopment Company. Permanent Improvements: General Obermeyer Redevelopment Company accepts the responsibility for the scope of work items denoted herein. The site for which such Permanent Improvements are to be constructed shall be known as "Recycle Center", which is an area separately defIned from "Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel" within the Agreement. Such improvements arise from the construction of the Obermeyer Place project and the public-private partnership integral to the development of the site, however, the Agreement and the Permanent Improvements described herein are separate and independent transactions and shall be restricted to the terms and provisions described herein. Permanent Improvements: Site Location For purposes of this Exhibit and for the purpose of delineating the scope of work encompassed by the Permanent Improvements, Recycle Center encompasses the land to the north side of Rio Grande Place, from the north edge of the entry to the Eagles Club parking lot to the westerly entry to the current Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel. From the Eagles Club parking lot entry extending to the eastern entry to the current Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel, Permanent Improvements shall generally encompass the sidewalk area only. The Recycle Center Permanent Improvements shall continue from the eastern entry to the western entry, and shall extend to the north to the area currently encompassing the snowmelt equipment and the perimeter landscape berm. Permanent Improvements shall extend northerly to the current Rio Grande Trail pedestrian walkway although they shall not extend to the area intended for an expanded skate park. Any expansion or reconfiguration of the skate park is excluded from Obermeyer's scope of work. Permanent Improvements: Scope of Work Obermeyer Redevelopment Company shall provide the following: I. Architectural and landscape design, engineering, and construction of the Recycle Center, inclusive of site improvements and a building to cover the recycle center operations (see item #12, below). It is understood that the Recycle Center building shall be a non-heated, open garage-type structure consisting of three walls and an open side facing to the north with a size large enough to house six recycling dumpsters. The overall design shall be as low in height as possible, shall be efficient in size in order to provide the Rio Grande Park area to expand if possible, shall operate as a daytime only operation, shall shield and minimize visibility of and reduce the current level of noise from the dumpsters and loading areas from the Rio Grande Place and from the Obermeyer Place project, shall accommodate adequate traffic circulation according to [mal design plans, including drop-off and temporary parking for people using the Recycle Center, shall provide improved access to the recycle dumpsters by individuals using the service, and shall accommodate the operations of Pitkin County Resource Recovery in a form largely consistent with current operations. The City of Aspen shall be allowed to comment on and approve the proposed aesthetic improvements with the understanding that the fInal design shall shield and minimize visibility of the dumpsters and loading areas from the Page 15 of17 7. 8. 9. 10. 2. Obermeyer Place project (per Ordinance no. 18, Series 2003). The site design will utilize the City's Rio Grande Master Plan in effect as of January I, 2005 as the guide for site improvements to the Recycle Center area. Demolition and site preparation, including the removal of the current snowmelt equipment, effluent piping, utility lines and meters, and the transportation of the equipment for storage to a site to be designated by the City within twenty miles of the current location. Grading and on site drainage inlprovements, including asphalt paving and parking curb stops. Asphalt shall be designed and constructed using 8" compacted backfill with a minimum of 95% modified proctor density, followed by hot bituminous paving a mininlum of 5" thick, placed in two lifts per the City's standard shallow utility trench details. Utilities extended to the north side of Rio Grande Place; in conjunction with a single street cut, including the following services: a. Extension of domestic water to the Recycle Center, capped. The City shall pay any corresponding water tap fee. b. Natural gas service re-routed from snowmelt equipment, capped. c. Electrical service to accommodate the electrical specifications provided by the City and configured for the current amount and mix of uses on the south side of Rio Grande Place. d. Storm drains, including inleVoutlet of typical storm sewer pipe and tie-in to storm system. Any related storm water fee or sewer fee shall be paid by City. Payment to the City of$10,000 to go towards construction of the storm water interceptor device or other such storm sewer system improvements in the vicinity of the Recycle Center. Payment to be made upon commencement of permanent improvements to the Recycle Center area. Street speed hump along Rio Grande Place in one location near the Recycle Center. New sidewalk and curb (detached, non-dyed concrete) from Eagles Club entry to western entry of Recycle Center. Provide ADA handicap access ramp for the western entry of the Recycle Center street crossing. None of the pavement or hardscape shall be snowmelted Landscaping the Recycle Center, including shrubbery (30 count) along the perimeter berm common to the Oklahoma Flats residential neighborhood and at entry points to Recycle Center. Broad leaf trees (4" caliper) along street at 20' intervals, planted between curb and sidewalk. Sod installed between sidewalk and curb. Irrigation to all new landscaping as needed. The City of Aspen will review and approve the landscape plan to ensure it meets the site requirements in terms of design before completion of the landscape plan in this area. The landscape contractor will coordinate with the City of Aspen before commencing landscaping activities to ensure that irrigation connections and utilities are clearly identified and located. Steel pipe bollards (6") at utilities stub up areas. Paint parking space in Recycle Center, street crossings, and bollards. Electrical service to the Recycle Center shall include two electrical outlets (II OV), four sidewalk light fixtures along Rio Grande Place, and the installation of an emergency 9-1-1 call station. There shall be no site lighting for the Recycle Center, which shall remain a daytime only operation. City Ordinance No. 18, Series 2003, Section 12, calls for the cessation and removal of the mechanical snow melter equipment. Obermeyer shall perform this work at Obermeyer's expense. Such work shall be performed at Obermeyer's discretion after providing 30-day written notice to the City, and shall occur no sooner than March 31, 2006, thereby saving the City the estimated $IOO,OOO/year in snow hauling costs during the winters of 2004-2005 and 2005-2006. Upon occupancy ofa residential unit at Obermeyer Place, use of the snow melter will be restricted to daylight hours. C) 3. 4. 5. 6. II. Page 160f17 II 12. Per City Ordinance No. 18, Series 2003, Section 13, the Obermeyer Place project was required to pay the City the sum of$125,000 toward the improvement of the recycling facility ("Recycle Center Funds"), either as improvements to the current location or as improvements to an alternative location. Insofar as the City accepts the terms and provisions of this Agreement, such requirement imposed by the City by way of the Ordinance shall be deemed satisfied and fulfilled by Obermeyer Place Holding Company as developer of the Obermeyer Place project The Permanent Improvements described herein shall encompass the USe of the Recycle Center Funds plus other funds deemed compensation for Base Term Ground Rents (per Section IV of the Agreement). It is understood that Obermeyer and the City shall work in unison toward an acceptable design of the Recycle Center, specifically providing for a signature approval of said design by the City of Aspen Parks Department and the Pitkin County Public Works Department. 13. When Obermeyer begins the mass excavation of the site, both Obermeyer and the Parks Department will create a plan for efficiently handling boulders such that the Parks Department shall have the first right to accept all boulders excavated from Obermeyer Place that are not needed by Obermeyer. As such boulders are excavated from the Obermeyer Place site, Obermeyer will relocate them to a designated receiving area north of Recycle Center, via a City-approved access route. Permanent Imorovements: Timinl! Permanent Improvements shall be completed no later than nine months following the vacation of the Recycle/Snowmelt Center Parcel as described in Section Ill, paragraph B, of the Agreement. Page 17 of17 A-~L\"\i'f)ev'I.+ is: (OWO\> ,?n?c...ess. f:x?lc.n.....,.\lW", ( Chapter 26.500 DEVELOPMENT REASONABLY NECESSARY FOR THE CONVENIENCE AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC Sections: 26.500.010 Purpose. 26.500.020 Authority. 26.500.Q30 Applicability. 26.500.040 Standards for p.etermination. . 26.500.050 Procedure. 26.500.010 Purpose. It is the purpose of this chapter to exempt certain types of development from all applicable sections, except as herein noted, of Title 26 and to establish an alternative process and standards for the re- view, analysis and approval of those types of developments determined to be eligible for such alter- native review and analysis. The purpose in identifying and applying alternative review standards for certain developments eligible for such treatment is to provide a more flexible, streamlined, thor- ough and coordinated review and approval process, and to allow for greater public participation in the review process when it is determined by the City Council to be in the best interests of the city to do so. (Ord. No. 7-2000 ~ 3) (; a;',~, f~~~}) 26.500.020 Authority. As a home rule municipality organized and operating under Article XX of the Colorado Constitu- tion, the City of Aspen is vested with the authority and power to exempt certain types of develop- ment from the Aspen Land Use Code, Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. See Clark v Town of Estes Park, 686 P.2d 777 (Cob. 1984); City of Colorado Springs v Smartt, 620 P.2d 1060 (Colo. 1980). (Ord. No. 7-2000 ~ 3) 26.500.030 Applicability. Only those development applications determined by the City Council to be reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public shall be eligible for review and approval in accordance with this chapter. Only those portions of Title 26 which are specifically incorporated in the ordi- nanc.e granting final approval of a development order shall be applicable to a project determined to be reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public. (Ord. No. 7-2000 ~ 3) 26.500.040 Standards for determination. A development may be determined to be reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public if the applicant for development is the City of Aspen, an agent of the City of Aspen author- ized by the City Council to proceed under this chapter of the Land Use Code, or the City of Aspen City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005 Part 500, Page 4 ., or agent of the City of Aspen is a co-applicant with a private party for the development of land which constitutes an essential public facility, provides essential services to the public, and which is in the best interests of the City of Aspen to be completed. By way of example and not limitation, the following types of developments may be determined to be reasonably necessary for the conven- ience or welfare of the public: (a) affordable housing projects developed by the City of Aspen by itself or in conjunction with an agent or private developer; (b) the development of public utilities; (c) park and recreational facilities development; (d) public infrastructure improvements; (e) public buildings and structures; or (1) transportation improvements. (Ord. No. 7-2000 ~ 3) 26.500.050 Procedure. A. Community Development Director. The Community Development Director, upon determin- ing that the proposed development application may be eligible for consideration as a project rea- sonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public,may consult with the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the proposed development's eligibility and shall thereafter prepare a memorandum for the City Council that: (a) outlines the reasons for consideration as an eligible pro- ject; (b) sets forth the conclusions of any referral comments received by the Community Develop- ment Director, if any; (c) includes the procedures the applicant would be required to follow if the project is determined not to be an eligible project; (d) includes a recommendation on the alternative procedure to be followed should the project be determined to be an eligible project; and (e) includes a recommendation as to the appropriate City boards and commissions and other interested parties necessary for the review of the project. The Community Development Director, before preparing such a memorandum for the City Council may convene a technical staff meeting consisting of the applicant, the applicant's representative, city staff members, consultants, and any other persons for the purpose of identifying and resolving any potential issues associated with the provision of utili- ties and services, environmental constraints, site engineering, access and circulation, anticipated public concerns, and any other technical information which would assist the Community D.evelop- ment Director to prepare the initial memorandum to the City Council. The Community Develop- ment Director shall formally notify the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and, if applicable, the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority, in writing, of the date of the hearing before the City Council at which time a determination is to be made concerning eli- gibility of the proposed development pursuant to this chapter. The Community Development Direc- tor shall provide notice to the public, including publication, posting and mailing, in accordance with section 26.304.060(E)(3)(a((b)&(c). B. City Council determination of eligibility. Following a public hearing in accordance with sec- tion 26.304.060(C), the City Council shall by resolution (a) make a determination whether the pro- posed development is reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public by apply- ing the standards of section 26.500.040; (b) establish a procedure for review of the proposed project to include standards of review; (c) establish a Task Force Team to review the development proposal and identify members of city boards, commissions, and other interested parties, (including at least two (2) members of the public at large) to be included as members of the Task Force Team, which shall include representation by the Planning and Zoning Commission; and, (d) establish a time- City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005 Part 500, Page 5 . ~ f , r j, fi " t:i I' I f r t , i r i r t ! r '" frame for the procedures to be used to review the proposed development. If the proposed project ( proposes development subject to Chapter 26.415, Development involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or Development in an H, Historic Overlay District, the City Council shall include in the review procedures the requirement for an application for review of the eligible project to the Historic Preservation Commission in accordance with the applicable sections of the Land Use Code. The City Council may, in appropriate circumstances, include as part of the review process it adopts a separate referral to the Planning and Zoning Commission, or any other city board and commission for their separate review and recommendation. Should the City Council determine that the proposed development is not reasonably necessary for the convenience and wel- fare of the public, the application shall be reviewed in accordance with the applicable sections of this Land Use Code. The City Council may amend the resolution at any time upon the request of the applicant, the Community Development Director, or upon its own motion. Pursuant to Chapter 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby amends section 26.510.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code to read as follows. (Note that only the specific passage to be amended is indicated. All portions of these sections not listed below shall remain in effect). C. Community development technical staff review. Following a determination by the City Coun- cil that a proposed development is reasonably necessary for the convenience or welfare of the pub- lic, the Community Development Director shall convene a staff level, interdepartmental develop- ment review committee meeting for the purpose of identifying and resolving any potential issues associated with the provision of utilities and services, environmental constraints, site engineering, access and circulation and for providing any other technical information to the applicant which wo~ld assist in ththe PCreparati~n of anlapPlicatiDO~ for furthhalelf re~iewh' FOllOI:,ing .the tec~cal s;aff (J revIew process, e ommuruty Deve opment Irector s asSISt t e app Icant III prepanng a 10r- mal application and preparation for submission of the development application to the appropriate boards, commissions and other interested parties identified by the City Council for such reviews. D. Review of application by task team. The members of the task team, composed of members ,of city boards and commissions, and interested parties identified by the City Council resolution shall meet and review the proposed development application using the standards of review identified in the resolution adopted by the City Council in accordance with subsection (B), above. The chair of the Task Force Team shall be the Director of the Community Development Department. The chair of the Task Force Team shall prepare meeting agendas, coordinate meeting dates for the Task Force Team, and facilitate all meetings. Following a review of the proposed development and at such time as the Community Development Director believes that further review would not significantly im- prove the overall development proposal, the Community Development Director shall report to the City Council the recommendations of the boards, commissions, and interested members of the pub- lic which participated in the review of the proposed project. The Community Development Direc- tor's report to Council shall include: (a) a recommendation as to whether the proposed development should continue to be considered to be reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public; (b) all of the land use decisions and approvals that need to be made for the proposed devel- opment; (c) a report of the deliberations and recommendations made by the Task Force Team; and (d) any conditions of approval that may be necessary for the land use approvals. The Community City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005 Part 500, Page 6 II Development Director shall present to the City Council a proposed ordinance that incorporates all of the applicable recommendations of the report. E. City Council adoption of ordinance. The City Council upon receipt of the report and proposed ordinance from the 'Community Development Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an ordinance granting a development order for the proposed development. The review shall be a public hearing for which notice has been published, posted, and mailed, pursuant to sec- tion 26.30.060(E)(3)(a)(b)&(c). (Ord. No. 7-2000 9 3; Ord. No. 1-2002 9 12,2002; Ord. No. 27-20029920 and 21, 2002) City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005 Part 500, Page 7 ."f i I l I. rf ! I r I MAR. 15, 2006 2:50PM OBERMEYER PLACE A.p,,,i,^'CM~ C: iC..\, '\' kn h~ NO. 392~P. 2 ~e:\"I"faS March 9'\ 2006 Mr. Cluis Bendon, Director Community Devolopment Department City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St Aspen, CO 81611 Re; AspenlPitkin Recycle Center Redevelopment Mr. Bendon, As part of the COWOP process for the Obermeyer Place Project (ord. No 18, series of2003), Obermeyer Redevelopment Corp. committed certain funds and efforts to redevelopment of the AspenlPitkin ReCycle Center, situated on the'north side oftuo Grande Place, at the eastern side of Rio Grande Park. These commi1ments were further defined in the Land Lease Agreement entered into between ORC and The City for temporary COnstruction facilities to be placed on that site. At this time the construction of Obermeyer Place is approaching the point at which those temporary facilities can be l'enlOved from the site. Our goal is to begin construction of the redevelopment as early as possible following May 1. 2006, and, if possible. to complete construction by 11/15/06, In anticipation ofthi5. ORC some months ago commissioned CCY Architects to prepare an initial design concept for the Center. based on meetings the operator of the facility and a review with the Parks Department. The Recycle Center sits on City owned park land, yet it is to be funded at least in part by a private entity (ORC). Exhibit B to the Land Lease Agreement stipulates that ORC shall be responsible for leading the design of the redevelopment, which design will need to be approved by the City in a land use action. For these reasons. we propose that The City and ORC jOin together as co-applicants in its design and review. Having reviewed provisions of the City's Land Use Code, we propose that this project be considered under the terms of Chapter 26.500, Development Reasonably Necessary for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public (commonly known as the COWOP process). We believe the Rccycle Center Redevelopment is eligible for the COWOP process for the following reasons: 1. The City of Aspen, as owner of tho land on which the Recycle Center is located, is a co-applicant (as described in 26.500.040 Standards for Determination). 2. Improvement of the Recycle operation is a "public infrastructure improvemenf', as listed in part (d) of that same section. 3. The Recycle Center site, as part of Rio Grande Park, is "park and recreational facilities development" as lis1ed in part (c) of that same section. II YAK, 'j, ~UU6 ~:jU1M U~c~M':Y:K PLAC': --m n~-w. 3 4, The Recycle Center itself is also a "public building" or "structure", as listed in part (e) of that same section. As described in 26.50Q.OI0 "Puzpose", application of the COWOP process to this project will provide a "flexible, streamlined, thorough and coordinated review and approval process" and will "allow for greater public participation in the review process" than would other procedures allowed by the Code. In addition to the necessary functions of the Recycle Center and the concerns which ORC has as a neighbor, we have received numerous co=ents suggesting that the Center should be a modol of resource efficiency, We support this goal and believe the COWOP process will provide the best mechattism for airing and evaluating the many possible features which might promote this goal. The Center is also a very visible public facility, which due to its function may be considered by some parties to have negative impacts; visual, audible or otherwise. We believe the COWOP process will allow the best opportunity to refine the design for maximum "buy-in" and acceptance by the co=unity. Among the parties we envision possibly participating in the COWOP process, either as members of the Task Force Toam: City Council representative(s) Co=unity Development staff Pitkin County Commissioners' representatives Pitkin County Solid Waste Division staff (operators of the facility) Obermeyer Redevelopment Corp. representative(s) Aspen Environmental Health Department representative Aspen Parks and Recreation Department representative Neighboring landowners/users - Oklahoma Flats, Eagles Skateboard Park users We suggest the following parties would be appropriate to participate as technical resources: CCY Architects (designers ofOb=eyerPlace) City of Aspen Building Official Co=unity Office of Resource Efficiency Aspen City Engineering Department (storm water system) . Please consider this request and contact US with any questions or comments. We look forward to moving ahead with the City on this important project. ( C. ... <~ .- .' . THE CITY OF ASPEN OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER February 28, 2006 Sarah LavertY Environmental Project Coordinator City of-Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Rio Grande Recrcle Center COWOP Application Dear Sarah: Please accept this letter as authorizing the inclusion of City-owned land in the planning review of the Rio Grande RecyCle Center COWOP application. Specifically, the City property to be added to the COWOP review is the portion of Rio Grande Park currently housing and affected by the snowmelt and recycling facilities. COWOP eligibility review is subject to City Council approval. . Sincerely, . #II~ Steve Barwick City Manager 130 SoUTH GALENA STREET. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 . PHONE 970.920.5212 . FAx970.920.5119 Printed on Re<:yded Paper 1111111111111111111111 ~~~~~~;l ~~ ABA SILVIFl ORVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 111.00 00,00 A+\'4c),..IY\t..~~ p: O(clW'C..~(C. 1\ (se\eL~~ "'?"'Y ') ORDINANCE NO. 18 (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN APPROVING FINAL LAND USE APPROVALS AND GRANTING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR THE OBERMEYER PLACE COWOP PROJECT, ON LANDS DESCRIBED HEREIN IN THE VICINITY OF THE 500 AND 600 BLOCKS OF EAST BLEEKER STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, pursuant to Resolution 21, Series of 2002, and Resolution 45, Series of 2002, determined eligible for the City's development for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public (COWOP) review process the redevelopment of certain real property (hereinafter the "Project") owned by Obermeyer Place Holding Company, LLC .and Klaus T. Obermeyer, George Murphy, Robert Zupancis (subsequently conveyed to the City of Aspen), Gailen Smith, Pitkin County, and the City of Aspen, and successors and assigns, for the purpose of providing service-oriented commercial space, surface and underground parking (for both public and private needs), free-market housing, deed restricted housing, pedestrian linkages between the river and the C~ty core, and possible City and/or County government office space; and, WHEREAS, the Project includes all land between East Bleeker Street and Rio Grande Place, all land bordering East Bleeker Street between Spring Street and Rio Grande Place, and portions of Rio Grande Park, more precisely described as: a tract of land in the East Aspen Townsite Addition, according to the plat thereof recorded as Document No. 108453 of the records of Pitkin County, identified as Parcel No. 2737.073.24.003 according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 540 East Main Street, Gignoux-Lynch Subdivision Lots 1 and 2, Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9, Block 20, East Aspen Addition, Lots 6, 7, 8, and 9 Rio Grande Subdivision, a tract of land identified as Parcel No. 2737.073.00.040 according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 600 East Bleeker Street, a tract ofland identified as Parcel No. 2737.073.00.041 according to the Pitkin County Assessor and known as 530 East Bleeker Street, that portion of East Bleeker Street right-of-way between Spring Street and Rio . Grande Place, that portion of Rio Grande Park owned by the City of Aspen accommodating and affected by the Pitkin County recycling operation and snow melting facility, that portion of Rio Grande Ordinance No. 18, Series of2003. Page I II 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 ~~~~~r0;f 1 ~7 46A SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 111.00 D 0.00 Alternative Interiors 1273 .---. Office Mark Reqan, GC 218 Office Total: 5.197 Section 11: Replacement of Conditional Uses Land uses approved as conditional uses prior to redevelopment are authorized to be reestablished within the Project for a period of time not to exceed existing lease terms, subject to the individual conditional use approval, and not to exceed the existing net leasable square footage. Conditional Use approval for such replaced uses shall expire upon conclusion of the existing lease. Changes in the operational style of the -use may require an amendment of the conditional use approval. The following use is currently an approved conditional use: Net leasable ' Business Name: square footage: Conditional Use Approval: Mittel Europa ,960 Planning and Zonin Commission Resolution No. 30, Series of 1999. Existin lease. including exentions" x ires in 2009. i:,;~V;i~ ""', J' Section 12: Snow Melter The City of Aspen agrees to the cessation and removal of the mechanical snow melter located north of the Project after the conclusion of the 2005-6 winter season. Section 13: Recvclinl! Center The City of Aspen agrees to pursue alternate locations for the Pitkin County recycling operation within the context of the Civic Master Plan. Any alternate location shall be considered viable by the City of Aspen considering neighboring uses and property owners, user groups, and operational methods of the Pitkin County recycling program. This ordinance shall not assure an alternate location for the recycling facility. The City of Aspen shall allow the Project developer to review and comment on the proposed aesthetic improvements. The [mal design will shield and minimize visibility of the dumpsters and loading areas from the Proj ect. The Project developer shall provide $125,000 to the City of Aspen for the purpose of improving the recycling facility upon commencement of improvements to the recycling facility. The City of Aspen and the Project developer shall enter into an agreement identifying the funds, identifying limits on the use of such funds, and applicable time periods for the exercise of such funds to either relocate or improve the existing recycling facility. An agreement between the Project developer and Pitkin County may be necessary. Section 14: Hunter Street Trail The City of Aspen agrees to provide a ten (10)-foot wide easement along the easterly property boundary of the 540 East Main Street property (the former Zupancis property) for the purpose of developing a pedestrian connection from Main Street to the Project and along the eastern boundary of the 540 East Main Street property. The easement shall be Ordinance No. 18, Series of 2003. Page 13 TO: THRU: FROM: COPY: RE: DATE: ~!t MEMORANDUM Tim Belinski, Obermeyer Redevelopment Company Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Chris Bendon, Senior Planner Dwayne Romero Obermeyer Redevelopment Company Jack Donovan, Obermeyer Redevelopment Company Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager Obermeyer Place PUD Amendment #2 - Temporary Use Provisions February 23,2004 ~ I have reviewed each of the provisions of Ordinance No. 18, Series of2003, you wish to amend as a result of lease negotiations for the City's Zupancis and Recycle properties pursuant to Section 26.445.100 - Amendment of a PUD Development OrdeL All of the amendments you have identified are insubstantial and consistent with the original approvals. Accordingly, I am approving the anlendments to Ordinance 18, as described below, and issuing a Development Order. Amendments to Ordinance 18, Series of2003: Section 6: Temporary Use. Change sentence in middle of section to read: "Use of the recycling and snowmelter areas shall not negatively affect the Pitkin County recycling program or the snowmelter operation through the entire term of the temporary use of this property. " Section 13: 1st Paragraph. Delete "The City of Aspen shall allow the Project developer to review and comment on the proposed aesthetic improvements." Section 13: Delete entire 2nd Paragraph referring to Obermeyer's payment to the City of$125,OOO for improving the recycling facility and insert the following: "The Project developer shall provide the scope of work items denoted as Exhibit B, 'Permanent Improvements' in the Land Lease Agreement between the City and the developer for the Zupancis Parcel and the Recycle/Snowmelter Center Parcel. The City of Aspen shall be allowed to comment on and approve the proposed aesthetic improvements with the understanding that the final design shall shield and minimize visibility of the dumpsters and loading areas from the Obermeyer 1111I111111111 111I11 111111 ~~~~~:;~ ~3: 25P 1 .VIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 11.00 0 0.00 II Place project. The Permanent Improvements shall encompass the use of the Recycle Center funds previously described in Section 13 of City Ordinance No. 18, Series of2003, plus other funds deemed compensation for Base Term Ground Rents." ApPROVAL: I hereby approve the above-described amendments to the Obermeyer Place Subdivision and Planned Unit Development, fmding the criteria for an insubstantial PUD amendment have been met. . .~~., -~~ J 'e Ann Woods, AICP, MLA Conununity Development Director City of Aspen date 3'/9/c><r ./ - ."'"., ."" At4,? 1 ;"n u'-4 "1'_ ~,:... . ,'1:-r\ 4. ~~ '-'~-- , 4'. ~- Cb~"P~<:>JW+ -~~M ~ \IIUll"~lIJI\UI\I~~~.l~~:~M;"'~ 2 Attachment E: Cost Sharing Agreement COST SHARING AGREEMENT FOR RIO GRANDE RECYCLE CENTER COWOP PROJECT This agreement between the City of Aspen and Obermeyer Redevelopment Company (Obermeyer) establishes the agreement and criteria for payment of expenses associated with the project known as "Rio Grande Recycle Center COWOP." 1. The City of Aspen and Obermeyer will independently pay for professional services such as planning, architecture, finance, and legal contracted by and on behalf of each individual party. 2. The cost of full time staff for the City of Aspen and Obermeyer working on the COWOP project will be the sole expense of the appropriate employer. 3. Obermeyer will take care of expenses related to: a. Lunches for COWOP meetings b. Mailings c. Public Notices d. Meeting Minutes The City of Aspen will take care of expenses related to: e. Newspaper Ads f. Binders 4. Obermeyer's financial contribution to the COWOP project will be taken from the $475,000.00 set aside according to the Land Lease Agreement. 5. Any additional expenses to be shared equally by both parties shall be pre- approved by both parties to insure against any future disagreements. IN WITNESS WHEROF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date hereinafter written. DATE: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO A Municipal Corporation: OBERMEYER: Helen K. Klanderud, Mayor Tim Belinski, Chief Financial Officer APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: John Worcester, City Attorney Attachment F: Location Alternatives MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Obermeyer/Rio Grande Recycling Task Force (Jeff Woods, Brian Flynn, Lee Cassin, Brian Pettit, Chris Hoofnagle and Miles Stotts) THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager DATE: 2/28/2003 RE: Rio Grande Recycling Location Alternatives SUMMARY: The redevelopment of the Obermeyer property opened the door to evaluate the current recycling situation in Aspen. The Obermeyer development team felt that finding a new location for the recycling center would benefit the new Obermeyer development. Staff was asked to evaluate the possibilities of moving the Rio Grande Recycling Center, or improving the current location, both without compromising the success and current level of recovered materials. Staff met on several occasions, one involving the private sector trash haulers, to discuss the pros and cons of different recycling scenarios. Staff has evaluated the options of improving the existing recycling center, an alternative central location, several downtown recycling centers, neighborhood recycling centers, and curbside recycling. While the group at first thought several recycling locations would be the best solution, our research led us to conclude that keeping the recycling center at its current location with major site improvements is the only way to serve the community well and allow recycling to operate at its current levels and success. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: None BACKGROUND: The following meetings were held: October 30, 2002 - Obermeyer Representatives, Pitkin County and City of Aspen November 20, 2002 - Task Force Reviewed pros and cons of research January 8, 2003 - Task Force meeting with private waste haulers, discussed ideas and asked for feedback January 22,2003 - Task Force met and discussed findings, options and conclusions DISCUSSION: Staff reviewed potential options for recycling. Evaluations were based on the desire to maintain existing levels ofrecycling, input from the private haulers, and Pitkin County's resource recovery constraints. The options are described in the attachments. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The Obermeyer project has committed to provide $100,000 in funding for a solution that improves their project. The cost of improvements is not known because a design for attractive building, paving, and landscaping has not been done. Providing attractive building and landscaping may cost significantly more than $100,000 and staff feels that the full cost of these improvements should be borne by the Obermeyer project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has evaluated these options and concluded that keeping the recycling center at its current location with major site improvements would best serve the community and allow recycling to operate at its current levels and success. This was not the Task Force's initial thought, but after a thorough review of pro's and con's of all the alternatives, the group believes this is the only approach that will allow recycling to continue at a high level without prohibitive costs to the public sector. Staff would like to present this recommendation to the Obermeyer Representatives in March. If Council feels this requires discussion, staff requests a meeting with Council. Staff will present this recommendation to Obermeyer if we do not hear differently from Council by March 7. ALTERNATIVES: Alternatives are discussed in the attachment. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachment Curbside Recycling Curbside recycling is currently provided by the private sector, but not for all recyclables and not at a low cost. Pitkin County's solid waste hauler licensing ordinance requires that all providers of trash service must offer recycling service to their residential accounts. However, the ordinance does not specify the cost, nor does it require that all recyclables be collected. For that reason, much or most ofthe community's recycling is provided by Pitkin County. The haulers usually provide the service only when and if a customer requests it, sometimes adding a fee for this requested service. The results are mixed: some residents don't receive the service they would like, meaning certain recyclables will not be picked up by the private hauler. Some customers end up paying for recycling service but have not been made aware that they have paid for this service. Rio Grande, on the other hand, offers the largest number of recyclables and free drop off, thus making it the most successful recycling program in the valley. The current situation proves that the private sector cannot, to date, collect recyclables at the current levels being collected at the Rio Grande Recycling center. A private firm will not offer a service that costs them more than they can charge and significantly increased costs would reduce recycl ing. An argument could be made that the public subsidy for recycling should be transferred from the present County recycling program and given to private haulers to allow them to provide free curbside recycling. The disadvantage to this would be that there would be no guarantee of the program continuing at current recycling levels, and free curbside recycling would cost much more than the present free drop-off system. Last, the public expects and supports the free program that offers them the chance to recycle a large number of materials. Switching to curbside recycling of cardboard instead of having the Rio Grande available would have a direct effect on the successful collection of cardboard. A substantial percentage of the 2 million pounds of cardboard collected at the Rio Grande site comes from businesses in the city core. A significant portion of this cardboard from the commercial sector would be lost if the Rio Grande were not available and businesses had to pay for curbside cardboard recycling. If private haulers provided curbside pickup for cardboard since it generates revenue, this would also very negatively affect the County's recycling program, since cardboard recycling brings in much more revenue than recycling of the other materials that Pitkin County recycles. Decentralized Drop-off Sites This solution would turn one site into five sites. Each site would collect the same number and type of commodities currently collected at the Rio Grande site, but in smaller volumes. There is a general consensus among those in the solid waste business that decentralizing operations adds to the costs of collection. The decentralized solution increases truck traffic in neighborhoods, and adds noise pollution related to hauling and dumping. It also has high development costs for five individual sites, unsightliness, illegal uses, and potential for blowing litter. Keeping up with these operational constraints at five sites will have a higher operational cost and potentially capture less of the recyclables. Unlike five different sites, the current location provides for staff presence, clean up and management. Neighborhood sites, while providing convenience to neighbors, pose the potential problem of neighborhood opposition. If Rio Grande were lost, in order to maintain the level of cardboard recycling by downtown businesses, it would be necessary to install cardboard compactors at several locations in the commercial core. This service would have very high infrastructure costs if the County provided pickup, or could be contracted through the private sector, with the public sector paying for the up front investments in installation and maintenance of the cardboard compactors. To keep it free, the public sector would also have to pay for the higher cost of operations. Having recycling locations in the commercial core would also add to the traffic and parking congestion downtown, and there would be significant liability due to untrained public using the compactors. A big concern with decentralized recycling is contamination of the materials. With one site in a busy location, the County can monitor it several times a day to minimize contamination. With several neighborhood locations, it has been the experience of other areas that contamination will greatly increase, causing an increase in the program costs. LI In any case, either the County would have to pay more for several locations and suffer increased contamination (if the City/County kept the cost free), or the County would lose the financial benefit of cardboard recycling and the amount of recycling would drop greatly (if customers had to pay). Improve Existing Site The problems with the existing site are primarily blowing litter, illegal dumping, and the inherent unsightliness associated with recyclable collection. No other location provides the incentive of convenience for all users (central location and easy access), allows the County to efficiently collect all recyclables with one truck in one location, and thus makes recycling as effective as possible. Having one centralized site allows Pitkin County to oversee the site, preventing illegal dumping and blowing trash. Many people and businesses that use this site could not justify paying private haulers but are motivated by their conscience to recycle if it is reasonably easy for them to do so. Improving the existing site would entail several steps and the attached schematic shows how the area might look. Changes include providing an attractive building to enclose the containers, reducing the overall footprint, planting attractive landscaping, and paving. Staff believes this will allow the community to keep the recycling program at it's current levels, providing a needed service, saving landfill space, reducing resource consumption, and living up to the ideals expected by many in the Aspen area. New Central Location Finding a new centralized location for the placement of the recycling center turned out to be a challenging task. Staff has been unable to find a location that would provide the same operations and service with easy and convenient access to the public and County, in a site owned by the public sector or on private land someone is willing to donate for this use. As seen in the small satellite sites, the local opposition from neighbors would prove to be a large hurdle. Attachment G: Citizens At Large Please rank the following individuals from 1-7, 1 being your top choice and 7 being your last choice. We will tally the results and the two individuals with the lowest score will fill the Citizen At Large positions on the COWOP Task Force Team. Rank David Miller millerinclalcomcast.net - 925-7235 I have lived within the City of Aspen since 1987 and have made trips to the recycle center every week with cardboard, newspaper, office paper and glass/plastic/aluminum. I assist all of our friends after Christmas with the recycling of their trees and make a point to break down boxes that are left not broken down at the Recycle Center every trip. I get extremely aggravated with people who leave boxes not broken down, or boxes filled with Styrofoam peanuts just blowing in the wind. Even though the city has changed the recycling requirements for pickup within the city, we (my daughters 3 & 7 and I) still make the trip to the recycle center to recycle every week. It is our little Sunday trip that provides me time to talk to them about recycling and what we all can do to help on a local, national and global scale. It is my belief that the recycle center site is a wonderful amenity to all the citizens of Aspen. However, the current state of the recycle center is quite an eyesore, especially with all of the redevelopment in the area (the parking garage, the old Youth Center & Jail, the Community Bank Buildin ,the Skate Park and Oberme er Place . Liz Shapiro lizshaollalvahoo.com - 544-0155 I have lived in Aspen since early October, and both my husband and I are interested in recycling. We made use of the recycling center in PA a lot while we lived there, and I feel my experiences with recycling will prove handy in revamping Aspen's recycling. I am very interested in Aspen's recycling center and park area since I feel it is past due in a town which prides itself on being green. I know that with an inviting center, more people will take advantage ofthis opportunity, which will only help our town, both in looks and character. And expanding Aspen's recycling program is the best wa to et eo Ie involved in kee in our town the best it can be. Toni Kronberg tonLwaterbabieslalgmail.com - 319-9693 I have been before this Council, as well as two previous Council's to speak on Aspen's and Pitkin Coun 's rec clin ro am, its' dro -offlocations and curbside ick-u services. Bill Hodges rflslalsooris.net - 925-2458 I have lived on Red Mountain since 1978 and believe in recycling. Once a week I drop newspapers, office papers, magazines, glass, aluminum and metal items at the Rio Grande Recycle Center so that when I saw the ad about the redevelopment of it, I called to express my interest in serving on the COWOP, the idea being that its "redevelopment" may encourage more users, which ma be considered both a blessin and a curse. Eric V ozick evozicklalafoimaging.com - 927-0774 I am Eric Vozick, and I use the recycling center (I live in Basalt and my in-laws live off of Cemetery Lane). I have previously managed a drop-off Recycling Center in Broomfield for three years, and would love the opportunity to put to use my experiences in helping shape the updated facilit here in Aspen. There is so much that can be accom lished. II Jane Battaglia im.battagliala1att.net - 920-3791 I live up Castle Creek and use the recycle center frequently. I have an interest in the area because it should be a state-of-the-art model for other such facilities -- and, currently, it is an eye sore and an embarrassment for the town of Aspen. If concerned citizens, like me, do not have input (based upon practical experience) in this re-design process, who knows what we will get? Bert Myrin Bertla1mvrin.com - 925-8645 I would like to be involved with the recycle center because I use it often, it is only a two minute walk from my home, and prior to the Obermeyer construction I lobbied successfully to keep Obermeyer free market residences off the current recycle center site. Would enjoy following through on oroviding some non-developers, non-architect eves to a COWOP for this site. Attachment H: Impact of Waste Reduction/Recycling Ordinance on the Need for Recycle Center The City of Aspen has a Waste Reduction/Recycling Ordinance that establishes curbside pick up ofrecyclables for residential and commercial customers in the City of Aspen. However, the following points demonstrate that a recycling center will still be needed, even with the ordinance. I. Residential Curbside does not provide for all the commodities collected at Rio Grande Recycle Center (i.e. cardboard, office paper, magazines, telephone books, batterfes) 2. Commercial curbside does not provide for all the commodities collected at Rio Grande Recycle Center (i.e. magazines, telephone books, batteries) 3. Some businesses have applied for and received exemptions for cardboard pick up, and will thus continue to use the Rio Grande Recycle Center to recycle their cardboard 4. The City ordinance only applies to citizens of Aspen, and the Rio Grande Recycle Center serves County residents as well (Red Mountain, East of Aspen, Castle Creek, etc) 5. The Ordinance is phased, thus a number of businesses will not need to abide by the provisions of the ordinance until 2007, 2008, and some as late as 2010 6. The Waste Reduction/Recycling Ordinance has a three year Sunset Provision (12.06.080). City Council will amend, expand, or repeal the ordinance after three years. A recycle center is important in the event Council repeals the Recycling Ordinance 7. Ifvolumes of traditional recyclables decrease, due to the ordinance, having a recycle center provides greater opportunity for other pilot recycling projects. Attachment I: Task Force Team Task Force Team Obermeyer Dwayne Romero - Obermeyer Redevelopment Corp. Tim Belinski - VP Finance, Obermeyer Jack Donovan - Director of Design and Construction, Obermeyer Aspen City Council To be determined Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission To be determined Neighbors To be determined Recycling Representatives Kristine Crandall Citizen-at-Iarge Two positions to be determined. Skate Park User Pat Jones Technical Resources Task Force Team Chair Chris Bendon - Community Development Director Environmental Health Staff Sarah Laverty - Environmental Project Coordinator, Env. Health Parks Department Scott Chism - Landscape Architect, Parks Dept Pitkin County Chris Hoofnagle -Site Manager, Solid Waste Center Architects Robin Schiller - CCY Architects, Ltd. CORE Gary Goodson I Attachment J: Timeline March 15,2006 March 27, 2006 April 10, 2006 April 13, 2006 (11am-2pm) April 14, 2006 (11 am-2pm) April 17, 2006 April 21, 2006 (1lam-2pm) April 28, 2006 (11 am-2pm) May 5, 2006 (1Iam-2pm) Timeline Provisional Meeting with Development Review Committee (DRC) Determination of Eligibility for COWOP review. City Council Resolution No. 19, Series of2006 - Continue to April 10, 2006 Determination of Eligibility for COWOP review. City Council Resolution No. 19, Series of 2006 COWOP #1. Introductions, background, project overview, scheduling, parameters for development. COWOP #lA (if needed). Continuation of parameters for development. Work Session with Council: Recycle Center design, 5pm COWOP #2. Direction on Physical and Financial Issues, incorporate direction from Council work session. COWOP #3. Ifready, review of Final Plan and recommendations to City Council. COWOP #4 (if needed). Review of Final Plan and recommendations to City Council. Meeting with DRC (needs to be scheduled) First reading of approval Ordinance (needs to be scheduled) Second reading of approval Ordinance (needs to be scheduled) IXb MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Plarmer ~ cffiWJ THRU: RE: Proposed Miscellaneous Code Amendments - Second Readinl! of Ordinance 50-a, Series 2005, continued from January 9, 2006, and March 13. 2006 MEETING DATE: April 10, 2006 Staff is proposing a number of revisions to the following sections of the Land Use Code: 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan; 26.208.010, Powers and Duties; 26.212.010, Powers and Duties; 26.220.010, Powers and Duties; 26.575.040, Yards; 26.710.190, Lodge (L); and 26.710.200, Commercial Lodge (CL). The intent of many of the revisions is to clarify particular sections of the Land Use Code, but there are also substantive changes included. This staff report is divided into sections that correspond with the attached ordinance. A summary of the proposed changes precedes the code amendments. Any words that are Ip"een. underlined. and in italics are new, while any words that are red with a striketl1fOHgh are deleted. Section 1: The intent of the amendments in Section 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan, is to clarify how plans and documents are to be used, either as guidelines or in a regulatory capacity, and the process for adopting those plans and documents. Besides the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), documents such as the Employee Housing Guidelines and Historic Preservation Design Guidelines are used for reviewing development applications by decision-making bodies. Additional documents such as neighborhood plans, the infill report, and the civic master plan either exist or are being developed but how they are to be used by decision-making bodies is not as clear. Staff is recommending that when a document is created, it should be determined whether these documents are to be used in a guiding or regulatory capacity. The intended use of the document shall be included within the document. If a plan or document is to be used as a policy or guideline of a decision-making body it should be adopted by resolution, but if it is to be used as a regulatory document it should be adopted via ordinance by Council. As proposed, the text amendments in Section 1 require that language be included within the text of the document as to how the plan or document is to be used: either in a guiding or regulatory capacity. If used as a guideline the document should be adopted by resolution. When a document will be used in a regulatory capacity it shall be adopted by ordinance. Additionally, the II amendment requires any resolution or ordinance adopting the document include language within the content of the resolution or ordinance stating how the document will be used and that the adoption of the document be preceded by at least one public hearing. Chapter 12.104 - GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan and Other Plans. Guidelines. or Documents. The city shall from time to time adopt and update a comprehensive community plan (known as the Aspen Area Community Plan or AACP) which shall establish and project the city's land use and development plarming philosophy, goals, and policies. The comprehensive community plan shall be broad in scope, and serve as a guide to all land use development and plarming. The plan shall encourage and incorporate regional plarming as well as land use development cooperation and coordination between the city and neighboring communities and jurisdictions. From time to time the citv may re-adovt. amend extend or add to its comvrehensive communitv vlan. or carry any vart of its subiect matter into f!reater detail throuf!h the develovment of suvvlemental vlans. f!uidelines. or documents. Within the text of these vlans. f!uidelines. or documents if shall be described how the material shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment, and vlanninf!. Svecifically. there shall be a determination of whether the document shall be used as a f!uidinf! or ref!ulatory document. The document shall be adovted by resolution or ordinance. as vroyided in Chavter 26.200. Administration - Decision Makinf! Bodies. Before the adovtion of a vlan or any such vart. amendment. extension. or addition by an adovtinf! body. at least one (]) vublic hearinf! shall be conducted. notice of the time and vlace of which shall be f!iven by one (]) vublication in a newsvaver of f!eneral circulation in the citv as outlined in Section 26.304.060 E. 3. a" Publication of notice. Section 2: Section 26.208.010, Powers and Duties, outlines the powers and duties that Council is granted which includes such duties as initiating amendments to the official zone district map, designating historic overlay districts, and designating historic landmarks. Section 2 provides Council the ability to adopt any document by resolution or ordinance. Currently, sub-section 26.208.010 1. provides COlmcil the power to adopt the historic preservation guidelines and ratify the Historic Preservation Commission's evaluation of the inventory of historic structures. The new language in the sub-section still provides Council the ability to adopt the guidelines, however the power to ratify the inventory has been deleted. Any structure that is listed on, or removed from, the inventory is through the adoption of an ordinance by Council. Ratifying the inventory is redundant and has been deleted. Chapter 26.208 - CITY COUNCIL Section 26.208.010, Powers and duties. I. TEl adept histerie aistriet aae kisterie landmark a0'lelsf)ffieBt gaiaeliaes ana t8 ratify the Historie Pr0sen'ati0B CeH11Bissien e,,'all:latisa sf the ia.:eRtery sf kisterie struet1lf6s pllfsllaflt te Ch!lflter 26.415; 1 To adovt bv resolution or ordinance any vlans. f!Uidelines. or documents that will be used in a f!Uidinf! or ref!Ulatorv cavacitv bv the city. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment. and vlanninf! shall be described in the content of the resolution or ordinance. Svecificallv. there shall be a determination of whether the document will be used as a f!uidinl! or ref!Ulatorv document. When used as a f!Uidinl! document of the city it shall be adovted bv resolution and when used as a rel!ulatorv document it shall be adovted bv ordinance. Anv vlans. f!Uidelines or documents that are adovted bv resolution or ordinance shall not be adovted until notice is vrovided as outlined in Section 26.104.030. Comvrehensive Community Plan and Other Plans. Guidelines. or Documents; Section 3: Section 26.212.010, Powers and Duties, outlines the powers and duties that the Plarming and Zoning Commission is granted including such duties as hearing conditional use applications and hearing variance requests to the Residential Design Standards. Section 3 provides the Commission the ability to adopt any document by resolution and recommend to Council that a document, if it is to be used as a regulatory document, be adopted by ordinance. Chapter 26.212 - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Section 26.212.010, Powers and duties. R. To adovt bv resolution any vlans. f!Uidelines. or documents that will be used in a f!Uidinf! cavacitv bv the Commission or. if to be used in a ref!Ulatorv cavacitv. to recommend via resolution adovtion of any vlans. f!Uidelines. or documents bv the City Council. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment. and vlanninl! shall be described in the content of the resolution. Svecificallv. there shall be a determination of whether the document will be used as a l!uidinf! or ref!ulatorv document. When avian. f!Uideline. or document is to serve as a ref!Ulatorv document as determined bv the Commission. the resolution shall include a recommendation to the Citv Council for adovtion of the document bv ordinance. Anv vlans. f!Uidelines or documents that are adovted bv resolution shall not be adovted until notice is vrovided as outlined in Section 26.104.030. Comvrehensive Community Plan and Other Plans. Guidelines. or Documents. Section 4: Section 26.220.010, Powers and Duties, outlines the powers and duties that the Historic Preservation Commission is granted including such duties as recommending to Council the approval or disapproval of the designation of a historic district or landmark and to review and approve development within Historic Overlay Districts or involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Section 4 provides the Commission the ability to adopt any document by resolution and recommend to Council that a document, if it is to be used as a regulatory document, be adopted by ordinance. Chapter 26.220, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) Section 26.220.010, Powers and duties. II E. To adovt bv resolution any vlans. f!Uidelines. or documents that will be used in a f!Uidinl! cavacitv bv the Commission or. if to be used in a ref!Ulatorv cavacitv. to recommend via resolution adovtion of any vlans. f!Uidelines. or documents bv the Citv Council. How the materia! shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment. vlanninf!. and historic preservation shall be described in the content of the resolution. Svecificallv. there shall be a determination of whether the document shall be used as a f!Uidinl! or rel!ulatorv document. When avian. f!Uideline. or document is to serve as a ref!Ulatorv document as determined bv the Commission. the resolution will include a recommendation to the Citv Council for adovtion of the document bv ordinance. Anv vlans. f!Uidelines or documents that are adovted bv resolution shall not be adovted until notice is vrovided as outlined in Section 26.104.030. Comvrehensive Community Plan and Other Plans. Guidelines. or Documents. Section 5: When developing a property, a minimum setback (the yard) between a building and the property line is typically required. However, when a property receives access from a private right-of-way, the property line is often located within the right-of-way. Previously, the land use regulations regulating the setback from a private right-of-way made the assumption that the property line was located at the centerline of the right-of-way. Often, this is not the case and the location of the property line within the right-of-way varies. To try and accommodate measuring setbacks for these properties, staff is proposing that in most cases the minimum setback be measured from the boundary of the right-of-way. This will create a consistent and uniform setback for properties along a private right-of-way. Chapter 26.575 - MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS Section 26.575.040, Yards. B. Required Yards Adiacent to Private Reaas Streets and Ril!hts-of-wav. ".II Fellliiree yard setBaeks lIReer zeRe eistriet reglilatieRs are Basee eft distanee measHI"ee Hem tile right of 'Nay liRe ef a eeeieatee pHBlie way. Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends into the eeftterliRe ef the right-of-way, the required yard setback shall equal the minimum distance specified under the zone district regulations~ aft additioRal distanee eEllial te eRe half (1/2) sf the right ef 'oVay width as if Slieft ("riyate way were aeaieated for pHIllie lise. alonl! the closest boundary of the ril!ht-of- VJQV to the vrovosed structure. When a TJrovertv's lot line does not extend into the ~if!ht-of-wav. the required yard setback shall eQualthe minimum distance sTJecified ~nder zone district ref!Ulations tram the lot line. Please refer to Fif!Ure 575.1. Required Setback tram a Private Road or Rif!ht-of-Wav. -.-'. -. -. -. -. -. -. ~.- ~- -- -- -.-.- -. .- -.-.-.- -..' 1_.-.-.-.-.-.-.- -- .-.-.-.- -.--.-.J:--.-.-.-. D D --f D Fil!ure 575.1: Required Setback from a Private Road or Ril!ht-of-Wav Section 6: With recent changes to the city's existing zone district regulations that accommodate lodging, a number of issues have surfaced that warrant clarification. In this section, Staff included language that requires a trash/utility service area be provided in the Lodge (L) zone district as is required in other zone districts. 26.710.190 D. 6., Minimum Rear Yard Setback is amended to read: 6. Minimum rear vard setback (feet): Five (5). Plus. a trash/utility service area shall be required abuttinf! the alley. vursuant to Section 26.575.060. Utilitvnrash/Recvcle Service Areas. Section 7: Included in Section 7 are substantive changes to the FAR allowance for non-unit space. Non-unit space includes hallways, private parking, linen closets, and etc. that are necessary components of a building. Looking at a number of current and potential projects, Staff determined that the individual ratio allowed for non-unit space was too small to allow for basic life-safety issues to be addressed within the ratio. After comments from the Commission, Staff is recommending removing the non-unit space ratio as an individual FAR category. Except for free-market development, FAR for non-unit space would not be attributed to the individual FAR caps for individual uses, but the maximum FAR cap for the parcel carmot be exceeded. The intent of including the non-unit FAR space associated with free-market residential development in the individual cap of FAR for free-market development is to provide a disincentive for the development of expansive hallways, foyers, and etc. that could be associated with the free- market development. 26.710.190 D.10, Floor Area Ratio (FAR), is amended to read: 10. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A. The following FAR schedule applies to Commercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with one or more lodge units per 500 square feet of Lot Area and an average lodge unit size of 500 square feet or less. This FAR schedule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of 3:1 for parcels of 27,000 square feet or less in size and 2.5:1 for parcels greater than 27,000 square feet. Also see Section 26.710.190.E. Unless otherwise stated below. a develovment's non-unit space shall not count towards the FAR cav of an individual use catel!orv: however. the maximum FAR cap for the varcel shall not be exceeded 1. Retail and Restaurant Uses, Neighborhood Commercial Uses, Service Uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 2.Lodge units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space): 2:1, which may be increased to 2.5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 3. Uses aRa faeilities aneillary te a leagiHg eperatieR (ReR lIRit spaee): .5:1. 4..1c Commercial Parking Facility: 1:1. ~.4. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. eSFree-Market Residential or Large Lodge/Timeshare Units: An amount less than or equal to 25% of the FAR of the total project including both unit and non-unit space, but not including FAR devoted to parking. For example: If the total project represents 10,000 square feet of Floor Area, then 2,500 square feet may be free-market residential space or space devoted to lodge/timeshare units which are not to be limited by the average unit-size limitation. This percentage may be otherwise established for a project through a Plarmed Unit Development review. Also see Section 26.710.190.F. All non-unit svace attributable to Free-Market Residential or Larf!e Lodl!e/Timeshare Units shall count towards the individual FAR allowance for Free-Market Residential or Larf!e Lodf!e/Timeshare units. Section 8: Included in Section 8 are substantive changes to the FAR allowance for non-unit space that duplicate the changes in Section 7. 26.710.190 B, is amended to read: B. The following FAR schedule applies to Commercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with less than one lodge unit per 500 square feet of Lot Area or an average lodge unit size greater than of 500 square feet. This FAR schedule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of than 27,000 square feet. Unless otherwise stated below. a development's non-unit svace shall not count towards the FAR cav of an individual use catel!orv: however. the maximum FAR cav for the varcel shall not be exceeded. 1. Commercial uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 2. Lodge units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space): I: 1. 3. Uses and facilities ancillary to a lodgillg o]3eratioll (asll Hllit space): .5:1. 4,1. Commercial Parking Facility: I: 1. ~d_. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 6.5. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. All non-unit space attributable to Free-Market Multi-Familv Housinf! shall count towards the individual FAR allowance for Free-Market Multi-Familv Housinf!. Section 9: Included in Section 9 are substantive changes to the FAR allowance for non-unit space that duplicate the changes in Section 7. 26.710.190 D. 10., Floor Area Ratio (FAR), is amended to read: 10. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 3: 1. Unless otherwise stated below, non-unit space associated with individual uses shall be attributable to the individual FAR allowance. Unless otherwise stated below. a develovment's non-unit space shall not count towards the FAR cap of an individual use catel!orv: however. the maximum FAR cav for the varcel shall not be exceeded. a) Commercial Uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center; commercial parking facility: 1:1. b) Lodging units, timeshare lodging units, and exempt timesharing units (unit space): 2:1, which may be increased to 2.5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 8) Uses aad faeilities ancillai')' to a lodgillg operatisll (11011 ullit space): .5:1. fl Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.d ill Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .5: 1. All non-unit svace attributable to Free-Market Multi-Familv Housinl! shall count towards the individual FAR allowance for Free-Market Multi-Familv Housinl!. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached ordinance, approving staff recommended changes to Sections: 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan; 26.208.010, Powers and Duties; 26.212.010, Powers and Duties; 26.220.010, Powers and Duties; 26.575.040, Yards; Lodge (L); and 26.710.200, Commercial Lodge (CL) of the Land Use Code. Recommended Motion (All motions are proposed in the affirmative): "I move to approve Ordinance No.50-a, Series of2005, upon second reading." City Manager Comments: Attachment: EXHIBIT A - Text Amendment Review Criteria & Staff Findings EXHIBIT B - Resolution of the Plarming and Zoning Commission EXHIBIT C - Minutes of the Plarming Commission (November 1 and 22, 2005) EXHIBIT D - Minutes ofthe City Council (January 9, 2006) ORDINANCE NO. 50-a (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING CODE AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 26.104.030, COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY PLAN; 26.208.010, POWERS AND DUTIES; 26.212.010, POWERS AND DUTIES; 26.220.010, POWERS AND DUTIES; 26.575.040, YARDS; 26.710.190, LODGE (L); AND 26.710.200, COMMERCIAL LODGE (CL) OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department is interested in providing clarification on the process of adopting plans and guiding documents and how the plans or guidelines will be used in relation to currently adopted plans; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department finds it is necessary to amend the way a setback is measured from a private road; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department initiated code amendments to the Lodge zone district and Commercial Lodge zone district standards to encourage new development and redevelopment of lodging units within the city and finds that additional amendments to the code are necessary to facilitate new development and redevelopment of lodging units; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the text amendments under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as listed under Land Use Code Section 26.310.040, Standards of review; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission during a duly noticed public hearing on November 1, 2005 and continued on November 22, 2005, as required by Section 26.310.020, Procedure for amendment, approved Resolution No. 34, Series of 2005, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving the recommended changes to the above referenced sections of the Land Use Code, and recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendments. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the code amendments under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has taken public testimony, and heard the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and Community Development Director on January 9, 2006, continued to March 13, 2006, and again continued to April 1 0, 2006; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1: Section 26.104.030 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth the Comprehensive Community Plan shall be amended to read as follows: Section 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan and Other Plans, Guidelines, or Documents. Page 1 of7 The city shall from time to time adopt and update a comprehensive community plan (known as the Aspen Area Community Plan or AACP) which shall establish and project the city's land use and development planning philosophy, goals, and policies. The comprehensive community plan shall be broad in scope, and serve as a guide to all land use development and planning. The plan shall encourage and incorporate regional planning as well as land use development cooperation and coordination between the city and neighboring communities and jurisdictions. From time to time the city may re-adopt, amend, extend, or add to its comprehensive community plan, or carry any part of its subject matter into greater detail through the development of supplemental plans, guidelines, or documents. Within the text of these plans, guidelines, or documents it shall be described how the material shall be used in relation to the AACP, land use development, and planning. Specifically, there shall be a determination of whether the document shall be used as a guiding or regulatory document. The document shall be adopted by resolution or ordinance, as provided in Chapter 26.200, Administration - Decision Making Bodies. Before the adoption of a plan or any such part, amendment, extension, or addition by an adopting body, at least one (1) public hearing shall be conducted, notice of the time and place of which shall be given by one (1) publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city as outlined in Section 26.304.060 E.3.a., Publication of notice. Section 2: Section 26.208.010 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth the powers and duties of the City Council, is hereby amended to by amending subsection (I) to read as follows: 1. To adopt by resolution or ordinance any plans, guidelines, or documents that will be used in a guiding or regulatory capacity by the city. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP, land use development, and plarming shall be described in the content of the resolution or ordinance. Specifically, there shall be a determination of whether the document will be used as a guiding or regulatory document. When used as a guiding document of the city it shall be adopted by resolution and when used as a regulatory document it shall be adopted by ordinance. Any plans, guidelines or documents that are adopted by resolution or ordinance shall not be adopted until notice is provided as outlined in Section 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan and Other Plans, Guidelines, or Documents; Section 3: Section 26.212.010 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth the powers and duties of the Plarming and Zoning Commission, is hereby amended to by adding subsection (R) to read as follows: R. To adopt by resolution any plans, guidelines, or documents that will be used in a guiding capacity by the Commission or, if to be used in a regulatory capacity, to recommend via resolution adoption of any plans, guidelines, or documents by the City CounciL How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP, land use development, and pi arming shall be described in the content of the resolution. Specifically, there shall be a determination of whether the document will be used as a guiding or regulatory document. When a plan, Page 2 of? guideline, or document is to serve as a regulatory document as determined by the Commission, the resolution shall include a recommendation to the City Council for adoption of the document by ordinance. Any plans, guidelines or documents that are adopted by resolution shall not be adopted until notice is provided as outlined in Section 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan and Other Plans, Guidelines, or Documents. Section 4: Section 26.220.010 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth the powers and duties of the Historic Preservation Commission, is hereby amended to by amending subsection (E) to read as follows: E. To adopt by resolution any plans, guidelines, or documents that will be used in a guiding capacity by the Commission or, if to be used in a regulatory capacity, to recommend via resolution adoption of any plans, guidelines, or documents by the City Council. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP, land use development, planning, and historic preservation shall be described in the content of the resolution. Specifically, there shall be a determination of whether the document shall be used as a guiding or regulatory document. When a plan, guideline, or document is to serve as a regulatory document as determined by the Commission, the resolution will include a recommendation to the City Council for adoption of the document by ordinance. Any plans, guidelines or documents that are adopted by resolution shall not be adopted until notice is provided as outlined in Section 26.1 04.030, Comprehensive Community Plan and Other Plans, Guidelines, or Documents. Section 5: Section 26.575.040 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth supplemental regulations that shall apply to all yards, is hereby amended to by amending subsection (B) to read as follows: B. Required Yards Adjacent to Private Streets or Rights-of-Way. Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends into the right-of-way, the required yard setback shall equal the minimum distance specified under the zone district regulations along the closest boundary of the right-of-way to the proposed structure. When a property's lot line does not extend into the right-of-way, the required yard setback shall equal the minimum distance specified under zone district regulations from the lot line. Please refer to Figure 575.1, Required Setback from a Private Road or Right-of-Way. Page 3 of? -.-.-.-'-'- -.-.-. -.-' -,-'.'-'-'-'- -.- -'-.- -'-.- .-.-.- ~- _._L .-.-.-.--. --[j -.-.- - -.-.-.-.- Figure 575.1: Required Setback from a Private Road or Right-of-Way Section 6: Section 26.710.190 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth regulations for the development of land within the Lodge (L) zone district, is hereby amended to by amending subsection (D)(6) to read as follows: 6. Minimum rear vard setback (feet): Five (5). Plus, a trash/utility service area shall be required abutting the alley, pursuant to Section 26.575.060, Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area. Section 7: Section 26.710.190 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth regulations for the development of land within the Lodge (L) zone district, is hereby amended to by amending subsection (D)(10)(A) to read as follows: A. The following FAR schedule applies to Commercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with one or more lodge units per 500 square feet of Lot Area and an average lodge unit size of 500 square feet or less. This FAR schedule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of 3:1 for parcels of 27,000 square feet or less in size and 2.5:1 for parcels greater than 27,000 square feet. Also see Section 26.710.190.E. Unless otherwise stated below, a development's non-unit space shall not count towards the FAR cap of an individual use category; however, the maximum FAR cap for the parcel shall not be exceeded. 1. Retail and Restaurant Uses, Neighborhood Commercial Uses, Service Uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center: .25:1, which may be increased to .5: 1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 2. Lodge units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space): 2:1, which maybe increased to 2.5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. Page 4 of7 3. Commercial Parking Facility: 1:1. 4. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 5. Free-Market Residential or Large Lodge!Timeshare Units: An amount less than or equal to 25% of the FAR of the total project including both unit and non-unit space, but not including FAR devoted to parking. For example: If the total project represents 10,000 square feet of Floor Area, then 2,500 square feet may be free-market residential space or space devoted to lodge/timeshare units which are not to be limited by the average unit- size limitation. This percentage may be otherwise established for a project through a Plarmed Unit Development review. Also see Section 26.71O.190.F. All non-unit space attributable to Free-Market Residential or Large Lodge/Timeshare Units shall count towards the individual FAR allowance for Free-Market Residential or Large Lodge!Timeshare units. Section 8: Section 26.710.190 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth regulations for the development of land within the Lodge (L) zone district, is hereby amended to by amending subsection (D)(IO)(B) to read as follows: B. The following FAR schedule applies to Commercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with less than one lodge unit per 500 square feet of Lot Area or an average lodge unit size greater than of 500 square feet. This FAR schedule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of 1.5:1 for parcels of 27,000 square feet or less in size and 1:1 for parcels greater than 27,000 square feet. Unless otherwise stated below, a development's non-unit space shall not count towards the FAR cap of an individual use category; however, the maximum FAR cap for the parcel shall not be exceeded. 1. Commercial uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 2. Lodge units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space): 1: 1. 3. Commercial Parking Facility: 1:1. 4. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 5. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. All non-unit space attributable to Free-Market Multi-Family Housing shall count towards the individual FAR allowance for Free- Market Multi-Family Housing. Section 9: Section 26.710.200 of the Municipal Code, which section sets forth regulations for the development ofland within the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district, is hereby amended to by amending subsection (D)(lO) to read as follows: Page 5 of7 10. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 3:1. Unless otherwise stated below, non-unit space associated with individual uses shall be attributable to the individual FAR allowance. Unless otherwise stated below, a development's non-unit space shall not count towards the FAR cap of an individual use category; however, the maximum FAR cap for the parcel shall not be exceeded. a) Commercial Uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center; commercial parking facility: 1: 1. b) Lodging units, timeshare lodging units, and exempt timesharing units (unit space): 2:1, which may be increased to 2.5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. c) Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430.d d) Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .5: I._All non-unit space attributable to Free-Market Multi-Family Housing shall count towards the individual FAR allowance for Free- Market Multi-Family Housing. Section 10: 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 11: 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. The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 12: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 9111 day of January, 2006, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen 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 12111 day of December, 2005. Attest: Page 6 of? Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen K. K1anderud, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 10th day of April, 2006. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen K. KIanderud, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Page70f7 Exhibit A TEXT AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.310.040 of the City Land Use Code provides that applications for text amendments to the Land Use Code must comply with the following standards and requirements. 26.310.040 Standards of review. In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Plarming and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Finding The intent of the proposed amendments is to repeal any conflicts and provide additional clarification within sections of the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding The code amendments generally implement the AACP. Some of the amendments such as requiring projects to use the Historic Landmark Lot Split will implement the goal of historic preservation. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding The text amendments are not site specific. This review standard is not applicable. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding The text amendments will not directly impact traffic generation and road safety. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding The text amendments will not directly impact public facilities. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding The text amendments will not directly impact the natural environment. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding Some of the code amendments should help preserve community character. Staff finds this criterion to be met. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding The text amendments will not directly impact a specific site. This review criteria is not applicable. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Finding The intent of the text amendments are to clarifY and be in harmony with the intent of Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met. ErfuD~b RESOLUTION NO. 34 (SERIES OF 2005) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING CODE AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 26.104.030, COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY PLAN; 26.208.010, POWERS AND DUTIES; 26.212.010, POWERS AND DUTIES; 26.220.010, POWERS AND DUTIES; 26.575.040, YARDS; 26.710.040, MEDIUM- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-6); 26.710.050, MODERATE-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R- 15); 26.710.060, MODERATE-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-15A); 26.710.090, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (R/MF); 26.470.040, TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT AND ASSOCIATED PROCESS; 26.710.190, LODGE (L); AND 26.710.200, COMMERCIAL LODGE (CL) OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, AND RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department is interested in providing clarification on the process of adopting plans and guiding documents and how the plans or guidelines will be used in relation to currently adopted plans; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department finds it is necessary to amend the way a setback is measured from a private road; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department finds that additional language concerning Historic Landmark Lot Splits needs to be included in the R-6, R-15, R-15A, and R/MF zone districts; and, . WHEREAS, the Community Development Department initiated code amendments to the Lodge zone district and Commercial Lodge zone district standards to encourage new development and redevelopment of lodging units within the city and finds that additional amendments to the code are necessary to facilitate new development and redevelopment of lodging units; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Plarming and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the text amendments under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as listed under Land Use Code Section 26.310.040, Standards of review; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 1, 2005 and continued on November 22,2005, as required by Section 26.310.020, Procedure for amendment, the Plarming and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 34 Series of 2005, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving the recommended changes to the above referenced sections of the Land Use Code, and recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Chapter 26.310 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Plarming and Zoning Commission hereby approves the Code Amendment sections initiated by the Community Development Department as outlined below: LI Section 1: The changes in Section 1 provide clarification on the adoption process of plans and guiding documents and how new plans and guiding documents will be used in relation to other plans. Therefore, Section 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan, is repealed in its entirety and replaced by striking and adding, denoted by ~ and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: Section 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan and Other Plans, Guidelines, or Documents. The city shall from time to time adopt and update a comprehensive community plan (known as the Aspen Area Community Plan or AACP) which shall establish and project the city's land use and development planning philosophy, goals, and policies. The comprehensive community plan shall be broad in scope, and serve as a guide to all land use development and plarming. The plan shall encourage and incorporate regional plarming as well as land use development cooperation and coordination between the city and neighboring communities and jurisdictions. From time to time the city may amend. extend. or add to its comprehensive communitv plan. or carry any vart of its subject matter into f!reater detail throul!h the development of supplemental plans. f!Uidelines. or documents. Within the text of these plans. f!Uidelines. or documents it will describe how the material shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment. and vlanninl!. Svecificallv. there shall be a determination of whether the document will be used as a f!uidinf! or rel!Ulatory document. If used as a f!Uidinf! or ref!Ulatorv document the document shall be adovted bv resolution or ordinance. as avvropriate and bv the appropriate body. as provided in Chavter 26.200. Administration - Decision Makinl! Bodies. Svecifically. if the document is to be used as a policy of a board or commission the document will be adopted by resolution of that board or commission. If a document is to be used as a policy of the city. it shall be adopted by resolution of the City Council. When avian. f!Uideline. or document is to be used in a ref!Ulatorv fashion. it shall be adovted bv ordinance of the Citv Council. The adovtinl! resolution or ordinance shall state how the olans. f!Uidelines. or documents shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment. and planninl!. ( C" :' Before the adootion of a vlan or any such vart. amendment. extension. or addition bv an adootinf! body. at least one (]) vublic hearinf!. notice of the time and vlace of which shall be f!iven bv one (J) vublication in a newsvaver of f!eneral circulation in the city. Section 2: The changes in Section 2 provide clarification on the powers and duties of the City Council when adopting plans and guiding documents. Therefore, Section 26.208.010 I. is repealed in its entirety and replaced by striking and adding, denoted by ~ and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: 1. To adopt historic Elistrict and historic laRamark dc\'ele]3meHt guiEleliaes aad to ratify the Historic Presen'atioa Commissioa eyalaatioa of ,fie iaYeator)' ef l1istorie structures Jlursuaat to Cl1apter 28.415; ( "-..._- 2 1 To adoot bv resolution or ordinance any vlans. rzuidelines. or documents that will be used in a f!Uidance or rerzulatorv caoacitv bv the city. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develooment. and olanninl! shall be described in the content of the resolution or ordinance. Soecificallv. there shall be a determination of whether the document will be used as a f!uidinf! or rerzulatorv document. When used as a f!Uidinf! document of the citv it shall be adovted bv resolution and when used as a ref!Ulatorv document it shall be adooted bv ordinance. Anv olans, f!Uidelines or documents that are adovted bv resolution or ordinance shall not be adovted until notice is orovided as outlined in Section 26.104.030. Comorehensive Community Plan and Other Plans, Guidelines. or Documents. Section 3: The changes in Section 3 provide clarification on the powers and duties of the Plarming and Zoning Commission when adopting plans and guiding documents. Therefore, Section 26.212.010, Powers and Duties, is amended to include sub-section 26.212.010 R. by striking and adding, denoted by stfil<e and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: R. To adoot bv resolution any vlans. l!Uidelines. or documents that will be used in a f!Uidinf! or rel!Ulatorv caoacitv bv the city. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment. and vlanninl! shall be described in the content of the resolution. Soecificallv. there shall be a determination of whether the document will be used as a f!Uidinl! or ref!ulatorv document. If a document is to be used as a f!Uidinl! document the Commission shall adovt it bv resolution. When a olano f!Uideline. or document is to serve as a ref!Ulatorv document as determined bv the Commission. the resolution shall include a recommendation to the Citv Council for adovtion of the document bv ordinance. Anv vlans. l!Uidelines or documents that are adooted bv resolution shall not be adovted until notice isorovided as outlined in Section 26.104.030. Comvrehensive Community Plan and Other Plans. Guidelines. or Documents. Section 4: The changes in Section 4 provide clarification on the powers and duties of the Historic Preservation Commission when adopting plans and guiding documents. Therefore, Section 26.220.010, Powers and Duties, is amended to include sub-section 26.220.010 1. by striking and adding, denoted by stfike and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: L. To adoot bv resolution any olans. l!Uidelines. or documents that will be used in a f!Uidinf! or ref!Ulatorv cavacitv bv the city. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP. land use develovment. olanninl!. and historic vreservation shall be described in the content of the resolution. Soecificallv. there shall be a determination of whether the document shall be used as a rzuidinl! or rel!ulatorv document. If a document is to be used as a f!Uidinf! document the Commission shall adoot it bv resolution. When a olano f!Uideline. or document is to serve as a ref!Ulatorv document as determined bv the Commission. the resolution will include a recommendation to the City Council for adootion o(the document bv ordinance. Anv vlans. f!Uidelines or documents that are adooted bv resolution shall not be adooted until notice is vrovided as outlined in Section 26.104.030, Comorehensive Community Plan and Other Plans. Guidelines. or Documents. 3 ,I Section 5: The changes in Section 5 provide clarification on Chapter 26.470 - Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) and how associated free-market residential development in an incentive lodge development application shall meet the underlying zone district dimensional requirements. Therefore, Section 26.470.040 C.3.d), Incentive Lodge Development, is repealed in its ehtirety and replaced by striking and adding, denoted by s-tFike and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: d) .^.ssoeiated Free-market residential development associated with an Incentive Lodf!e Develovment, as permitted PUrSHaat tEl the Z8f18 district in '.vhieh tae lodge is devoloped shall be allocated on a unit basis and attributed to the armual development allotment. Each unit shall require the provision of affordable housing mitigation by one of the following methods: i) Providing an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADO) or a Carriage House for each residential unit pursuant to Section 26.520, Accessory Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. The unit need not be detached or entirely above grade to meet this criterion. ii) Providing on-site or off-site Affordable Housing Units equal to 30% of the free-market residential units (on a unit basis). The affordable housing units shall be one-bedroom or larger and be provided as actual units (not as a cash- in-lieu payment). Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. Provision of affordable housing mitigation via units outside of the City of Aspen shall require approval from City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.D.2. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. iii) Paying an affordable housing cash-in-lieu fee for each residential unit normally associated with exempt single-family and duplex development, pursuant to the Aspen/Pitkin County. Housing Authority Guidelines. Notes: 11 The City encourages the affordable housing units required for the free-market residential development to be associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term viability of the lodge. An efficiency or reduction in the number of employees required for a lodge component of a Incentive Lodge project may be approved as a credit towards the mitigation requirement for the free-market component of the project, pursuant to Section 26.470.050.A.I - Employee Generation. II When an assemblal!e of varcels or lots. that are either contif!uous or non-' conti f!Uous. is considered one develovment avvlication. the varcels or lots shall meet the followinl! standards: If an assemblaf!e of varcels or lots is located entirelv within the Lodf!e zone district. all varcels or lots shall be elirdble for FAR and heif!ht incentives as outlined in the Lodf!e zone district 4 ( " .;~;~~j "" Il. L standards. When one develovment aovlication includes oarcels or lots outside of the Lodl!e zone district, said varcels or lots shalf meet the underlvim! standards of the zone district within which they are located. Section 6: The changes in Section 6 clarify how to measure mlrumum setbacks from a private road. Therefore, Section 26.575.040 B, Required Yards Adjacent to Private Roads, is repealed in its entirety and replaced by striking and adding, denot~d by stFike and add, language to the Land Use Code as follows: B. ReCJliired Yards .^.djaeeBt to Pri'/ate Roads. .^JI required yara s~tbacks wder Z~Re distriet regHlatioRs are based ElR aistaRee measHfed fram the right of way liRe of a dedicated publie '.'1ay. Where there is RO puelic aedicatieR ana the lot liRe eJ[tends to the eenterline Elf tl1e rigl1t sf way, tl1e reql:lired yard setback shall eEfuallhe distance , speeified HBder zeRe distriet regulatiElBs, plus aB additiElBal distanee ~CJHal to ORe half (1/1) afme right Elf way width as if slioh private way w~re dedieatea for publie use. B. ReQuired Yards Adiacent to Private Streets or Rif!hts-of-Wav. Where there is no vublic dedication and the lot line extends into the ril!ht-of-way, the reQuired yard setback shall eQual the minimum distance svecified under the zone district ref!Ulations alonf! the closest boundary of the ril!ht-of-wav to the orovosed structure. When a orooertv's lot line does not extend into the rif!ht-of-wav. the reQuired yard setback shall eQual the minimum distance svecified under zone district ref!Ulations (rom the vrooertv line. Section 7: The changes in Section 7 require a Historic Landmark property that would like to take adv<mtage of reduced dimensional standards in a Medium-Density Residential (R-6) zone district to undergo the Historic Landmark Lot Split process. Therefore, Section 26.710.040 D.1., Minimum Lot Size, and Section 26.710.040 D.3, Minimum Lot Width, are amended by striking and adding, denoted by stFike and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): Six thousand (6,000J For Historie Landmark Preperties: ~ For lots created bv section 26.480.030 AJ4) Historic Landmark Lot Solito' Three thousand (3.000). And, 3. Minimum lot width (feet): Sixty (60J Fer Historio Lanamark properties: 30.For lots created bv section 26,480.030 AJ4) Historic Landmark Lot SoUto' Thirtv (30). Section 8: The changes in Section 8 require a Historic Landmark property that would like to take advantage of reduced dimensional standards in a Moderate-Density Residential (R-15) zone district to 5 ~ I undergo the Historic Landmark Lot Split process. Therefore, Section 26.710.050 D.I., Minimum Lot Size, and Section 26.710.050 D.3, Minimum Lot Width, are amended by striking and adding, denoted by &tFi*e and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: I. Minimum lot size (square feet): Fifteen thousand (15,000). For Historic LaFldmark Properties: three taelisaad (3,000). For lots created bv section 26.480.030 A.(4) Historic Landmark Lot Svlit: Three thousand (3,000). . And, 3. Minimum lot width (feet): Seven tv-five (751. Histone LaFldmark Properties: 30. For lots created bv section 26.480.030 A.(4) Historic Landmark Lot So lit: Thirtv (30). Section 9: The changes in Section 9 require a Historic Landmark property that would like to take advantage of reduced dimensional standards in a Moderate-Density Residential (R-15A) zone district to undergo the Historic Landmark Lot Split process. Therefore, Section 26.710.060 D.1., Minimum Lot Size, and Section 26.710.060 D.3, Minimum Lot Width, are amended by striking and adding, denoted by &tFi*e and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): Fifteen thousand (15,000). For Historic Landmark Properties: three thelioaFld (3,000). For lots created bv section 26.480.030 A.(4) Historic Landmark Lot Solit: Three thousand (3, 000). ( '.-.. ( And, 3. Minimum lot width (feet): Seventy-five (75). Histone LanEifHark Properties: thirty (30). For lots created bv section 26.480.030 A'(4) Historic Landmark Lot Svlit: Thirtv (30). Section 10: The changes in Section 10 require a Historic Landmark property that would like to take advantage of reduced dimensional standards in a Residential Multi-Family (R/MF) zone district to undergo the Historic Landmark Lot Split process. Therefore, Section 26.710.090 D.I., Minimum Lot Size, and Section 26.710.090 D.3, Minimum Lot Width, are amended by striking and adding, denoted by &tFi*e and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): Six thousand (6,0001. For Historie Lafldmark properties: ~ For lots created bv section 26.480.030 A.(4) Historic Landmark Lot Sv/it: Three thousand (3.000). And, 2. Minimum lot width (feet): Sixty (601. For Histone Landmark !JfI3perties: 30. For lots created bv section 26.480.030 A.(4) Historic Landmark Lot Solit: Thirtv (30). l 6 Section 11: The changes in Section 11 clarify how an assemblage of parcels for an incentive lodge development application may take advantage of height and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) incentives. Also, the minimum lot area per dwelling unit has been amended to clearly have a minimum standard when a project is completely residential but provides no minium when there is a residential component in a mixed project. Finally, the FAR allowance for non-unit space is removed and included in the FAR for lodge units. Therefore, Section 26.710.190 D., Lodge (L), is repealed in its entirety and replaced by striking and adding, denoted by stHI<e and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: 26.710.190 Lodge (L). D. Dimensional requirements. To encoural!e the construction. renovation. and overation of lodf!es, tourist ~riented multi-family buildinf!s, hil!h occuvancv timeshare facilities. and ancillarv uses comvatible with /odl!inf!. an assemblaf!e of varcels or lots. which do not need to be contif!Uous, may constitute and be considered one develooment avvlication. If an assemblal!e of varcels or lots is located entirelv within the Lodf!e zone district, all varcels and lots shall be elif!ib/e for FAR and heif!ht incentives as outlined in the Lodl!e zone district standards. When an assemblaf!e of oarcels and lots includes orovertv outside of the Lodl!e zone district, said varcels and lots located outside of the lodf!e zone district shall meet the under/vinf! reQuirements of the zone district within which they are located. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Lodge (L) Zone District: 1. Minimum lot size (square feet): 3,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (square feet): a. Multi-Family residential - 3,000 square feet, when the develovment is one- hundred (JOO) vercent free-market residential. There is no minimum reQuirement for multi-family residential develovment in a mixed use or lodf!inl! develovment. . b. Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, and Exempt Timesharing - no requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): 30. 4. Minimum front vard setback (feet): 5. 5. Minimum side vard setback (feet): 5. 6. Minimum rear vard setback (feet): Five (51. Plus, a trash/utilitv service area shall be reQuired abuttinf! the alley. vursuant to Section 26.575.060, 7. Maximum height: a) Multi-Family (as a single use): 28 feet. b) Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with less than one lodge unit per 500 square feet of Lot Area or an average lodge unit size greater than 500 square feet: 28 feet. c) Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with one or more lodge units per 500 square feet of Lot Area and an average lodge unit size 7 il of 500 square feet or less: 38 feet for sloped roofs. 42 feet for flat roofs. Also see Section 26.710.190.E. 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): 10. 9. Pedestrian Amenitv Space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030. 10. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): A. The following FAR schedule applies to Commercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with one or more lodge units per 500 square feet of Lot Area and an average lodge unit size of 500 square feet or less. This FAR schedule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of 3:1 for parcels of 27,000 square feet or less in size and 2.5: I for parcels greater than 27,000 square feet. Also see Section 26.71 0.190.E. 1. Retail and Restaurant Uses, Neighborhood Commercial Uses, Service Uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 2. Lodge units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space): 2:1, which may be increased to 2.5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 3. Uses and facilities ancillary te a leelgiBb operatieB (noB Hnit spaee): .5:1. -4.-.J." Commercial Parking Facility: I: I. ~.4. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. ~-I. Free-Market Residential or Large Lodge/Timeshare Units: An amount less than or equal to 25% ofthe FAR of the total project including both unit and non-unit space, but not including FAR devoted to parking. For example: If the total project represents 10,000 square feet of Floor Area, then 2,500 square feet may be free-market residential space or space devoted to lodge/timeshare units which are not to be limited by the average unit-size limitation. This percentage may be otherwise established for a project through a Plarmed Unit Development review. Also see Section 26.710.190.F. ( Note: A develoDment aDDlication's non-unit svace shall not count towards the FAR cavan an individual use catel!orv. but the maximum FAR caD (or the Darcel shall not be exceeded. B. The following FAR schedule applies to Commercial, Lodge, Timeshare Lodge, Exempt Timesharing, and mixed-use projects, with less than one lodge unit per 500 square feet of Lot Area or an average lodge unit size greater than of 500 square feet. This FAR schedule is cumulative, up to a total maximum FAR of 1.5:1 for parcels of 27,000 square feet or less in size and 1:1 for parcels greater than 27,000 square feet. ( '-- 8 1. Commercial uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center: .25:1, which may be increased to .5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 2. Lodge units, Timeshare Lodge units, Exempt Timesharing units (unit space): 1:1. '3. TJses aRd faeilities aneillary to a lodgiRg operatioR (ReB unit spaee): .5:1. 4,1. Commercial Parking Facility: I: 1. ~.1.. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. 6.5. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased to .5: I by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. Note: A develoDment aDvlication 's non-unit svace shall not count towards the FAR caD on an individual use catel!orv. but the maximum FAR caD for the varcel shall not be exceeded. C. The following FAR schedule applies to multi-family (as a single use) projects established prior to the adoption of Ordinance 9, Series of 2005, cumulatively, up to a total maximum FAR of I: I. Receipt of a Development Order shall constitute the date the use was established. 1. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: I: I. 2. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: 1: I. D. The following FAR schedule applies to multi-family (as a single use) projects established after the adoption of Ordinance 9, Series of 2005, cumulatively, up to a total maximum FAR of .75:1. Receipt of a Development Order shall constitute the date the use was established. 1. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .5:1. 2. Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .5:1. Section 12: The changes in Section 12 eliminate the FAR allowance for non-unit space and includes it in the FAR ratio for lodging units. Therefore, Section 26.710.200 D.IO., Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is repealed in its entirety and replaced by striking and adding, denoted by stflke and add. language to the Land Use Code as follows: 10. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The following FAR schedule applies to uses cumulatively up to a total maximum FAR of 3: I. a) Commercial Uses; Arts, Cultural and Civic Uses; Public Uses; Academic Uses; childcare center; commercial parking facility: I: 1. 9 .1 b) Lodging units, timeshare lodging units, and exempt timesharing units (unit space): 2:1, which may be increased to 2.5:1 by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. ' E) Uses and facilities aneillary 10 a 10dgiFlg operatioFl (FlOFlllFlit space): .5:1. f.!. Affordable Multi-Family Housing: .25:1, which may be increased by Special Review, pursuant to Section 26.430. !il Free-Market Multi-Family Housing: .5:1. Note: A develovment application's non-unit svace shall not count towards the FAR cao on an individual use cater!Orv. but the maximum FAR cao (or the varcel shall not be exceeded. Section 13: This Resolution shall not effect/affect any eXlstmg 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 recommended, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 22nd day of November, 2005. ( APPROVED AS TO FORM: 0.,.u&== City Attorney PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ~/~ Jasmine Tygre, Chair (> ( ATTEST: ( 10 ~\~\T C -ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes November 01. 2005 Public Comments: 1. Donna Fischer, public, stated that she lived on the opposite side of Eastwood Drive and said that it was not acceptable for people to build closer to the street. Fischer spoke of the variance granted by the board of adjustment for the ability to build a garage 5 feet from the road because the woman was elderly and there were more variances allowed. Fischer stated concern because it was not an appropriate spot for people to come closer to the road. Fischer emphasized that this was a really narrow road. 2. Catherine Garland, public, stated that she lived on McSkimming Road and was against the amendment because the road was very dangerous and narrow. Garland stated concern for building too close to the road. 3. Peter Kelly, public, stated that he lived on McSkimming Road and asked who generated this code amendment. Chris Bendon answered that there were quite a few requests for that front yard setback variances and the Board of Adjustment granted these variance requests; staff did not support the variances. Bendon said that staff generated this amendment. Bendon said the way that the city measured property lines was different than the way the county measured so there was a change in the rules that affected property, which was not considered. 4. Evan Clark, public, represents several property owners on Skimming Lane and said the setback difference was 5 feet. Clark said that this was not created by the lot owners own actions. Clark said this was simply a difference in how the city and county measured. 5. Dan Martineau submitted a letter in support ofthe code amendment. Jasmine Tygre requested some kind of a diagram to show the amount and points of reference. John Rowland requested a series of street sections to get a better feeling. Tygre said that they needed a drawing to show how close the properties. would be to the actual road. Ruth Kruger requested a blow up of the portion of the drawing to show the impacts on the street. MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to continue the Land Use Code Amendmentfor Eastwood/Skimming to November nnd; seconded by John Rowland. All infavor, motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: *' LAND USE CODE MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS Jasmine Tygre opened the land use miscellaneous amendments. Notice was provided. Jennifer Phelan stated a number of the revisions had to do with items deleted from the code or with the new lodging overhaul language that needed to be changed or clarified. Phelan said the staff report followed the resolution. 4 II . 'C-~. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes November 01. 2005 Phelan said that Sections I, 2, 3 and 4 (page 3 in the memo) had the intent to clarify the use and role of planning documents. Phelan said the documents had to include a mission statement of how the document will be used and if the document is used as a policy document then it will be adopted by resolution. Guiding policies will be adopted by ordinance. . Phelan stated that Sections 2, 3 and 4 were broken down to the powers and duties of City Council, Planning Commission and Historic Preservation Commission. Phelan said Section 5 was a change in the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS); if free market residential projects were an assemblage and were in 2 different zone districts then the zone district that each portion was located in would apply to each portion ofthe project. Phelan stated that Section 6 was Miscellaneous Supplemental Regulations and how setbacks were measured; the setbacks were measured from the boundary of the easement or pavement. In the new language "B" added "into" and deleted "te-fue ccntGrlinG of'. CJ Phelan said S,ections7, 8,9 and 10 added language to take advantage of the historic lot splits and dimensional requirements for R-15A and RlvfF. ( Phelan noted Section 11 (pages 7 & 8) included clarification of the assemblage of parcels that don't have to be contiguous for kldge projects. , Tygre noted that sometimes code amendments were passed by ordinance and changed from the time P&Z approved. Tygre expressed the need to see what code amendments by Ordinance have changed from the time it was reviewed by P&Z to the Council review. MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue the Miscellaneous Code Amendments to November 22nd; seconded by Dylan Johns. All infavor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ( 5 -- - ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes November 22,2005 PUBLIC HEARING: 920/930 MATCHLESS DRIVE Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing for 920/930 MatcWess Drive. MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to continue the public hearing/or 920/930 Matchless Drive; seconded by Steve Skadron. All in/avor motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: LAND USE CODE MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS Jasmine Tygre opened the land use miscellaneous amendments. Notice was' provided at the November 1 st public hearing. Jennifer Phelan stated a number of changes that staff presented were noted in green italics for additions and red strikethroughs for deletions. Section 5, the Growth Management Quota System (pages 4 & 5) language was added to the footnote ~'2) jVhen an assemblaze of varcels or lots, that are either conticzuous or non-contizzlOus, is considered one development avvlication, the varcels or lots shall meet the followin" standards: If an assemblaf!e of varcels or lots is located entirelv within the Lod"e zone district, all parcels or lots shall be eli"ible for FAR and hei"ht incentives as outlined in the Lodf!e zone district standards. When one development apvlication includes parcels or lots outside of the Lod"e zone district, said parcels or lots shall meet the underlvin" standards of the zone district within which they are located" Section 6, measuring the setback from a private right~of-way (pages 5 & 24) the language adde,d was "Required Yards Ad/acent to Private Streets or Ri"hts-of-Wav Where there is no public dedication and the lot line extends into the ri"ht-of-wav, the required yard setback shall equal the minimum distance specified under the zone district rezzdations alom! the closest boundarv of the ri"ht-of-wav to the proposed structure. When a property's lot line does not extend into the ri"ht-of-wav, the required vard setback shall equal the minimum distance specified under zone district re"ulations from the property line. " Phelan said that the measurement was taken from the edge of the right-of-way fQr this code amendment. Phelan said that non-unit space with regard to lodging structures (pages 9 & 10) Section 11 was created for the floor area ratio calculations (FAR). The language added was "Note: A development application's non-unit svace shall not count towards the FAR cap on an individual use catef!orv. but the maximum FAR cav for the parcel shall not be exceeded" Brandon Marion stated that he would not vote on these code amendments since he was not present at the prior meeting and did not hear the public comments. DRAFT ~ .J l.l_~_______. .- - ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes November 22. 2005 MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to approve Resolution #34, series 2005, based upon the code amendment request meeting the review standards of Section 26.310.040 of the Land Use Code. This resolution makes staffrecommended changes to Sections 26.104.030, Comprehensive Community Plan; 26.208. 010, Powers And Duties; 26.212.010, Powers And Duties; 26.220.010, Powers and Duties; 26.575.040, Yards; 26.710.040, Medium-Density Residential (R-6); 26.710.050, Moderate-Density Residential (R-15); 26. 710.060, Moderate-Density Residential (R-15a); 26.710.090, Residential Multi-Family (RiM)); 26.470.040, Typ?s of Development and Associated Process; 26.710.190, Lodge (L); and 26.710.200, Commercial Lodge (Cl) of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, and recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code. Seconded by Brian Speck. Roll call vote: Skadron, yes; Rowland, yes; Speck, yes; Johns. yes; Tygre, yes; APPROVED 5-0. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT - EASTWOOD/SKIMMING ROAD Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing for the Land Use Code () Amendments on Eastwood and McSkimming Roads. Sarah Oates provided sections and aerial photos of Eastwood Drive and Skimming Lane. Oates noted this was looking to amend setbacks in the R-ISB Zone District; currently all properties have a 30 foot front yard setback. Oates stated there was a change in the way the setback was measured; the edge of the easement was where the setback was going to be measured from. Oates presented Exhibit A as the proposed setback board, Exhibit B as the GIS mapping, Exhibit C was the various requests and Exhibit D was the Eastwood aerial. Oates said approximately 8 to 10 ofthe existing house would be put into conformance by this change in setbacks. The only lots that were affected by this- code amendment on Eastwood were the lots that were also bordered by Highway . 82 and Eastwood. Steve Skadron asked if this was a reality of the topography of the property. Chris Bendon replied that there were many variance requests along this road and staff could not support the variance because staff could not find that by applying this 30 foot setback that there was a taking of property that doesn't exist. Bendon said the Board of Adjustment.granted the variance requests because it did not seem like the right plannjng solution therefore staff needed to have a planning discussion about what is the proper setback along this street. Skadron said if you buy this property make it work under these guidelines. Bendon said there was a question here what was the better planning solution, do you want the houses pushed closer to Highway DRAFT 4 Re2ular Meetin2 Aspen City Council . t:-'4-\\6\\\) January 9, 2006 Councilman DeVilbiss said he would like to see the false alarm permits and fees increased. Councilman DeVilbiss suggested the permit be increased from $75 to $100; first false alarm $75 to $100; 2nd $115 to $200; 3'd $163 to $300. Loren Ryerson, chief of police, said he tried to increase the fees as recommended by administration. The goal of the police department is to cover administrative costs. Ryerson told Council the number of false alarms has almost doubled in the last 4 years. A higher fee might act as a deterrent to false alarms. Ryerson said he would like to involve the alarm companies in this discussion. Barwick suggested the increase in fees be added to the ordinance and staffwill deal with the timing of the false alarm fees. Council agreed with the increases. Councilman DeVilbiss noted under fun pass there is no senior fun pass. Paul Kulik, recreation department, said a 20-punch pass comes to $7/use and a senior one-day is $7, the same cost. Barwick suggested staff review the senior proposals and report back to Council. Pucak told Council the recreation department will be meeting with the senior group this month on different aspects of the recreation program and staff can bring a proposal back to Council. Barwick said staff will bring back a senior proposal as well as a needs based proposal. Councilman DeVilbiss noted in the zoning fees, it states that fees charged for processing applications which fall into more than one category will be cumulative and fees charged in the same category will not be cumulative and in the event the fees which result from accumulation are excessive, the community development director may waive the accumulation requirement. Councilman DeVilbiss suggested this be changed to state that the community development director may waive the excessive portion. Chris Bendon, community development department, agreed with that change. Councilman DeVilbiss said under zoning enforcement fees, projects constructed without a permit, the fees are doubled as a penalty. Councilman DeVilbiss said he would like to see projects constructed without permits dealt with more punitively. Bendon said being red tagged is more punitive than the fees. People working without permits are usually on an extreme deadline. Bendon said he does not think this needs to be changed. Councilman DeVilbiss asked about the barmer installation fee. Barwick said these are the special event banners across Main street and are installed by the electric department. Councilman DeVilbiss said he would like the fee to reflect the costs. Mayor Klanderud said almost all users are non-profits and she would not support increasing that fee. Councilman DeVilbiss said he would like staff to determine costs for banner installation. Councilman Torre moved to adopt Ordinance #49, Series of2006, as amended; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, yes;"DeVilbiss, yes; Torre, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. . ORDINANCE #50. SERIES OF 2005 - Miscellaneous Land Use Code Amendments Councilman DeVilbiss moved to continue Ordinance #50, Series of2006, to January 10, 2006, at 4 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Torre. Councilman Torre and Councilman 10 II Rel:!ular Meetinl:! Aspen City Council Januarv 9, 2006 DeVilbiss in favor; Councilman Johnson and Mayor Klanderud opposed. Motion NOT carried. Jennifer Phelan, community development department, told Council the first section amendment 26.104.030, comprehensive community plan. Ms. Phelan said this is to provide clarity on how plans, guidelines and documents can be used in a guiding or regulatory capacity and how these should be adopted by ordinance as a regulatory document or by resolution as a guiding document. Ms. Phelan said this should address documents like historic preservation guidelines, the comprehensive community plan. Ms. Phelan said every document should contain how the document will be used. Chris Bendon, community development department, said many plans are created through a process and at the end of that process, there should be some clarity to the meaning of the plan. Bendon said he feels it is confusing to the public and to applicants when these documents are attached to nothing. Bendon said if these are statements of policy, there should be a process where Council says that and adopts them by resolution or ordinance. Bendon said each update of the AACP is reviewed and adopted by P&Z and Council. Councilman DeVilbiss argued that if a document is not adopted by ordinance, it is not a regulatory document. Ms. Phelan noted sections 2, 3 and 4 relate to powers and duties of Council, P&Z and HPC and outline those P&Z and HPC may adopt a document by resolution and ifthey feel it needs to be a regulatory document, they can include a recommendation that Council adopt it by ordinance. These sections state when a document is a guiding document, it can be adopted by resolution and when it is to be a regulatory document, it shall be adopted by ordinance. Bendon told Council state statute says master plans are adopted by P &Z. Staff wanted it to be clear that there should be an end process to master plans or other documents and that is not in conflict with the state statutes. Ms. Phelan said section 5 deals with GMQS for incentive lodge development and relates to another section in this ordinance on lodge zoning. One change in the growth management system is that free market residential development associated with incentive lodge development shall be allocated on a unit basis attributable to the armual development. Ms. Phelan said this is to clarify language that was deleted in earlier legislation. Another clarification is that paying a cash-in-lieu fee for affordable housing is for each residential unit. Ms. Phelan pointed out a note has been added saying all parcels or lots within an incentive lodge development shall be eligible for the growth management incentives in this section. Ms. Phelan said when an assemblage of parcels or lots that are either contiguous or non-contiguous is considered for development, the parcels or lots shall meet the standards of the underlying zone district. Ms. Phelan said all parcels whether contiguous or non-contiguous are available for the growth management incentives in the quota system. Ms. Phelan said it also means they shall meet the underlying standards of the ' zone district in which they are located. Ms. Phelan said Section 6 changes how required setbacks for yards adjacent to private streets are measured. Ms. Phelan explained the current code assumes when a private right-of-way goes through individual parcels, the expectation is that the property lines 11 Rel!ular Meetinl! Aspen City Council January 9, 2006 come to the centerline of the private road. Ms. Phelan said the current measurement is to take half the distance of the right of way from the centerline and add the minimum front yard setback. This leads to an inconsistent front yard setback along the right-of-way depending on where the right-of-way falls. The code amendment is to measure the setback from the boundary of the right-of-way rather than from the centerline. This would measure the setback from the edge of the right-of-way regardless whether the right-of-way is public or private. Ms. Phelan noted Sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 are changes to R-6, R-15, R-15A and RMF zone districts. Ms. Phelan reminded Council there are incentives for historic properties that allow a narrower minimum lot width and a smaller minimum lot size. Ms. Phelan said earlier one could only receive these benefits through a historic landmark lot split. This requirement was deleted by mistake in recent code amendments and staff feels this language should be put back into the code. One may currently apply for a lot split through the subdivision process and the result is larger FAR. Councilman Johnson said adopting this would be creating consistency between the spirit and the law. Bendon told Council there were a lot of code amendments adopted last year and in using the code, staff has discovered inconsistencies and lack of clarity and this addresses those problems. Bendon said this ordinance contains clarification language in the dimension requirements regarding lodge to speak to the intent. There are incentives in the dimensional requirements, different F ARs, different heights and density for incentive lodge project. If a project meets the 500/500, they may avail themselves of the larger height and FAR and growth management incentives. There is clarification language on this issue. Bendon told Council the section about assemblage of parcels states if the assemblage lies in different zone districts, the properties have to comply with the zone district in which they lie. If all the assemblage lies within one zone district, the incentives and dimensional requirement apply to all properties within the assemblage. An assemblage of parcels can be one development application; the confusion has been when the zoning is the same or is different. This is to provide clarity to dimensional standards. Bendon stated this is different from split zone properties. This addresses development application on several properties. This code amendment states if the project is in two different zones, the zoning for those properties guides. This only Jipplies in the lodge zone district where those incentives are allowed. Councilman DeVilbiss asked if the section of the code amendment stating if all properties are in the lodge zone district all parcels shall be eligible for the FAR and height dimensional variations specifically addresses the Limelite. Bendon said this issue came up during conceptual review of the Limelite lodge. The question was what is the allowed height of the residential portion of the Limelite application and staff stated it is 42'. They comply with the lodge incentive standards; they met 500/500 so the lodge dimensions apply to the project, which was the intent of the code; however, it is not stated in the code. Councilman DeVilbiss stated he does not agree with this contention. Mayor Klanderud said the heights were set for the lodge zone to accommodate lodges and to discourage single-family structures. Mayor Klanderud stated this code amendment has to be analyzed on its own merits, not tied to any particular applications. 12 Ii Re2ular Meetin2 Aspen City Council January 9, 2006 Bendon said the proposed language is consistent with the intent and purpose of the lodge district amendments to the code. Only through use of the code do unclear areas become apparent. Councilman Torre said it is difficult to discuss a code amendment with a pending application. Councilman Torre said this code amendment should be continued until after the application is reviewed. Councilman Johnson said he would support continuing as this seems more than a clarification. Councilman DeVilbiss asked the effects of "notes" in these code amendments and whether notes are substantive parts of the ordinance. Worcester said these notes can be used to assist the reader. Councilman DeVilbiss asked why these carmot be part of the ordinance rather than a "note". Ms. Phelan said the current code requires multi-family residential have a density of 3,000 square feet per lot area. There is no requirement for lodge or timeshare lodge. Originally in a mixed-use development, there were no density requirements, which would allow smaller, denser units. Staff recommends no minimum density requirement for multi- family in the lodge infill area. If an application is going to do 100% multi-family, they have the ability to do a denser project. The current code encourages lodge development. There are other areas of the code that address height, FAR and growth management mitigation that create disincentives to multi-family residential. If someone proposes a multi-family residential free market project, it makes sense to have more density in the downtown lodge zone. Bendon explained if one is proposing a lodge and it will have some free market penthouses, if one had the FAR, it does not matter whether this is 1, 2 or 10 units so staff recommends deleting the minimum lot size for the mixed use projects. This only applies to residential units in a mixed-use project. Ms. Phelan noted the trash utility service area requirement has been added. It was not included in the lodge zone district and is included in other zone districts. Ms. Phelan said there is a note on non-unit space. Non-unit space for lodge is life safety issues, hallways, closets, and the parts of the buildings not having to do with a lodge. Ms. Phelan said with the changes in the lodge and commercial lodge district there was a new category of non- unit space included and the original ratio given by staff was too low. This was originally in the lodge FAR allowance, not broken out. Ms. Phelan suggested the non-unit space not contribute to the individual FAR for the lodge units but the non-unit space carmot go over the maximum cap for the parcel. Bendon said during the lodge code amendments, lodge owners suggested an FAR allotment for "other things" that does not take away from the FAR for lodge units. Staff estimated that space at and FAR of .5: 1. It has become very limiting as every space that is not a lodge unit has to fall into that .5: 1. Councilman Johnson said he would prefer if a maximum FAR were allowed and the applicant can figure out how to use the space. Council requested examples when this ordinance is revisited. Councilman DeVilbiss said he would prefer this a section of the ordinance rather than a "note". Bendon said the notes are codified as part of the code. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. Dale Paas said he is familiar with a pending project; however, has been working on a workable ordinance for all hotel redevelopment. Paas said when the lodge redevelopment group was looking at how to redevelop, when projects were looked at 13 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council Januarv 9, 2006 around the country, mixed projects with hotel and free market in the same building were usual. Paas said projects built that way are to accommodate the convenience of the homeowners and to maximize the FAR. A penthouse in a fancy hotel affords one access to maid service, spa, security and concierge services and nightly rentals are secondary. In Aspen, the main concern should be the tourists and accommodation of guests. Paas supports these code amendments as written. Robin Shiller said this ordinance appears to be a clarification to the code rather than a . change. The lodge zone district changes were silent on the issue of contiguity. There are entities in the community that have operations on non-contiguous sites that are tied together operationally. A development on two pieces of property becomes one development by being submitted and considered as one whether contiguous or not. Shiller said the purpose oflodge incentives was to encourage desirable projects and to get them to be viable. If this code amendment limits the number of projects that can use these incentives, few desirable projects will be built. Tom Smith, representing Jim French and Andrea Clark, agreed it is obvious with a pending application, which is subject to proposed changes, the relationship between these amendments and the Limelite application. Smith stated assemblage of parcels is not defined in the code; does assemblage refer to ownership or to operations. Andrea Clark, 210 Cooper, quoted from the AACP under managing growth that "we should endeavor to bring a middle class back into the community". The goal under that is to preserve the quality oflife for the residents and enjoyment of visitors. The town is not to only service visitors. Ms. Clark said her comments tie into whether this is an end run around the Pun text defmitions and responsibilities and mandatory compliance issues and is this an end run around the AACP, which plays a major part in the applications that come before Council. Ms. Clark said putting the documents side by side, clarification is needed because of the nature of the land use amendments that are assisting a particular proj ect. Toni Kronberg said the public has been confused by what is allowed under the AACP and under zoning. Ms. Kronberg said she has brought up contradictions in the AACP and the zoning code. Ms. Kronberg said the Conner project was approved despite the fact it is in a protected view plane. Ms. Kronberg said Section 1 stated the Aspen Area Community Plan is a guiding document. Ms. Kronberg said every ordinance ties into the AACP and the plan is a contradiction to itself. Ms. Kronberg said developments are scored against the Aspen Area Community plan and her examples show contradictions to the code. Ms. Kronberg stated the AACP should be regulatory. Mayor Klanderud asked for support or objection to the specific code amendments. Sue Woolery, Lime1ite Lodge, encouraged Council to adopt these land use code amendments and to keep in mind the reasons for the change in the lodge zone was to get more moderately priced hotel rooms. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. 14 II Rel!ular Meetinl! Aspen City Council January 9, 2006 Councilmar Torre stated this should be continued until after the application is reviewed. Bendon requested Council consider adopting sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 dealing with the historic landmark properties to correct what staff feel is an issue with the lot. This deals with lot splits of historic properties versus subdivision of historic properties and a big FAR difference. Adopting this would give more protection to preservation of historic properties. Bendon explained the code is written that the minimum lot size for a historic landmark property is 3,000 square feet. If one has a historic property that is 6,000 square feet, it can be subdivided into two 3,000 square foot lots. Under the current code with a standard subdivision, there is stand-alone FAR. This proposed language states only lots created by historic landmark lot splits can be 3,000 square feet. It forces one through the lot split procedure' and divides the original FAR into two properties so there is no gain in FAR. Adopting sections 7, 8, 9, and 10 will result in less FAR on the historic lot split properties. Ms. Phelan said this was in the code prior to recent amendments and this is putting it back in the code. Bendon said without this code amendment, any lot can go through a subdivision down to a lot of 3,000 and by not having to go through the historic landmark lot split process, the FAR is significantly more than that achieved through the historic landmark lot split process. Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #50, Series of2006, amending it to adopt Sections 7, 8, 9, and 10 only; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Roll call vote; Councilmembers DeVilbiss, yes; Torre, yes; Johnson, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. Councilman Johnson moved to continue the remainder of Ordinance #50, section 1 through 6 and 11, to March 13,2006; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman DeVilbiss moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 10 p.m; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINAl'"CE #51. SERIES OF 2005 - Code Amendment Eastwood/McSkimming Setbacks Sarah Oates, representing the community development department, told Council this code amendment will allow certain sections of Skimming Lane and Eastwood Road a 10' front yard setback rather than a 30' front yard setback and a 30' rear yard setback rather than a 10' rear yard setback. Ms. Oates illustrated Skimming lane and 4 lots on it; 2 are developed with single-family houses and 2 are vacant. Ms. Oates told Council on both streets there has been a condition, changes in city regulations, which altered the front yard setback without notification to the property owners. When Eastwood was armexed in 1987, there was a private road easement running through the lots. The setback was taken from the property line on the north side of Eastwood road. The city dedicated the right-of-way in 1988 in order to do the maintenance. After the city dedicated the road, the property line shifted 30' south because ofthe city code measures setbacks from the edge of the right-of-way. There have been cases in front of 15 MEMORANDUM ltG-i.d TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner ~WJ THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Director. Community Development RE: 214 E. Bleeker Plat Vacation and Lot Split: 2nd Reading of Ordinance 53 and 54. Series of 2005 DATE: April 10,2006 SUMMARY: Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, P.C, representing William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, owner of 214 E. Bleeker St, is requesting a plat vacation, a lot split and a subdivision exemption. A public hearing on the plat vacation (Ordinance 53) and a public hearing on the lot split (Ordinance 54) were held on January 9, and were continued to January 23, when City Council voted 3-2 to deny both requests. On February 13, Council unanimously approved a Motion to Reconsider both Ordinance 53 and 54, and public hearings were scheduled for April 10. Staff has scheduled two public hearings because the requested Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption in Ordinance No. 54, Series of2005 could not legally be granted without first approving the Plat Vacation request in Ordinance No. 53, Series of2005. However, staff is proposing that both public hearings be opened together, as the substance of the two applications both relate to 214 E. Bleeker St. The first public hearing is for the Plat Vacation request. The criteria for review states that City Council City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. Staff is continuing to recommend approval, based on mutual mistakes by applicant and staff during a previous application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption at 214 E. Bleeker St., and during the review and approval of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998. The second public hearing is for the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split application, which may only be granted if Council has first approved the Plat Vacation request. Staff believes the lot split application meets all relevant standards and is recommending approval. ApPLICANT: William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz, r.c. LOCATION: 214 E. Bleeker St. ZONING: R-6 REVIEW PROCEDURE: Criteria for Plat Vacation are noted in 26.480.080 (C), stating that City Council may approve a plat vacation if good cause is demonstrated. Review criteria and Staff Findings for Plat Vacation have been included as Exhibit "A." The required conditions for a Lot Split are listed at 26.480.030 A(2); and review standards for a Subdivision Exemption are outlined at 26.480.050. Review criteria and Staff Findings for Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption have been included as Exhibit "B." BACKGROUND: In 1998, the City Council approved a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption for a parcel made up of four (4) original townsite lots at 214 E. Bleeker (Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998). The application was made and approvals rendered based on a 1996 survey of the property showing the total parcel size to be 11,963 square feet. The current request for a vacation of the 1998 plat is based on the argument that the City has a long-standing policy of legally recognizing original townsite lots as 3,000 square feet in size, regardless of actual surveys on the ground, making the parcel 12,000 square feet in size. The City Attorney's Office has confirmed this long-standing policy. If the Brumder parcel were legally recognized as 12,000 square feet in size, it would have allowed the applicant to proceed under a traditional Lot Split rather than a Historic Landmark Lot Split. A traditional lot split would have allowed for substantially more FAR (see chart below). The case planner for the 1998 Brumder application, Amy Guthrie, does not recall any discussions regarding whether the 1996 survey of the Brumder parcel or the townsite record was the correct legal basis to determine the size of the parcel. In addition, there is no written record in the case file showing that this issue was discussed or debated. The only document in the Brumder case record that shows a lot size other than 11,963 square feet is the original 1996 survey, which shows both the 12,000 square feet "record," and the 11,963 square feet "pro-rated." All subsequent documents in the 1996 and 1998 case file specified the lot size at 11,963 square feet. At the January 9 and January 23 public hearings on the requested Plat Vacation and Lot Split, statl stated that a "mutual mistake" was made regarding the 1998 approval of a Historic Landmark Lot Split for 214 E. Bleeker Street. Staff based this assessment on informal interviews with Community Development Department staff, none of whom were aware until recently that it had long been the City's policy to legally recognize townsite lots as 3,000 square feet in size, regardless of actual surveys on the ground. However, staff did not submit any formal statements from the planning staff. In preparation for the April 10 hearing on the plat vacation, staff has included a formal statement from the planner for the 1998 Historic Landmark Lot Split, Amy Guthrie. as follows: "When the original application for this parcel was reviewed in 1996, I was not aware that original townsite lots are to be interpreted as being 3,000 square feet in size, even if the survey does not indicate those exact dimensions. I do not recall whether or not the applicant asked if they could apply for a traditional Lot Split rather than a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 1996. If they did, I feel confident that I would have said they were not eligible based on my understanding of the code at that time." In addition, the applicant has submitted six affidavits for the April 10 hearing, which are enclosed in this information packet. The affidavits are from three former employees of the City Engineer's Office, one is from the Deputy Pitkin County Assessor and two are from private sector surveyors who have been working in Aspen for many years. The gist of the affidavits reflects a longstanding practice of calculating townsite lots at 3,000 square feet, based on the 30'XIOO' lots prescribed in the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen. The applicant has also submitted a copy of Ordinance No.6, Series of 1959, adopting the Otlicial Map of the City of Aspen, as well as records of the Pitkin County Assessor showing the parcel to be 12,000 square feet. At this time, staff is maintaining its finding that a "mutual mistake" was made regarding the 1998 Brumder case. The applicant may have erred in not fully investigating the rights of the property owner, and the City may have erred in not encoding the position of the City regarding the proper legal use of the "record" regarding the lot size of original townsite lots, or otherwise making that position common knowledge among staff and applicants. In summary, statTis recommending approval of Ordinance 53 and Ordinance 54, as well as initiating a code amendment process to insert appropriate language to the Land Use Code reflecting the legal use of the "record" lot size for original townsite lots. The net result of vacating the existing 1998 plat and approving the lot split request is an increase of allowable FAR on both Lot A and Lot B. Under the proposed lot split, each lot size would be 6,000 square feet, allowing a future addition of approximately 1,300 square feet to the existing historic structure on Lot B; and either a single-family home up to 3,240 square feet, or two (2) detached dwelling units totaling up to 3,240 square feet, or a duplex up to 3,600 square feet on Lot A, according to the current Land Use Code, as follows: Existing Ord. No. 29 (1998) Proposed Ordinance Lot A 2,344 3,240 -- 3,600 FAR Single-family or 2 detached -- duplex LotB 1,913 + eligible for 500 s.f. bonus 3,240 FAR The applicant has agreed to forego any square footage bonus that may be applicable in this case, pursuant to Section 26.420, and this restriction is included as a condition of approval. Regarding the proposed lot split and subdivision exemption, staff finds that the application meets the criteria. Any future addition to the Historic Landmark on Lot B must proceed under the review procedures pursuant to Section 26.415. In addition, staff and the applicant have agreed to a condition requiring that any future development on Lot A, the vacant lot, must also undergo review procedures pursuant to Section 26.415. RECOMMENDA TIONS: Staff has reviewed the proposal for a plat vacation and recommends that the City Council find that good cause has been demonstrated to approve this plat vacation for 214 E. Bleeker St. Staff has reviewed the proposals for a Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption and recommends that the City Council find that the criteria and review standards have been met to approve the Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption applications for 214 E. Bleeker St. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 53, Series of2005, upon second reading." "I move to approve Ordinance No. 54, Series of2005, upon second reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Review criteria and Staff Findings for Plat Vacation. Exhibit B: Review criteria and Staff Findings for Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption. Exhibit C: Statement of Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer. Exhibit D: Letters from applicant's representative; affidavits; Ordinance 6, Series of 1959, adopting Official Map of City of Aspen; and records of the Pitkin County Assessor. ORDINANCE No. 53 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLAT VACATION AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, 0, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C., requesting approval of a Plat Vacation regarding the property at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; said plat based upon Ordinance No.29, Series of 1998; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use .Code Section 26.480.080C, the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for a Plat Vacation, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Plat Vacation regarding the property located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, 0, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plat Vacation proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plat Vacation proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Plat Vacation for the property located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: I. The applicant shall submit and record a plat vacation that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. Section 2: 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 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: A public hearing was held on the 9tl1 and 23rd day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12th day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a vote on this lOth day of April, 2006. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney ORDINANCE No. 54 (SERIES OF 2005) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION LOT SPLIT AT 214 EAST BLEEKER STREET (LOTS N, 0, P, AND Q, BLOCK 72, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO) WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust, represented by Oates, Knezevich & Gardenswartz P.C. requesting approval of a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split of the property to be known as Lot A and Lot B of the Brumder Lot Split, located at 214 E. Bleeker Street, City of Aspen, Pitkin County; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.030A(2), the Aspen City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application for a Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for the property to be described as Lots A and B of the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker Street (Lots N, 0, P and Q, Block 72, of the City and Townsite), City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, 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 ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Subdivision Exemption Lot Split for Lots A and B of the property to be known and described as the Brumder Lot Split located at 214 E. Bleeker St, City of Aspen, Pitkin County, is approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Chapter 26.480, and conforms to the requirements of the Land Use Code, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after approval of this ordinance. The plat shall indicate that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots, nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Furthermore, the proposed Lot Split Plat shall clearly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot A from Lot B and show all easements of record. 2. The lot split plat shall exhibit two lots in conformance with the R-6 Zone District regulations and shall include the following plat notes: a. Upon redevelopment, all structures on these two (2) lots shall comply with the R-6 Zone District provisions, as may be amended from time to time, with respect to the newly created lot boundaries and setbacks. Upon redevelopment, all encroachments into Public Right of Way shall be removed or properly licensed. b. Maximum potential build-out for the two (2) parcels created by lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single family home. Only one unit is allowable on Lot B. c. The future development of Lots A and B shall be subject to Chapter 26.415, Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmarks Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District. d. The future development of Lots A and B shall not be permitted to utilize the 500 square footage bonus pursuant to Section 26.420.020 (B) l(c). e. Any setback nonconformity(s) created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development of the applicable lot(s). f. Vehicular access to either lot shall be from the alley only. g. Upon redevelopment, the applicant shall construct sidewalk, curb and gutters according to the specifications of the City Engineer. h. Both lots are required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470. 040 B(l). 3. Both lots shall comply with the applicable development regulations prior to applying for building permits, including those regulations related to Residential Design Standards, Accessory Dwelling Units, and GMQS Exemptions. 4. The applicant shall obtain a tree removal permit prior to removing any trees from the site for which a tree removal permit is required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. Any tree to remain on-site during the development of Lots A and B shall have its drip line fenced off prior to, and throughout construction. Tree Removal Mitigation may be required for removal of trees pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 13.20. 5. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed. All sanitation-related improvements below grade shall require the use of a pumping station. The existing sewer line may be used to service one of the new residences if it is inspected and determined to be satisfactory by the Aspen Sanitation District. If the existing service line is not used for the proposed development it must be abandoned and removed. 6. 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. Upon redevelopment of the new lots, the applicant shall abandon the existing water service line prior to receiving new water taps. 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 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 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 separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: A public hearing was opened on the 9th and 23rd day of January, 2006, at 5:00 PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 12tl' day of December, 2005. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a vote on this 10th day of April, 2006. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Exhibit A Review Criteria & Staff Findings Plat Vacation 26.480.080 ( c) Vacation of an approved plat or any other document recorded in conjunction with a plat shall be considered a plat amendment, and shall only be approved by the City Council if good cause is demonstrated. Staff Findinl!: The plat under consideration for vacation was recorded based upon City Council approval of Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1998, granting an Historic Landmark Lot Split and a Subdivision Exemption for 214 E. Bleeker St. Ordinance No. 29 created Lot A, a 6,000 square foot lot, with allowable FAR of 2,344 square feet; and Lot B, a 5,963 square foot lot, with allowable FAR of 1,913 square feet (plus a possible 500 square foot bonus to be granted by the Historic Preservation Commission). Lot A was, and continues to be, vacant. Lot B contains a historic structure. Staff finds that there is good cause for this plat vacation request, based on mutual mistakes made by applicant and staff during the review and approval of the Historic Landmark Lot Split and Subdivision Exemption application, and Ordinance No. 29 Series of 1998. During review and approval, an assumption was made that lots located in the original townsite had to be surveyed to determine their legal size. In fact, the City of Aspen has traditionally interpreted all original townsite lots to be 3,000 square feet in size, despite the fact that some may measure slightly more or less due to the movement of monuments over time. In this case, the 1998 survey showed the amalgamation of the lots in question at 11,963 square feet, which limited the applicant's right to a Historical Landmark Lot Split, and not a regular Lot Split. If the correct interpretation was made at the time -- that the amalgamation of lots legally measured 12,000 square feet -- the applicant would have been allowed to file for a regular Lot Split. Since 1998, there has been a minor remodeling of the historic structure on Lot B, and no development on Lot A, which remains vacant. Exhibit B Review Criteria & Staff Findings Lot split - 214 E. Bleeker St. 26.480.030 A (2) The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following conditions are met: a. The land is not !ocated in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24. 1969. This restriction shall not apply to properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Staff Findinl!: This condition does not apply to 214 E. Bleeker St., as it is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. (This proposal meets the conditions stated above regardless of its historic status.) h. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots con/arm to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470.070(B). Staff Findinl!: Staff finds that the proposal meets these conditions. This proposal would create 2 lots, both of which would conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Future development will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.470.070 (B), and is a condition contained in the proposed Ordinance. c. The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this Chapter or a "lot spUt" exemption pursuant to Section 26.470.040 (C)(l)(a). Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal meets this condition. In the case that City Council has vacated the 1998 plat as requested, the property meets this condition. d A suhdivision plat which meets the terms of this Chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this Title. must he submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder after approval. indicating that no fUrther subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this Chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Staff Findinl!: St<iff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. e. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. .f In the case where an existing single~family dwelling occupies a site which is eligible/or a lot ,Ipfit. the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application/or a lot .Iplit. Staff Findinl!: Staff finds this condition is not applicable to this application, as the existing residence on Lot B is a Historic Structure, subject to Chapter 26.415. g. Maximum potential buildout fiJr the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units. which may be composed a/a duplex and a single family home. Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal meets this requirement, which appears as a condition in the proposed Ordinance. Further, the condition states that only one dwelling unit is allowable on Lot B. . l EXH \13(T c MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 214 E. Bleeker Street, Brumder DATE: January 27, 2006 With regard to my past history as the caseload planner on the Brumder Lot Split, I can offer the following information. When the original application for this parcel was reviewed in 1996, I was not aware that original townsite lots are to be interpreted as being 3,000 square feet in size even if the survey does not indicate those exact dimensions. I do not recall whether or not the applicant asked if they could apply for a traditional Lot Split rather than a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 1996. If they did, I feel confident that I would have said they were not eligible based on my understanding of the code at that time. , l Extt li3 \/ D LAW OFFiCES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 E HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO. 81611 TELEPHONE (970) 920_1.,'00 FACSIMII.E (970) 920_112' LEONARD M. OATES RICHAHD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KELLY OF COUNSEL JOHN T. KELLY Imc@ckglaw,corn MARIA MORROW February 27,2006 VIA HAND DELIVERY Honorable Helen Kalin Klanderud and Members of the City Council c/o City of Aspen Community Development Dept. A TTN: Ben Gagnon . 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Reconsidered Ordinance Nos. 53, Series of 2005 & 54, Series of 2005 Dear Mayor Klanderud and Members of the City Council: As you are aware, subsequent to the denial of the Brumder Trust request for the adoption of Ordinance No. 53, Series of2005 (Withdrawal of the Brumder Historic Lot Split Plat), Mayor Klanderud suggested a reconsideration of the denial which was moved by Councilman De Vilbiss, seconded by Councilman Torre and passed four to one. Since the Motion for Reconsideration we have done additional research in connection with the treatment of the Brumder property and as to the position oftheCity of Aspen with respect to the treatment of parcels within the original City and Townsite. Attached to this letter are the following: 1. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor John M. Howorth, President of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. 2. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor James F. Reser, President and Principal of Aspen Surveys, Inc. 3. Aflidavit of Former City Engineer Nick Adeh. 4. Affidavit of Former City Engineer Jay Hammond. 5. Affidavit of Licensed Surveyor Louis H. Buettner. 6. Affidavit of Deputy Pitkin County Assessor Larry Fite, which is submitted for the purpose of demonstrating the Historical Treatment, generally oflots within the Original Townsite of Aspen and as well certain matters relating specifically to the four Brumder Lots which were subsequently subdivided into two parcels by the Brumder Historic Lot Split which we are now seeking to withdraw. Hopefully you will find these submittals to be informative. C:\LMO Data & FormslData\ClientslBrumder Trust\ltr to Klanderud and Council 2.22.06.doc The statement was made by Councilman Johnson (to my understanding) that he believed that each of the Original Townsite Lots should be treated based upon measured dimensions. We believe that this would result in potentially unfair or overly advantageous treatment of Original Townsite Lots depending upon the measurement. We believe it is the best policy to follow the current policy of treating all such lots as constituting 3,000 square feet, which was the intention of those who laid out the Original Townsite and which has been followed at all times since then. If there is confusion regarding this policy then certainly the City Council should give consideration to adoption of some form of legislation which makes this absolutely clear so that the error which we believed occurred in connection with the submission of the original Brumder Historic Lot Split does not occur in the future. Additionally, Councilman Johnson made a statement at the January 23, 2006 meeting that he did not believe that it was the obligation of the City of Aspen Community Development Department to advise property owners as to how to maximize development rights upon their property. We believe that Councilman Johnson fails to understand the Community Development Department's Pre-Application Conference process. In this process a property owner requests a meeting with a StaffPlarmer. In that meeting the property owner explains to the StaffPlarmer what the property owner would like to see occur with respect to his or her property. The StaffPlarmer then reviews the Code provisions either at or subsequent to the meeting and advises the property owner as to the appropriate code sections which the property owner needs to follow in order to solicit the development approval which is available to the property by the underlying zoning. In order to do so, the Staff Planner must determine and advise the Property Owner as to whether or not under the existing provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code the result desired by the property owner is attainable. That is the nature of the process and by necessity requires the StaffPlarmer to advise the property owner what the property owner's practical expectations might be in connection with the. development and/or redevelopment of his or her property. Any other approach to the process would be somewhat akin to "Where's Waldo." It would be unfair and unduly burdensome upon property owners within the City of Aspen to expect the property owner to ferret out the information which the property owner needs in order to proceed. The cooperative process as between the property owner and the community development department general works quite well. Another approach without such cooperation would lead to significant criticism of the City in the treatment of its landowners. If the City Council is in need of any further supplementation please feel free to contact me. There is also aAached to Mr. Buettner's Affidavit a copy of the 1959 Official Plat of the City of Aspen which is and remains its Official Plat. Because ofthe size of this document and the expense we have included it in the initial cover to Mayor Klanderud and are requesting that either she or Ben Gagnon bring the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen to the City Council meeting. This Official Map is approved by Ordinance adopted in 1959 which has not been amended and remains in effect as of the date of this writing. Very Truly Yours, OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. By~~y-(fjk& Leonard M. Oates LMOlbab C:\LMO Data & FormslDatalClientslBrumder Trustlltr to K!anderud and Counci12.22.06.doc LAW OFFICES OF OATES, KNEZEVICH & GARDENSWARTZ, P.C. PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION THIRD FLOOR, ASPEN PLAZA BUILDING 533 E HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO. 81611 LEONARD M. OATES RICHARD A KNEZEVICH TED D. GARDENSWARTZ DAVID B. KElLY TELEPHONE (970) 920-1700 FACSIMILE (970) 920-1121 OF COUNSEL JOHN T. KELLY Imo@okglaw.com MARIA MORROW March 8, 2006 VIA HAND DELIVERY Honorable Helen Kalin K1anderud and Members of the City Council clo City of Aspen Community Development Dept. ATTN: Ben Gagnon 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Brumder Request for Withdrawal of Historic Lot Split Dear Mayor K1anderud and Members of the City Council: Subsequent to my last correspondence including surveyor affidavits and the affidavits of others knowledgeable in the premises we were able to locate the following: 1. The Plat of the Aspen Townsite (not however to scale because of machine reproductions), per certified copy by B. Clark Wheeler, U.S. Deputy Surveyor, dated March 19, 1880 by which the Aspen Town and Land Company conveys lots within the originfll Townsite of Aspen. Although the Plat does not contain lot dimensions for Main Street stated at 100 feet, all individual regularly dimensioned rectangular lots are 30 feet by 100 feet scaling of the comparative dimension. 2. The original survey plat of the Town of Aspen prepared by H. Pfeiffer, C.E. prepared under authority of Byron E. Shear. This map was prepared at a time when Aspen was part of Gunnison County before the split off which created Pitkin County. This map is recorded in Book V at Page 112 of the records of Gurmison County Colorado. It is submitted to you for the proposition that lots in the original townsite are 30 x 100. You can see that that is noted below Mr. Pfeiffer's field notes of the Town of Aspen. We have highlighted that lot size statement in the copy provided to you. Very Truly Yours, OATES EZEVICH & GA By cc: Tom Fitzgerald LMOlbab C:\LMO Data & FormslData\Clients\Brumder Trustlltr to Klanderud and Council3.2.06.doc AFFIDAVIT OF NICK ADEH THE UNDERSIGNED, Nick Adeh, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows, 1. He is a Colorado professional engineer, License No. 30499 and has been so licensed since 199'5 . . 2. He is currently employed by Sopris Engineering. 3. That for the periods, approximately J~f1..J3. 1996 to &b. 6 2OOf>, inclusive, that he was employed by the City of Aspen in the Engineering Department as City Engineer. 4. One of his duties in the employ of the City of Aspen was to review maps of the City and surveys of the properties in the City of Aspen. 5. That during his employment, it was his understanding that the Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared in 1959 by George E. Buchanan set Original Townsite City Blocks consisting of eighteen lots in each block (9 on each side of an alley) and that such blocks measured at 270 feet. There are instances where blocks are slightly longer or slightly shorter than 270 feet. Monuments based upon that spacing were set pursuant to the 1959 Official Map. The 1959 Official Map was intended to be based on the 1890 survey notes of Frank D. Howe who was the City Engineer for the City of Aspen in 1890. A copy of the 1959 Official Map is in the City Engineer's Office and available for public inspection. 6. The Howe field notes recognize Lots within the City of Aspen each were intended to be 30 feet by 100. 7. In connection with the placement of such monuments by G. E. Buchanan, he is aware, in some instances monuments were placed slightly further or slightly less apart than 270 feet. 8. In each case when performing surveys in accordance with proper survey practice, a surveyor should make field survey measurements of the actual measured distance between monuments and those should be prorated across the distance between monuments by dividing by all nine Lots on each side of the block. The survey should show both recorded and measured distances. 9. The 1959 Official Survey shows Block 72 to be 270 feet in length. 10. To the best of my knowledge the 1959 Official Plat remains the official plat of the original City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 11. Survey measurements notwithstanding, to my knowledge, it has always been the position of the City of Aspen Engineering Office to consider all lots not intersected by Townsite Lines within the original City and Townsite of Aspen to be, 30 feet by 100 feet and calculated at 3,000 square feet in size. AFFIANT SA YETH FURTHER NOT. Dated Fl'.b. 2 =3 ,2006 - $--'-'~ O. r2dct Nick Adeh STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this 23 day February, 2006 by Nick Adeh. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Ot ~ 13' 01 ,., ("II'" lVI' ',",,,,1. 01113/2007 AFFIDAVIT OF JAY HAMMOND THE UNDERSIGNED, Jay Hammond, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows, 1. He is a Colorado professional engineer, License No. z,<PC>"t e and has been so licensed since I q e l3 . 2. He is currently employed by the engineering/survey firm of Schmueser Gordon Meyer. 3. That for the periods, approximately \ ~ e, ~ to I, ~ 8 C) , inclusive, that he was employed by the City of Aspen in the Engineering Department as City Engineer. 4. Actual survey measurements notwithstanding, during my tenure as an employee of the City of Aspen, to my knowledge, it was always the position of the City of Aspen Engineering Office and Planning/Community Development Department to consider all lots not intersected by Townsite Lines within the original City and Townsite of Aspen to be, 30 feet by 100 feet and considered 3,000 square feet in size. AFFIANT SA YETH FURTHER NOT. Dated ~\o. Z- ~ . , 2006 ~;(ffi. ~ ~~: OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this c2..3- day February, 2006 by Jay Hammond. Witness my hand and official seal. J." .C3" My commission expires: .;, . d ; LOr;,:',;jA. {I \ GODAT " , . ,\.,~;...., ~. r'."~\ ~I" 0.- ' .,' "1.~ '. . r l:1 d\ /.~, ":.0.. "3".:a~ b.: .., "\'I\c?" COl-~ , . ',-" c55',. AFFIDAVIT OF LOUIS H. BUETTNER THE UNDERSIGNED, Louis H. Buettner, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows, 1. He is a Colorado licensed surveyor, License No. 13166 and has been so licensed since 1975. 2. He is currently the principal of Louis H. Buettner Surveying. 3. That for the periods, approximately May 1, 1971 to May 1, 1983, inclusive, that he was employed by the City of Aspen in the Engineering Department. 4. That among other duties, his primary duty when in the employ of the City of Aspen, was to perform surveys. 5. That during his employment, it was his understanding that the Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared in 1959 by George E. Buchanan set Original Townsite City Blocks consisting of eighteen lots in each block (9 on each side of an alley) and that such blocks measured at 270 feet. There are instances where blocks are slightly longer or slightly shorter than 270 feet. Monuments based upon that spacing were set pursuant to the 1959 Official Map. The 1959 Official Map was intended to be based on the 1890 survey notes of Frank D. Howe who was the City Engineer for the City of Aspen in 1890. A copy of the Official Map is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 6. The Official Map was approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen by Ordinance 6, Series of 1959, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 7. The Howe field notes recognize Lots within the City of Aspen each were intended to be 30 feet by 100. 8. In connection with the placement of such monuments by G. E. Buchanan in some instances monuments were placed slightly further or slightly less apart than 270 feet. 9. In each case when performing surveys in accordance with proper survey practice, a surveyor should make field survey measurements of the actual measured distance between monuments and those should be prorated across the distance between monuments by dividing by all nine lots on each side of the block. The survey should show both recorded and measured distances. 10. The 1959 Official Survey shows Block 72 to be 270 feet in length. 11. To the best of my knowledge the 1959 Official Plat remains the official plat ofthe original City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 12. Survey measurements notwithstanding, to my knowledge, it has always been the position of the City of Aspen Engineering Office to consider all lots not intersected by Townsite Lines within the original City and Townsite of Aspen to be, 30 feet by 100 feet and calculated at 3,000 square feet in size. AFFIANT SA YETH FURTHER NOT. D"eJ~~2~ _ :-:~~ ~ ~ Louis H. Buettner STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and sworn before me this ;{lj. day February, 2006 by Louis H. Buettner. Witness my hand and official sea, My commission expires: Vgl1.&J 00; I ~1~ , . ~ .,eY . ,I" /.() q~r 1 id/ ,1'/"11 )rptl .r~ / y~ ~ 111 t;. V ORDINANCE NO. <?' vv[ ~ (Series of 1959) /oq AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A MAP ENTITLED "OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO," AS THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN: PROVIDING FOR DEDICATION OF ALL STREETS AND ALLEYS, EXCEPT SUCH STREETS AND ALLEYS HERETOFORE VACATED: AND PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF SAID MAP, FIELD NOTES, AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLATS WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDER FOR PITKIN COUNTY. WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, has heretofore authorized the prepara- tion of a map of the original townsite of the City of Aspen, East Aspen Addition and Block 98, Hallam Addition annexed to said City, based upon the. original survey notes as amended by the City Engineer, Frank D. Howe, and dated June 7, 1890, in order that adequate en- gineering information shall be available to the inhabitants of the said City and to the corporate authorities; WHEREAS, said map has been completed by the City Engineer with all City boundary lines, lots, blocks and all streets and alleys, shown thereon, together with survey monuments identified thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: SECTION 1: That the map entitled, "Official Map of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, State of Colorado" as prepared by G. E. Buchanan, as City Engineer for the City of Aspen, shall be and is hereby accepted as the official map of said City of Aspen, Pitkin County, State of Colorado. SECTION 2: That all streets and alleys as the same appear upon said map shall be and are hereby dedicated to the public ex- cept such streets and alleys as have heretofore been vacated by Ordinance or Resolution of the said City Council for the City of Aspen. SECTION 3: That upon the effective date of this Ordinance the City Engineer shall file said original map as adopted by Sec- tion 1 of this Ordinance with the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County, State of Colorado, togetherwl.th all field IDtes relating thereto and all supplemental plats and notes identifying location of survey monuments or natural. monuments shown upon said map and that thereafter said map, field notes, supplemental plats and iden- tifying information shall be available for use of the general public. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of Aspen, COlorado,~~~. i regular meeting held at said City of Aspen, on this 2n~~J;.,Y?J fl~ A. D. 1959. FINALLY passed, adopted and approved on this .ti- /t.. - day of __ ..-1 : 7"<2",':-"I).t<.,., 1959. OucJ /." . ~ ~U~~"'- MAYOR ATTE~,:: / " '. ._' i ,<~,;:,{~ -IJ J?!',<r-r'l /'-~Y . . In 'CLERK STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss.' COUNTY OF PITKIN ) I, ETHEL M. FROST, as City Clerk of the City of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify that that above and foregoing Ordinance was introduced, read in full and passed first reading at the regular meeting of the City Council held 7Zn~f-'.;l', 1959, and published in The Aspen Times, a weekly newspaper of general circulation pub- lished at the City of Aspen, Colorado, in its i~,sue of :'Yl,;-vt-!.-vr.J5, 1959, and was finally adopted and approved on 7?~'-7"L-~,.nc~,tV 'C , 1959, and was ordered published as Ordinance No. ~(Series of 195 ) of said City, as provided by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have seal of the City of Aspen, Colorado, A. D. 1959. hereunto ~et my hand and the this It, 't, day of X Ie-", ,,<-.t., , , . , " . '\ <7 ~-'~ I '. ~ -'r/:' . ' or l,L.. )9).: . /f!;;y"" J . City erk AFFIDAVIT OF LARRY FITE The undersigned, Larry Fite, being first duly sworn upon his oath, states as follows: 1. He is the Deputy Pitkin County Assessor. 2. That upon the request of Leonard M. Oates, Attorney at Law, he was requested to research the records of the Pitkin County Assessor's Office relating to Lots N, 0, P & Q, Block 72, City and Townsite of Aspen, assessed to the William G. Brumder Florida Land Trust. 3. That the Assessor's records concerning the subject property in the Assesor's Office date back only until 1985. 4. That attached hereto as Exhibits A & B are residential property appraisal records from the Pitkin County Assessor's Office reflecting the subject property to be 12,000 square feet in size. 5. He believes that prior records which have since been destroyed dating back prior to 1985 would reflect the size of the subject property to be 12,000 square feet. 6. That as of December 12, 1998 the records of the Pitkin County Assessor's Office were modified to reflect the filing of the subdivision of the subject property into Lots A & B of the Brumder Historic Lot Split. At that time, the land size of property which was subdivided into two parcels was reflected on the Pitkin County Assessor's Office as 12,000 square feet as shown on Exhibit C hereto. AFFIANT SA YETH FURTHER NOT. ZZ, 2006 STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) Subscribed and swom before me this .:;;s;;l. day February, 2006 by Larry Fite. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: ~ ~ 1- ;J,ttf6 ,~ .,.............. ..O,,D.,RY p/-" .,l-~ ...-il....... '~s. "'". .'" .... ""'<l<';~;"" * .. 'r' -~ E cnf J~~ ~~: .. ..-\ -II' ~. ...:;:......,,'" ,..<" <,j -.. 0; ..~~","~; .....:~ ~),:~~",,- I Q ~ 0 U III ~ .... <( en ~- ~~~ C2~ << . d "- =-ll.~ ;: . ~.!! 0<( Z .... ,,~u T "'" "- e ~ /~~J e IIIC ..... m::)!: ~ III - < ~ a. <( 9.h: u o e. '" < ~ ~ :;i e ~ ... <; - <- % "",,- ,!Z l>l 0<- i< !,!.N III < Q c in III ~ S'~ 0<'" d 8 ~~~ z ~ - w '" U ~ -~ % 0 ::> ~g 2 0 0 ~~ 0< w % :I: " M ill '" Z '" w :; ~ '" '" c 015 :>. 0<0< u" -~ ;;: :l: \ ~ ~ ... . ~ il \ I w ,~ ~ iil ~ ~ z :il '" 1- .... ~ !!!. '" .'" l! w z j~O < ~ l-1;: ~ ;0 ~ 3i~ ~ 1; v . ~ u He:. < a e ~ u, co lSl ~ ... I NISIC"-' 1.11 ~ to ('-. lSlr-JvC', I 1SI..... ~ t-. Ii'J I co ) ., 0,() 'I ..... 6 j M <Sl j " <Sl I <Sl <Sl I ~ , <Sl j " ('oJ 1SI ('-. M......lSI ('. ,! "'...... ..t-. C'.~ ...... ,...; ('. (/) 0 f\l "- U to- <l - I ..... 0 ::.cz. ..... (/) i" U uJ OJ rr, on. 5 - rr: '" -'''' ~ ..... r:n <l ~ V'1 Z 2 -"- '" . .-.~ "" ," .. Ct!l U) '" J I Z '" ..., 'LJ c lil ......,-. c :;) ~ ..... ~ ~ J _<t wu <l~ " I ... U) '" {/) ~ I"\J .-.>-1 ...2 to- -' "" 3:. Cl. '" 0>-1 0 I '" ..... . ...... to- "'uJ '" "-, - '" '" c, r- :::::~..1J ~ L ..'2 r~ '.JJwu.. =' ~ <: 01- <l ,~ lJ":; ~ " <I'. )- ... :>::> J'I -' ..... ..... <3' 0:. n. '" .-. 0 ... ..... ':0 I- f\J Y.C -' u II:) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > ,,~~~fil ~ q" ill ~ s """~ <::, ;.., 8 (;" ~l :\.1, t.:: ~ t .. -.. , <:I " ~~ In \~ , ~ " " % U H '. 11 ~ ,.f t :c ~. .c; :u <.:... It t~ 8 ~ ~ i~ 5~ ;~;:. :(~J;, ~ 1M ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ "' :(:< ;/ () ....> > \ ~~ ~ ~ ~ '" < 'l-- ~ 8 ':j- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 0 ;/ ~;/ > c . > !;/; C \\ at: rX Z CZ N ~ "l ~ ';( i . '.1 z i~ ~~ -~ ~8 <~ ~~ !z u.... ~i3 ~u . "' ~ ~ , i'! ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ I ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ i 31 ~r ~ g J: If; Sl ! ~. "' =3;; ~ ~ a I I I ! ! '> ~~ III a ~ ... \) (, '" .' a ~ ~ ~ f\J 0 ~. . ." ",: ,... \':-..' It '(' I", " II ., $ Il< ~ ~ '" ;;~ I ,t~ '<1,-. r- ". .' ~ c ,~; "0', ~ c\ ~ ,;>/ !!l g '" ''::: '.~ , , I ~ .2 ~ , '-' ':;~ ~ c-.,; :t');' ,,'11,. ~.; " "" '" . u, (l) - - IS! - .... ~ .J NSt" ~,,'\: UJ ...-4 CO ('-- ,_.: ~ N q- ('. 1 ~ ' IS!.... . ". u, ~ (l) ) ~ 0,() ., .... " .' I ( 'I M , " , IS! " IS! IS! 1SI . IS! "NIS! ". M...... ". ".... . ". ('"oJ""'" ~ 0 lo= 0 U YO lo= .. < - II> '" _wo .~~ ."z << . "" .0. Xll..:" ",,0:;= ;~] cOJ<ZO- ,,~u <~- .. ~ ~ /~ ~ -~ "'- !Cat _Gl~ w YO - < ~ A.. <: e.~ G o e. VI < ::: lo= :;i "'- ~ "" <; - <;::: x ru.. ""z M <(- " ~N YO < 0 Q Vi YO lo= 6'0- d 8 :!l~~ z w - w '" U ~ -~ x 0 is ~g ~ 0 >~ <( w -~ x :J: " U " :!l '" z w " ~ ~ '" crO :>. j~ -z ::; <1 ~ \ ~ ~ ;;i! ~ <> il >- ~ \ "i w J z il e. ~ i; :;= ~ z .,0 ~ '" 1- 0- ::: e '" '", . w ~!O 8 z < :;= ,. >- d ~ 0 0- ;0 . w a;i ~ 2 ~c_ G L f;~~ ~ 5 = 2:. . <I) 0 N u.. U .... << .... I t--O ::.:::2. .... <I) '\I ww ::; "" on. ~ .... a::\/'l ...J<I) " r- co<< ,. . \/'l Z Z ou.. ~ '" . ........ "'"'" C<!l (1)<1) ~ I ZZ o ILl g ..cz CC) 2"- - << UW <<..... " I - V) <I) '" ~ ""...J ......... "Z ~ .......J ~ :?;: a.-.: -" 0..... 0 I 11: r- 0 or- .... <l)UJ 0 "" 0 o<w Co ~O::'..LJH-.s::. 0:Z NUJl..1.lu...=' "' << ~ Or- <[ '~iJ"'.,.::j'- "So VO>- ....t~::lLn..J ....r- O'o::o..:.OH 0- ....COI-(\J~ ...JU ~ ; t . ~ ! ~ , :j; :,;' '" .. w. ~- ~~ C' '" '" ~A. ........ '1." ,..~!l ;c:,.-IlIlE; ',- <CO( ~ . ~ )1~ .. ~~c I~ f~ {i.!z ~ Jf{ u~ :11:: ~8 \., 'l" 8;u :ii': . ''$,: iJ,': . / ~ ~~. . -{ li! - ! F. z i III II> . ; " ;) ,--.~ l' ... "t:. zr.. ',/ f f ~i II ~ ..~ ~ ~ . III H~ ~"-r .. ~ a Z ::J ~ul!!~~.~ :; ii ~ i1l a :J. ~ ~ .. .. : ill ~~ ~ tl-.U _ I U !~ < ~ n ~ ~~~I~~~~~~~~~ ,. '> ..,., : I I I , i i ~ ~ . ~ i < i ~ 0 0 . , v , j ~ . ; i i . , I . ~ 0 l l ~ ~ v ~ " , , , 0 - 8 '0 It) 0 N 'E f ;;; 0> "'It) :J 0> ~g8 '" I ~ ,6 0> a;J:?2 0> -00. ;a ~::;-- ~ a:~gg ... ;,;~ e..~ 3- :=1- .. o!l .. .. ~HH~ ~ g a:: .. (j III W o o ,:.: g .. Z ~ -' N ... '" -' '" Z W 0. III <( U. o W .... 1ii z ~ o :l'" ~~ ~~ "'- :>:> Ill'" w w Ii; :> ~ Cl ~ ::; -' !i a: w c :Ii :> a: al - ;0 ;;; Z W 0. III <( Ii; a: w '" w w -' '" W ... N o () Ii; :> ~ z 1ii z o () III ~ ~ ii: ~ o N ....~ :E~ c cncn~ " u u o ;i! i= z w o iii w iii: ~n~~~ "'6N18-- '" ... - - !l 1: 0. .l! .z ~ .. " ~~~~~1Il N18~:.21!! J M '!to u"'" .....z :ii ~~ c w ~s " c 'E .. <> .!!> ;~ .;:& ca! >::1 .s.S! QCI) 1:1 '0 CI_ :!! i'5:~ m ..JID)(~ l a: - ..J ~ ;;0 NZ &lo ~~ w::l ~1Ii: :>1- <(1Il ;:Z =10 :liU z z w w :Ii 0. W ~ f) . a: 0_ 0. ail!: :Ii D.. (j) QOo~ .... Ii; w w.... l!! ... -' wO a:-, <( - '" ~~~ '" w ~'Sl:5 0 ...~"'~ 'lOw:>: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~<~~~~~ ~~ ~~@~ ~~m ~8~~~~~t~~~ ~~i:li@ 5....0l!!w~~! il!:1ii~~~~w8~, Qi:lia:~IIl~t808~~ffi~x~;;;;~1ii~~8~- ~a:<(o<(o> ;:~"'<(IIlii:ZONSlN"'''' ~<~~~Z~ ~D..~~<O~ONON~~~ .....MNMM.....NM_MNMW....._..............._....._N~~~~ ..J.,J ~ Q C ::1M ~ ~ w-' ~~.... 8~ o~ .... - al'rII ~,~, ~ ~ :,;:, ~ o~ III II! J:,w ~,al, ~ ~8 ClClC~aOa: I- w OClC<>~ ~ cnz~~~~~~~~~~ ~~8~~ w'U ~~~~~~~~1!!~~88~~~.~~~~~;~,~ cm~~x'cu~_~~~~::)zlD::)CWQ~cn~o~ .. ~ z !l<:lillil - 0><0'" ~ M,.... .!888 ~d~'d N '" 0> '" ....:...: ~ _N..... e :> ll~g~ .1".......- !!l .000 ::lIC"')(I')C") 'i5' " "'"f'-.,.......... "lllllllll ~--- 'i Q.....-- " :a 8 od It)_ ...'" .... -ill NN --N ,..:........... U-ID.....J flo.Wg ON.o.!!; ~"'lt;Q <LLa. -fZ... " c!l_N'" It)'" N<O 0> . -; www 000 ogo () () m1m1ml l!iS.gooo ~t},<>\!(\!(\!( fl ~ z H ~~ '" - i~ l:t - ll- e :> ",0 'i5' " NO 'i5' " -It) ~~ " J~ "N -g- .5 ,,- .c8 i!c; ~ III ll<( ag ~ " c!l- " -', <>0 .aZ ril~ '" ... .g~ u;:: AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN M. HOWORTH The undersigned, John M. Howorth, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: 1. He is a Colorado licensed surveyor, License No. 7S~"7 2. He is the President and principal owner of Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. 3. He has been surveying real property in the Aspen area since approximately 2..4 ..,~ 4. In connection with the survey oflots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen, as a part oflocal surveying protocol that he sets forth on surveys the record and measured dimensions of such lots. 5. The record dimensions of all regularly sized lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen is 3,000 square feet per the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared by G.E. Buchanan. 6. Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. prepared the plat for the Brumder Historic Lot Split in the 1990s. 7. He was not aware at the time the Historic Lot Split Plat was prepared that for land use purposes the City of Aspen has traditionally treated all such lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen as being their record dimensions, regardless of minor discrepancies in the measured dimensions. 8. He did not advise Gretchen Greenwood that all such lots would be treated by the City of Aspen as containing 3,000 square feet when Aspen Survey Engineers arranged for survey work for the Brumder Historic Lot Split Plat prepared between 1996 and 1998; and, had he known such was the case he would have so advised her. AFFIANT SA YETH FURTHER NOT. Dated: February 1'7 , 2006 c'"4 My Commission ExpireI Witness my hand tmVetillUltl;!l007 My commission expires: FROM ALPINE SURVEYS INC PHONE NO. 9709252688 FEB. 17 2006 04:32PM P2 AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES F. RESER The undersigned, Janles F. Reser, being first duly sworn upon his oath states as follows: l. 2. 3. He is a Colorado licensed surveyor, License No. '7 ( g "f- He is the President and principal owner of Alpine Surveys, Inc. He has been surveying real property in the Aspen area sltlce approximately I 9 u .8 . In connection with the survey oflots within the original City and Townsite of ASpen, as a part oflocal surveying protocol that he sets forth on surveys the record and measured dimensions of such lots. That the record dimensions of most regularly sized lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen is generally 3,000 square feet per the 1959 Official Map of the City of Aspen prepared by G.E. Buchanan based on Blocks 270 feet in length. Some Blocks shown 011 the 1959 Official Plat to be slightly more than 270 feet and some Slightly less. Such minor variances notwithstanding, he is aware that for Engineering DeparlJnent land use purposes the City of Aspen has traditionally treated all such lots within the original City and Townsite of Aspen as being 3,000 square feet, regardless of minor discrepancies in the measured dimensions. 4. 5. 6. AFFIANT SAYETH FURTHER NOT. Dated: Febl1UlIY CL 2006 J"""f'#- / STATE OF COLORADO ) )S5. COUNTY OF PlT:KIN ) Subscribed and swom before me this R ~y of Febmary, 2006 by James F. Reser. . Witnessmyhand~ My commission ex~ber 13, 2007 ~ MEMORANDUM IY.. ",$. -'.'/ <0 ~ TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~\;VJ FROM: James Lindt, Senior Plarmer .JL- RE: Reconsideration of Ordinance No.2, Series of 2006, 202 North Monarch Street Subdivision DATE: April 10, 2006 BACKGROUND: City Council approved the subdivision of the property located at 202 N. Monarch Street into two (2) parcels of land pursuant to Ordinance No.2, Series of 2006 (attached as Exhibit "A"), on March 13th after several public hearings were held. Included in this approval were provisions for vehicular access to the two (2) parcels of land that were created as a result of the subdivision. Vehicular access to Lot 1 of the subdivision was approved by means of opening and improving the unopened, but platted alleyway from Monarch Street. Vehicular access to Lot 2 of the subdivision was granted by means of opening and improving the platted, but unopened alleyway from Mill Street to access the rear of Lot 2. During the March 27th City Council meeting, Councilman DeVilbiss made a motion to reconsider Ordinance No.2, Series of 2006, citing that he had misunderstood the motion that Councilwoman Richards had made earlier in the March 13th meeting (before the ordinance was adopted) that would have granted access to Lot I of the subdivision from Bleeker Street rather than opening the alley from Monarch Street as was finally approved. City Council voted by a three to two (3-2) vote to reconsider the ordinance. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff has attached the staff memorandum and fmdings from the March 13th meeting as Exhibit" A" and the adopted ordinance as Exhibit "B". If Council would like to change the amended ordinance to provide access from to Lot 1 of the subdivision from East Bleeker Street as was shown on the alternative access plan presented at the March 13th meeting, Council could strike Section 7 in the approved ordinance and replace it with the following text: Section 7: Vehicular Access and Allevwav Imvrovements Vehicular access to Lot 1 shall be provided by a new curb cut on East Bleeker Street meeting the City Engineer's standards. The single curb cut on East Bleeker Street shall be used to serve all existing and future structures on Lot 1 of the Subdivision. Vehicular access to Lot 2 shall be provided by opening and improving approximately the easternmost 145 feet of the Block 78 alleyway. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any new development on Lot 1 of the subdivision. the Applicant shall have provided the new curb cut on East Bleeker Street to provide vehicular access to Lot 1. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any new development on Lot 2 of the subdivision. the Applicant shall have opened and paved to the City Engineer's standards, a 145-foot long portion of the alley in Block 78 of the City and Townsite of Aspen, to provide vehicular access to Lot 2 of the subdivision from the alleyway to be accessed from North Mill Street. Prior to recording a subdivision plat and agreement, the Applicant shall submit a plan for review and approval by the City of Aspen's Public Works Director to relocate the existing above-grade utilities in the alleyway. Also, prior to improving the alleyway, the Applicant shall submit a detailed design plan to the Community Development Department for the alleyway improvements that addresses soil stability, erosion control, and drainage as well as a detailed site improvement survey. In designing the alleyway improvements, the Applicant shall consult with the City Engineer and Parks Department to determine an acceptable grade. The recommended motion that was made and approved on March 13th is located on the fifth page of the Staff Memo that is attached as Exhibit "A". City Council should amend the recommended motion accordingly if Council wants to change the vehicle access points that were previously adopted in Ordinance No.2, Series of2006. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -March 13,2006 Staff Memo Exhibit B -Ordinance No.2, Series of2006 Exhibit C -Previous Council Meeting Minutes 2 MEMORANDUM G-Jv k t'/-- f)4 ~ Vl\a TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~\iV'} FROM: James Lindt, Senior Plarmer ~ RE: Second Reading of Ordinance No.2, Series of 2006,202 North Monarch Street Subdivision - Continued Public Hearinl! DATE: March 13,2006 ApPLICANT /OWNER: Blu Vic, LLC. REPRESENTATIVE: Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. LOCATION: Lots K, L, M, N, and 0 of Block 78, City and Townsite of Aspen; 202 N. Monarch Street. CURRENT ZONING: Lots K-M are zoned R-6 (Medium- Density Residential). Photo Above: Property as seen from E. Bleeker Street. Lots N and 0 are zoned Mixed Use (MU). PROPOSED LAND USE REQUEST: Subdivision to split the existing parcel into two parcels of land. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests subdivision approval to subdivide the existing parcel of land into a 9,000 square foot residential parcel and a 6,000 square foot mixed use parcel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the attached ordinance, approvmg the proposed Photo Above: Property as seen from N. subdivision request with the conditions of Monarch Street. approval included therein. REVIEW PROCEDURE A development application for subdivision shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Plarming and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.040, Subdivision. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant, Blu Vic, LLC, requests subdivision approval to subdivide the existing 15,000 square foot parcel located at 202 N. Monarch Street into two (2) parcels; a residential parcel (Lot I of the proposed subdivision) of 9,000 square feet to contain the existing historically designated single-family residence and a 6,000 square foot parcel (Lot 2 of the proposed subdivision) for future development under the Mixed Use Zone District's requirements. In conjunction with the proposed subdivision, the Applicant originally proposed to open a portion of the currently unopened but platted alley and improve it to the City's standards for public alleys to provide vehicular access to the proposed 6,000 square foot parcel for development wlder the Mixed Use Zone District's requirements. The existing 15,000 square foot parcel contains a single-family residence that is designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historically Designated Sites and Structures. The Historic Preservation Commission has approved the existing shed for demolition (resolution was attached as Exhibit "E" in the first reading packet). The parcel cUlTently has a split zoning with the westernmost 9,000 square feet of land being zoned R-6 and the easternmost 6,000 square feet being zoned in the Mixed Use Zone District. The proposed subdivision places the new parcel boundary line where separation in zoning currently exists on the fathering parcel. PREVIOUS HEARING: At the last Council meeting, City Council heard additional discussion about the access and tile development possibilities for the parcels in the proposed subdivision. City Council also considered additional public comments and had a lengthy discussion about the issues associated with this proposal. At the conclusion of tile meeting, the Applicant requested and was granted a continuance to furtller address some of City Council's concerns. 2 UNCERTAINTY ABOUT NATURE OF DEVELOPMENT: Several City Council members expressed concerns once again about the uncertainty of what is to be developed in the proposed subdivision. As was discussed in the staff memorandum for the previous hearing, Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision, sets forth what needs to be included in an application for subdivision within the City of Aspen. The required contents in a subdivision application include the identification of proposed lot boundaries, public improvements, and vehicular access. However, the required application contents for subdivision do not require the Applicant to provide a specific development plan for each of the lots within the proposed subdivision. As was also discussed at the last hearing, the prior City Council discussed whether they wanted to have the subdivision section of the land use code amended to require architectural drawings and specific development programs and plans when reviewing a subdivision proposal and Council decided not to amend the code in this manner. Staff would suggest that if City Council does want to start seeing greater detail in future subdivision applications such as development programs and site design, Council should direct Staff to bring forward code amendment to the subdivision section to require site specific development information. The Applicant did offer to deed restrict Lot 2 of the proposed subdivision against further division through either a subdivision process, lot split, or historic landmark lot split. Staff has included a condition of approval in the proposed ordinance reinforcing this offer by the Applicant. LOT 1 PRESERVATION: Nearing the conclusion of the last hearing, several City Council members expressed interest in whether the Applicant could preserve the remainder of the land on the proposed Lot 1 that is not currently utilized for the existing historic residence. City Council wanted the Applicant to look into the possibility of establishing transferable development rights (TDR) to sell off from the property to preserve the existing single-family residence as the only residence on Lot I of the proposed subdivision. Alternatively, City Council also wanted the Applicant to explore whether the neighbors of the property would entertain providing funding to buy-off the excess allowable FAR from Lot I to maintain the open area between the existing residence and neighboring parcel to the north as open YaTd space. The Applicant has responded by asking the neighbors if they would like to contribute funds tOWaTds buying down the excess allowable FAR on the Lot 1. The Applicant's letter (attached as Exhibit "C") expresses that he approached the neighboring property owners and the neighbors indicated that they were not willing to buy-down the excess allowable FAR from Lot I to maintain the area on the parcel that is not covered by the existing historic house as open YaTd space. Additionally, the Applicant indicated that he explored the possibility of establishing TDRs to extinguish the excess allowable FAR, but that the anticipated value of selling off the TDRs does not compare to the proceeds he would get from the construction of an additional single-family residence. Staff believes that the concern over developing the large yard area on Lot 1 is somewhat contrary to the incentive program that has been set up for historic properties. The entire basis for the historic landmark lot split code provisions are to allow for historically designated properties to split in order to allow for the development of new residential units that are o " compatible in size and scale to that of a historic resource, rather than to push additions onto the historic resource. VEHICULAR ACCESS OPTIONS: There was considerable discussion about the vehicular access options at the last meeting. It appeared that the majority of City Council felt that it was appropriate to take access to Lot 2 by opening the alleyway from NOlih Mill Street as the altemative access proposal represented. It also seemed apparent that the majority of City COlillcil was not in favor of having a new curb cut on East Bleeker Street. That said, there did not appear to be a majority of Council members that favored opening the alleyway from North Monarch Street to access Lot 1 tmless an effort to preserve the large yard area around the historic house failed. Since the Applicant has not been able to come up with a possible method of limiting the development on Lot I to a single-family residence as was described above, Staff has proposed a condition of approval in the ordinance providing that the Applicant would have the ability to open the alleyway from North Mill Street to access Lot 2 of the proposed subdivision and the ability to open the alleyway from North Monarch Street to access Lot 1 of the proposed subdivision, since this is the access option that City Council was closest to having a majority opinion on at the last meeting. Staff does not support the Applicant's suggestion that City Council consider tile subdivision and the access to the subdivision under separate ordinances. Staff feels that in order for City Council to approve the subdivision, access must be established in conjunction '.\-rith the subdivision. Therefore, Staff has not included a separate ordinance for Council's consideration related to the access. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDA nON: The Plarming and Zoning Commission recommended that City Council approve the proposed subdivision with vehicular access to the parcels being provided from East Bleeker Street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As was discussed at the last meeting, Staff believes that the subdivision review standards are met by the proposal and recommends that City Council approve the proposed ordinance to split the property at 202 N. Monarch Street into a parcel of 9,000 square feet and a parcel of 6,000 square feet. Staff does not believe that the land use code requires the Applicant to provide a site specific development plan to simply subdivide the property and that the concern over the potential of splitting Lot I in the future is irrelevant because it is not being requested by the Applicant at this time. Staff further feels that the access option of opening the alley from North Monarch Street to access Lot 1 and opening the alley from North Mill Street to access Lot 2 is appropriate. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: 4 RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE MADE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.2, Series of 2006, approving with conditions, the 202 N. Monarch Subdivision to divide the property described as Lots K-O, Block 78, of the City and Townsite of Aspen into a 9,000 square foot parcel and a 6,000 square foot parcel. " ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A --Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B - Revised Ordinance Exhibit C -Letter from Applicant about Lot I 5 Subdivision REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. 1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is consistent with many aspects of the Aspen Area Community Plan. The properties to be subdivided are located close to the core area of town, which should encourage the residents to use alternative means of transportation such as walking and riding their bicycles as is encouraged by the AACP. Staff also finds that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan CAACP) in that this proposal would create a vacant parcel for infill development within the original Aspen townsite from a fathering parcel that was significantly underutilized. In conjunction with the proposed subdivision, the Applicant has also proposed to provide sidewalk adjacent to the Monarch and Bleeker Street right-of-ways, thereby filling in a missing sidewalk lin1e on both streetscapes as is consistent witll the expressed transportation goal of adding sidewalk connections within the City. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Staff Finding The Applicants have not proposed a specific plan for Lot 2 of the Subdivision, but have represented tllat development on the site will be constructed in compliance with the regulations established in the underlying Mixed Use Zone District. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding Staff does not feel that the proposed subdivision will adversely affect the future development of surrounding propeliies. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding The Applicant at this time is not proposing any additional development on the proposed Lot I than what exists at this time and the existing single-family residence is within the allowed dimensional requirements of the R-6 Zone District in which it is located. Additionally, the Applicant has not proposed a site-specific plan on the proposed Lot 2, but has made a representation in the application that all new development on Lot 2 will meet tile Mixed Use Zone DislTict's dimensional and use requirements. The Applicant has also represented that all development on Lot 2 will need to obtain necessary development allotments prior to being developed. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 6 B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of jlooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudjlow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding Staff believes that the properties are suitable for subdivision. Only a small corner of the proposed Lot 2 contains steep slope and there are no known geologic hazards that may harm the health of any of the inhabitants of the proposed development. In addition, staff believes that there will not be a duplication or premature extension of public facilities because the property to be subdivided is already served by adequate public facilities. Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Improvements. The improvements setforth at Chapter 26.580 shall be providedfor the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: 1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding The Applicant has consented in the application to meet the applicable required improvements pursuant to Section 26.580. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System Staff Finding The Applicant has not proposed any new construction within the subdivision at this time. This application is simply to subdivide the existing parcel into two (2) parcels of land. Any future development on Lot 2 of the proposed subdivision will require the Applicant to apply for and obtain all nccessary development allotments prior to commencing construction. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7 E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards setforth at Chapter 26.630. Staff finding The proposed subdivision is required to meet the School Land Dedication Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630. The Applicant has proposed to pay cash-in-lieu of providing land. In this instance, the amount of the required cash-in-lieu payment carmot be determined at this time because there is not a specific plan proposed on Lot 2 of the subdivision. Therefore, the dedication aJll0Wlt carmot be determined because it is calculated based on the number of bedrooms being proposed in the subdivision, which is still an uncertainty. The Applicant has consented to paying the applicable school land dedication fee at the time of building permit issuance for development within the subdivision. Thus, staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, 92) StaffPinding The Applicant has not proposed a specific development plan for Lot 2 of the proposed subdivision at this time. Staff has proposed a condition of approval that requires all necessary grmvth management allotments to be applied for and obtained prior to developing Lot 2. Staff finds this criterion to be met if all applicable development allotments aJ-e obtained prior to developing Lot 2 of the proposed subdivision. 8 ~ItJklf~ ORDINANCE NO.2 (SERIES OF 2006) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, THE 202 N. MONARCH STREET SUBDIVISION, DIVIDING THE PROPERTY AT 202 NORTH MONARCH STREET INTO TWO PARCELS OF LAND, CREATING LOTS 1 AND 2, OF THE 202 NORTH MONARCH STREET SUBDIVISION CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-073-17-005 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Blu Vic, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson and Associates, Inc, requesting to subdivide the property located at 202 N. Monarch Street (Lots K-O, Block 78, City and Townsite of Aspen), to create Lots 1 and 2 of the 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, the fathering parcel has a split zoning with the westernmost 9,000 square feet (Lots K-M) being zoned R-6 (Medium Density Residential) and the easternmost 6,000 square feet (Lots N-O) being zoned Mixed Use (MU); and, WHEREAS, the proposed Lot 1 is to contain 9,000 square feet and maintain the R-6 (Medium Density Residential) zoning designation that the land currently contains; and, WHEREAS, the proposed Lot 2 is to contain 6,000 square feet and maintain the Mixed Use (MU) zoning designation that the land currently contains; 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, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Plarming and Zoning Commission also recommended that City Council approve with conditions, the 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision without allowing the opening and improvement of the alleyway pursuant to Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 37, Series of2005; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission expressed that they supported keeping the alleyway closed and providing for vehicular access from E. Bleeker Street to the new parcels to be created; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code a~ identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noted public hearing on February 13, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposed 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision and continued the public hearing to February 27,2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on February 27,2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposed 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision and continued the public hearing to March 13,2006; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on March 13, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposed 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision and approved Ordinance No.2, Series of 2006,by a three to two (3-2) vote, approving with conditions, the 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision, the opening of the westernmost 90 feet of Block 78 Alley to access Lot 1 and opening of the easternmost 145 feet of the Block 78 Alley to access Lot 2 of the subdivision; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, City Council hereby approves the 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision, subdividing the parcel located at 202 N. Monarch Street into 9,000 square foot parcel (Lot 1 of the subdivision) and a 6,000 square foot parcel (Lot 2 of the subdivision), with the conditions contained herein. Section 2: Plat and Al!reement The Applicant shall record a subdivision plat and agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision, within 180 days of approval. Section 3: Dimensional Requirements Development on Lot 1 of the Subdivision shall conform to the dimensional requirements of the R-6 (Medium Density Residential) Zone District. Development on Lot 2 of the Subdivision shall conform to the dimensional requirements of the Mixed Use (MU) Zone District. Section 4: Growth Manal!ement Allotments Since the Applicant is not proposing any development on Lot I of the subdivision at this time and there is not a specific development plan proposed on Lot 2 of the subdivision, any future development within the subdivision shall require receipt of applicable growth management allocations prior to submitting for a building permit. Section 5: Historic Preservation Review on Both Lots Any development on either Lot 1 or Lot 2 of the subdivision shall be subject to review and approval pursuant to Chapter 26.415, Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Section 6: Sidewalk, Curb. and Gutter Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new development within the subdivision, the Applicant shall have installed an attached sidewalk meeting the City Engineer's design requirements along the entire lot frontage abutting East Bleeker Street. The Applicant shall also enter into a sidewalk agreement to install a future sidewalk adjacent to North Monarch Street along the entire lot frontage if it is deemed appropriate by the City of Aspen to have a sidewalk in this location at some time in the future. The Applicant shall consult with the Parks Department in designing and installing the sidewalk along East Bleeker Street in order to preserve the significant lilacs that exist along East Bleeker Street. Additionally, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any new development within the subdivision, the Applicant shall upgrade the curb and gutter along the entire lot frontage abutting both East Bleeker Street and North Monarch Street to meet the City Engineer's design requirements. Section 7: Vehicular Access and Allevwav Improvements Vehicular access to Lot 1 shall be provided by opening and improving approximately the westernmost 90 feet of the Block 78 alleyway. Vehicular access to Lot 2 shall be provided by opening and improving approximately the easternmost 145 feet of the Block 78 alleyway. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any new development on Lot 1 of the subdivision, the Applicant shall have opened and improved with gravel to the City Engineer's standards, a 90-foot long portion of the alley in Block 78 of the City and Townsite of Aspen, to provide vehicular access to all development on Lot 1 of the subdivision from the alleyway to be accessed from North Monarch Street. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on any new development on Lot 2 of the subdivision, the Applicant shall have opened and paved to the City Engineer's standards, a 145-foot long portion of the alley in Block 78 of the City and Townsite of Aspen, to provide vehicular access to Lot 2 of the subdivision from the alleyway to be accessed from North Mill Street. Prior to recording a subdivision plat and agreement, the Applicant shall submit a plan for review and approval by the City of Aspen's Public Works Director to relocate the existing above-grade utilities in the alleyway. Also, prior to improving the alleyway, the Applicant shall submit a detailed design plan to the Community Development Department for the alleyway improvements that addresses soil stability, erosion control, and drainage as well as a detailed site improvement survey. In designing the alleyway improvements, the Applicant shall consult with the City Engineer and Parks Department to determine an acceptable grade. Section 8: School Lands Dedication Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, the Applicant shall pay a fee-in-1ieu of land dedication in conjunction with any residential development in the subdivision. Prior to building permit issuance on any residential development within 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 in effect at the time of building permit submission as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.630.030, School Lands Dedication: Dedication Schedule. Section 9: Park Development Impact Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fee, the Applicant shall pay a park development impact fee at the time of building permit issuance for any construction within the subdivision that adds new residential/lodge bedrooms and/or commercial/office square footage. The City Zoning Officer shall calculate the amount due using the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submission as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.610.030, Park Development Impact Fee: Fee Schedule. Section 10: Sewer Line Extension The Applicant shall be required to provide a main sewer line extension to serve Lot 2 of the subdivision, subject to the review and approval of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, prior to the development of Lot 2. The Applicant shall submit a detailed service plan for review and approval by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District prior to building permit submittal on Lot 2. Section 11: Fire Sprinklers Development on Lot 2 shall contain fire sprinklers and a fire alarm system meeting the requirements of the Fire Marshall. Section 12: Landscapinl! The Applicant shall submit a tree protection review plan and a tree permit for any new development within the subdivision. The Applicant shall also submit a 1andscape- planting plan for improvement of the City right-of-way for the entire lot frontage abutting both East Bleeker Street and North Monarch Street that will be reviewed by the Parks Department in conjunction with submitting a building permit application for new development in the subdivision. Section 13: Lot 2 Deed Restriction Al!ainst Future Lot Split The Applicant offered to deed restrict Lot 2 of the Subdivision against further subdivision (except for condominiumization) through the subdivision, traditional lot split, or historic landmark lot split processes. This deed restriction shall recorded at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to or in conjunction with recording the subdivision plat. Section 14: Vested Rie:hts The development approvals granted herein shall be vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lots 1 and 2, of the 202 N. Monarch Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen, by Ordinance No.2, Series of2006, of the Aspen City Council. Section 15: 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 construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 16: 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 17: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 13th day of February, 2006, 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 9th day of January, 2006. Attest: FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 13th day of March, 20 . Attest: Approved as to form: ~u~ ~ . o~et~,CrtyAttomey Regular Meeting Aspen City Council frh h'h,\f- rJ March 13, 2006 , this site. Councilman Johnson said his concerns were directed at architectural representations in the plan. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2006 - 202 N. Monarch, Blue Vie Subdivision James Lindt, community development department, reminded Council this is a subdivision request on property with two different zone categories. At the last public hearing, Council requested the applicant study the possibility ofTDRs for lot 1 and approaching the neighbors to buy down the excess development rights on lot 1. Stan Clauson, representing the applicant, told Council the applicants explored TDRs as well as an open space purchase involving the neighbors. The results are summarized in a letter to Council dated March 3. Clauson said nothing works from a financial feasibility standpoint to either acknowledge the value of the property or to cover the cost of rehabilitating the existing house. Clauson said Council requested the alley and driveway locations be staked. The edge ofthe alley was staked, both at 16' and 20'. 20' is the width of the right-of-way. The concept is to open the alley from Monarch to where the slope falls away and have it be 16' wide. The proposed driveway off Bleeker street was also staked. The existing curb cut would be closed and a new 12' curb cut would be installed at the east end oflot 1 on to Bleeker street. Clauson noted having the curb cut on Bleeker moved to the west is at a flatter spot. Clauson reminded Council the original application requested an alley off Monarch be opened to provide access to lots 1 and 2 and the curb cut on Bleeker would be closed and a sidewalk installed. After P&Z m~etings, the applicants developed a split access between residential and mixed use. The residential access would be off Monarch and the mixed-use access would be off Mill street. The applicants met with HPc in a work session, which supported that concept. Clauson noted the applicants presented another plan with no access off Monarch and a paved access to the residential off Bleeker street and the mixed-use access from Mill street. The existing house would have to be moved forward to accommodate a driveway off Bleeker street. Clauson said opening the alley off Monarch street would allow for access to neighboring parcels without having a curb cut for a driveway. Clauson said any of the access alternatives is acceptable to the applicant. Clauson said this subdivision application meets the appropriateness of subdivision regarding the review standards. Clauson said the review standards are direct and straightforward and state the proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. This subdivision does not contravene that plan. The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the existing land uses. The subdivision proposed a mixed-use lot adjacent to existing mixed uses and a residential lot adjacent to residential uses. The plan is consistent with the character of existing land uses. Clauson said regarding future development of surrounding areas, there is no adverse affect; there is nothing that will prohibit additional residential development or rehabilitation of 5 '! Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 ~ residential properties; nothing that will prevent rehabilitation of adjacent mixed-use properties. The proposed subdivision is in compliance with all applicable provisions of the subdivision title of the code. Tim Semrau, applicant, stated regarding using TDRs, there have been no TDRs sold in the city. There are some under contract and the current value is about $75,000/TDR. There is a possibility of 7 TDRs on this property. Semrau said all neighbors except Hodgson declined to participant in purchasing this to preserve it as open space. Semrau noted there are 4 access points to the property, upper and lower alleys, Monarch and Bleeker. Semrau said the Mill street alley is the best option to serve the commercial property and has many benefits. This access would open up the circulation for the KSNO building and puts cars underground, out of sight. This will lead to one alley in the future. Semrau agreed the Monarch street is a wonderful corridor. The Bleeker access diminishes the historic asset, with which HPc agreed, and it makes on site parking a little more difficult but it is an acceptable alternative. Semrau said if Council decides to close the Monarch alley, he would like some assurances made that it will remain closed. David Eisenstein, representing Tim Semrau, noted any encroachments or agreements with the neighbor to the north should be cleared up. Eisenstein said Tom Smith stated the subdivision should be denied because architectural drawings have not been submitted. Eisenstein stated there is no requirement for plans to be submitted for subdivision approval. Staff certified this application complete. Eisenstein said Council made no decision about the access or whether to close Monarch alley. Eisenstein reiterated this is property with split zoning, which zoning is adopted after site planning. This property has been zoned the way it is for some time and it is appropriate that part of it should be used as mixed use and part of it for residential. To north and west are residential uses and to the south and east are commercial uses. A mixed-use designation is a buffer between residential and commercial and a transition to the historic structures. Councilwoman Richards asked the maximum height in the mixed-use zone. Lindt said it is 32'. Councilwoman Richards asked the rear setback. Lindt said it is 5'. Councilwoman Richards pointed out there will be a building to the east of the historic building within 5' of the property line that is 32' high. This will change the perception of the historic building from Monarch. Semrau noted HPc has review over the mixed-use building and a building cannot be 5' away and 32' by right; it is up to HPc. Councilwoman Richards agreed with Tom Smith about presentation of new materials at the beginning of the second public hearing. The materials were not available for the public to review and analyze. Councilman Johnson asked if the alley on the west side of Monarch is paved. Staff said it is dirt. Councilman Johnson asked the city's policy for paving alleys in the west end. Amy Guthrie, community development department, said the preference is to leave alleys unpaved unless the neighbors get together and request this. Councilman Torre asked if access off Bleeker could work for both parcels. Semrau said it would take two curb cuts, one lower for the mixed-use building and a driveway curb cut for the residential. 6 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 Mayor Klanderud said she would like to have a public hearing limited to the new information presented at the last meeting. Mayor Klanderud said Council had consensus on the Monarch alley at the first meeting but did not take formal action. Councilwoman Richards noted her motion at the first meeting that the Monarch street access was no longer part ofthe discussion and the applicants were to bring back opening up a Mill street access. Councilwoman Richards said she feels this public hearing should be open to all discussion. Council agreed this should be a complete public hearing. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. Ruth Harrison said opening up Monarch and making it a driveway makes no sense. The access should be through places that are more commercial. Ms. Harrison said it is premature to judge an alley opening with new owners of the Hodgson house as they will probably own it for years and years. Ms. Harrison said it does not make sense to open an alley for the good of one or two people when hundreds of people walk by and appreciate the beauty of the open space. Tom Smith, representing the Hodgsons, said he submitted a letter dated March 3. Smith reiterated this alley is not like most alleys because the alley runs perpendicular to the street and the alley is a dead end and will not serve a public purpose. This would be a driveway, not an alley. Smith noted the parking pad will be removed; the Hodgsons are not asserting any permanent rights. Smith said statements have been made that alleys are a requirement and his letter refutes that stating alleys are not required if there are other provision for access. Council has the discretion to decide among the options for the access. Smith noted the grade is non-existent in the area in which the curb cut is proposed on Bleeker street. Smith agreed the subdivision regulations do not require a detailed plan; however, there are circumstance in which these plans are not critical for Council's decision. Smith stated it is their position that a mixed use commercial building and with a potential for a further subdivision oflot 1, Council does not have enough information to determine whether the alley should be open or whether the subdivision application is appropriate because one cannot tell the ultimate use of the property. Smith said it is common in development applications for access to be undetermined until there is an approval. Phil Hodgson said he submitted a letter to Council. He also submitted a bird's eye view map showing the Blue Vie and the alley running all the way down and stopping at Monarch street where it is closed now. Hodgson said there was an 1890 photo, and 1892, a deed about the alley. Hodgson said the alley should remain closed as it would be open space and breaking up the mass of construction. There is an HPc guidelines, revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context ofthe site, which is it should stay the same. Hodgson told Council he went through the 9 examples of alleys brought up at an earlier meeting and submitted pictures in the packet. Hodgson said he and his family intend on staying in this property; this is a home. Hodgson reiterated he will remove the parking pad off Monarch. Hodgson noted moving a historic house is discouraged unless it is the only viable option. The only viable option for moving 202 North Monarch would be to accommodate the driveway off Bleeker street. 7 II Regular )1eeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 Hodgson said he sent pictures of the tree, which protrudes 5' into the alley. The Hodgson house is II' feet from the alley. Hodgson told Council he did make a cash offer to Semrau for the open space. Bob Limacher said if the city uses this alley as a driveway to this property, the applicant will drive in and make a right turn and park. Limacher asked if there is a buildable parcel. Semrau said there is. Limacher said the guidelines state the goal is to have the parking behind the structures but another primary concerns is where it states "to minimize the impacts of that parking". Limacher said he cannot see how that plan would minimize the parking. It would minimize the parking to use Bleeker and pull in behind the houses. Joe Krabacher, Jerome Professional Building east of the new lot, said his preference would be not to develop the mixed-use lot; however, it is zoned mixed use and is developable. Krabacher said the issue is whether to approve subdivision of this lot; some of the cornnlents pertain to HPc on the residential lots. Krabacher said from personal observation is that Bleeker does not get much sun; it is a slick street; traffic backs up trying to get onto Mill street. Krabacher said trucks have run into and hit the Jerome Professional Building. Krabacher said his concern is putting too much access off Bleeker. Residential access may be acceptable with one access point. Sara Kuhn told Council she attended school at the Red and Yellow Brick schools and has worked at ACES. Ms. Kuhn said this is a beautiful area and she would not like to see an alley there. Ms. Kuhn said she hopes Council chooses not to open it up. Junee Kirk said Council needs to look at preserving this area of the west end which serves as a gateway to the Victorians and is one of the most beautiful areas ofthe west end. It would ruin the integrity of the west end by developing this lot. It there is a development allowed, it should be small Victorians to fit in with the size and scale of the west end. Ms. Kirk said this is the last place that can be considering as saving the town. David Hyman said most compelling issue is that both interested parties prefer not to open the alley. Hyman noted there are various alternatives for access and both neighbors would prefer not to open the alley. Helen Palmer said she has not found on any historic maps or photographs of Aspen that show this alley has ever been open. Ms. Palmer said the platted end of the alley has never been used as an alley and there is no need to open it now becaus(: there are alternatives. Hayley Pace said she is concerned about safety of children using this area and Monarch street. Children going from the Red and Yellow brick buildings to ACES and to the library use this street. Opening the alley will introduce more traffic onto Monarch street and will compromise safety of pedestrians and bicyclists. Dennis Cyrus, caretaker of house on northwest corner of Bleeker and Monarch, said if the access is behind the house off Bleeker, it could be used to access the lots to the north without interrupting the historic aspects of Monarch street. It makes more sense to have the alley between the residential and commercial lots. Walt Madden said if the alley is opened, it becomes the responsibility of the taxpayers' to maintain for a private driveway. 8 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 Madden said it makes more sense that the driveway come off Bleeker and that is be the responsibility of the property owner. Bert Myrin said there were discussions over the last two weeks that the alley owned by the city be turned into a public park, a 20' wide pocket park not using any of the private property. Myrin said the community can continue to pursue TDRs or raising money to see if more can be preserved as green space. Myrin said there are a lot of development rights for the mixed-use parcel. If the land is subdivided it can no longer be used as a tool to preserve the house and the open space. Myrin requested Council not foreclose the possibility of making this a pocket park. Matt Pace said it would be great to leave the alley green. The city could purchase a portion of the property and leave this area open. The city prides itself on leaving the enviromnent open and green and this should be left green not asphalt. Lisa Markalunas said the access off Bleeker street is far superior to the rear of the historic buildings. It is less impacting and gives more of an alley access. Toni Kronberg said the subdivision being requested involves a historic landmark. Ms. Kronberg said there is contradiction in the zoning, the Aspen Area Community Plan and HPc. Council has looked at an ordinance regarding which set of rules a developer follows; subdivision, HPc, design review standards. Ms. Kronberg said subdivision approval is premature when Council is looking at access and the driveway and creating a development right. Ms. Kronberg said the historical significance of this property has to be reviewed by HPc before subdivision. Ms. Kronberg said streetscapes, landscapes and community character should be addressed. Ms. Kronberg submitted a Sanborn map and read from the HPc guidelines about moving historic structures. Wyley Hodgson told Council before Nick Adeh left the city, he stated his concerns about the driveway off Bleeker were its location, not the proposed location to the west. Hodgson noted the Sandborn map submitted at the last meeting was a 1904 map and he submitted a Sandborn map of a different year. Hodgson presented photographs of pictures taken in the west end of unopened alleys, which are shown as open on the Sanborn map. These photos also show the value of this land as open space. Hodgson said this alley has value for turning this area into a park. Hodgson said he has concerns about the tree, which has a large root system, and if the alley is opened it may kill the tree. The tree has been in this location since the turn of the century. Lindt entered letters from Bill Stirling, James and Hensely Peterson, John Markalunas and Julie and Marshall Hall for the record. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Semrau read from the AAcP, item 5 in the action plan, allow easier subdivision of properties in the historic townsite and allow for infill development. Clauson reiterated the applicant is happy to use the alternate access off Bleeker street. The staking on site shows that access to be possible. Clauson said any movement ofthe historic house would be subject to HPC review; any lot split would be subject to HPc and Council review. The development of the mixed-use site would require a growth management approval, 9 II Regular )1eeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 subject to P&Z and Council review. Clauson stated for the subdivision, the requirements of the code have been met. Eisenstein stated this application is for a subdivision to subdivide the 5 lots into two lots, lot 1 with 3 lots zoned residential and lot 2 with 2 lots that is zoned mixed use. Council has to make a decision on where they think the access for this subdivision is appropriate. Eisenstein said there has been no evidence presented to Council showing that the subdivision should not be approved. Staff as well as P&Z have indicated the subdivision meets all the criteria. Mayor Klanderud asked if the city attorney agreed the subdivision could be approved without a decision on the access. John Worcester, city attorney, told Council the alleys are intertwined with the subdivision regulations. One cannot subdivide property and create new lots ifthere is no access to the lots. The applicant is requesting subdivision of land into 2 lots. The city's regulations require before the property is subdivided, the remaining parcels have access. If Council subdivides the properties, the applicant is entitled to legal access to the properties. Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #2, Series of2006, on second reading changing Section 7 to eliminate the sentence regarding the Monarch street access inserting a sentence stating "vehicular access to lot I shall be provided by a new driveway off of Bleeker street as submitted by Stan Clauson and associates"; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Councilman Torre said he prefers a shared access for both lots off Bleeker. Councilman Torre said a hardship for access does not seem justification to open an alley that is not currently in use. Councilman Torre stated he would not support vacation of the Monarch alley. Councilman Torre stated he supports maintaining that alley as green space. Councilman Torre said opening this alley is a long length for the city to provide a more desirable access when sufficient access can come off Bleeker. Councilwoman Richards said her support of the Mill street access for the mixed use is because of the level of activity. Councilwoman Richards said she is familiar with Bleeker street and she would support residential access off Mill street because of the proximity to all locations in town. Councilman DeVilbiss said if Council does not approve access off Monarch, the applicant has requested some guarantee that the alley will remain closed. Councilman DeVilbiss said he does not think Council can make that guarantee. Councilman DeVilbiss stated the alley has been used by the Hodgson with a parking pad. The sign on Monarch says "no parking in driveway" and that is not a driveway. Councilman DeVilbiss said both the alley off Monarch and the alley off Mill street are being used by adjacent property owners and these are city property. Councilman DeVilbiss stated the city should reclaim public property. Mayor Klanderud agreed those are public property and any existing encroachments on either ofthese alleys should be removed. Mayor Klanderud said a 20' green space does not make a pocket park and does enhance the neighborhood for residents. Mayor Klanderud said she does not support using city open space money for this green space. 10 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 Mayor Klanderud pointed out there are garages, curved parking areas and curb cuts across the street for these properties so it is not completely pedestrian friendly. Councilwoman Richards said she would support the city retaining the alley easement and not opening the alley. In the future both parties may agree they want the alley opened for access to each property. Councilwoman Richards agreed the parking pad should be removed; however, that is not a determination for the best access. Councilwoman Richards said she does not see the alley opened as a public benefit. Opening up this alley will make a funny view plane from the east. Leaving it closed makes it a green buffer. Councilwoman Richards stated this discussion shows how important small places are to residents. Mill street is a mixed-use corridor and access off there for the commercial building is reasonable. Councilwoman Richards said without more information, she cannot tell whether this is in keeping with the residential character or not. Mayor Klanderud asked if the house is moved to accommodate the access from Bleeker, will there be a problem with the setback requirements. Clauson said there will not be. Lindt told Council on a corner lot, one has a front yard setback and the applicant gets to choose which side is the front yard setback of 10' and an alternative front yard setback which is 2/3 of the required front yard setback. Clauson noted the renderings show the blue Victorian moved to the west to line up with the house to the north. Clauson said it is possible not to move the house as far to the west. None ofthis would happen without HPc approval. Mayor Klanderud asked about the condition in Section 13 and deed restriction against further subdivision. Mayor Klanderud said she would prefer not to have the lot be less than 6,000 square feet because someone may argue in the future that the lot can still be subdivided. Clauson said the applicants are amenable to a deed restriction against further subdivision with the addition of "except for condominiumization", which is a subdivision process. Mayor Klanderud noted the entire parcel could have been condominiumzed without this process. Lindt said condominiumization would not have allowed development of parcel 2. Mayor Klanderud said she would have liked the applicant to come forward with the entire development outlined, showing what ultimately could have occurred. Mayor Klanderud said she is a proponent of keeping the historic building where it is located. Councilman Johnson asked ifthere is a minimum width for an access. Lindt said the fire marshal has concerns about a minimum width for access to the rear of lot 2. The fire marshal said he feels he cannot serve a larger mixed-use building from the Mill Street alley because of the grade change. The minimum width is 12'. The preference of the fire marshal would have been access to both parcels from North Monarch. Councilman Johnson said his preference is to preserve as much as possible what exists on the site right now, including the alley remain closed and the open space remain undeveloped and that the house not be moved. Councilman Johnson said purchasing portions of this property would be the most expensive open space in the city. Councilman Johnson said he would work with the neighbors and the city if there were to 11 II Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 , be an effort to purchase the property. Councilman Johnson said Council has to follow the land use code. Councilman Johnson said through letters and public testimony, Council is being asked to preserve the prerogatives of one landowner by denying the prerogatives and rights of another landowner. Councilman Johnson stated the issue is not whether the alley has ever been opened but whether it should be. Councilman Johnson said he has looked at 3 pieces of evidence, one of which is the 1890 to 1904 Sandborne maps which may not show an opened alley but do show a pattern of development on the Elder property which indicates the expectation an alley would be opened. Another is the letters from Smith and Hodgson stating in the 1990's there was a request for parking on the Hodgson property and the city giving approval of parking on that alley, which seems to be recognition if there is to be a curb cut it should happen on the alley. Councilman Johnson said this seems to be a recognition the alley could be open. The photo of a sign "Do Not Park in Driveway" seems to acknowledge the parking pad is a driveway and the alley is in some use. , I ! Councilman Johnson said the purpose of alleys is to decrease the number of curb cuts, which is a public benefit. Councilman Johnson stated alleys provide access, not open space, which is why alleys were platted. Councilman Johnson said not opening the alley may have been a result of the economic devastation ofthe failure of silver. Councilman Johnson said if Council approves opening this alley, it should remain dirt or not paved, which may eliminate the tree issue as the surface will be pervious to water. Councilwoman Richards noted no one has spoken in favor of opening the alley; the applicant stated they would be satisfied with the Bleeker street access. Councilwoman Richards said she would not want to vote for a situation that created conflict in the neighborhood. Councilwoman Richards said the best way to preserve the open space is to leave the alley undeveloped and leave the neighborhood time to work on a solution. Councilwoman Richards said this is a significant piece of property with moving pieces, historic structures, possible lot split, that Council should see the entire plan to determine whether the access decision would negatively impact future development potential and negatively affect the character of the neighborhood. Councilman DeVilbiss stated he supports Councilman Johnson's logic as well thought out and well stated. Mayor Klanderud agreed Council does not know if this is consistent with the neighborhood because they do not know the entire development. Mayor Klanderud stated she supports access for the mixed-use parcel from Mill street. Mayor Klanderud said keeping the Monarch street a public alley protects property on both sides because ofthe setbacks to either side. Mayor Klanderud said she does not feel this property would be used by the public as a park. It does not make sense for the city to purchase TDRs and hold them for the benefit of private property owners. Councilwoman Richards said she does not support the ordinance as written because she does not support the Monarch street access. Councilwoman Richards said the subdivision will be approved or not based on the motion on the floor. 12 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 Councilwoman Richards withdrew her motion and moved to amend the ordinance to have a Monarch street access to the residential lots ifthey go forward. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Torre, no; Richards, no; Johnson, no; DeVilbiss, no; Mayor Klanderud, no. Motion NOT carried. Mayor Klanderud asked if the applicant is willing to come back with a more comprehensive application. Semrau said he would like Council to be specific because everything has to go through several layers of review. Semrau said he has done everything required by the code. Mayor Klanderud asked if the applicant were willing to deed restrict lot I to further lot split. Semrau said there is 4,080 FAR allowed on the residential lot and one can expand the historic house or make two houses. Semrau said one large house would diminish the historic resource and two houses of 2,040 square feet would be preferable. Semrau outlined on the rendering where access, driveway, garage and houses could be located using the Monarch access or the Bleeker access. Councilwoman Richards said she is concerned about granting the subdivision without a master plan for the site and without moving the historic house, the open space aspect from the back will be gone because it will have a mixed use building on it. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to see how far to the west the historic house would move to retain the open space. The garages could block some ofthe negative aspect of the mixed-use building. Councilwoman Richards stated she supports the Bleeker street access and the applicants have stated they would be comfortable with that access. Councilwoman Richards said she does not want to see the historic building pushed back on the site. Looking at all the pieces on a complex parcel makes sense not to foreclose better planning. Councilman DeVilbiss said he does not feel there is a fair basis to deny a subdivision application. Councilwoman Richards said criteria numbers 2 and 3, the proposed subdivision shall be consistent with existing land uses in the area, Council does not know this will be consistent with the historic west end neighborhood. #3 states the proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding area and Council does not know that. Councilman Johnson said he is willing to look at changing the subdivision code in the future. Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #2, Series of 2006, amended to delete the paving aspect in Section 7 of the alley portion from Monarch so that it is pervious and access to lot 2 off Mill street should be paved; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Mayor Klanderud asked if this requires a sidewalk on Monarch. Lindt said the ordinance requires the applicant to sign a curb and gutter agreement to put a sidewalk in the future. Councilwoman Richards amended the motion to eliminate the access on Monarch street alley and have the curb cut on Bleeker street only for the residential units; seconded by Councilman Torre. Roll call vote; councilmembers Johnson, no; Torre, yes; Richards, yes; DeVilbiss, no; Mayor Klanderud, no. Motion NOT carried. 13 11 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council March 13, 2006 Councilwoman Richards said this motion would open an alley, eliminate green space and gardens. The applicant has not asked for this and the public does not support it. Councilwoman Richards said this is going forward with an incremental subdivision and determining accesses that will make the automobile access cover Yz the site rather than less than v.. This will determine where future historic lot split will end up and the movement of the historic house. Councilman Johnson reiterated he would prefer nothing happen on this site but if something is to happen, it should follow the way the town was developed, for access to come off alleys, not increasing curb cuts. Councilman Torre brought up alleys not being on the side of historic properties and this block does not run according to the traditional development pattern; the houses are west facing, which makes the alley different. Councilman Torre said this may be an opportunity to make better decisions than the code outlines, then change the code rather than adopting them backwards. Councilman Torre said it is Council's charge to make a better decision. Mayor Klanderud stated an applicant has the right to rely on the code and not have the rules changed in the process. Councilman Torre stated Council c!ll exercise the option they see fit. Councilwoman Richards said this alley runs to the side of the houses, not behind them, which is different. The access off Bleeker street behind all the houses would fit the pattern. Councilwoman Richards said she would grant a driveway access off Bleeker street for the residential units. Councilwoman Richards said opening the alley would require city plowing to the end of a bluff. This would be following a set pattern that is not appropriate for today. Councilman DeVilbiss said the motion on the floor follows the law. Mayor Klanderud said this has been a difficult process and the real issue is bigger than the alley, which is a preference to do nothing on this property. A property owner does have certain property rights. Mayor Klanderud agreed there are unknowns about the future development. Mayor Klanderud said at the first hearing it was stated that any future development will have to go through HPc and Council. Councilwoman Richards said this is a mistake; no one in the room has argued for opening the alley. Councilman Torre agreed this is a bad decision from all sides. Councilwoman Richards stated she is not interested in denying this applicant the right to proceed. Councilwoman Richards said she has reservations about not seeing the entire plan but would approve the applicant not using the Monarch street access. Councilwoman Richards urged Council to vote against this motion and to keep Monarch street alley green with trees and not to have an access for Yz of the property for automobiles. Roll call vote; councilmembers Torre, no; Johnson, yes; Richards, no; DeVilbiss, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to II p.m.; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried. 14 Re!!ular Meetin!! Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 Gram Slayton, director Wheeler Opera House, said this formalizes Council's direction from the January 24 work session for the formal marketing plan, the physical improvements and the co-promotion arrangements. The finances have not changed since January. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #8, Series of2006, on second reading; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, yes; Richards, yes; Torre, yes; DeVilbiss, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2006 - Blue Vic, 202 North Monarch Subdivision James Lindt, community development department, reminded Council this was continued from the last meeting. The property is to the north of the Hotel Jerome and contains two different zone districts. The 9,000 square feet to the west is zoned R-6 and the 6,000 square feet to the east is zoned MU (mixed use). The applicant is requesting a subdivision to split off the eastern portion of the parcel. Lindt said access to the parcel was the main issue at the last meeting. The applicants originally proposed to open the alley from Monarch street to access both parcels, which Council did not favor. The applicants offered an alternative of opening the alley off Mill street to access lot 2 and to have a curb cut off east Bleeker street to access the residence on lot I. Lindt stated staff continues to recommend access off Monarch street as the best access. Amy Guthrie, historic preservation officer, gave Council a photograph from 1890 showing a pathway where this proposed alley is. Ms. Guthrie also presented a 1904 Sanborn map, which is documentation of exact conditions in town for fire insurance purposes. Ms. Guthrie noted on the Sanborne map this property with outbuildings that are oriented against the alley suggesting alley use. Ms. Guthrie said at the last meeting, it was brought up that this lot was unusual because the house is oriented towards the side street and it would be awkward to have an alley. Ms. Guthrie pointed out at least 8 other lots where houses face the side street. Ms. Guthrie said the property to the north, 212 N. Monarch, has head in parking and does not have a garage. HPC would prefer if there were a garage in the future that access be off an alley. It would be difficult for 212 N. Monarch to have a garage without an alley. Ms. Guthrie noted the city cannot deny someone to have some access to his or her property. Chris Bendon, community development department, said if Council decide they do not want to open this alley, they may find there is no public purpose for the alley and will get a request to vacate that alley. This alley land would go to property owners on each side of the vacated alley. Bendon noted one of the purposes of alleys is that they break up mass on blocks and the development on North Monarch could be 20 feet closer together by virtue of moving the property line. Bendon reiterated the city code allows one access 4 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 per residence in residential areas and there could be an access permit off North Monarch for this structure. Ed Sadler, assistant city manager, reminded Council they adopted a sidewalk plan, which indicated a sidewalk along North Monarch to the Red Brick was appropriate. Sadler noted Bleeker street has a fairly steep slope and is shaded by the Hotel Jerome. The proposed access is right on that slope, Lindt said CoUncil had asked iflot 1 could be further subdivided; it could through a historic lot split. Lindt gave Councilletlers from Tom Smith indicating disagreement with that. Councilwoman Richards asked if this would allow reconfiguration of the lots. Lindt said it depends on whether and to where the historic house would be moved. Councilman Torre asked ifthis is one or two development rights. Lindt said it would only allow one single-family house. A regular lot split would not be possible because there is a review standard in the regular lot splits stating one cannot furth~ split a lot and this would be a historic lot split. That is not being proposed in this application. Lindt said another issue was whether the development rights for the Jerome Professional building would be affected by opening the Mill street alley. Lindt told Council the Jerome Professional building would receive no additional FAR; however, they may be able to use more of their site but it would not change the dimensional requirements. Lindt stated this application meets the review standards for subdivision. Staff prefers the Monarch street access. The alternative of opening the Mill street alley and using Bleeker street for the residential lot is acceptable. Stan Clauson, representing the applicant, said there is agreement that splitting off the mixed-use parcel from the residential makes sense. The applicants have proposed several accesses. The first was opening up the alley off North Monarch and using it for both parcels. There was opposition about increased traffic in the neighborhood. The applicants proposed a split access with alley off North Monarch, which would serve only the residential property, and an alley off North Mill, which would serve the commercial property. The neighborhood still opposed that plan. The 3'd alternative was to have the commercial traffic access off North Mill and the residential access from a curb cut on east Bleeker. Clauson noted there has been beneficial use ofthe alley off North Mill without any official approvals from the city. Clauson said the windows of the Moss building look out on to the alley and th~e is a patio in the alley. Clauson told Council there is 20 feet from building to building and the fire department will support a 16-foot wide access. This wOuld allow 4' on the Moss building side, which will accommodate the existing air conditioners and the foundation and will provide some landscaping to soften the alley. Rather than concrete, the plan is to use interlocking pavers. This will result in two access points 20' apart on Mill street. Clauson said if the access for the residential lots is approved on Bleeker, the applicants would request vacation ofthe alley off North Monarch. Clauson noted vacation of alleys does not lead to increased floor areas. 5 Regular Meetio!! Aspen City Council Februarv 27, 2006 Clauson told Council the 9,000 square foot parcel with the historic house on it could be the subject of a historic lot split, which would have to be reviewed by HPC and Council. Because of the size ofthe lot, it could have a duplex on it and it would not need to be attached. A conventional lot split would not be allowed. The maximum development that would be allowed is two residences on the 9,000 square foot parcel. Ms. Guthrie told Council the commercial lot could be split under the historic lot split; however, one lot would have to contain a residence. The historic lot split does not create rnore square footage, it allows different ownership. Clauson noted the rendering shows the existing house moved forward on the property; however, nothing has been approved. TinJ Semrau, applicant, told Council he contacted a representative of the J~ome Professional building and told him support of opening this alley meant the Jerome Professional building would have to use this alley if they were to redevelop. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. Tom Smith, representing the Phillip Hodgson, said it seemed like at the last meeting, Council gave direction not to open the North Monarch alley. Staff is arguing Council should reconsid~ that. Smith noted 6 P&Z members thought it was a bad idea to open the Monarch alley. Srnith stated that is an alley in name only and does not go through to Mill street. This would be a dead end alley and it would be nothing more than a driveway. The Bleeker street alley has been moved to the west and improves the situation. Smith told Council P&Z recommended against opening the Monarch alley because they do not know what is going to be developed on this property. Smith told Council this applicant is trying to accomplish something they CarUlOt do directly under the Municipal Code. Smith said if this were reviewed as a subdivision, they applicant could not come back and apply for a lot split. Smith stated the applicant knows how many lots they plan. Smith said this applicant has not shown consistency with the comprehensive plan or the surrounding uses to gain subdivision approval. Smith stated the purpose of the historic lot split is to take a single historic lot, allow it to be split once for. an additional single-family house. Smith said these lots are merged into one ownership and this parcel is what is subject to the historic landmark lot split, not a furth~ subdivided piece. Chris Faison said he uses the west end pedestrian way and this section is a passageway to the west end and sets the tone for the walk. Council should be careful to keep this a residential area. Phil Hodgson said he thought the decision about access was made at the last meeting. Hodgson said important Victorian houses had a lot ofland surrounding them, Hodgson said these large houses and their yards should be preserved. Perry Michaels, representing the KNSO building, said when this building was built in 1978, it was allowed to be built with no setbacks. It is not a secret that this building encroaches on city property. Ms. Michaels stated she is opposed to having the city contribute [mancially to a private development. This seems to be a driveway, not an 6 Re!!ular Meetiul! Aspen City Council Februarv 27, 2006 alley. Ms. Michaels asked who will pay the landscaping, maintenance and snow removal. There will be relocation costs of electric transformers and landscaping. Ms. Michaels asked if this city will have money in escrow to make sure these improvements are complete. Bert Myrin, 218 North Monarch, said he supports the access off Monarch, that alley spaces break up massing between buildings. Myrin said he is not supportive of the notion of vacating the alley because of more massing. Myrin said TDRs might be used to preserve the large lot. Lisa Markalunas noted there has been not HPC approval of this project but an informal work session about what might happen on the property. Ms. Markalunas said Aspen is losing settings for the historic buildings. Walt Madden, Monarch street, said Council does not know what will happen to this property after the subdivision approval. There are no linlitations to what the businesses on the commercial lot may be. Lindt entered into the record letters from Perry Michaels and Bill Parsyback. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilman Torre asked about the existing parking pad. Lindt said the parking pad for 212 North Monarch is in the alley and staff could find no city license to allow that parking pad. Councilman Torre asked about possible vacation of the alley off North Monarch. Lindt answ~ed Council is not required to vacate that alley; however, the main reasons for alleys is for access and for service. If the alley is not opened, staff suggests it be vacated. Councilwoman Richards asked about the allowable size for the commercial building. Clauson said the allowable FAR is .75:1 and it could go to 1:1 with special review. The building could be 4500 square feet or 6,000 square feet with special review. Councilwoman Richards asked if there will be affordable housing requirements for the mixed-use building. Clauson said the mixed-use proposal would have to go through growth management, which process looks at affordable housing mitigation. Councilwoman Richards asked the maximum numb~ of employees generated by a 6,000 square foot mixed use building. Lindt said the maxinlum would be 13 employees. Councilwoman Richards said years ago, Council determined adjacent lots in same ownership should be merged into a single lot. John Worcester, city attorney, said if these lots were held in common ownership by 1977, they are autornatically merged into one parcel. Councilwoman Richards said the intention of that was to maintain growth control in the west end. Worcester agreed the intent was to limit the number of development rights and at the same time Council developed the lot split concept to allow these lots to be unmerged. Over the years the city has appreciated that smaller house are better even if that means two houses, so the system oflot split was allowed. Councilwoman Richards asked what size house would be allowed on a 15,000 square foot lot. Lindt said 4,020 square for a single-family house. The existing house is 2,050 square feet. 7 Re!!ular Meeting Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 Councilwoman Richards asked if subdivision is a discretionary act of Council. Worcester said there are standards in the land use code. If Council finds those standards have been met, the discretion has been removed. Council does have discretion determining if those standards have been met. The first standard listed in the memorandum talks about consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Worcester stated this is a subjective standard and Council may use discretion to determine whether an applicant has met that standard. If an applicant meets all the standards for subdivision, the discretion is gone. Councilwoman Richards said criteria 3, the proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. councilwornan Richards said the surrounding areas are lots 1(, L, and M and Council does not know what the historic lot split will be and its configuration may be driven by the access allowed in this approval. Councilwoman Richards said she does not like the incremental approach of this. Councilwoman Richards stated she supports the Mill street access for the mixed-use building but it could affect where the affordable housing would be for this building. The subdivision will drive design and future development of surrounding areas. Councilman DeVilbiss asked about the statement that the application will relocate the existing above grade utilities in the alley and if there is a license for those utilities. Lindt said there is no requirement for utilities to have a license. Semrau said there are 3 transformers and they can be moved onto the applicant's property or elsewhere. Mayor Klanderud agreed at the last meeting there was a consensus to not open the Monarch alley. Mayor Klanderud said information presented at this meeting has caused her to rethink that position. Mayor Klanderud said alleys do create a break between buildings. For future planning, if the property to the north were to redevelop opening the alley for access to that property would be a public benefit. If there were no alley, there could be two curb cuts off North Monarch. Mayor Klanderud said she, too, is concerned about incremental lot splitting. Mayor Klanderud said she pref~s history In context and the historic value of that house is its setting. Mayor Klanderud said she would agree to opening the alley off North Monarch and ending it so that it cannot be a thoroughfare to Mill. Councilman DeVilbiss said Bleeker is an icy street and he does not favor using that as access. Councilman DeVilbiss asked if the city could open only a portion ofan alley. Worcester said the city does not need to open the entire alley and th~e is a grade change in this alley. Councilman DeVilbiss said there is already a use of the unopened alley with a paved parking pad. Councilman DeVilbiss stated opening North Monarch for access to the residential building is preferable to accessing off Bleeker with access to the mixed- use building off Mill street. Councilman Johnson said the maps provided by staff are helpful and persuaded him the alley has been opened at sometirne. Councilman Johnson said unopened alley is a dead end driveway now. Councilman Johnson agreed the access decisions can affect future 8 Regular Meetine Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 land development for the subdivided parcel. Councilman Johnson agreed large lots need to be preserved. Councilman Johnson stated his preferred outcome is access to lot 2 from the Mill street alley. Councilman Johnson said if something could be worked out between the applicant and the adjacent property owner and the city to preserve the large open space, he would like to see that. If that cannot be achieved, the alley on North Monarch should be opened for access. Councilman Torre said the historic picture shows a pathway, not an alley. Councilman Torre agreed the assessment of the mixed-use parcel is appropriate. Councilman Torre stated he cannot support the opening of eith~ alley and would support using Bleeker as access as less obtrusive and impacting. Both parcels could get access off Bleeker. Councilman Torre said moving the historic house and taking up a smaller parcel deters from its historic value and he does not favor that. Opening the alley would be against the pattern set in this neighborhood. Allowing development to encroach into that space would change the historical context. Semrau reiterated all that is allowed on lot 1 is 4,080 square feet ofF AR whether it is in one house, two houses or a duplex. Semrau said a house attached to this historic structure would be inappropriate and two smaller houses would be more appropriate. Semrau said this meeting is the first time he learned the mixed-use lot could be eligible for a lot split. Semrau stated he would be willing to reduce the size of the lot so that it could not be split again or to put a deed restriction on lot 2 so that there is no further subdivision. John Worcester, city attorney, asked the applicant if they would agree to a condition this that there would be no furth~ subdivision. Semrau said he would. Semrau pointed out that HPC has complete control over the siting of the historic house. Ms. Guthrie noted if this were to be a historic lot split, that would need Council approval. Council may also call up an HPC decision. Semrau said if the access is by a driveway offBleek~, the house will have to be moved to the west in order to accommodate the driveway. Clauson stated the reason the code provides for incremental possibilities in subdivision is to have the assurance a subdivision is possible and that the access is known. Clauson said the applicant could not have presented plans for a building on lot 2 because there are 3 possibilities of access and they each generate a different building. Clauson said the alleys off Monarch and off Mill are the public rights-of-way for purposes of access and for utilities and they should be restored to those uses. The only lot that is under possibility for a future split is lot 1. Mayor Klanderud said a deed restriction on parcel 2 would address her concerns about future development. Councilwoman Richards urged Council to vote no on this subdivision application. Councilwoman Richards noted Council is addressing little issues forgetting this is incremental. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to know wh~e a second residence on lot I would be before she approves this application. A subdivision would allow up to a 6,000 square foot building on lots Nand 0, which would not currently be allowed. This approval would increase the developability of this parcel without a complete set of plans. Councilwoman Richards said a mixed use building may be appropriate on lots No and 0 but she would like to know how a lot split will affect lot 1, 9 Re!!ular Meetinl! Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 where the affordableJlOusing for the commercial building will go. Councilwoman Richards noted approving this subdivision will be driving the design ofthe commercial building. Councilwoman Richards said this does not meet the review criteria that the proposed subdivision be consistent with the character ofthe existing land uses in the area. Councilwoman Richards noted the existing uses are historic houses and a historic neighborhood. Councilwoman Richards stated it is not known what a future lot split will do to the character ofthe existing land uses in the neighborhood and whether it will adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to see more refinement of the plan. Councilman Torre noted Council is looking at making the Mill street corridor h more pedestrian friendly as part of the civic master plan. Councilman Torre stated opening the Mill street alley goes against the years of the civic master planning process. Councilman Torre said he can only support a single curb cut off Bleeker. Councilman Torre said he favors keeping the alley off Monarch as a green space as it currently enhances the neighborhood. Mayor Klanderud said she cannot support a Bleeker access; that is one of the worst hills in town during the winter. Mayor Klanderud reiterated a lot split on lot 1 would have to be approved by Council. Mayor Klanderud stated if the applicant is willing to deed restrict lot 2 and the development conforms to the land use code, she could support that. Mayor Klanderud said approving this ordinance would designate access and would allow subdivision between the residential and the mixed-use parcel. Mayor Klanderud stated she would not support a sidewalk along Monarch street. Mayor Klanderud said she can support opening the alley for use for the residential parcels only with design and assurance that there is a break and that the alley does not go through to Mill street. Mayor Klanderud supports opening the alley from Mill street to parcel 2. Councilman DeVilbiss agreed. Councilman DeVilbiss pointed out the public alley way has been appropriated by the property owner to the north for private use. Smith said th~e are agreements with the city. Councilman DeVilbiss stated it is a public right-of- way and there is no reason not to open is. Councilman DeVilbiss emphasized Bleeker is an icy mess in the winter. Councilman Johnson said any futureresident of the historic house would benefit from the prop~ remaining undeveloped, as would any adjacent property owner. Councilman Johnson said there should be a dollar amount to pay for the benefit of this open space and that the city would also benefit from this property being undeveloped. Semrau said he would pursue whether the neighbors will participate financially in buying the lots and keeping them open. Councilman Johnson said he favors Monarch for residential access and Mill for commercial access; however, he would vote no at this meeting because the proposed subdivision does not meet the criteria that it is consistent with the existing land uses in the area. Councilman Johnson stated he feels the proposed subdivision could adversely affect future development of surrounding areas. Councilman Johnson said this subdivision does not meet several criteria in the code. 10 Re!!ular Meetin!! Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 Mayor Klanderud said it is unfair and unreasonable to ask a private landowner to preserve their property as a park. Clauson showed an illustration of the house as it would be historically restored. Clauson said the reality of restoring a house in poor condition to its original look takes economic resources. Restoration of this property would require an economic engine to make that happen. Clauson stated there is nothing automatic about this development; not the development on lot 1 nor the development on lot 2. Lot 2 will need growth management allocations from P&Z and review by HPC. Clauson pointed out this discussion about access has illustrated how different the building on lot 2 would be depending on from where it is accessed. Councilman DeVilbiss noted the city set up the zoning and the subdivision is appropriate. Councilwoman Richards said the city also set up the merg~ of ownership of lots into one lot if they are owned that way prior to 1975 and then allowing subdivision if Council felt it was appropriate. Councilwoman Richards said when people purchase a historic property, they know what it would take to restore it. Councilwoman Richards said she does not think purchase of the parcel that may be subdivided off would be appropriate for the city's open space fund. Councilwoman Richards said she does not see a public gain by opening the alley off north Monarch. Councilman Torre reiterated the opening of the alley is not a necessity for the development or for access of the residential off Monarch; the owners could do a private drive. Councilman Johnson said he would like to know the cost of giving up development rights, the cost of returning the housing to its original historic condition, the interest of the neighbors to participating in purchasing the green space because of the added value to them, and whether TDRs and/or open space funds can be used. Councilman DeVilbiss moved to continue Ordinance #2, Series of2006, to March 13; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 2006 - Castle Creek Road Lot Split/PUD Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council this is located at 488 Castle Creek road. Bendon showed the location of the property, Castle Creek road, Marolt Ranch and the Aspen Valley Hospital. Bendon said the request is for a PUD amendment and a lot split. There is no PUD plan for this property. The property was annexed in 1980. This property is zoned R-15A with a PUD overlay. The property is 35,800 square feet. The R-15A zone allows duplexes when one side is deed restricted as affordable housing. Bendon told Council when the city considered the initial zoning on this property after annexation, the records indicates with the slope reduction it would reduce the net area below that which would allow a lot split. Bendon said lot area is what derives the density, floor area, ability to do a lot split. When a PUD is applied to a property, it implements the slope reduction and eliminates the potential for a lot split. In 1999 the property owner requested a rezoning to remove the PUD overlay, which was reviewed by staff and P&Z. Both staff and P&Z recommended against the rezoning because it did not represent a community benefit. Bendon said the property has 11 Regular Meetin!! Aspen City Council February 13, 2006 public information campaign on the water and electric rate increase before second reading so that the public are aware. Phil Overeynder, public works, told Council the ordinance will be published in full and a press release will go out this week. Roll call vote; Councilmembers DeVilbiss, yes; Torre, yes; Richards, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Richards moved to continue Ordinance #3, Series of2006, to March 13, 2006; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2006 - 202 North Monarch, Blue Vic Subdivision Chris Bendon, community development department, showed Council where this property is located and said it consists of 5 original town site lots, 15,000 square feet. The east two lots are zoned MU, mixed use, and the west 3 lots are zoned R-6. There is a single- family residence on the west lots and the property is historically land marked. Bendon told Council the proposal is to divide the parcel into a 9,000 square foot lot with the historic house and a 6,000 square foot lot on the east, which parcel is vacant. The applicant requests the platted alley to the north of the propmy be opened to access the lots from the rear of the parcel. Bendon pointed out the parcel slopes to the east and it is not feasible to have an alley that continues through to Mill street. There is a curb cut on North Monarch, which accomrnodates parking of the neighbor to the north. This curb cut is located in the public right-of-way. Bendon noted a curb cut on East Bleeker servicing a parking pad. There is no sidewalk along the property; however, the applicants propose a sidewalk along East Bleek~ to the corner at Monarch. P&Z recommends approval of the subdivision as does staff. Much ofP&Z's discussion was about the opening of the alley. P&Z recommends the alley not be opened. P&Z was concerned about the development on the parcel and suggested access off East Bleeker. HPC reviewed this and stated they preferred access from North Monarch, which is tradition in the west end. Bendon noted the city's design standards require access from alleys if they exist. The city engineer agreed the alley should be opened either from Monarch street or from Mill street. Bendon pointed out the alley off Mill street and told Council there are some improvements in the public right-of-way. Bendon said ifthat alley were used, one would enter the property subgrade. The city engineer noted the entry off East Bleeker is the worst choice as East Bleeker street has congestion as well as icing which would complicate that access. The fire marshal prefers the access off Monarch street for fire protection. Bendon told Council the HPC jurisdiction is on the entire parcel so creation of the vacant lot and any development is within their jurisdiction. Bendon said staff received notes from the parks department regarding a tree on the north of this parcel and some steps for preservation of that tree. Councilwoman Richards asked where the alley off Mill street would be located. Bendon showed the location with regards to the Jerome Professional building and there would need to be coordination in order to use one curb cut for the alley and the Jerome professional building. 9 Rel!ular Meetin!! Aspen City Council Februarv 13, 2006 Stan Clauson, representing the applicant, told Council the code states if an alley exists the access would not be an issue. This alley is platted but it has nev~ been opened. Clauson noted section 14.20 of the HPC design guidelines, which states off street driveways should be removed, iffeasible, if parking can be placed on the alley. Clauson said the initial application was designed to access the entire project from the alley off North Monarch street. Clauson pointed out some encroachments into the North Monarch alley as well as the Mill street alley. None of these encroachments have approval from the city engineer's office. Clauson presented photographs of the encroachments and the proposed alleys. Clauson said the P&Z had concerns about all access to this development from North Monarch. The applicant requested an amendment to their applications with split access; residential access from North Monarch and commercial access from Mill street. This would not be a through access because the grade separation is 15 to 20'. The split access should reduce the amount oftraffic on the North Monarch access. Clauson told Council the applicants took the split access to HPC for their reaction. HPC agreed the split access would be the first choice with all access off North Monarch as their second choice. Tim Semrau, applicant, told Council this property has everything in place for subdivision; it meets all city rules; it will enable the applicants to restore the historic house; it is located in two zone districts. Semrau said at P&Z the neighbors noted there would be commercial traffic using this alley. Semrau said that was reasonable and the application was amended for a split access. Semrau told Council the grade separation in the Mill street alley in insurmountable. Semrau stated this is a by right subdivision and what can be built reverts to the city's land use code. The maximum commercial build out is 4500 square feet with 4.5 parking spaces; 4500 square feet for residential use plus affordable housing requirement, which is 40% ofthe FAR of the residential building. The allowable height is 32'. Councilwoman Richards asked if there is a waiver of any affordable housing requirement on the mixed-use building or the residential building because this is a historic landmark. Clauson said there is not. Councilwoman Richards asked if there would be commercial uses in the residential building. Clauson said that building is located in the R-6 and would not have commercial uses. Semrau noted the historic building needs a foundation. HPC has commented when the building is picked up, they would like it moved closer to Monarch street. Councilwoman Richards asked if the house could be moved far enough to the west that the access could be off Bleeker. Clauson said that is feasible; however, city staff and HPC were opposed to that solution. P&Z felt it might be appropriate. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. Tom Smith, representing the Hodgsons, said this alley is unique to most alleys in the city. This alley is between two houses, not an alley going through the rear of lots. Smith said another unique feature of the alley is not it would not be a through alley. This would be a driveway with only one property benefiting from the alley. Smith stated the neighbor to 10 Rel!ular Meetin!! Aspen City Council Februarv 13, 2006 the north is willing to elirninate the parking pad if that is the city's desire. Smith said the P&Z voted against this request because they did not know what will happen to the property, what the commercial development would look like. Smith noted this is a subdivision application and it is premature to decide on access to the lots before there is a development application. Smith said he does not think the Bleeker access has been explored thoroughly enough. Smith noted this alley would have a great impact and change the historic neighbor because ofits orientation. Opening the alley is inappropriate and certainly premature before seeing a development application Bert Myrin, 218 North Monarch, submitted a GIS map of the area and a letter for the record. Myrin noted section 26.480.050 requires a proposed subdivision be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. The entire block of North Monarch is residential and ifthis driveway were abandoned, there would be a block flow without curb cuts. Myrin said he supports access for the commercial project from Mill street. The residential use will be low impact and access off Bleeker would be appropriate. Phil Hodgson, Monarch street, told Council the city originally suggested he put his parking in the alley, which was not being used. Hodgson said this was not done legally. Hodgson said if the curb cut is a hindrance to Council's decision, he will remove it. Hodgson quoted from Aspen's Early Days, a walking tour, which describes North Monarch street as 3 large Victorians standing close together on the edge of the hill and facing west on Monarch street and forming a protective border for the residential neighborhood. Walt Madden, Monarch street, said this block of Monarch street is one of the few in the west end where the houses are oriented east and west rather than north and south. Alleys in the rest ofthe city are on the backs of buildings. Opening this would be creating a driveway not an alley. Madden said a 9,000 square foot lot would be a result of this subdivision and it seems like it would be available for a lot split. Madden noted this street becomes a historic walkway in the summer in order to reduce traffic and is a refuge from Main street. Bill Stirling said this alley should not be opened; it is unique; it contains a hillside. This alley is like that of the Paepcke house and the Given Institute which alleys are not open and are landscaped and help retain the historic feeling of the neighborhood. Stirling noted this has never been an alley. Hayley Pace said she is concerned about opening this alley; it is a unique alley. Having this become an open alley would change the street scape of Monarch. Ms. Pace said opening this alley would only benefit the applicant. Ms. Pace said there would be no turn around in the alley; trucks and fire trucks would have to back out onto a residential street. Ms. Pace said it would be historically devastating to the neighborhood to open the alley. This is one ofthe few untouched blocks left in the west end. Lisa Markalunas said she was on the HPC when the guidelines were developed. This is a very historic neighborhood and an additional access driveway will have an adverse impact on the . historic properties. Ms. Markalunas said section 14.22 of the historic guidelines advocates locating driveways away from the primary fa~ade to maintain the importance 11 Rel!ular Meetin!! Aspen City Council Februarv 13, 2006 of the structures. Ms. Markalunas encouraged Council to look at access off Bleeker street. Bill Seguin, neighbor, said this area is a gateway to the west end. Seguin said there is an alternative to opening this alley. David Hyman said it will be an amenity to the neighborhood to have the historic house returned to its glory. Hyman noted there is heavy pedestrian and bicycle use on this street and Council should resist adding more traffic onto North Monarch. Hyman said the AACP has a goal of promoting a standard of design that is of the highest quality and is compatible with the historic features of the community. Hyman contended the opening of the alleys is not compatible with the historic features of the neighborhood. Hyman said the green space between the two buildings is inJportant and gives some relieffrom the commercial district. Jim Markalunas presented a W.H. Jackson photograph illustrating the bluffline. Marklaunas said the purpose of an alley is to serve interior lots and there are no interior lots in this case. Markalunas said the aesthetic quality ofthe streetscape is the most important issue. North Monarch street is a refuge from Main street. Crispin LinJacher said if the city opens this alley, they are giving the developer of a driveway so he will not have to take it away from his property. This alley opening only benefits the developer. This alley has not been open for 100 years. Ms. Umacher said it is a property owner's responsibility to provide access to his property, not the city's. Perry Michaels asked Council to consider the traffic implications ifthe alley is opened into Mill street. There are already two driveways and a large amount of traffic and this will add to the congestion of Mill street. Toni Kronberg said this application highlights the contradictions with a historic landmark property, underlying zoning, what is allowed and what is not. Ms. Kronberg said opening this alley will destroy the historic landscapes. Wyley Hodgson, 212 North Monarch, said the parking off east Bleeker is historic parking. Hodgson presented letters from Robert Ryan and M. J. Elisha regarding the historic use of the parking on Bleeker. Hodgson said he feels the access for the commercial property from Mill street to be a good suggestion, and access for the residential property could be off Bleeker street. Mayor Klanderud asked if the remaining parcel on the residential site could be further subdivided. Bendon said that 9,000 square foot parcel would be eligible for 2 houses or a duplex. As a historic property, it could be lot split. Bob Limacher asked Council whether the applicant wants an alley or wants access to his development so he can maxintize the size. Limacher said he hopes the city will not help a developer by giving away public land to a private developer. Bendon entered into the record letters from Walter Madden, Steve and Karen Breffila, Matthew Pace, Hayley Pace, Phillip Hodgson and an e-mail from Ed Van Walraven, fire marshal. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Clauson told Council the applicants followed the code and followed staffs recommendations; both of which supported opening the alley for all access. Clauson 12 Regular Meetinl! Aspen City Council Februarv 13, 2006 noted after the P&Z meetings and the public testimony, the applicants offered a split access. Semrau told Council the owners ofthe Jerome Professional building support opening the Mill street alley and would like to use it and close their access. Semrau said staff insisted the project use North Monarch alley for their access; HPC insisted the North Monarch alley be used; the engineering department regulation states subdivision improvements require paved alleys. P&Z wanted the Bleeker street access; the neighbors favor the Bleeker street alley. Semrau noted Council has control over the curb cuts and he had no ability to access the property from Bleeker. Semrau stated he is willing to put not opening North Monarch is the decision, he requests that alley be vacated with the property being split between him and the Hodgsons. Mayor Klanderud noted the geological report states the soils are acceptable. Mayor Klanderud said this property may have been used as a dump site. Semrau said at building permit stage they will have to have soils test, which is normal procedure. Mayor Klanderud said the landmark designation applies to the entire property and HPC will have purview ov~ any development. Councilman Torre asked about the possibility of more residential developrnent on the west parcel. Semrau said 4,080 square feet of FAR is allowed on a 9,000 square foot lot. Semrau said this can be accomplished in one structure, two small structures or a duplex. Semrau stated he could get a lot split but the amount of square footage would not change. Semrau said adding the additional FAR on the existing house would historically inappropriate. Mayor Klanderud said splitting this property again seems to run counter to the code. Bendon reminded Council there was a code amendment to allow historic lot splits within existing subdivision. Bendon said the 9,000 square foot parcel would allow for a certain amount ofF AR in one structure, a duplex or 2 detached structures. The lot split does not increase development rights only the method of ownership. Councilman Torre asked if the city has evidence of support from the Jerome Professional building for sharing the alley off Mill streets. Councilman Torre asked ifaccess could be obtained through the Jerome Professional or KSNO buildings parking structures. Semrau said he tried that to no avail. Councilman Torre said he does not support the alley off Monarch and is hesitant about using the alley off Mill. Councilman Torre said he would rather see all access off Bleeker. Councilman Torre requested staff look into making Mill and Bleeker a 4-way stop. Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 10 p.m.; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, with the exception of Councilman DeVilbiss. Motion carried Councilwoman Richards stated she does not support opening the alley off Monarch; historically it has been closed. Councilwoman Richards said she does not want to approve this subdivision because ofthe piecemeal nature. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to know where the house is going to go and more about the commercial building before making a decision about the access. Councilwoman Richards said she might agree to access off Bleeker to the relocated house and with the N and 0 lots. Councilwoman Richards noted there are already two accesses off Mill street and none off 13 Re!!ular Meetinl!: Aspen City Council Februarv 13, 2006 Bleeker and this would split the traffic. Councilwoman Richards said she would like more thorough analyses of future potential on this land. Councilwoman Richards said she would be prefer to continue this in order to see an overall plan for the 15,000 square lots, the open space, the setbacks. Councilman Johnson asked if the applicant had a proposal for the remainder of the property. Semrau said it is not required; what is required is that the development meet the setbacks and dimensional requirement of the zoning code. Semrau stated he needs to know which access is approved so that he can design the project. Councilman Johnson asked if applicants have looked at one access offBJeeker for the entire development. Semrau said that would be the least desirable for the development and for Bleeker street. Councilman Johnson noted leaving the Monarch alley closed is a benefit to the neighbors to the north. Councilman Johnson stated opening the Mill street alley is all right with him; mixed use on lot 2 is all right; well designed access from Bleeker is all right; vacating the Monarch alley is all right. Councilman Johnson stated the parking pad in the right-of-way should be eliminated. Mayor Klanderud agreed not to support opening the Monarch alley and she could support vacating the alley. The encroachments on the Monarch and the Mill alleys need to be taken care of by staff. Mayor Kland~d said she can support the Mill street access to the mixed use lots. Mayor Klanderud said she would like staff to look at increased FAR for the Jerome Professional building if access were shared off Mill street. Mayor Klanderud stated she does not want to see a sidewalk on Monarch street; the west end does not have sidewalks. Mayor Klanderud noted there is already a curb cut on Monarch and this house could have a driveway with a curb cut. Mayor Klanderud stated she, too, is having trouble with what can happen on this property. The Mill street access makes sense for the mixed use; however, the Bleeker access has problems. Councilman DeVilbiss asked ifthe city could covenant against future lot split on this property. John Worcester, city attorney, stated the current regulations allow a historic property a historic lot split. The applicant has applied under the subdivision section of the land use code and should be judged based on the standards in the code. Councilman DeVilbiss asked if jacking the house up to put it on a foundation alters the historic character. Semrau said the HPC requires when digging a new foundation, the house be replaced so it looks the same. Councilman DeVilbiss asked what the applicant is requesting from Council at this meeting. Semrau stated he has met every requirement for subdivision, which does not require plans. This is not a PUD; the applicant is not asking for variances. Semrau noted the city's subdivision rules require use of the alley. If Council does not want use of this alley on Monarch, then he requests access off Bleeker. Semrau said using the Mill street access is fine with one curb cut on Bleeker to access the 9,000 square foot lot. Semrau said if access off Mill street is not allowed, he would request two curb cuts on Bleek~. This application meets every requirement for subdivision; there is no requirernent for a design or for architectural drawings. Worcester said another issue is whether this is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan, which is one of the most subjective decisions Council can make. 14 Re!!ular Meetin!! Aspen City Council Februarv 13, 2006 Councilwoman Richards asked if this application meets all the requirements for subdivision, does that compel Council to approve it. Worcester said if one meets all the standards, there is no discretion; however, some of the standards provide for some discretion, like rroding whether this is consistent with AAcP and with the existing charact~ of the area. Councilwoman Richards supports sidewalks because this is a major pedestrian access to the Red Brick school. Councilwoman Richards supports the 4-way stop sign at Monarch and Bleek~. Councilwoman Richards said she is concerned about approving an access without knowing where additional FAR would be located. Councilwoman Richards said she would not object to the historic building moving west on the lot and having a Bleeker street curb cut behind the house where the hill flattens out. Councilwoman Richards said she is amenable to looking at opening the Mill street alley. Councilwoman Richards said she does not want to see the access issue drive where the other house will got on the parcel. Semrau reiterated the 9,000 square foot parcel has building rights for 4,080 FAR and the lot split is irrelevant. Semrau pointed out the ultimate siting of any house would be a decision of the HPC. The mixed use building is also under HPC's purview. Councilman Torre said he needs to know more about sidewalk recommendations, information about the shared access off Mill street. Councilman Torre said he leans toward sidewalks on Bleeker and not Monarch. Councilman Torre agreed the encroachments along the two alleys need to be addressed. Councilman Torre said he would prefer the Mill street access but it looks narrow and difficult. Councilwoman Richards moved to continue Ordinance #2, Series of 2006, to February 27, 2006, requesting the applicant to come back with detailed use of a reopened alley off Mill street, how this would work with the Jerome Professional Building and KSNO, the question about new development potential about shifting access in the areas, also a direction to develop access for the residential portions off Bleeker street with a potential siting of where the new foundation ofthe existing historic structure would go and denying the potential of opening the alley off Monarch; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Councilman Torre said he would like information about the sidewalk, about ending at the comer of Bleeker and Monarch. Councilman DeVilbiss said Bleeker is an icy street with people walking in the street in this area. Councilman DeVilbiss stated he supports the 4- say stop signs; he said the alley should either be opened or be vacated. Councilman DeVilbiss stated he would like a site visit, especially the access off Mill street. Councilman DeVilbiss said he would like to see the letter from the Jerome Professional building regarding this access. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 11 p.m; seconded by Councilwoman Richards. All in favor, motion carried. 15 Rel!ular Meetinl! Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 Gram Slayton, director Wheeler Opera House, said this formalizes Council's direction from the January 24 work session for the formal marketing plan, the physical improvements and the co-promotion arrangements. The finances have not changed since January. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilwoman Richards moved to adopt Ordinance #8, Series of2006, on second reading; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, yes; Richards, yes; Torre, yes; DeVilbiss, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2006 - Blue Vic, 202 North Monarch Subdivision James Lindt, community development department, reminded Council this was continued from the last meeting. The property is to the north of the Hotel J~ome and contains two different zone districts. The 9,000 square feet to the west is zoned R-6 and the 6,000 square feet to the east is zoned MU (mixed use). The applicant is requesting a subdivision to split off the eastern portion of the parcel. Lindt said access to the parcel was the main issue at the last meeting. The applicants originally proposed to open the alley from Monarch street to access both parcels, which Council did not favor. The applicants offered an alternative of opening the alley off Mill street to access lot 2 and to have a curb cut off east Bleeker street to access the residence on lot 1. Lindt stated staff continues to recomrnend access off Monarch street as the best access. Amy Guthrie, historic preservation officer, gave Council a photograph from 1890 showing a pathway where this proposed alley is. Ms. Guthrie also presented a 1904 Sanborn map, which is documentation of exact conditions in town for fire insurance purposes. Ms. Guthrie noted on the Sanborne map this property with outbuildings that are oriented against the alley suggesting alley use. Ms. Guthrie said at the last meeting, it was brought up that this lot was unusual because the house is oriented towards the side street and it would be awkward to have an alley. Ms. Guthrie pointed out at least 8 other lots where houses face the side street. Ms. Guthrie said the property to the north, 212 N. Monarch, has head in parking and does not have a garage. HPC would prefer ifthere were a garage in the future that access be off an alley. It would be difficult for 212 N. Monarch to have a garage without an alley. Ms. Guthrie noted the city cannot deny someone to have some access to his or her property. Chris Bendon, community development department, said if Council decide they do not want to open this alley, they may find there is no public purpose for the alley and will get a request to vacate that alley. This alley land would go to property owners on each side of the vacated alley. Bendon noted one of the purposes of alleys is that they break up mass on blocks and the development on North Monarch could be 20 feet closer togeth~ by virtue of moving the property line. Bendon reiterated the city code allows one access 4 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 per residence in residential areas and there could be an access permit off North Monarch for this structure. Ed Sadler, assistant city manager, reminded Council they adopted a sidewalk plan, which indicated a sidewalk along North Monarch to the Red Brick was appropriate. Sadler noted Bleeker street has a fairly steep slope and is shaded by the Hotel Jerome. The proposed access is right on that slope. Lindt said Council had asked if lot 1 could be further subdivided; it could through a historic lot split. Lindt gave Councilletlers from Tom Smith indicating disagreement with that. Councilwoman Richards asked if this would allow reconfiguration of the lots. Lindt said it depends on whether and to where the historic house would be moved. Councilman Torre asked if this is one or two development rights. Lindt said it would only allow one single-family house. A regular lot split would not be possible because there is a review standard in the regular lot splits stating one cannot further split a lot and this would be a historic lot split. That is not being proposed in this application. Lindt said another issue was whether the development rights for the Jerome Professional building would be affected by opening the Mill street alley. Lindt told Council the Jerome Professional building would receive no additional FAR; however, they may be able to use more of their site but it would not change the dimensional requirements. Lindt stated this application meets the review standards for subdivision. Staff prefers the Monarch street access. The alternative of opening the Mill street alley and using Bleeker street for the residential lot is acceptable. Stan Clauson, representing the applicant, said there is agreement that splitting off the mixed-use parcel from the residential makes sense. The applicants have proposed several accesses. The first was opening up the alley off North Monarch and using it for both parcels. There was opposition about increased traffic in the neighborhood. The applicants proposed a split access with alley off North Monarch, which would serve only the residential prop~, and an alley off North Mill, which would serve the commercial property. The neighborhood still opposed that plan. The 3'd alternative was to have the commercial traffic access off North Mill and the residential access from a curb cut on east Bleeker. Clauson noted there has been beneficial use of the alley off North Mill without any official approvals from the city. Clauson said the windows of the Moss building look out on to the alley and there is a patio in the alley. Clauson told Council there is 20 feet from building to building and the fire department will support a 16-foot wide access. This would allow 4' on the Moss building side, which will accommodate the existing air conditioners and the foundation and will provide some landscaping to soften the alley. Rather than concrete, the plan is to use interlocking pavers. This will result in two access points 20' apart on Mill street. Clauson said if the access for the residential lots is approved on Bleeker, the applicants would request vacation ofthe alley off North Monarch. Clauson noted vacation of alleys does not lead to increased floor areas. 5 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 Clauson told Council the 9,000 square foot parcel with the historic house on it could be the subject of a historic lot split, which would have to be reviewed by HPC and Council. Because of the size of the lot, it could have a duplex on it and it would not need to be attached. A conventional lot split would not be allowed. The maxinlUm development that would be allowed is two residences on the 9,000 square foot parcel. Ms. Guthrie told Council the commercial lot could be split under the historic lot split; however, one lot would have to contain a residence. The historic lot split does not create more square footage, it allows different ownership. Clauson noted the rendering shows the existing house moved forward on the property; however, nothing has been approved. TinJ Semrau, applicant, told Council he contacted a representative of the Jerome Professional building and told him support of opening this alley meant the Jerome Professional building would have to use this alley if they were to redevelop. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. Tom Smith, representing the Phillip Hodgson, said it seemed like at the last meeting, Council gave direction not to open the North Monarch alley. Staff is arguing Council should reconsid~ that. Smith noted 6 P&Z members thought it was a bad idea to open the Monarch alley. Smith stated that is an alley in name only and does not go through to Mill street. This would be a dead end alley and it would be nothing more than a driveway. The Bleeker street alley has been moved to the west and improves the situation. Smith told Council P&Z recommended against opening the Monarch alley because they do not know what is going to be developed on this property. Smith told Council this applicant is trying to accomplish something they CamJot do directly under the Municipal Code. Smith said ifthis were reviewed as a subdivision, they applicant could not come back and apply for a lot split. Smith stated the applicant knows how many lots they plan. Smith said this applicant has not shown consistency with the cornprehensive plan or the surrounding uses to gain subdivision approval. Smith stated the purpose of the historic lot split is to take a single historic lot, allow it to be split once for. an additional single-family house. Smith said these lots are merged into one ownership and this parcel is what is subject to the historic landmark lot split, not a further subdivided piece. Chris Faison said he uses the west end pedestrian way and this section is a passageway to the west end and sets the tone for the walk. Council should be careful to keep this a residential area Phil Hodgson said he thought the decision about access was made at the last meeting. Hodgson said important VictOrian houses had a lot ofland surrounding them, Hodgson said these large houses and their yards should be preserved. Perry Michaels, representing the KNSO building, said when this building was built in 1978, it was allowed to be built with no setbacks. It is not a secret that this building encroaches on city property. Ms. Michaels stated she is opposed to having the city contribute financially to a private development. This seems to be a driveway, not an 6 Re!!ular Meeting Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 alley. Ms. Michaels asked who will pay the landscaping, maintenance and snow removal. Th~e will be relocation costs of electric transformers and landscaping. Ms. Michaels asked if this city will have money in escrow to malte sure these improvements are cornplete. Bert Myrin, 218 North Monarch, said he supports the access off Monarch, that alley spaces brealt up massing between buildings. Myrin said he is not supportive of the notion of vacating the alley because of more massing. Myrin said TDRs might be used to preserve the large lot. Lisa Markalunas noted there has been not HPC approval of this project but an informal work session about what might happen on the property. Ms. Markalunas said Aspen is losing settings for the historic buildings. WaIt Madden, Monarch street, said Council does not know what will happen to this property after the subdivision approval. There are no limitations to what the businesses on the commercial lot may be. Lindt entered into the record letters from Perry Michaels and Bill Parsyback. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilman Torre asked about the existing parking pad. Lindt said the parking pad for 212 North Monarch is in the alley and staff could find no city license to allow that parking pad. Councilman Torre asked about possible vacation of the alley off North Monarch. Lindt answered Council is not required to vacate that alley; however, the main reasons for alleys is for access and for service. If the alley is not opened, staff suggests it be vacated. Councilwoman Richards asked about the allowable size for the commercial building. Clauson said the allowable FAR is .75: I and it could go to 1: 1 with special review. The building could be 4500 square feet or 6,000 square feet with special review. Councilwoman Richards asked ifth~e will be affordable housing requirements for the mixed-use building. Clauson said the mixed-use proposal would have to go through growth management, which process looks at affordable housing mitigation. Councilwoman Richards asked the maximum number of employees generated by a 6,000 square foot mixed use building. Lindt said the maximum would be 13 employees. Councilwoman Richards said years ago, Council determined adjacent lots in same ownership should be merged into a single lot. John Worcester, city attorney, said if these lots were held in common ownership by 1977, they are automatically merged into one parcel. Councilwoman Richards said the intention of that was to maintain growth control in the west end. Worcester agreed the intent was to limit the number of development rights and at the same time Council developed the lot split concept to allow these lots to be unmerged. Over the years the city has appreciated that smaller house are better even if that means two houses, so the system of lot split was allowed. Councilwoman Richards asked what size house would be allowed on a 15,000 square foot lot. Lindt said 4,020 square for a single-family house. The existing house is 2,050 square feet. 7 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 Councilwoman Richards asked if subdivision is a discretionary act of Council. W orcest~ said there are standards in the land use code. If Council finds those standards have been met, the discretion has been removed. Council does have discretion detennining if those standards have been met. The first standard listed in the memorandum talks about consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Worcester stated this is a subjective standard and Council may use discretion to determine whether an applicant has met that standard. If an applicant meets all the standards for subdivision, the discretion is gone. Councilwoman Richards said criteria 3, the proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Councilwoman Richards said the surrounding areas are lots K, L, and M and Council does not know what the historic lot split will be and its configuration may be driven by the access allowed in this approval. Councilwoman Richards said she does not like the incremental approach of this. Councilwoman Richards stated she supports the Mill street access for the mixed-use building but it could affect where the affordable housing would be for this building. The subdivision will drive design and future development of surrounding areas. Councilman DeVilbiss asked about the statement that the application will relocate the existing above grade utilities in the alley and if there is a license for those utilities. Lindt said there is no requirement for utilities to have a license. Semrau said there are 3 transformers and they can be moved onto the applicant's property or elsewhere. Mayor Klanderud agreed at the last meeting there was a consensus to not open the Monarch alley. Mayor Klanderud said information presented at this meeting has caused her to rethink that position. Mayor Klanderud said alleys do create a break between buildings. For future planning, ifthe property to the north were to redevelop opening the alley for access to that property would be a public benefit. If there were no alley, there could be two curb cuts off North Monarch. Mayor Klanderud said she, too, is concerned about incremental lot splitting. Mayor Klanderud said she pref~s history in context and the historic value of that house is its setting. Mayor Klanderud said she would agree to opening the alley off North Monarch and ending it so that it cannot be a thoroughfare to Mill. Councilman DeVilbiss said Bleeker is an icy street and he does not favor using that as access. Councilman DeVilbiss asked if the city could open only a portion of an alley. Worcester said the city does not need to open the entire alley and there is a grade change in this alley. Councilman DeVilbiss said there is already a use of the unopened alley with a paved parking pad. Councilman DeVilbiss stated opening North Monarch for access to the residential building is preferable to accessing off Bleeker with access to the mixed- use building off Mill street. Councilman Johnson said the maps provided by staff are helpful and persuaded him the alley has been opened at sometime. Councilman Johnson said unopened alley is a dead end driveway now. Councilman Johnson agreed the access decisions can affect future 8 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 land development for the subdivided parcel. Councilman Johnson agreed large lots need to be preserved. Councilman Johnson stated his preferred outcome is access to lot 2 from the Mill street alley. Councilman Johnson said if something could be worked out between the applicant and the adjacent property owner and the city to preserve the large open space, he would like to see that. If that cannot be achieved, the alley on North Monarch should be opened for access. Councilman Torre said the historic picture shows a pathway, not an alley. Councilman Torre agreed the assessment of the mixed-use parcel is appropriate. Councilman Torre stated he cannot support the opening of either alley and would support using Bleeker as access as less obtrusive and impacting. Both parcels could get access off Bleeker. Councilman Torre said moving the historic house and taking up a smaller parcel deters from its historic value and he does not favor that. Opening the alley would be against the pattern set in this neighborhood. Allowing development to encroach into that space would change the historical context. Semrau reiterated all that is allowed on lot 1 is 4,080 square feet of FAR whether it is in one house, two houses or a duplex. Semrau said a house attached to this historic structure would be inappropriate and two smaller houses would be more appropriate. Semrau said this meeting is the first time he learned the mixed-use lot could be eligible for a lot split. Semrau stated he would be willing to reduce the size of the lot so that it could not be split again or to put a deed restriction on lot 2 so that there is no further subdivision. John Worcester, city attorney, asked the applicant if they would agree to a condition this that there would be no furth~ subdivision. Semrau said he would. Semrau pointed out that HPC has complete control over the siting of the historic house. Ms. Guthrie noted if this were to be a historic lot split, that would need Council approval. Council may also call up an HPC decision. Semrau said if the access is by a driveway off Bleeker, the house will have to be moved to the west in order to accommodate the driveway. Clauson stated the reason the code provides for incremental possibilities in subdivision is to have the assurance a subdivision is possible and that the access is known. Clauson said the applicant could not have presented plans for a building on lot 2 because there are 3 possibilities of access and they each generate a different building. Clauson said the alleys off Monarch and off Mill are the public rights-of-way for purposes of access and for utilities and they should be restored to those uses. The only lot that is under possibility for a future split is lot I. Mayor Klanderud said a deed restriction on parcel 2 would address her concerns about future development. Councilwoman Richards urged Council to vote no on this subdivision application. Councilwoman Richards noted Council is addressing little issues forgetting this is incremental. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to know where a second residence on lot 1 would be before she approves this application. A subdivision would allow up to a 6,000 square foot building on lots N and 0, which would not currently be allowed. This approval would increase the developability of this parcel without a complete set of plans. Councilwoman Richards said a mixed use building may be appropriate on lots No and 0 but she would like to know how a lot split will affect lot 1, 9 Rel!ular Meetinl! Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 where the affordable.housing for the commercial building will go. Councilwoman Richards noted approving this subdivision will be driving the design of the commercial building. Councilwoman Richards said this does not meet the review criteria that the proposed subdivision be consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the area. Councilwoman Richards noted the existing uses are historic houses and a historic neighborhood. Councilwoman Richards stated it is not known what a future lot split will do to the character of the existing land uses in the neighborhood and whether it will adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to see more refinement of the plan. Councilman Torre noted Council is looking at making the Mill street corridor h more pedestrian friendly as part of the civic master plan. Councilman Torre stated opening the Mill street alley goes against the years of the civic master planning process. Councilman Torre said he can only support a single curb cut offBleek~. Councilman Torre said he favors keeping the alley off Monarch as a green space as it currently enhances the neighborhood. Mayor Klanderud said she cannot support a Bleeker access; that is one of the worst hills in town during the winter. Mayor Klanderud reiterated a lot split on lot I would have to be approved by Council. Mayor Klanderud stated ifthe applicant is willing to deed restrict lot 2 and the development conforms to the land use code, she could support that. Mayor Klanderud said approving this ordinance would designate access and would allow subdivision between the residential and the mixed-use parcel. Mayor Klanderud stated she would not support a sidewalk along Monarch street. Mayor Klanderud said she can support opening the alley for use for the residential parcels only with design and assurance that there is a break and that the alley does not go through to Mill street. Mayor Klanderud supports opening the alley from Mill street to parcel 2. Councilman DeVilbiss agreed. Councilman DeVilbiss pointed out the public alley way has been appropriated by the propmy owner to the north for private use. Smith said there are agreements with the city. Councilman DeVilbiss stated it is a public right-of- way and there is no reason not to open is. Councilman DeVilbiss emphasized Bleeker is an icy mess in the winter. Councilman Johnson said any future resident of the historic house would benefit from the property remaining undeveloped, as would any adj acent property owner. Councilman Johnson said there should be a dollar amount to pay for the benefit of this open space and that the city would also benefit from this property being undeveloped. Semrau said he would pursue whether the neighbors will participate financially in buying the lots and keeping them open. Councilman Johnson said he favors Monarch for residential access and Mill for commercial access; however, he would vote no at this meeting because the proposed subdivision does not meet the criteria that it is consistent with the existing land uses in the area. Councilman Johnson stated he feels the proposed subdivision could adversely affect future development of surrounding areas. Councilman Johnson said this subdivision does not meet several criteria in the code. 10 Rel!ular Meetinl! Aspen City Council February 27, 2006 Mayor Klanderud said it is unfair and unreasonable to ask a private landowner to preserve their property as a park. Clauson showed an illustration of the house as it would be historically restored. Clauson said the reality of restoring a house in poor condition to its original look takes economic resources. Restoration of this property would require an economic engine to make that happen. Clauson stated there is nothing automatic about this development; not the development on lot I nor the development on lot 2. Lot 2 will need growth management allocations from P&Z and review by HPC. Clauson pointed out this discussion about access has illustrated how different the building on lot 2 would be depending on from where it is accessed. Councilman DeVilbiss noted the city set up the zoning and the subdivision is appropriate. Councilwoman Richards said the city also set up the merger of ownership of lots into one lot if they are owned that way prior to 1975 and then allowing subdivision if Council felt it was appropriate. Councilwoman Richards said when people purchase a historic property, they know what it would take to restore it. Councilwoman Richards said she does not think purchase ofthe parcel that may be subdivided off would be appropriate for the city's open space fund. Councilwoman Richards said she does not see a public gain by opening the alley off north Monarch. Councilman Torre reiterated the opening of the alley is not a necessity for the development or for access of the residential off Monarch; the owners could do a private drive. Councilman Johnson said he would like to know the cost of giving up development rights, the cost of returning the housing to its original historic condition, the interest of the neighbors to participating in purchasing the green space because of the added value to them, and whether TORs and/or open space funds can be used. Councilman DeVilbiss moved to continue Ordinance #2, Series of2006, to March 13; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #5, SERIES OF 2006 - Castle Creek Road Lot SplitIPUD Chris Bendon, community development department, told Council this is located at 488 Castle Creek road. Bendon showed the location of the property, Castle Creek road, Marolt Ranch and the Aspen Valley Hospital. Bendon said the request is for a PUD amendment and a lot split. There is no PUD plan for this property. The property was annexed in 1980. This property is zoned R-15A with a PUD overlay. The property is 35,800 square feet. The R-15A zone allows duplexes when one side is deed restricted as affordable housing. Bendon told Council when the city considered the initial zoning on this property after annexation, the records indicates with the slope reduction it would reduce the net area below that which would allow a lot split. Bendon said lot area is what derives the density, floor area, ability to do a lot split. When a PUD is applied to a property, it implements the slope reduction and eliminates the potential for a lot split. In 1999 the property owner requested a rezoning to remove the PUD overlay, which was reviewed by staff and P&Z. Both staff and P&Z recommended against the rezoning because it did not represent a community benefit. Bendon said the property has 11 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council February 13, 2006 public information campaign on the water and electric rate increase before second reading so that the public are aware. Phil Overeynder, public works, told Council the ordinance will be published in full and a press release will go out this week. Roll call vote; Councilmembers DeVilbiss, yes; Torre, yes; Richards, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. Councilwoman Richards moved to continue Ordinance #3, Series of2006, to March 13, 2006; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #2, SERIES OF 2006 - 202 North Monarch, Blue Vic Subdivision Chris Bendon, community development department, showed Council where this property is located and said it consists of 5 original town site lots, 15,000 square feet. The east two lots are zoned MU, mixed use, and the west 3 lots are zoned R-6. There is a single- family residence on the west lots and the property is historically land marked. Bendon told Council the proposal is to divide the parcel into a 9,000 square foot lot with the historic house and a 6,000 square foot lot on the east, which parcel is vacant. The applicant requests the platted alley to the north of the property be opened to access the lots from the rear of the parcel. Bendon pointed out the parcel slopes to the east and it is not feasible to have an alley that continues through to Mill street. Th~e is a curb cut on North Monarch, which accommodates parking of the neighbor to the north. This curb cut is located in the public right-of-way. Bendon noted a curb cut on East Bleek~ servicing a parking pad. There is no sidewalk along the property; however, the applicants propose a sidewalk along East Bleeker to the comer at Monarch. P&Z recommends approval of the subdivision as does staff. Much ofP&Z's discussion was about the opening of the alley. P&Z recommends the alley not be opened. P&Z was concerned about the development on the parcel and suggested access off East Bleeker. HPC reviewed this and stated they preferred access from North Monarch, which is tradition in the west end. Bendon noted the city's design standards require access from alleys if they exist. The city engineer agreed the alley should be opened either from Monarch street or from Mill street. Bendon pointed out the alley off Mill street and told Council there are some improvements in the public right-of-way. Bendon said if that alley were used, one would enter the property subgrade. The city engineer noted the entry off East Bleeker is the worst choice as East Bleeker street has congestion as well as icing which would complicate that access. The fire marshal prefers the access off Monarch street for fire protection. Bendon told Council the HPC jurisdiction is on the entire parcel so creation of the vacant lot and any development is within their jurisdiction. Bendon said staff received notes from the parks department regarding a tree on the north of this parcel and some steps for preservation of that tree. Councilwornan Richards asked where the alley off Mill street would be located. Bendon showed the location with regards to the Jerome Professional building and there would need to be coordination in order to use one curb cut for the alley and the Jerome professional building. 9 TO: FROM: THRU: DATE: RE: MEMORANDUM ~i( -f- Mayor and Council Tom McCabe, Executive Director, Housing Ed Sadler, Assistant City Manager April 1 0, 2006 APPROVAL OF ASPENIPITKIN COUNTY EMPLOYEE HOUSING GUIDELINES SUMMARY: The City Council and the Board of County Commissioners gave direction to the Housing Office to review the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines (hereinafter "Guidelines") every three years. The process was done throughout 2005 with various check-in worksessions with Council and the BOCc. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council and BOCc reviewed certain sections of the Guidelines on March 15, 2005; September 6, 2005; December 6, 2005; and a final review was held at a Joint Worksession on March 7, 2006 where an informal approval was received. City Council approved at 1st Reading on March 27, 2006 and scheduled for 2nd Reading and Public Hearing for April 1 0, 2006. DISCUSSION: The Guidelines (attached as Exhibit "8") have been revised under the direction of the BOCc and City Council and a formal approval is being requested. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications with the approval of the Guidelines. BACKGROUND: At 1st Reading a couple of issues were raised. This is in response to those questions: Page 5 Page 5 Page 13 The survey of Pitkin County employees that determined the median household income for households with zero and one dependent at $60,000 was conducied in November of 1999. It was conducted by RRC Associates. Using net assets as income is currently used in all sales units if requested by an applicant. Once the first phase of Burlingame Ranch is completed, the use of assets as income to rnove down to a Category 4 will be eliminated. Section 4, Rental Compliance, and Section 5, Rental of Ownership Unit, has been incorporated into different sections in the revised Guidelines. Section 4, # 1 - Moved to first paragraph under Section 3, page 11. Section 4, #2 - Moved to No.9 on page 9. Section 4, #3 - Moved to No. 10 on page 9. Section 4, #4 - Has been eliminated as random audits are not done for rental units. Section 5 - Has been incorporated into the Leave of Absence policy located as Section 8, page 36. RECOMMENDATION: Housing recommends that City Council approve at 2nd Reading and Public Hearing Ordinance No. 10 , Series 2006, An Ordinance Adopting the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines Amended and Approved March 2006 for Pitkin County and the City of Aspen Recommended by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (attached as Exhibit "A") and schedule 2nd Reading and Public Hearing for April 10, 2006. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # No. to (Series 2006), An Ordinance Adopting the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines Amended and Approved March 2006 for Pitkin County and the City of Aspen Recommended by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority ~" Ordinance No.-11l (Series of 2006) AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE ASPENIPITKIN COUNTY EMPLOYEE HOUSING GUIDELINES AMENDED AND APPROVED MARCH 2006 FOR PITKIN COUNTY AND THE CITY OF ASPEN RECOMMENDED BY THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, as amended, the housing income, eligibility guidelines and housing price guidelines are established by the City Council; and WHEREAS, pursuant to prior resolutions and ordinances of the City, the City Council established employee housing income eligibility guidelines and housing price guidelines for prior years; and WHEREAS, the Employee Housing Guidelines Amended and Approved March 2006 for Pitkin County and the City of Aspen (h~einafter "Guidelines") has been recommended by the Board of Directors of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, has been submitted to City Council which Guidelines set forth the employee housing qualification guidelines for Category 1 through 7 and RO ownership, rental housing projects, lodge and commercial development, and development of residential housing units; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt said Guidelines, and by virtue of the enactment of this Ordinance to sup~sede and amend all prior resolutions and ordinances of the City pertaining to housing guidelines, but only to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Ordinance No. 12- .2006 Section I That the City Council of the City of Aspen h~eby adopts the Employee Housing Guidelines Amended and Approved March 2006 for Pitkin County and the City of Aspen, as recommended by the Board of Directors of the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority, a cop of which is annexed hereto and incorporated h~ein. Section 2 That the regulations and Guidelines set forth and adopted herein shall supersede, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, all prior resolutions and ordinances of the City of Aspen; provided furth~ that the provisions of resolutions and ordinance p~aining to employee housing guidelines shall remain in full force and effect to the extent not inconsistent with the regulations and guidelines adopted herein. Section 3 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4 Nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to affect any right, duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, and the same shall be continued and concluded und~ such prior ordinances. Section 5 A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the lOth date of April 2006, in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of March 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud ATIEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City cI~k Ordinance No. r 0 -2006 2 ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY EMPLOYEE HOUSING GUIDELINES Stillwater 2005 AMENDED AND APPROVED March 2006 for Pitkin County/City of Aspen Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 East Main, Lower Level Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-920-5050/970-920-5580 Fax www.asoenhousinfloffice.com 'I HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD Sheri Sanzone - Chairperson/City Appointee Marcia Goshorn - Vice Chairperson/County Appointee Ron Erickson - City Appointee Kristin Sabel- County Appointee Dan Lauer - Treasurer/Joint Alternate Wish to thank: THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL Mayor Helen Klanderud Rachel Richards - Councilperson Torre - Councilperson Jack Johnson - Councilperson Je DeVilbiss - Councilperson And THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Mick Ireland - Chairperson Dorothea Farris - Conunissioner Patti Clapper - Commissioner Jack Hatfield - Commissioner Michael Owsley - Commissioner for their continued support. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................. Pae:e i CREATION .................................................................................................................... . PURPOSE................................................................................................................... 2 HOUSING BOARD POLICY STATEMENT ......................................................... 3 PART I. EMPLOYEE HOUSING CATEGORIES SECTION I. Category Incomes.................................................................... .. .............................................................. 5 SECTION 2. Resident Occupied Units ........... ................................................ ............................................................. 7 PART II. RENTING EMPLOYEE HOUSING SECTION I. Qualifications to Rent Employee Housing ............................... ............................................................... 7 SECTION 2. Initial Qualification to Rent .................................................... ................................................................ 9 SECTION 3. Maintaioiog Eligibility for Rental of Employee Housing ....................................................................... I I SECTION 4. Management of Rental Units ....................................................... ............................................................ 14 SECTION 5. Rental Sign-Up Policy ............................................................... ................................................... 14 SECTION 6. Seasonal Housing....................................... ............................. ................................................ ............... 15 PART III. PURCHASING EMPLOYEE HOUSING SECTION I. Qualifications to Purchase Employee Housing ............................ ........................................................... 16 SECTION 2. Initial Qualification to Purchase ............................................. ............................... ................................ 18 SECTION 3. Qualifications for Purchase of Resident Occupied Units......................................................................... 20 SECTION 4. Maintaining Eligibility for Ownership of Employee Housing.... ............................... 22 SECTION 6. Priorities for Persons Bidding to Purchase an Employee Housing Unit ...................... ............... 25 PART IV. LOTTERY PROCESS 31 PART V. PROCEDURES FOR THE SALE OF A CATEGORY EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT SECTION I. Listing a Unit with the Housing Office.......................................... .......................................................... 32 SECTION 2. Advertising the Sale: Bid Periods ............................................... ........................................................... 33 SECTION 3. Fees for Listing and Sales ........................................................... ....................... ................. 33 SECTION 4. Deed Restriction. ............................................................................ ......................................................... 34 SECTION 5. Co-Ownership and Co-Signature.................................................... ......................................................... 34 SECTION 6. Sale or Resale of Resident Occupied Units ..................................... ....................................................... 35 SECTION 7. Sale of Single Family Lots ................................................................ ...................................................... 35 SECTION 8. Leave of Absence for Owners of Employee Housing Units. ........................ ................. 36 SECTION 9. Roommates in Sales Units.. .................... ........................................ ........................................ 37 SECTION 10. Capital Improvement Policy & Minimum Standards........................ ..................................... ................ 38 PART VI. SPECIAL REVIEW....................... 42 PART VII. INFORMATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING SECTION I. Priorities for the Employee Housing Units ............................................. ................................................ 43 SECTION 2. Employee Housing Units Required for Mitigation ................................... ............................................. 44 SECTION 3. Requirements for Employee Housing Units in Residential Subdivisions................................................ 46 SECTION 4. Requirements for AH Units under the Multi-Family Housing Replacement Program............................ 47 SECTION 5. Requirements for the Affordable Housing Zone District ............. .......................... 48 SECTION 6. Dedication Fee for Exempt Single.Family Home and Duplex Units .......... .. ..................................... 51 I" TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) SECTION 7. SECTION 8. SECTION 9. SECTION 10. SECTION 11. SECTION 12. SECTION 13. SECTION 14. SECTION 15. SECTION 16. PART VIII. PARTIX. PART X. PART XI. I II III IV V VI Resident Occupied Units .................................................. ...................................... ................... Net Minimum Livable Square Footage for Newly Deed. Restricted AH Units .............. ......... Maximum Sales Prices for Newly Deed Restricted AH Units & Lots............... ..................................... Maximum Monthly Rental Rates for Newly Deed Restricted AH Units.......... ...................................... Requirements for DormitorylLodge (Seasonal Units) ................................. ........................................... Employee Housing Dedication Fee (Payment-in-Lieu Fee) ...................... Conveyance of Vacant Lots............................. ............................. Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units ................................................. Execution of Deed Restrictions by Applicants .................................... .................... Maximum Vacancy ................................. ......................... MAXIMUM ANNUAL RENT INCREASE FOR EXISTING RENTAL UNITS GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES.................... DEFINITIONS.. APPENDIX A. Maximum Household Incomes and Assets per Category ............................ ................... B. Chart of Principal Ownership Projects .... . . ............................ ........................ ........................... C. Chart of Principal Rental Projects and Requirements.... .................................. D. Listing of Principal Rental Projects and Property Managers ........................... .................... ................. TABLES Maximum Incomes by Category..................... ... ... ....................... Minimum Net Livable Sq. Ft. for Each Unit Type and Income Category .......... Maximum Unit Sales Prices............................................ ........... .................................. . ........... ............... Maximum Monthly Rent ..................................................... ........................................................... Occupancy Standards by Unit Type .................................... ............................. ................................ Permitted Increase in Maximum Rents for Existing Employee Housing Units... Page 51 52 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 70 71 74 77 6 53 54 55 58 62 CREATION The Housing program was created in 1974. There were two separate entities at that time- the City and County. In 1981/1982, a citizen panel was formed and combined both entities into one City and County entity, creating the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office. The entity became the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority in November of 1988 so that the entity could do the following: . incur debt . borrow money . secure mortgages . obtain grants, gifts or otherwise . obtain .fUnds for implementing, completing and operating housing projects . condemnation There were two new legislations that passed in 2001 relating to Housing Authorities -- House Bill 1172 and House Bill 1174. Both Bills expanded the duties of Housing Authorities. The City of Aspen, Pitkin County and the Community support the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. There are two main funding sources for the housing program -- a Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETI) and a portion of a sales tax. The RETT is a 1% transfer tax on the sales price of all real estate sold within the City of Aspen only and does not apply to the jirst $100,000 of each sale. The RETT alone raises over $3 million per year for the employee housing program and was extended for a third time in 2001 for an additional 20 years -- December 31, 2024. The Authority was established for the purpose of effecting the planning, jinancing, acquisition, construction, reconstruction or repair, maintenance, management and operation of housing projects pursuant to a multi-jurisdictional plan to provide residential facilities and dwelling accommodations at rental or sale prices within the means of persons of low, moderate and middle income who are permanent residents and persons employed in the City and County. Housing authorities are created by Section 29-1-204.5, Colo. Revised Statutes. The Housing Board consists of a jive-member (with an additional alternate) Board of Directors that help to make policy. Until November of 1992, the Authority dealt with three separate accounting jirms. Currently, all money transactions are handled through the City of Aspen with support by Pitkin County. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 1 of 72 II PURPOSE "To assure the existence of a supply of desirable housing for persons currently employed in Pitkin County, persons who were employed in Pitkin County prior to redrement, the tlisalJledhandicaooed. and other qualified persons of Pitkin County as defined herein. " - Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority's Goal- (Originally Adopted 1983) Each year the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority (hereinafter the Housing Office) establishes Guidelines that govern the development of, admission to and occupancy of deed restricted employee-housing units for Aspen and Pitkin County. The guidelines support the Housing Office's goals and are not intended to supersede City or County Land Use Codes or the Uniform Building Code. The Employee Housing Guidelines respond to housing needs in Aspen and Pitkin County as identified by the Housing Office. The guidelines are used to: . Review land use applications . Establish employee rental rates . Establish employee sales prices . Establish criteria for qualifications and occupancy . Develop and prioritize current and long range housing programs . Provide information and a process for developing employee housing It is the intent of the Housing Program to provide housing opportunities for persons who are or have been actively employed or self-employed in Pitkin County, which provide goods and services to individuals, businesses or institutional operations in Pitkin County. These Employee Housing Guidelines shall remain in effect until such time as the Housing Board, the City Council and the Board of County Commissioners approve. new or amended Guidelines. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 2 of 72 HOUSING BOARD POLICY STATEMENTS The purpose of this section is to assist the staff, development community and public in understanding the Housing Board's philosophies regarding various aspects of the program. These Policy Statements will be reviewed and revised by the Housing Board on an annual basis. EMPLOYEE HOUSING As the purpose states on page 2. the existence of the housing program is to provide housing opportunities for persons who are or have been activelv employed or self-employed in Pitkin County and Aspen. and which provide goods and services to individuals. businesses or institutional operations in Pitkin County. All deed-restricted housing. of any type or CategorY. requires an individual to: . Work full-time in Pitkin County (due to the nature ofthe seasonality of the town. full-time is defined as workinl! 1500 hours per calendar year); and . Not own any other developed property within the Roarinl! Fork drainal!e system. There are other specific criteria for the categorY units and for the RO units. and these are spelled out within this document. Most relate to maximum household income and maximum assets for the specific categorY unit and/or the specific RO unit. Mitigating Employee Housing Impacts The Housing Board has prioritized the following options in order of preference depending on the site location: I. On-Site Housing ~ that the location of a deed restricted property used for construction or redevelopment of a property for mitigation purposes be either next to or attached to the development. 2. Off-Site Housing - that the location of a deed restricted property used for construction or redevelopment of a property for mitigation purposes be at a separate location approved by the Housing Office. 3. Cash-ln.-Lieu or Land-in-Lieu - that the applicant for a development may, under certain conditions and subject to certain requirements, satisfy the mitigation requirement by payment of an employee housing dedication fee or a donation of land. The preference of cash or land shall be determined on a case-by-case basis. Development and Construction of Employee Housing The Housing Board has prioritized the following options in order of preference regarding the types of units to construct: Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 3 of 72 II The private sector priorities for development should be as follows: I. For-sale type units whereby the average sales price is no higher than Category 3 and the units consist of one-bedroom and two-bedroom units, with associated RO units 2. Farnily-oriented sales units (Categories 3 and 4) The public sector priorities for development should be as follows: I. Entry-level rental units consisting of I-bedroom Categories I and 2 2. For-sale units consisting of Categories 2 and 3 I-bedroom and 2-bedrooms 3. Farnily-oriented sales units consisting of Categories 3 and 4 Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 4 of 72 PART L EMPLOYEE HOUSING CATEGORIES The Housing Office's goal is to establish and implement a plan to provide housing within the community. Rental rates and sales prices are established which are provided to employees and families oflow (Category I), moderate (Categories 2 and 3) middle (Category 4) and upper middle (Categories 5, 6, 7 and RO) income levels as related to housing costs in Aspen and Pitkin County. In order to carry out this objective, employee-housing units are categorized to reflect which income levels they are to service as set forth in Sections I and 2 below. SECTION I CATEGORY INCOMES Prior to 1990, income categories were designated as low, moderate or middle income in accordance with the applicable Guidelines at that time. In 1990, APCHA redefIned the terms and established four income categories in an effort to create a greater variety of units to serve the community's income levels., along with Resident Occupied (RO). The four income categories were equated to the past income categories and adjusted annually using the Consumer Price Index (Cpn. In 2003, Categories 5, 6 and 7 were added. Current income amounts were derived from 1999 data collected by the APCHA including: 1999 Housing Survey of Pitkin County Employees; Colorado Department of Labor and Employment reports; Colorado Department of Employment and Wages reports; U.S. Census Bureau: Flow of Funds Accounts Report and Annual Expenditures Per Child Report; and Housing and Urban Development Data Sets, and increased by 3% or the Consumer Price Index (as defIned in the DefInition section). The survey of Pitkin County employees determined that the median household income for households with zero and one dependent was $60,000. Category 1 low-income level Category 3 upper moderate-income level Category 5, 6, 7 and RO upper middle income level Category 2 lower moderate-income level Category 4 middle-income level The maximum gross household income (defined in the Defmitions) for each income category is set forth in Table!. If net assets exceed the Category 4 net asset limit for any household with a Category 1, 2 or 3 income, prior to construction of Categary S, G aall 7 HBit~ the first phase of Burlineame Ranch, the following method will be used to calculate income: Each $45,000 of excess assets over $175,000 (the Category 4 asset limit) will be converted to $4,152 of income and added to the Gross Household Income. This is the amount necessary to purchase $346 per month of mortgage at an 8.5% interest rate over 30 years. However, should a household's net assets exceed $900,000, that household will be ineligible for deed- restricted housing. THIS METHODOLOGY ONLY ALLOWS FOR A HOUSEHOLD TO MOVE INTO CATEGORY 4 ONLY. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 5 of 72 11-- -~- TABLE I NUUaMUM INCOMES BY CATEGORY Maximum rental incomes are different than maximum sales incomes. Due to the nature of the working adult in Pitkin County and the wages that are required to maintain a consistent employee base, the Housing Office and Board have recognized the need for a higher allowable income adjusted by the number of adults and the bedroom mix. Maximum sales incomes are not attributed to the number of bedrooms, but will remain the same per household, with an adjustment to dependents only. No. Of Adults Maximum Incomes for RENTAL Units Only (See Income Verification, Part II, Section 2, No.1) Cate 0 I Cate 0 2 Cate ory 3 One Adult Two Adults Three Adults Net Assets not in Excess of $30,000 44,000 52,000 100.000 $47,000 70,000 82,000 125,000 $76,000 114,000 133,000 150,000 Maximum Incomes for SALES/OWNERSIllP Units Only (See Income Verification, Part ill, Section 2, No.1) Cate 0 I Cate 0 2 Cate 0 3 $30,000 $47,000 $76,000 37,500 54,500 83,500 45,000 62,000 91,000 52,500 69,500 98,500 100,000 125,000 150,000 No.OfD endents o Dependents I Dependent 2 Dependents 3 or More Dependents Net Assets Not in Excess of Cate 0 4 $123,000 184,000 214,000 175,000 Cate 0 4 $123,000 130,500 138,000 145,500 175,000 Maximum Incomes for SALES/OWNERSIllP Units Only (See Income Verification, Part ill, Section 2, No.1) No. of Dependents Category 5 Category 6 Category 7 Category RO o Dependents $132,000 $145,000 $159,000 N/A I Dependent 139.500 152,500 166,500 N/A 2 Dependents 147.000 160,000 174,000 N/A 3 or More Dependents 154,500 167,500 181,500 N/A Net Assets Not in Excess of 200,000 225,000 250,000 $900,000 - NOTE: A household can qualify to purchase a unit in a higher category. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED Q1/06 Page 6 of 72 SECTION 2 RESIDENT OCCUPIED UNITS In addition to the income categories for employee housing units set forth in Table I above, employee housing units may also be designated "Resident Occupied" (RO) units. Persons shall occupy RO units who qualify as stated in Part Ill, Section I and 3, Qualifications for Purchase of Resident Occupied Units. Resident Occupied units with deed restrictions recorded prior to the establishment of the RO Guidelines are subject to their individual deed restrictions. Information on Resident Occupied Units is also found in Part V, Section 6, Sale or Resale of Resident Occupied Units; and Part VII, Section 7, Resident Occupied Units. PART IL RENTING EMPLOYEE HOUSING SECTION 1 QUALIFICATIONS TO RENT EMPLOYEE HOUSING To qualify. be eligible, and remain eligible to rent and reside in a long-term employee-housing unit (Category I, 2, 3, 4. 5, 6, 7, RO, or long-term at Marolt & Truscott), a personlhousehold must meet the following criteria and must not be over the maximum income and net assets as stipulated in the table below: Maximum Incomes for RENTAL Units Only (See Income Verification, Part II, Section 2, No.1) No. Of Adults Cateeory I Cateeory 2 Cateeorv 3 Categorv 4 One Adult $30,000 $47,000 $76,000 $123,000 Two Adults 44,000 70.000 114,000 184,000 Three Adults 52,000 82,000 133,000 214,000 Net Assets not in Excess of 100,000 125,000 150,000 175,000 I. Be a full-time employee working in Pitkin County for an employer whose business address is located within Aspen or Pitkin County, whose business employs employees within Pitkin County, whose business license is in Aspen or Pitkin County, and/or the business taxes are paid in Aspen or Pitkin County (if an employer is not physically based in Pitkin County, an employee must be able to verify that they physically work in Pitkin County a minimum of 1500 hours per calendar year for individuals, businesses or institutional operations located in Pitkin County); or a retired person who has been a full-time employee in Pitkin County a minimum offour years immediately prior to his or her retirement (as further defined in the DefInition section); or a aisabledhandicapped person residing in Pitkin County who has been a full-time employee for a Pitkin County employer a minimum of lwefour years immediately prior to their disability as defined in these Guidelines; or in the event of the qualified employee's death, the spouse of any such employee, retired person, or disabledhandicapped person; and/or a dependent living with that qualified employee, retired person or aisableahandicapped person. In a two-person household of two adults only (no dependents as defined in the Guidelines), both adults must be working in Pitkin County to qualify for an additional bedroom. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 7 of 72 2. Upon rental of the unit, employee(s) shall occupy the unit as the primary residence. 3. The tenant must not own developed residential real estate or a mobile home in those portions of Eagle, Garfield, Gunnison or Pitkin Counties, which are part of the Roaring Fork River drainage. 4. If vacant land is owned in the portions of these counties, which are part of the Roaring Fork River drainage, while leasing an employee-housing unit, the land must remain unimproved. If the land is improved with a residence, the individual must then relinquish the employee-housing unit by vacating the rental unit. Upon approval of a buildinl! vennit. such owner shall have three-vears to build on such free-market lot. If the residential lot (whether free-market or deed-restricted) remains undeveloped after the three-vear time frame. the owner must sell the lot within 180 davs or list the deed-restricted unit according to their deed-restriction. NOTE: Persons ownin" imoroved residential orooertll. residin" in emolovee housinll or",r to Mav 1. 1994. will be allowed to retain ownershio of that residential orooertll and still be elisrihle to reside in emolovee housinll. However. once the residential OroDertv is sold. the Derson residinll in emDlovee housinl! mav not acauire additWnal residential orooertll and remain elillible to reside in emolovee housinll. 5. The tenant must have total current household income and assets no greater than the maximum amount specified for the particular Category I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or RO unit. Any renter who has assigned, conveyed, transferred or otherwise disposed of property within the last two years without fair consideration in order to meet the net asset limitations shall be ineligible. Maximum net asset limits for households. which consist of at least one citizen of retirement age. are 150% of the applicable income categorv. 6. If the Tenant's residency began prior to ownership by the City, County or Housing Office as a result of a "Buy down" situation, and the Tenant's residency has been continuous since that time, the Tenant must qualify only as a full-time employee. The Tenant does not have to qualify under the Income or Asset provisions. The Tenant will be required to pay rent commensurate with his or her household income regardless of the price category of the unit. 7. If a Tenant or potential Tenant is under review for a non-compliance issue, the Tenant or potential Tenant will not be approved and/or his or her lease will not be renewed until the non-compliance issue is satisfied. 8. Bmergeaey .;;eFl:ers reeei-;e J3r=ieFity fur FeBtal wHts. They HHlst yeRfy their eSRtim::J.ea ser.iee (see DefinitisftS), t8 that ageaey fer their lease t8 Be FeReo::ea. 'This FeEfHiremeat e*fHes after t",i'a years sf R!5iEleaey/sef\'iee. See Part R, Seetisa 8, EmergeBey "~8r-1[eF, to see if yeu Bfe eligiele fur an eRletgeBey vfsFker prierity aful the pfssess that Reeds t8 be felleo;:ea.An emenzencv worker may be placed on the top of the rental sil!ll-uP list if approved as a aualified Emergencv Worker through the Public Safetv Council Committee review and as defined under the Definitions section herein. The individual's supervisor must reauest the Priority. in writing. to the Public Safety Council Housing Subcommittee. This Subcommittee will consist of members from anv emergencv worker deoartment. and a member of the Public Relations Board fPRB). It is the responsibilitv of the supervisor to prove to the Public Safety Council that the emolovee is a required resPonse prioritv. The member of the PRB will not vote. but will comment on whether the individual should be Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 8 of 72 allowed the priority. If the Public Safety Council Housing Subcommittee approves the individual for priority status. written verification must be provided to the Housing Office. At such time. the Housing Office will place the individual at the top of the rental sign-up list for Citv-owned projects. Thev must verify their continued service (see Definitions) to that agencv for their lease to be renewed. This requirement expires after two vears of residency/service. 9. Roommates are permitted under the Guidelines. Individuals residing in two or three bedroom units must. at all times. have the unit filled with qualified tenants. In case of a vacancy. the remaining tenant(s) is/are responsible to find a new roommate within forty-five (45 days). All residents must be qualified through the Housing Office prior to occupancy. 10. The Minimum Occupancy Requirement of one qualified individual per bedroom must be met: however. if the property manager of a rental unit has advertised a vacant unit for over one month. minimum occupancy requirements can be waived. At such time the rental unit becomes vacant. the property manager must again trv and meet the minimum occupancy requirement. The Housing Office may do random audits and investigate complaints or reports of non-compliance on an ongoing basis. II. All qualification items stated above are verified everv two years by the Housing Office staff unless the property has a yearly requirement. SECTION 2 INITIAL QUALIFICATION TO RENT In order to determine that a person or household desiring to rent an employee housing unit meets all of the criteria set forth in Section I above, PRIOR to occupancy, the Housing Office must review and have on file specific documentation which provides proof of: residency, employment, income and assets. The Housing Office may request any or all of the following documentation. (All information and documentation received will remain confidential.) I. Income Verification: a. Copy of the previous year's (must current) Federal Income Tax return. b. Current income and financial statement verified by the applicant to be true and correct. If there is a variance of more than or less than 20% between current income and income reported on the previous year's tax returns, the incomes will be averaged. This will establish the income category. e./.flfllieaBts may, "flSB reEjuest, have the sfltioB ts haye their grsss iBesme averagea sver a three year ]3erisa fsr Ej"alifieatisB. Ehc. Social Security report of employer(s) and location(s). If the above information is not available, the applicant must provide other documentation as requested by the Housing Office. 2. Emplovment Verification: Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page g of 72 II a. All W -2 forms from the current or previous year (a potential tenant who has signed up on for a specific unit must provide documentation of employment for the full term that was specified on the Sign-Up sheet). Wage stubs (ifW-2's are not available). Employer(s) name, address, telephone and dates of employment. Housing Office "Employment Verification Form" [signed by employer(s)]. Evidence oflegal residency. Landlord verification of residency, stating specific dates. Valid Colorado Driver License. Valid Pitkin County Voter Registration. Verification of telephone service in Pitkin County. Divorce Decree or Separation Agreement, including alimony and child support. A copy must indicate that it has been entered in the record with all exhibits and supplements attached. A picture I.D. (driver's license. state issued II) card. passport. etc.) is required. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. 1. J. k. If the above information is not available, the applicant must provide other documentation as requested by the Housing Office. 3. When someone is self-employed and works too few or no hours for an employer, then the number of hours worked in Pitkin County must be clearly documented by providing: a. A complete copy of the applicant's most recent tax returns, including Federal tax returns, Schedule C (profit and loss statement) and all other completed schedules, and State tax returns and copies of most recent W2's and or 1099's for each job (if applicant received W2's and/or 1099's). b. Copies of any paycheck stubs received by the employee or an up-to-date profit and loss statement. c. A copy of a current business license. d. The following documentation must be provided if a, b and c above does not verify the employment requirement and the residency requirement. I) A copy of a current detailed work log or appointment book for the last year (or at least the last quarter) listing hours worked each day for each job or appointment and clients' names and local addresses. Time spent in marketing, accounting and other administrative tasks in support of the business will also count towards the 1,500 hours per year employment requirement if the applicant can clearly demonstrate to the Housing Office that this is the case. 2) Copies of invoices sent to clients, particularly if the invoices reflect the amount of time spent on the job invoiced (and copies of payment for invoiced work); 3) A Client List, which would provide client names with local telephone numbers and local addresses, type of work done, and approximate time spent with client per appointments in a year. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 10 of 72 4) Any additional documentation the Housing Office may require to verify the applicant is employed in Pitkin County and occupying the unit as their primary residence, such as business and personal banking records, utility bills, payments received, etc. It is the responsibility of the applicant to clearly demonstrate that he/she is meeting the full-time employment and residency criteria. If the household does not specifically fall under the current policy, the household may request a Hearing before the Housing Board for review. Due to the need for an employer to house their employees on-site, for rental units owned by employers, if the deed-restricted housing is located on-site of the business, the employer may choose the tenant. If the income and/or assets are greater than the maximum allowed for that specific unit, that employee's income and/or assets shall be waived. All other qualifications must be adhered to. Note: Applicants for Employee Housing will verify on the application that all information provided is true and accurate. If any of the information is determined to be inaccurate or non-verifiable, the applicant may he subject to disqualification by the Housing Office from the application and/or approval process. SECTION 3 REQUf.LIFICA TIONMAINT AINING ELIGIBILITY FOR RENTAL OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING The status of Renters/Tenants of Employee Housing Units shall be reviewed and verified every two years to ensure that they continue to meet the requirements of the Guidelines, including but not limited to: Minimum Occupancy, Income and Asset Requirements. and Employment. The Housing Office shall notify the Landlord to provide the Tenant written notice of the reQualification at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the two vears. The Housing Office Rental Approval form should accompany this notice. The Landlord shall disclose in the lease that the tenants must requalifv everv two years. Housing Office Responsibilities: I. The HelisiRg Offiee shall eRaea','er ts ealise ~he LaRalenl te pre'lide the Tellallt writtelllletiee ef the re'lUirelllellt fer re'l"alifieatieR at leaot thirty (30) aays prier te the m'l'iratiBIl ef the t'.VB yeilI'1r.lf a complaint is received. it is forwarded to the Oualification Specialist. who researches the complaint. If staff finds grounds to move forward. the first compliance letter will be mailed within 30 calendar davs of receipt of the complaint. The bi-annual requalification request will be treated as a compliance letter. 2. The IIslioillg Offiee will previae te the TellaRt a espy sf the Rell~al f.f'pf8val ferm with illstrnetiellG.If the client does not respond within two weeks to the initial compliance letter. a second compliance letter will be sent. The first and second compliance letters will be sent by regular mail. 3. If the client does not respond to the second compliance letter within two weeks. and/or if the compliance situation is not fullv resolved within 60 calendar days from the date of the first letter. a Notice of Violation (NOV) letter will be sent to the landlord. The NOV will provide the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 11 of 72 _II landlord an option if thev wish to dispute the violation bv requestinl! a Housinl! Board Grievance Hearing in writing within 15 calendar davs from the date of the NOV letter. The NOV letter will be sent bv rel!Ular and certified mail. APCHA will also notify the APCHA Board when a NOV letter is sent. For Board uodate ourooses. the landlord situation will be referred to bv a case number only. with no mention of client name or address. and will brieflv outline the case. ,;A. If the landlord does not resoond or does not request a Board hearinl!. of the landlord does not request a Board hearing within the specified deadline. APCHA will send a final letter to the landlord. For ownershio units. the final letter will state the client has 30 dayS to list their unit with the Housinl! Office and that their aporeciation has stoooed. For rental units. the client will be notified their lease will terminate bv a date agreed upon bv the Housinl! Office and the Prooertv Manal!er (end of lease term or the Prooertv Manal!er mav choose to oursue lel!al eviction). The final letter will be sent bv rel!Ular and certified mail. 5. Should a tenant or owner be receiving unemplovment benefits. the tenant or owner must still meet the 1500-hour oer calendar vear work requirement. Landlord Resoonsibilities: I. The Landlord shall provide disclosure in the lease that tenants must be qualified every two years and must reapply in the second year. 2. The Landlord shall provide the Tenant written notice of the requirement for requalification at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the two years. The Housing Office Rental Approval form should accompany this notice. 3. Provide the Housing Office a copy of the lease signed by both parties, prior to Tenant occupancy. Tenant Responsibilities: I. Tenant Reftlef" must meet all of the Initial Qualifications stated previously in Section I. Should a tenant not meet the income/asset requirements of the categorv unit. the tenant shall have one year to come into comoliance or find another olace to live. A tenant who has entered into the bidding orocess to ourchase a deed-restriction unit and is looking for other rental opoortunities has one additional vear to reside in the unit. However. the rent shall be increased to the categorv that matches the tenant's income. 2. Once a tenant receives a letter from the Housing Office. the tenant must provide the comoleted form and/or anv additional documentation requested bv the deadline stated in the letter. If4e Tee.aet sees Bet reeei"';e t:he LaaalsFd's ootiee Sf the Reatal ~A..ffJ1eval fSFm, t.:ft@ TeHaBt Hmst eerneet the Heesing OfHee BY telepheee, 929 5959. er in Jlersee. 3. If a tenant wishes to disoute a NOV. the tenant must submit a written request for a Board Grievance Hearinl! within the deadline stated in the tenant's NOV letter. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 12 of 72 4. Once a tenant receives a final letter. the tenant will be notified their lease will terminate by a date agreed upon between the Housing Office and the designated Property Manager. 5. If the client does not respond by the final deadline. legal counsel will follow-up with appropriate legal action. ~6. The Tenant must pay a ~ Requalification Fee. as stated in the Fee Scheduled adopted on a yearly basis. when the documentation is filed with the Housing Office. SECTION 1 RENTAL COMPLIf.NCE 1,,'.11 EjHalifieatiaR items feam SeetiaR I, I 8, are yerifiea eyery t\'.'o yeam ay the IlaHsiRg Offiee staff. 2.Ramnmates are j3effiiittea Imaer the GHideliaes. iHdiviffilals resiaiRg iR two or tl1ree aearaem HRits must. at all times, ha':e !he Hait fillea with Ell'alifiea teRants. iH eace ef a vaeaney, the remaiRiRg tsnaRt(s) is/are resj3eRsiale ta fiaa aRe',': roamrnate withiR farty fiye (15) aa:,'s. :\11 resiaeats must ae Ejualifiea thrallgh the HousiRg Offiee j3rier te eeellj3ancy. 3. THe Minimllm Oeellj3aRey ReEll'ircmeRt ef eRe Ejualifiea inaiviffilal j3er aearoam mllst ae met. 1.THe IIeusiag Offiee may ae r-anaam lllIaits ana iw:estigate eomj3laifllS or rej3erts of ROR eeflltllianee OR aR eRgaiRg aasis. SECTION 5 RENTAL OF f.N OWNERSHIP UNIT /\ unit may, upaR approval efthe HellsiRg Offiee, ae rafllea to a Ejualifiea iRaiviffilal, iR aeeorElaaee with the GlIiaeliRes for a mm,iHllim periaa aftwo (2) years. Terms aRa CaRaitioRs: I.Notice of slleh iRteRt aRa the alJility te eemrneRt sflall ae j3rayidea to aRY "flplieallle homee\'iRer's asseeiatiaR at tHe time ef reEjllect te the HeHsiRg Offiee. 2./\ letter must ae sent te the HaHsiag Offiee reEjllestiRg permissiaR to H)fll the lIRit. J.,,/. miaimllm siJ[ (~)meRth wRtteR lease mllst ae pHJviaea ta the taaant, with a faFl)' five (15) aay me'le Ollt dallse, eJ[eapt fer ROR j3refit eflltlleyee/faclIlty teRimts, where a three meRth leace er a mafllh te maRth lease cHallae allawea. A three meRth rentalmHct ae appr8vea as a Lea\'e ef /.8seRse lIRaer Part V, SeetieR 8. 1.The Ilellciag omee Iflllst EjUalil',' all teRaRts, aRa SHall '::aive tHe iReome aRa asset reEjUiremCfllS for naR prafit teRaflls. The tenant mHot ae a EjHalifiea eflltllayee as stipHlatea in tlwse GuideliRes, or ReR Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 13 of 72 II pFGHt _fllGyeelfuculty memeer an aefutea ill these Glliaeliftos. The lmit must be leaned fer the t.:~ims set [ena in tile nasa Restrietisa ell the liB:it af, if tfteFe are Be S\:le.fl pFs-fisieBs in. the Deed Restfletiefl, liflea teffils llflflreyea BY the Heuaiag Offiee. 5.Prier te the UGlising Offiee's EJIill!ifieatioa ef the leaGftl. sma teflllflt shall ae!al.o'.,'!eage an part ef tlle lease that said tenaat has r:esei-vea, reaa and wuleFSt8:Ras !Jae halBe8~;/IlefS' aSS06iatieB eSYeRB:Rts, mles Mla rsgaJatieas fer the 1:H1it 8flEl shall aeilie BY them. Enfef6eaumt sf saiEl eevoo.ants, mles aHa FegHlatieBs shall se the feSJ38llBiBility Elf tile aemBl:rNileFS' asseeiatieB.. a.A ee13Y sf t.he 6Jteeutea lease shall Be furnished ey the e~.Vfter af teaant t8 the He1:lsing Omes aHa lwmeev:Refs' asseeiatieB. SECTION ~ MANAGEMENT OF RENTAL UNITS Private management companies manage most of the rental projects. Each specific complex may differ in its rental procedures. Persons desiring to rent an Employee Housing unit must meet employment and income requirements as well as minimum occupancy. A list of the rental projects and managers is located in Appendix D. Units managed by the Housing Office are Truscott Place Phase I and Phase II, Smuggler Mountain Apartments, Aspen Country Inn and Marolt Ranch Seasonal Housing. Please contact the Housing Office or individual property managers for specific rental information. If a qualified tenant of a deed-restricted rental unit requests Alpine Legal Services (ALS) to resolve a housing dispute. ALS wiJl contact the landlord to initiate a mediation between the landlord and the tenant. If the landlord refuses to participate in the mediation process. ALS mav directlv assist the tenant to pursue their leeal claim. If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute. ALS will refer the parties to private counsel. or for qualified tenants. ALS will attempt to place their case with a pro bono attomev for direct representation, SECTION 1~ RENTAL Wl.ITl..ISTSIGN-UP POLICY The Housing Office advertises any vacancies in the classified section of the local newspaper on Mondavs and Tuesdays Ilfla '.Ve.meaElays. Any interested party may sign up for that specific unit in the Housing Office. The sign-up for an advertised unit ends at 4:00 p.m. that following Wednes+lmfsday. Staff reviews the sign-up list and contacts the household with the most years worked fuJI-time in Pitkin County. The interested applicant must provide proof of their work history in Pitkin County for all the years stated on the sign-up sheet. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 14 of 72 SECTION 8 EMERCENCY WORKER An emergea,,)' werker may ae Illaeea aa the tall af the Natal 'l:aitlist if the)' are allllravea as a fjllalifiea Emergen"y W arkcr dmlllgh the Pllillie Safety Callileil Cammittce review ana as aeRaea lIBEler the Def."iR81lS section hereiR. The iREliviffilal's SlllleIyiser fRlist H!fjuest the Ilriarit)', in writiRg, ta the Pllelie Safety COllBeil HallSiRg Slleemnmiftee. This SllileaRlHlitlee will eaRsint af memeers from any _ergeRe)' werkcr EleflartHlelTt, ana a memeer af the Puelie RelatioRs Bear~ (PRB). It is the NSflaasiei1it)' af the sllfler\'isar ta ]3reye te the Pllel;e Safety CaHReil that the eHlJ3la)'ee is a reEJ:Uirea emergeRe)' r-eSflanse ]3riarit)'. The memBer ef the PRB aRa the HallsiRg Offiee will Ret vete, ellt will eallliRent an whether the iRai','iallal shallla ae alle',yea the ]3rierity. If the Pllillie Safety CeuReil HallsiRg SlleeallliRitlee "flflre':es the iRai','iffilal for ]3riarity ntatlls, written verifieatian must ee IlrElviElea te the HouniRg Offiee. /.t slleh time, the llellsiag Offi"e will ]3laee the iRai-.'iffilal at the te]3 efthe rental waitlist far City ewaea ]3rejeets. SECTION 6 SEASONAL HOUSING Beginning September I of each year and ending May 31 (winter season) of each year. seasonal units located at Marolt Ranch and Burlingame Seasonal Housing can accept students. as defined in the Guidelines. At the time of sign-up. each student shall provide to APCHA documentation proving enrollment in a school. or documentation proving an internship with a Pitkin County business. Each student shall sign a lease for the appropriate time frame and provide first, last month's and a securitv deposit as required from each seasonal housing proiect. See the Definitien section for the definition of Accredited and Student. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 15 of 72 'I PART III PURCHASING EMPLOYEE HOUSING SECTION 1 QUALIFICATIONS TO PURCHASE EMPLOYEE HOUSING To qualify. be eligible, and remain eligible to purchase and reside in an employee-housing unit, a person/household must meet the following criteria and must not be over the maximum income as stipulated in the table below. An owner, however, does not have to continue to comply with income and/or assets. No.OfD endents o Dependents I Dependent 2 Dependents 3 or More Dependents Net Assets Not in Excess of Maximum Incomes for SALES/OWNERSIllP Units Only (See Income Verification, Part ill, Section 2, No.1) Cate 0 I Cate 0 .2 Cate 0 3 $30,000 $47,000 $76,000 37,500 54,500 83,500 45,000 61,000 91,000 52,500 69,500 98,500 100,000 125,000 150,000 Cate ory 4 $123,000 130,500 138,000 145,500 175,000 Maximum Incomes for SALES/OWNERSHIP Units Only (See Income Verification, Part ill, Section 2, No.1) No. of Dependents Category 5 Category 6 Category 7 Category RO o Dependents $132,000 $145,000 $159,000 N/A I Dependent 139,500 152,500 166,500 N/A 2 Dependents 147,000 160,000 174.000 N/A 3 or More Dependents 154,500 167,500 181,500 N/A Net Assets Not in Excess of 200,000 225,000 250,000 $900,000 NOTE: A household can qualify to purchase a unit in a higher category. 1. Be a full-time employee working in Pitkin County for an employer whose business address is located within Aspen or Pitkin County, whose business employs employees within Pitkin County, whose business license is in Aspen or Pitkin County, and/or the business taxes are paid in Aspen or Pitkin County (if an employer is not physically based in Pitkin County, an employee must be able to verify that they physically work in Pitkin County a minimum of 1500 hours per calendar year for individuals, businesses or institutional operations located in Pitkin County); or a retired person who has been a full-time employee in Pitkin County a minimum of four years immediately prior to his or her retirement (as further defined in the DefInition section); or a E1immleElhandicaooed person residing in Pitkin County who has been a full-time employee for a Pitkin County employer a minimum of w.<efour years innnediately prior to their disability as defmed in these Guidelines; or in the event of the qualified employee's death. the spouse of any such employee, retired person, or EHslibleElhandicaooed person; and/or a dependent living with that qualified employee, retired person or E1iGaeleelhandicaooed person. In a two-person household of two adults only (no dependents as Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 16 of 72 defined in the Guidelines), both adults must be working in Pitkin County to qualify for an additional bedroom. 2. Upon purchase of the unit, employee(s) shall occupy the unit as the primary residence and maintain at least the minimum work requirement until retirement age as specified in these Guidelines. 3. The purchaser/owner must not own developed residential real estate or a mobile home in those portions of Eagle, Garfield, Gunnison or Pitkin Counties, which are part of the Roaring Fork River drainage. If property is owned, the purchaser/owner must list for sale, at competitive market prices, the residential real estate or mobile home prior to or simultaneously with closing on the employee housing unit and still meet the asset/income limitations as set forth in Table I. The purchaser must provide the Housing Office with a copy of the appraisal of the property. Upon the sale, a copy of the closing documents indicating the sale price must be provided to the Housing Office. If the property is not sold by the time of closing on purchase of the employee- housing unit, it must remain listed until sold. The owner has 180 dayS to sell the free-market unit. After such time, the owner must list and sell the deed-restricted unit according to their deed- restriction. If the owner of the other residential property desires to rent that property prior to sale, the owner shall be required to rent such property as employee housing in accordance with the Guidelines at the income category determined by the Housing Office to be appropriate under the circumstances. 4. If vacant land is owned in the portions of Eagle, Garfield, Gunnison or Pitkin, which are part of the Roaring Fork River drainage, while owning an employee-housing unit, the land must remain unimproved. If the land is improved with a residence, the individual must then relinquish the employee-housing unit by listing and selling the ownership interest in that unit. Uoon approval of a building permit. such owner shall have three-years to build on such free-market lot. If the residential lot (whether free-market or deed-restricted) remains undeveloped after the three-vear time frame. the owner must sell the lot within 180 days or list the deed-restricted unit according to their deed-restriction. NOTE: Persons owning improved residential property, residing in employee housing prior to May 1, 1994, wi/I he allowed to retain ownership of that residential property and still he eligible to reside in employee housing. However, once the residential property is sold, the person residing in employee housing may not acquire additional residential property and remain eligible to reside in employee housing, A business owner, where the individual owns a deed restricted unit, has an opportunity to purchase another unit in the Roaring Fork drainage system under the following conditions: I) the business owner would contact APCHA that a unit has been found in the free market that they would like to purchase; 2) the business owner would then discuss with the APCHA the needs of the owner; 3) the specific Category would be agreed to by both parties (the owner and APCHA) and 4) the Housing Office has the option to approve the request as long as a recorded deed restriction is placed on the free market property relating to the business. The employer would only be allowed to rent the unit to a qualified employee of Pitkin County unless the unit is located in the down valley area. Should the unit be located down valley, the owner would be allowed to rent to an individual employed somewhere in the Roaring Fork Drainage System as long as their employee would have the first right of refusal, with the second right of refusal going to someone employed in Pitkin County, with the last right to any other qualified employee. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 17 of 72 II 5. The purchaser/owner must have total current household income and assets no greater than the maximum amount specified in Section I above for the particular category. Any purchaser who has assigned, conveyed, transferred, or otherwise disposed of property within the last two years without fair consideration in order to meet the net asset limitations shall be ineligible. Maximum net asset limits for households, which consist of at least one citizen of retirement age, are 150% of the applicable income category. This is applicable at the time of purchase ONLY. After purchase, owners must continue to meet 1-5 above to continue to own and reside in employee housing. 6. The ownership of any property shall be considered in determining Maximum Net Assets. 7. All qualification items stated above in 1-5 are verified by requesting each owner to sign a Requalification Affidavit every two years. 8. Any individnal or household who is under review for a possible non-compliance issue may not enter any new lotteries, including in-complex bids, until the non-compliance issue has been satisfied. The owner MUST also be in eood sundin!! with their homeowners' association and a notarized document from the BOA will be required at the time of application. SECTION 2 INITIAL QUALIFICATION TO PURCHASE In order to determine that a person or household desiring to purchase an employee housing unit meets all of the criteria set forth in Section I above, the Housing Office must review and have on file specific documentation which provides proof of: residency. employment, income and assets. The Housing Office may request any or all of the following documentation. All information and documentation received will remain confidential. I. Income Verification: a. Copies of the past two years complete Federal income tax returns, with W2's attached. b. Current income and financial statement verified by the applicant to be true and correct. If there is a variance of more than or less than 20% between current income and income reported on the previous year's tax returns, the incomes will be averaged. This will establish the income category. c. Social Security records, or W2's for all the years worked in Pitkin County. If the above information is not available, the applicant must provide other documentation as requested by the Housing Office. 2. Emplovment Verification: a. All W-2 forms from a minimum of the previous four years (purchase). b. Wage stubs (ifW-2's are not available). c. Employer(s) name. address, telephone and dates of employment. d. Housing Office Employment Verification Form [signed by employer(s)]. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 18 of 72 e. Evidence oflegal residency. f. Landlord verification of residency, specific dates. g. Valid Colorado Driver's License. h. Valid Pitkin County Voter Registration. 1. Verification of telephone service in Pitkin County. J. Divorce Decree or Separation Agreement including alimony and child support. A copy must indicate that it has been entered in the record with all exhibits and supplements attached. k. Applicants desiring to purchase a unit will be required to sign a release in order for the Housing Office to obtain a copy of the loan application from the lender. 1. Any additional information the Housing Office will require to verify the applicant's full- time residency in their unit, e.g., business and personal banking records, utility bills, etc. m. Picture LD. If the above information is not available, the applicant must provide other documentation as requested by the Housing Office. 3. When someone is self-employed and works too few or no hours for an employer, then the number of hours worked in Pitkin County must be clearly documented by providing: a. A complete copy of the applicant's most recent tax returns, including Federal tax returns, Schedule C (profit and loss statement) and all other completed schedules, and State tax returns and copies of most recent W2's and or 1099's for each job (if applicant received W2's and/or 1099's). b. Copies of any paycheck stubs received by the employee and/or an up-to-date profit and loss statement. c. A copy of a current business license. d. The following documentation must be provided if a. b and c above does not verify the employment requirement and the residency requirement. I) A copy of a current detailed work log or appointment book for the last year (or at least the last quarter) listing hours worked each day for each job or appointment and clients' names and local addresses. Time spent in marketing, accounting and other administrative tasks in support of the business will also count towards the 1,500 hours per year employment requirement if the applicant can clearly demonstrate to the Housing Office that this is the case. 2) Copies of invoices sent to clients, particularly if the invoices reflect the amount of time spent on the job invoiced (and copies of payment for invoiced work); 3) A Client List, which would provide client names with local telephone numbers and local addresses, type of work done. and approximate time spent with client per appointments III a year. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 19 of 72 II 4) Any additional documentation the Housing Office may require to verify the applicant is employed in Pitkin County and occupying the unit as their primary residence, such as business and personal banking records, utility bills. payments received, etc. It is the responsibility of the applicant to clearly demonstrate that he/she is meeting the full-time employment and residency criteria. If the household does not specifically fall under the current policy, the household may request a Hearing before the Housing Board for review. Note: Applicants for Employee Housing will verify on the application that all information provided is true and accurate. If any of the information is determined to be inaccurate or non-verifiable, the applicant may be subject to disqualification by the Housing Office from the application and/or approval process. SECTION 3 QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE PURCHASE OF RESIDENT OCCUPIED UNITS In order to determine that a person or household desiring to purchase a Resident Occupied housing unit meets all of the criteria set forth in Section I above (except income limits). the Housing Office must review and have on file specific documentation which provides proof of: residency, employment. and assets. The Housing Office may request any or all of the following documentation. All information and documentation received will remain confidential. 1. Income Verification: a. Copies of the past two years complete Federal income tax returns, with W2's attached. b. Current income and financial statement verified by the applicant to be true and correct. c. Social Security records. or W2's for all the years worked in Pitkin County. If the above information is not available, the applicant must provide other documentation as requested by the Housing Office. 2. Emplovment Verification: a. All W-2 forms from a minimum of the previous four years (purchase). b. Wage stubs (ifW-2's are not available). c. Employer(s) name, address, telephone and dates of employment. d. Housing Office Employment Verification Form [signed by employer(s)]. e. Evidence oflegal residency. f. Landlord verification of residency, specific dates. g. Valid Pitkin County Driver License. h. Valid Pitkin County Voter Registration. 1. Verification oftelephone service in Pitkin County. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 20 of 72 J. Divorce Decree or Separation Agreement including alimony and child support. A copy must indicate that it has been entered in the record with all exhibits and supplements attached. k. Applicants desiring to purchase a unit will be required to sign a release in order for the Housing Office to obtain a copy of the loan application from the lender. 1. Any additional information the Housing Office will require to verify the applicant's presence in Pitkin County; e.g., business and personal banking records, utility bills, etc. m. Picture J.D. If the above information is not available, the applicant must provide other documentation as requested by the Housing Office. 3. When someone is self-employed and works too few or no hours for an employer, then the number of hours worked in Pitkin County must be clearly documented by providing: a. A complete copy of the applicant's most recent tax returns, including Federal tax returns, Schedule C (profit and loss statement) and all other completed schedules, and State tax returns and copies of most recent W2's and or 1099's for each job (if applicant received W2's and/or 1099's). b. Copies of any paycheck stubs received by the employee or an up-to-date profit and loss statement or an up-to-date profit and loss statement. c. A copy of a current business license. d. The following documentation must be provided if a, b and c above does not verify the employment requirement and the residency requirement. I) A copy of a current detailed work log or appointment book for the last year (or at least the last quarter) listing hours worked each day for each job or appointment and clients' names and local addresses. Time spent in marketing, accounting and other administrative tasks in support of the business will also count towards the 1,500 hours per year employment requirement if the applicant can clearly demonstrate to the Housing Office that this is the case. 2) Copies of invoices sent to clients, particularly if the invoices reflect the amount of time spent on the job invoiced (and copies of payment for invoiced work); 3) A Client List. which would provide client names with local telephone numbers and local addresses. type of work done, and approximate time spent with client per appointments in a year. 4) Any additional documentation the Housing Office may require to verify the applicant is employed in Pitkin County and occupying the unit as their primary residence, such as business and personal banking records, utility bills, payments received, etc. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 21 of 72 . --.1-1--- It is the responsibility of the applicant to clearly demonstrate that he/she is meeting the full-time employment and residency criteria. If the household does not specifically fall under the current policy, the household may request a Hearing before the Housing Board for review. 4. Additional Conditions and/or Requirements: a. Gross income is not limited. but net assets are limited to no more than $900,000. b. An owner cannot own any other developed residential property within the Roaring Fork Drainage System. c. See the deed restriction for the specific RO unit for any other additional restrictions and/or conditions. d. Applicant must demonstrate that their income/earnings are earned primarilv in Pitkin Countv (75%). Applicants must demonstrate that thev pav Colorado Income Tax as a Colorado resident. 5. Resale of RO Units: The owners of an RO unit must list the unit through the Housing Office, unless the specific deed restriction states otherwise. At the time of the listing, the Owner will pay to the Housing Office a Listing Fee of eRe halfpereeRt e~%) one percent (1 %) of the total sales price. The unit will go through the normal selling process, with a lottery held at the end of the two-week bid period. At the time of closing. the Owner will pay an additional Sales Fee of one-half percent (!hl%) of the total sales price, for a total of a eBetwo-percent (+2%) of the overall sale's fee. SECTION 4 MAINTAINING ELIGIBILITY FOR OWNERSHIP OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING There is not a requalification requirement to meet Income, Asset and Minimum Occupancy for persons who have purchased and own an employee-housing unit. The individual must remain a qualified employee or retiree, continue to occupy the unit as their primary residence as defined in these Guidelines, and not own any other property within the Roaring Fork Valley as defined in these Guidelines, and as they are amended from time to time. It shall be a re'tuiF8HleRt for lIB eWRer te preyiEle E1aeameftlatiaR ef 7:erkiftg m PitkiB Cea:ety e~..ery twe years, resi9iBg ia their ani! at least a.me lRElBtas ellt Elf a ealea8ar yeM, eBB RaR e'I:ReFDhip ef ether pFSpeFty '::illHB lke Raariag Park ElFaiaage syDtem. Hawever. APCHA will require all owners to complete and sign a Requalification Affidavit on a bi-yearly basis ea I!fiits leeatee e1:ttsiae ~e City (this is a reftliiFemeBt that ~..:as adaptea BY t.he Ce1::lflty afla is 6WTeBtly eeiB:g reaaaressea 1ft the City). APCHA has the rieht to request additional documentation through an audit or follow-up on a compliant to show proof of employment and residencv. Additional documentation mav include items previously stated in Section 1. The 8';:Her has tke e~ti8B 18 J:1Fe~:iae FeEleRI lReeme Tan Retums and 'N2's, OR a ReEftlalifieatisa L^~f!i6iP.it sigRee ana BstanZe8. BY the e.,Vilet'. He\~:e~/er, APCIL~~ has the right 10 reE}'liest aelaitisBal B.eeanumtatisa tlHsugh an aHait SF fells":: 1:1:13 8a a eelBf'lamt te BaS":: J:1reef ef em191eymeat aHa FeSieleBSY. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 22 of 72 /.aditioRal doeumeBlatioR may iRdude the followiRg, 131lt is Rot limited to, the most reeeRt Federal meeme Tal[ RetlifBs aleRg ','{ith '.V2's aRd 1Q99's, afl)' additieRal iRf{)nBatieR the HelisiRg Offiee will re(jaire to '/erify the oY.'Rer's full time r-esideRey iR their aRit; e.g., ElHsiRess aRd jlemeRaleanking reeonls, atilityeills, ete.; or if someell.e is self effijlleyed aRa ?:errs lee fe':: or RO hOlm for aR emjlloyer, thell. the Rameer efhoHfs .....erked iR PitkiR COIlBly mast ee dearly doetlmeRted e)' jlr-e'/idiRg: I. \liheR someORe is self effijlloyed aRd ?/orks too Ie'.\' or RO hOllrs for aR 81Hf'leyer, theR the Rtlmeer of hotlrs worked iR PitkiR CellBly mllst ee dearly doellmeBled by llroyidiRg: a. COjlies of most reeeRt W2's aRd or 1099's for eaeh job (if Bj'ljllieant roeeived W2's anEl/or 1099's). b.Cojlies of aRY jlayeheek stubs reeei','ed by the effijlloyee. e.A eOllY of a eurreRt eaSiReGS lieense. d.The followiRg doeameBlatioll. mast ee jlreyided if a, e aRd e abo'{e does Rot '/erify the emjlloymeBl re<j:uiremell.t aRd the resideRey re(jtliremeRt. I) Federal lax ret1H1ls, Sehedllle C (jlrofit aRd loss slatemeRt) aREI all other eOlHf'leted seheffilies, alId Slate tall rohlffiS. 2) /\ eOllY of a eliffeRt detailed werk log or Bj'ljloiRtmeRt book for the last year (or at leaGt the last (jaarter) liGtiRg hOlifs worked eaeh day for eaeh job or Bj'ljloiBlmeBl and slieRts' Rames aRd loeal addresses. Time sjleRt iR markeliRg, aseeaBliRg aRd other admiRistrati':e tasks iR stljljleFt ef the bllGiRess 'l:ill alse eOIlRt towards the 1,500 helirs jler year effijlloymeRt re(jairemeRt if the Bj'ljllieaRt eaR elearly aemsRstrale to the HeusiRg Offiee that this is the ease. 2) COjlies ef ilF/oiees seBl to dieRls, jlartieularly if the iRyoiees refleet the amollRt of time sjleRt OR the job iRyoieed (aRd eOjlies ofjlaymeRt for iR'/oieed .....ork); 3) .^. ClieRt List, ':;hieh ',','oald jlroyide elieRt Rames '::ith loeal telejlhoRe Rambers aRd loeal addresses, tYjle of '::ork dORe, aRd alljlro"imate time SjleRt with dieRt jler al'jlOiBlmeBls In a year. 1) /Jl.y additioRal doeumeRtatioR the IloasiRg Offiee may re(jaire to verifY the ajljllieaRt is emjlloyed iR PitkiR CouRtyaRd oeetljlyill.g the unit as lheir jlrimary reGiaeRee, saeh as bllsiRess aRd jlersoRal bankiRg reeoras, atilit), bills, llaymeRts resei':ed, ete. It is the reGjloRsibility of the Bj'ljllieaBl to dearly aemoRGlrate that he/Ghe is meetiRg the full time emjlloymeBl an<l resi<leRey eriteria. If the hSllsehol<l <loes ROt sjleeifieally fall aRder the ellffeRt jleliey, the household may re(jlleGt a HeariRg before the lIoasiRg Board for re':iew. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 23 of 72 'I SECTION Ii COMPLL\-~CE OF OWNERSHIP UNITS I. All qualification items under Part Ill, Section I, 1-5 shall apply to continue ownership. 2. Roemmates aFe fJ8FHlittea 1:I:Raer the G\:liaeliRes. ~\ll roemmates of a Etlialifi8a 8':.~er li-.iBg m t.a8 aRit a:mst Be f)Fe ttlia1if.iea tBrS\:lgli t.hs Heasiag Off.iee ealy fer the atR8\:lat sf Feat t.aey €Ian Be €IRargea. 3. The Helwing Omee will se aeiag a Faildem allait ea all the ev:aershijlllaits as te cffiflleymeat alU! s\-:rHag ether flrsfJ8rty ..dt:lHB the Reariag Ferk Valley. This is t8 eBS1:H"e that all S'NB8fS esatiRtle t8 meet the reqairemeats sf the Caiaeliaes. Housing Office Responsibilities: a.The Helloiflg omee shall eaaeaver te re(jlialif)' eaeh O",'Rer ,':ithia llie aeJ[t Rye yellfS. B.The H011smg Offiee shall randemly piek the 0YlBeFS, o':er t.ms h-:e year 13eFiea eft.ime, tEl flre :lae aeeUffieRtatiea Ie the Heusiflg Offiee shewing effiflleymeBl moler)' aRa that they ae Ret eV:R ef:.her 13re13etty ';:ithin the Rea.ri&g PaM Yalley. e.The IIelising Omes shall mail a letter ana a KUru. to Be e8Hif)letea BY the O'AtHer reE:jQestiag empleym.eat iafsFfilatioR BBti maSHie tax Feturns. a.ORee llie aeeumeRlatiell. has seeR reaeivea, llie Hellsrng Offiae -::i1l l'e'i'ic'..: saah file fer e8Hif)li8flse. a.Saeala the O'.\~er he em sf eeHlf'liaBee, a SaSaRa letter ".vill 1ge seat te ~he O";:aer FeElf::lestffig ~hat tJie O\".~er list tlleir liBit as statea iB their Deea RestrietieB. f.Ehslila tJie O\.lti.er esatest tile aeea Fe!$=ietisa, if the Cew1: fmas fer the Reusing ~'\uthmi.ty, aU legal fees ".\"ill 1ge f'laia 'By said OYfBer. I. If a complaint is received. it is forwarded to the Oualifications Soecialist. who researches the complaint. If staff fmds grounds to move forward. the fIrst compliance letter will be mailed within 30 calendar davs of receipt of the complaint or if the bi-annual Affidavit has not been returned. The bi -annual affidavit will be treated as a compliance letter. 2. If the owner does not respond within two weeks to the initial compliance letter. a second compliance letter will be sent. The fIrst and second compliance letters will be sent bv regular mail. 3. If the owner does not respond to the second compliance letter within two weeks. and/or if the compliance situation is not fullv resolved within 60 calendar davs from the date of the first letter. a Notice of Violation (NOV) letter will be sent to the owner. The NOV will provide the owner an option if thev wish to dispute the violation bv requesting a Housing Board Grievance Hearing in writing within 15 calendar dayS from the date of the NOV letter. The NOV letter will be sent bv regular and certified mail. APCHA will also notify the APCHA Board when a NOV letter is sent. For Board update purposes. the owner will be referred to bv a case number onlv. with no mention of client name or address. and will brieflv outline the case. 4. If the owner does not respond or does not request a Board hearing. or the owner does not request a Board hearing within the specified deadline. APCHA will send a fInal letter to the owner. The Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 24 of 72 final letter will state the client has 30 days to list their unit with the Housing Office and that their appreciation has stopped. The final letter will be sent by regular and certified mail. Owner's Responsibilities: a. Onee the Owner reeei'ies tlie leller ana fSffilS frelB the Helwrng Offiee, the O'.\'ner will j3re',<iae te tile IImising Offiee by the aeaaline aate statea in tile leller the eelBJ3letea feffil, aaailienal aeoolBentatien fe(jllirea by tile Hellsing Offiee verif)1ng efllJ'lleymelTl '.\'ithin Pillan Cellftty ana net e'Nning ether resiaelTlial j3rBj3erty witllin the Rearing Perk Draiaage. b. Iflile O-.-o'ner aGes net slffimit the infeffilatien ar eeBlaet the HaHGing Offiee in the time allattea, the 8fljlreeialien fer their \!Rit will be sHsjlenaea. 811eula tile O-.-o'ner be faHfla elll af eefllJ'llianee. the O'.\'Rer will list the Hnit with the llellsing Offiee as statea in their aeea feslrietien. e. Tllere are life eireumGlaRees tllat may be beyona tile eentral ef llle Owner. The O-.-:ner has the epperluBity te feEJHest a 8j3eeial Re\1ew. Seme e"alBJ3les iRekuie, bill are net liHlitea la, a aeatll ar illness in llle family, 811 aeeiaelTl reEJair'.ng the inaBility fer tile a'lo'ner te '.'{ark, a single j3arellt -.-o'lIe is \!Rallle te wark full time, ete. I. Owner must meet all of the initial Qualifications previously stated in Section I except for the income/asset Qualification. 2. Once an owner receives a letter from the Housing Office. the owner must provide the completed form and/or any additional documentation requested bv the deadline stated in the letter. 3. Should the owner be found out of compliance. the appreciation on the unit will be suspended. 4. If an owner wishes to dispute the NOV. the owner must submit a written request for a Board Grievance Hearing within the deadline stated in the NOV letter. The owner will then be scheduled for a hearing at the next available Board meeting. The owner and the Housing Office will each be allowed one extension of the originally scheduled Board meeting. Per APCHA Guidelines and Grievance procedures. "the decision of the Board shall be binding and the Housing Office shall take all action necessarv to carrv out their decision." 5. Once an owner received the final letter. the owner shall list their unit for sale within 30 days. 7. If the owner does not respond and/or ifthe owner does not list said unit by the final deadline. legal counsel will follow-up with appropriate legal action. SECTION 6 PRIORITIES FOR PERSONS BIDDING TO PURCHASE AN EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT The Housing Office operates a lottery for the sale of employee housing properties. Priorities for the lottery bid process are as stated below. The qualified person(s) submitting the highest bid price, which does not exceed the maximum bid price, during the bid period shall have the first right to negotiate the purchase of the unit. If two or more qualified bids are submitted at the highest bid price, they shall receive preference and be prioritized for selection as the top bidder in the following order: I. Persons with a present ownership interest Joint or Tenants In Common, in the employee housing unit. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 25 of 72 II 2. Person{s) chosen by the remalmng owner{s) to purchase the interest of another owner. ANY FRACTIONAL SALES MUST BE APPROVED BY SPECIAL REVIEW IF NOT UNDER A COURT ORDER DUE TO DISSOLUTION PROCEDURES. 3. Qualified spouses and/or children of current owners, including joint custody of the children. and/or qualified parent{s) meeting minimum occupancy. A transfer between siblings is permitted; however, any person who is gaining ownership by a transfer between a family member (as defined in these Guidelines) must qualify fully under that specific category. For example. if the unit is a Category 3 unit, the sibling must qualify as a fully qualified Category 3 person with a work history of at least the last four years. Transfer within immediate family to a qualified buyer requires a$lOO fee, and must be approved by the Housing Office prior to the transfer. The qualified buyer is also required to enter into a new deed restriction during the transfer process. 4. Persons living in and owning another unit within the complex who meet mmrmum occupancy standards. A person must have owned his in-complex unit for at least one year prior to receiving the in-complex priority. If there are more than one in-complex bids meeting minimum occupancy!, a lottery will be held by giving the number of chances as stipulated below. On an in-complex move, a unit must open up to bid to other qualified persons before receiving the in-complex priority. For new multi-phase projects, the in-complex priorities will apply only after completion of all employee- housing phases of the project. The in-complex priority DOES NOT apply to any sinl!le-family homes. 5. PefSOtlS with [oW' or more eOflseemi'le years ef empleymefll iR Pilkffi Cellffiy immeElialely pl'ier Ie at'~lieatieR fer ~1::J:fehase: a. 'Nith B'lifHm.um eS6lifJaney and ORe ef mOfe defleRaeats fer HIlits "...-:ita thfee sr mefe eearooms, aepeaaeflls ffi1ist resiae ifllhe IIflit a mHriIHwHl gg e!ays em of llfl)' 12 mofllh peFiee!. B. With miaimlHB oeeupllfley a. PefSOfl5 '.yith eRe Ie [oW' eeRSeemF:e yel1FS ef efElJlleymefll iR PillaB Ceuflly immeEliately prier Ie afJfJlieatieR fer fJl:IFeftase (eaell iadFAdIlal ~..iIl FeeeP/e ODe ehaDee ill a separate lottery oBly if there is DO ORe hiElttiag .;rllellas heeR werkiBg iD PftkiR COH.My fOH.F.years OF Blore): a. ',Vit:h B1ifMm1iIR eeelifJaaey ana eae er male 8.efJeaaeets fer 1:H1its ",":ita t1H'ee er m0fe eeareems (sefjeaseats mast fesies in the unit greater thaft 189 ~ em efEm:)' 12 meRta period), B. With minimum eeellJlaney 1 Minimum OcclljX1.ncy (see Definitions) ar used herein is one person (with an ownership interest) per bedroom and/or a dependent. A Dependent is defined and can be cOIU/tedfor a bedroom as stipulated in Part X, Definitions. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 26 of 72 7. PerseRS with less thllR eRe eeRseeuti...e year ef effi1lle)'meftt iR PitkiR CeUftl). iffil1.l.eaiately llrier te aj'llllieatieR fur llufehase (eaell iDllh<illRal ..."ill reeei'te ene ehllDee in a seflllrate lette~' enly if tllere is ne ane !lidding wlla lias !leen 'Narlang in Pitlan CaRnty feRr years ar mare): a. With miRimlHB eeellJ3ll1'ley aRa eRe 8r mere aelleRaeftts fer lImls with thr-ee er mefe llearilems (aaj'leRaeftts must r-esiae iR the lIRit gfeater thllR 189 aays eut ef aBj' 12 meRth lleFieaj. e. \l.'ith millimum eeel::lf3afley 8. Pefsens -:"ith feur er mere eeflseellti...e years ef effi1lle)'meftt in Pitlffil CeuRt)' immeaiately llFier te aj'llllieatisR fur llur-ehase Ret meeting miflimllm oeellJ3afley, lllit 'l.meh mest elesely aj'lllfB)[imates miRlmWB eeeullaBey. 9. Persens with ene ts felH' esnseeutive years ef effi1lls)'meftt in PitkiR C81JBty immeaiately llrier to aj'llllieatisR fur llurehase Ret meeting miRimllm eeellJ3ll1'ley, llllt whieh mast elesel)' aj'lllre)[imates miRi_ eeellJ3aRe)'. 10. PeFsens \'fith less thllR eRe eORseeutive )'ear sf effi1lleyment ill Pitlffil Celillty immeEl-iately llFier te alllllieatioR fer llurehase flOt meeting miRimum seeullane)', llut which mest elesel)' aj'lllre)[imates miRimum eeellJ3arle)'. STUDIO UNITS: 5. A single person with four or more consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 6. A household greater than one with four or more consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 7. A household with one to four years of consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. S. A household with less than four years of consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. ONE-BEDROOM UNITS: 5. A household of one or more Qualified emplovees with four or more consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 6. A household of one or more Qualified employees with one to four consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 7. A household of one or more Qualified employees with less than one consecutive year of employment in Pitkin County immediatelv prior to application. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 27 of 72 II TWO-BEDROOM UNITS: . 5. A household of at least two Qualified emoloyees or one qualified emplovee and one dependent which said emplovee( s) has four or more consecutive vears of emolovment in Pitkin Countv immediately prior to aoplication for ourchase. 6. A household of at least two Qualified emplovees or one qualified emolovee and one dependent which said emolovee(s) has worked one to four consecutive years of emolovment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv prior to aoolication for purchase. 7. A household of at least two Qualified emolovees or one qualified emoloyee and one deoendent which said emolovee(s) has worked less than one consecutive vear of emolovment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv orior to aoolication. 8. A household of one with four or more consecutive years of employment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv prior to aoplication for ourchase. 9. A household of one with one to four years of consecutive years of emolovment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv prior to aoolication for ourchase. 10. A household of one with less than four vears of consecutive vears of employment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv orior to aoplication for purchase. THREE-BEDROOM UNITS: 5. A household of at least two Qualified emolovees and one dependent. or one Qualified emolovee with two dependents which said emoloyee(s) has four or more consecutive vears of emplovment in Pitkin County immediatelv orior to apolication for ourchase. 6. A household of at least two Qualified emolovees and one dependent. or one qualified employee and two deoendents which said emolovee(s) has worked one to four consecutive vears of emolovment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv prior to apolication for ourchase. 7. A household of at least two Qualified emplovees and one dependent. or one Qualified emolovee and two dependents which said emolovee(s) has worked less than one consecutive vear of employment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv orior to aoolication. 8. A household of at least two Qualified emolovees or one Qualified emplovee and one dependent which said emplovee( s) has four or more consecutive vears of employment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv orior to aoolication for purchase. 9. A household of at least two qualified emolovees or one qualified emplovee and one deoendent which said emolovee( s) has worked one to four consecutive vears of employment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv prior to application for ourchase. 10. A household of at least two Qualified emoloyees or one qualified emolovee and one dependent which said emolovee(s) has worked less than one consecutive vear of employment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv prior to aoolication. II. A household of one with four or more consecutive vears of employment in Pitkin Countv immediately prior to apolication for purchase. 12. A household of one with one to four vears of consecutive years of emolovment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv prior to apolication for purchase. 13. A household of one with less than four vears of consecutive vears of emolovment in Pitkin Countv immediatelv orior to application for ourchase. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 28 of 72 FOUR-BEDROOM UNITS: 5. A household of at least two Qualified employees and two dependents. or one Qualified employee with three dependents which said employee(s) has four or more consecutive vears of emplovment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 6. A household of at least two Qualified employees and two dependents. or one Qualified emplovee and three dependents which said employee(s) has worked one to four consecutive years of employment in Pitkin Countv immediately prior to application for purchase. 7, A household of at least two Qualified employees and two dependents. or one Qualified employee and three dependents which said employee(s) has worked less than one consecutive year of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application. 8. A household of at least two Qualified employees and one dependent. or one Qualified employee with two dependents which said employee(s) has four or more consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediatelv prior to application for purchase. 9. A household of at least two Qualified employees and one dependent. or one Qualified employee and two dependents which said employee( s) has worked one to four consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediatelv prior to application for purchase. 10. A household of at least two qualified employees and one dependent. or one Qualified emplovee and two dependents which said employee( s) has worked less than one consecutive year of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application. II. A household of at least two Qualified employees or one Qualified employee and one dependent which said employee(s) has four or more consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 12. A household of at least two qualified employees or one qualified employee and one dependent which said employee(s) has worked one to four consecutive years of emplovment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 13. A household of at least two Qualified employees or one Qualified employee and one dependent which said employee(s) has worked less than one consecutive year of emplovment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application. 14. A household of one with four or more consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 15. A household of one with one to four years of consecutive years of employment in Pitkin County immediately prior to application for purchase. 16. A household of one with less than four years of consecutive vears of employment in Pitkin Countv immediately prior to application for purchase. If a person has left the Roaring Fork Valley and then returned. a person would only become re-eligible if thev meet all of the following criteria: I) work in Pitkin Countv at least four years prior to their absence; 2) absence has been for no more than one year; and 3) working in Pitkin County for at least one full year after returning. Each household in the top priority will receive the following number of chances. These chances relate only to those households who have worked in Pitkin County four years or more. Any other bidder who has worked in Pitkin County less than four years, will receive only one chance if a separate lottery is held. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 29 of 72 II Working in Pitkin County greater than 4 years, less than 8 years Working in Pitkin County greater than 8 years, less than 12 years Working in Pitkin County greater than 12 years, less than 16 years Working in Pitkin County greater than 16 years, less than 20 years Working in Pitkin County greater than 20 years 5 chances 6 chances 7 chances 8 chances 9 chances After prioritization, names of bidders with the highest bids of equal amounts and equal priority status shall be placed in a lottery which will be held within a reasonable amount of time following the deadline for bids. If the terms of the proposed purchase contract, other than maximum price, as initially presented to the owner, are unacceptable to the owner, there shall be a mandatory negotiation period of three (3) business days. During this period, the owner and potential buyer shall endeavor to reach an agreement regarding said terms, including but not limited to the closing date and fmancing contingencies. If the owner and buyer have not reached an agreement at the end of the negotiation period, the next bidder's offer will then be presented to the owner for consideration. A new three"business day negotiating period will begin. All follow-up qualified bids will be processed in a like fashion until the unit is sold or all bids are rejected. If the owner rejects all bids, the unit shall be placed back on the market for new bids or withdrawn from sale. The owner shall be subject to the provisions of Part V, Section 3, paragraph I, regarding sales fees. If a unit has been expanded to include another bedroom, minimum occupancy shall be based on the original bedroom count (e.g., for a I-bedroom unit expanded to a 2-bedroom unit, a single person household would meet minimum occupancy, and the unit would be marketed as a one-bedroom unit). EXCEPTIONS TO PRIORITIES SUBJECT TO (SPECIAL REVIEW): I. Emergency workers (see Definitions and the BIBElfgces)' Jl!'iefil)' >lRa8f Par-! H, Sesliee g, mergcRs)' '.Verk-er) meeting minimum occupancy may qualify for placement into the highest lottery category (except paragraphs I, 2, 3 and 4, of Part ill, Section 6). The employee may compete with other applicants in that category (with a maximum of 5 chances) upon approval from the Public Safety Council. In order to receive the emergency worker priority, the emergency worker must have been in service to the community with that agency for a least one year. The worker will be required to be in service to the agency as a qualification of ownership until they have completed four years of service. If the worker leaves the emergency status position before that time, they will be required to list their unit for sale to a qualified employee. (The option for Special Review of circumstances for leaving is open to emergency workers.) 2. First priority for mobility disability llaBEliellJlJlsEl aeeessillle units shall be given to E1ioaeleElhandicapoed persons prioritized by length of residency and who meet the definition of a mobility disability. The handicapped person must meet APCHA's Guidelines criteria for a mobilitv disability as well as other minimum occupancv criteria to receive this Priority. 3. Persons removed from their residence in Aspen or Pitkin County due to conversion or reconstruction of their residence by government action may receive higher priority upon Special Review. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 30 of 72 PART IV LOTTERY PROCESS Priority for purchasing via the Housing Lottery is given to those persons who have worked in Pitkin County a minimum of four consecutive years. An initial lottery is held for persons who have priority status. A subsequent lottery may be held if necessary. Any persons employed in Pitkin County and meeting the above criteria are eligible to participate in the Housing Lottery, however, demand for housing is so great that it is unlikely in the foreseeable future that a non-priority lottery will need to be held. I. The lottery is held the Monday after the listing period has ended, unless otherwise specified. Should there be an in-complex bid, the lottery will not be held. If there are more than one in-house bids, a lottery will be held for those in-complex households only. Should all in-house people decline the unit or not get financing, the lottery will be held for the households who entered the lottery prior to the deadline. 2. All qualified households who have bid on that unit are entered into the lottery. 3. The names are printed out and verified prior to running the lottery to ensure that a household has not been excluded. The names are verified by the bid sheets and by the receipts provided to each bidder. This list is currently posted on the outside door of the Courthouse Plaza Building by Noon, the Friday before the lottery is held. 4. The lottery shall be run on the date specified in the advertisement. 5. Once the lottery has been run, the list is printed out and the names are, again, verified to ensure that all households were included in the lottery. If there is a problem, the problem is noted on the printout and explained as to why the lottery has to be rerun. The lottery is then rerun with the correction(s) made. 6. The file of the lottery winner is pulled and reviewed for completion. 7. Once the winner's information is verified, the winner is notified by the APCHA and an appointment is scheduled. 8. The lottery is then classified as "official" and the names posted on the bulletin board in the Housing Office. 9. If the winner of the lottery does not proceed to contract the Housing Office and sign the contract within three business days. the next in line is notified and so on, until the unit is under contract for purchase. NOTE: The APCHA has the right to disqualify a potential winner if the winner's qualification information cannot be verified, is incomplete, or inaccurate at the time of contract. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 31 of 72 11 PART V PROCEDURES FOR THE SALE OF A CATEGORY EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNIT SECTION 1 LISTING A UNIT WITH THE HOUSING OFFICE I. An owner of an employee housing unit desiring to sell should consult with the Housing Office and review the Deed Restriction covering the unit to determine the maximum sales price permitted and other applicable provisions concerning a sale. 2. Unless otherwise provided in the Deed Restriction, the unit must be listed for sale with the Housing Office and the Housing Office staff will administer the sale in accordance with the Guidelines in effect at the time of listing. 3. The sale of an Accessorv Dwellinl! Unit (ADD) deed-restricted as a "for-sale" unit must be through the Housing Office lotterv process. exceot that the developer may select the first fullv-aualified purchaser as stated in Section 26.520.070. Deed Restrictions and Enforcement. of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. JA. There shall be a minimum listing period of three months before a unit's price can be readjusted. Any termination in the listing may require the payment of administrative and advertising costs. 4,5. The APCHA acts as a Transaction Broker representing both Buyer and Seller. Questions will be answered and help provided to any potential purchaser or seller EQUALLY in accordance with the current Guidelines. ~. The APCHA is responsible for preparing all documents pertaining to the sale and purchase of Category Units. ft, 7. All purchasers and sellers are advised to consult legal counsel regarding examination of title and all contracts, agreements and title documents. The retention of such counsel, licensed real estate brokers, or such related services, shall be at purchasers or sellers own expense. +'8. The fees paid to the Housing Office are to be paid regardless of any actions or services that the purchaser or seller may undertake or acquire. 8. A seller in the process of purchasing a different unit may find it necessary to secure additional financing should the property listed for sale not close prior to the closing date on the newly purchased property. 9. A If ilfspeeti8n fo/'lftSeller's Prooertv Disclosure Form will be !lre,iacEl lecompleted bv the Seller at the time of listing. This will be reviewed with the Sales Manager. Each seller will be provided a ~of the Minimum Standards required in order for the Seller to receive maximum value. It is required that the Seller shall provide the Buyer with a clean, working unit upon delivery of deed. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 32 of 72 Holes in the walls will be filled, carpets steam cleaned, damaged windows will be repaired, appliances will be in working order, and the plumbing shall be in working order. A fmal inspection of the unit shall be conducted by the Buyer on the day of closing. If the unit is not left in satisfactory condition, at the sole discretion of the APCHA, monetary compensation shall be held in escrow at closing from the Seller's proceeds until the repairs and/or cleaning are completed. The repairs and/or cleaning shall be paid from this fund. Any monies left over shall then be distributed to the Seller. The escrow amount shall be determined by the Housing Office. SECTION 2 ADVERTISING THE SALE: BID PERIODS I. After a unit is listed for sale with the Housing Office, the Housing Office, at its expense, arranges to advertise the unit for sale in the Wednesday daily papers. Upon listing, there is an initial two-week bid period during which the unit is advertised with tweone open house dates for showing. APCHA will accept in-complex bids the first week only. Such deadline will be stated in the Guidelines. After the deadline. any bid from an in-complex owner will be treated as all other bids. The initial two-week bid period ends on the Wednesday after the second week of advertising. If there are no bids received in the initial bid period, there will follow consecutive one-week bid periods, ending Wednesday, until the unit is sold. 2. Prospective purchasers are encouraged to investigate sources of financing prior to submitting a bid for employee housing and can obtain names of lenders from the Housing Office sales department. Sales staff are available to assist interested parties with the purchase procedure and to answer any questions about the process. 3. If more than one bid is received during any bid period, bids are prioritized according to the Guidelines. If more than one bid is in top priority, a lottery is held. SECTION 3 FEES FOR LISTING AND SALES There are two fees involved in the listing and sale of a Deed Restricted Employee Housing unit -- a Listing Fee and a Sales Fee. The Sales Fee is equal to two percent (2%) of the sale's price of the property, unless otherwise specified in the Deed Restriction. Also, unless otherwise specified in the Deed Restriction, the Housing Office will collect half of the total fee (the Listing Fee) at the time of the listing. If a sale is completed by the Housing Office, the Listing Fee is considered part of the overall Sales Fee and will be applied to the total Sales Fee payable at closing. The Housing Office may instruct the title company to pay said fees to the Housing Office out of the funds held for the Seller at the closing. In the event that the Seller: a) fails to perform under the listing contract, b) rejects all offers at maximum price in cash or cash- equivalent terms, or c) withdraws the listing after advertising has commenced, that portion of the Listing Fee will not be refunded. In the event that the Seller withdraws for failure of any bids to be received at maximum price or with acceptable terms, the advertising and administrative costs incurred by the Housing Office shall be deducted from the fee. The balance will be credited to the Seller's sales fee when the property is sold. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 33 of 72 'I 2.Unless etheFoise sf)6eifiea in the Deea ResHietiea eeveriftg the 1:HHt, a. fee 8t}HaliBg a ijaarter flefeeRt 04K) ef the tetallllftelHlt ef the leEIB _ellB! silalllle alwges Ily the MeuaiBg Off.iee ellly whea FaBftie }'4ae ~e fmaneiBg flFe~.'isie8:S are used. F8fHt:ie ~fae ~l1e fimmeiBg shall be at the sele &s8:FetieB sf the HeasIDg Omes. TJ.:H.s fee shed! Be 13mEl by the BeFfe'.y.~er €tJie SHyer) BBa is eases 8a the ameHftt sf the m.e~age. The fee shall Be paiEi fer aReB. meft.gage tfaBsaetieB B:B8 sha:ld ee 88fJ8siteEi iR the Heasmg omes l\{eFtgage ReseR'S F1:Hul }"eeeant. If the fee was Bat paid 8a the imtial fl\ifehe.se efthe unit using the ~~f}~ t:YfJe fmaneing pFe~.qsieBS, the fee is thee. flayaele BY the O.,Ylfler at the tim.e the H:nit is sela Elf refmaRsea. The Buyer ef said lHlit shall Mae !lay the fee llaGea ea the _ellBt ef the mengage as set feFth aIleye. If the ICe has Ileea !leis efl a lIBit lUlS the lHlit iG ref_eee!, the fee shall aaly lljlflfj' te the amalHlt af ref.iaanees "'engage that iG gfeater thllB the initial "'eltgage lIflBa wffioh the fee was iBitially eelleotes. f}~L\ type fiaanei:ag fJreyisieBS are these v:hieh j3ffr:ide, ameag sHier ~hiags, fer the rem0ya! sf the Deed Restrietiea 8ft t.he UBi! urea fefeeleslH'e ef the lReFtgage, 13reT.'iEleEl that the IIeHsIDg Offiee. City ef CallB~y de Bet e)[l~reise the el*iea te flarehage the uffit withia a time s!leeif.iea at !he ti",e ef fefeeleallf8. The amallB! lUlS aseEjHliey ef the fee llBS Mertgage ReseF,'e PaBa ghall be revie\T:eEl antHlaUy as 13art efthe lIeHsing Gliiaelines t=e\'ie71. SECTION 4 DEED RESTRICTION The purchaser must execute, in a form satisfactory to the Housing Office and for recording with the Pitkin County Clerk concurrent with the closing of the sale, a document acknowledging the purchaser's agreement to be bound by the recorded Deed Restriction covering the sale unit. This form is either a Memorandum of Acceptance that relates to a Master Deed Restriction, or an Occupancy and Resale Agreement. The form is provided for signature by the Housing Office at the time of closing, and will be recorded along with the other documents that are required to be recorded. SECTION 5 CO-OWNERSHIP AND CO-SIGNATURE I. Any co-ownership interest other than Joint Tenancy or Tenancy-In-Common must be approved by the Housing Office. 2. Co-signers (persons providing security or assuming partial responsibility for the loan) may be approyed for ownership of the unit but shall not occupy the unit unless qualified by the Housing Office. An additional document will be required for the non-qualifYing owner to sign at the time of closing and will be provided by the Housing Office. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 34 of 72 SECTION 6 SALE OR RESALE OF RESIDENT OCCUPIED UNITS 1. There may be a maximum initial sales price for a newly developed Resident Occupied Unit. This will be based on a project-by-project basis. 2. If a vacant lot is purchased for development, an initial Certificate of Occupancy must be obtained within three years of the sale of the lot. 3. For those RO proiects that do not require the unit to be listed with the Housing Office. +!he Housing Office shall qualify prospective purchasers (under Housing Office qualifications). Any other resales of RO units shall be listed with the Housing Office and will be marketed through the same process as the category units, unless specified differently in that project's specific deed restriction. This will guarantee that the maximum sales price is being adhered to in all aspects of the housing program. The Seller will be required to pay a Listing Fee of one-lialf percent (1~%) of the total sale's price in addition to the one-lialfpercent (1),4%) Sales Fee, for a total of ooetwo percent (+2%) of the overall sale's price. Mobile home parks with no sales price limits are exempt from this section, except that at the time of closing, a I % fee of the sales price will be paid by the seller into the housing program, unless stated otherwise. 4. The maximum resale price shall be calculated as follows (unless specified differently in a recorded deed restriction). The appreciation is calculated using the simple method, not the compounded method. . the initial sale price of the RO lot or unit, plus 3% or the Conswner Price Index (CPI) whichever is less, appreciation on that amount, subject to the requirements below; PLUS . the actual cost to construct a unit on a lot, plus 3% or CPI, whichever is less, appreciation on that amount from the time of Certificate of Occupancy (CO). subject to the requirements below; PLUS . any additional cost to expand the unit to the maximwn 2.200 square feet, plus 3% or CPI, whichever is less, appreciation on that amount, from the time of CO for that addition, subject to the requirements section stated below; PLUS . the actual cost of permitted capital improvements stated in an exhibit attached to the deed restriction, not to exceed 10% of the initial sales price of the completed unit, or the expanded unit. 5. Existing mobile home park(s) converted to the RO category will not have an appreciation cap on the mobile home and/or lot if the unit owners are qualified Pitkin County residents as defined by the Guidelines. The Housing Office shall retain the right of first refusal on any resale. SECTION 7 SALE OF SINGLE FAMILY LOTS The City or County will receive sales proceeds from single-family lots when the land is. being provided as mitigation of employee housing impacts for a development or growth. The property owner or developer will receive sales proceeds from single-family lots when the land is not being provided as mitigation of employee housing impacts for a development or growth. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 35 of 72 II SECTION 8 LEAVE OF ABSENCE FOR OWNERS OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS An owner of an employee-housing unit must reside in their unit at least nine months out of the year and work at least 1500 hours per calendar year. There are instances in someone's life where they must leave Pitkin County for a limited period of time and desire to rent their unit during their absence. In those instances. a Leave of Absence may be granted by the Housing Office for one year. The homeowner must provide clear and convincing evidence, which shows a bona fide reason for leaving and a commitment to returo to the Aspen/Pitkin area. Leave of Absence Request Procedure I. A Leave of Absence Request form must be completed and returoed to the Housing Office at least 30 days prior to leaving. This form must be obtained from the Housing Office. 2. Notice of such intent to rent and the ability to comment shall be provided to any applicable homeowners' association at the time of request for their input and recommendation. Terms and Conditions: I. The leave of absence shall be up to one year and may, at the discretion of the Housing Office, be extended for one more year, for a maximum of two years. 2. The unit may be rented in accordance with Part II, Section 5, during said eBe sr!we yell!' period so long as the Deed Restriction covering the unit permits the rental. A summer Leave of Absence may be granted and units rented under provisions of Part II, Section 5. 3. In the event that the rental rate is not set forth in the Deed Restriction, the rent shall be eotabliohea at the gpeatef sf sv;aer's seat af the FeB.t estaelishea ia a66SfElaBee ','lith the GHiaelines f-er ooits at the OflJlrSJlRale rne8IBe ealegsry (see Table I\')charged based on the owners costs plus $50. For someone who no longer has debt on their unit. the rent would be calculated beginning with the rental amount associated with the Guidelines in effect at the time they bought the unit. and then appreciated forward per Table VI in the Guidelines. 4. Owner's cost as used herein includes the monthly mortgage principal and interest payment, condominium fees. utilities remaining in owner's name, taxes (if not part of the mortgage payment) and insurance prorated on a monthly basis, plus $50 per month. 5. Prior to the Housing Office's qualification of tenant. said tenant shall acknowledge as part of the lease that said tenant has received, read and understands the homeowners' association covenants, rules and regnlations for the unit and shall abide by them. Enforcement of said covenants, rules and regnlations shall be the responsibility of the homeowners' association. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 36 of 72 6. A copy of the executed lease shall be furnished by the owner or tenant to the Housing Office and homeowners' association. 7. Should the homeowners' association recommend denial of the owner's request for a leave, the Housing Office will conduct a Special Review with the owner and homeowners' association representative(s) present. 8. Bona fide reasons for a leave of absence shall be limited to: an illness or death in the family, educational purposes, job enhancement, travel, exploring relocation options. Should the owner be denied the Leave of Absence, the owner may request a Special Review. 9. A short-term rental may be permitted, with the consent of the Housing Office and the Homeowners' Association, to faculty or employees of a non-profit group and who shall be qualified without meeting income and assets only for a short-term rental (three months or less). SECTION 9 ROOMMATES IN SALES UNITS Owners are allowed to have roommates, however, there are certain conditions that must be followed when renting a room. Terms and Conditions: I. Roommates are permitted as long as the owner is a qualified employee and residing full-time in their unit. 2. The maximum rental rate for the room shall not exceed the maximum rental rate permitted under Part vrn above, for said unit pro rated on a per bedroom basis. One roommate in a two-bedroom unit shall pay a maximum rent of one-half (1/2) of the costs; one roommate in a three-bedroom household shall pay a maximum rent of one-third (1/3) of the total costs. 3. An owner may rent a unit or room to a qualified employee if it is permissible under the Deed Restriction and or covenants of the Homeowner's Association covering the unit. The owner must continue to reside in the unit as a sole and exclusive place of residence. The owner shall be deemed to have ceased to use the unit as his or her sole and exclusive place of residence by accepting permanent employment outside of Pitkin County, or residing in the unit fewer than nine (9) months out of any twelve (12) consecutive months. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 37 of 72 II-~- SECTION 10 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT POLICY AND MINIMUM STANDARDS TO RECEIVE FULL VALUE AT TIME OF RESALE Capital improvements and upkeep on deed-restricted units are necessary to enhance the longevity of the affordable housing unit. A maximum sales price will be affected, either higher or lower, relating to the condition of the unit and if the unit meets the minimum standard criteria. Any owner wishing to utilize the new capital improvement policy will be required to enter into the deed restriction that is currently being used at the time of the request. Units Built After January I, 2004 and Re-Sale Units: An owner will be required to maintain a minimum standard for the unit purchased. See Table I, Minimum Standards for Seller to Receive Full Value. Prior to any sale of a unit, the Housing Office Staff will determine a maximum sales price. The Sales Manager shall conduct an inspection and a list provided to the Seller as to the items that will need to be done PRIOR to closing to get full value. The Buyer also has the right to pay for a formal inspection of the unit during the inspection period stated in the Sales Contract. If said inspection reflects items not met on the Minimum Standards for Seller to Receive Full Value table. the Seller shall be required to remedy those items. If the unit meets the standard criteria, the Property or Unit shall be sold for an amount ("Maximum Resale Price") in excess of the lesser of the purchase price: . Plus an increase of three percent (3%) of such price per year from the date of purchase to the date of Owner's notice of intent to sell (prorated at the rate of .25 percent for each whole month for any part of a year); OR . An amount based upon the Consumer Price Index (All Items, U.S. City Average, Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (Revised), published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics) calculated as follows: the Owner's purchase price divided by the Consumer Price Index published at the time of Owner's purchase stated on the Settlement Statement, multiplied by the Consumer Price Index current at the date of intent to sell; . Plus any approved capital improvements. Homeowners Requesting the Ability to Use this Capitallmprovement Policy: If an owner requests to utilize the new capital improvement policy, such owner shall be required to enter into a new, updated deed restriction. Capital improvements can be added to the maximum resale price. A 10% capital improvement maximum will be established for each new owner~All capital improvements will be deoreciated. Certain capital improvements will not be counted as the 10%. Each capital improvement will depreciate according to the depreciation schedule stated in an approved handbook. The current source is the Marshall Swift Residential Handbook. Any capital improvements associated with health and safety, energy efficiency, water conservation, and green building products will be exempt from the 10% capital improvement cap; however, such capital improvements shall be depreciated according to the depreciation schedule stated in an approved handbook. Any improvement to bring the unit up to the Aspen Affordable Housing Building Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 38 of 72 Guidelines will also be allowed as part of the 10% cap. An owner should check with the Housing Office prior to starting the improvement to verify that the cost can be recouped. It will be up to the homeowner to maintain the unit in good condition. This would include, but not be limited to, the condition of the roof, boiler and water heater, and appliances. Educational programs shall be scheduled for existing homeowners' associations and newly developed homeowners' associations as to what their responsibilities are in maintaining the project in good condition, Permitted CapitallmproYements I. The term "Permitted Capital Improyement" as used in the Agreement shall only include the following: a. Improvements or fixtures erected, installed or attached as pennanent, functional, non-decoratiye improyements to real property, excluding repair. replacement and/or maintenance improvements; b. Improvements for energy and water conservation; c. Improyements for the benefit of seniors and/or handicapped persons; d. Improyements for health and safety protection devices (including radon); e. Improvements to add and/or finish pennanentlfixed storage space; f Improvements to finish unfinished space; g. Landscaping; h. The cost of adding decks and balconies, and any extension thereto; and/or i. Improvements associated with health and safety, energy efficiency, water conservation, and green building products. 2. Permitted Capital Improvements as used in this Agreement shall NOT include the following: -a. Jacuzzis, saunas, steam showers and other similar items; b. Upgrades or addition of decorative items, including lights, window coverings and other similar items. c. Upgrades of appliances, plumbing and mechanical fixtures, carpets and other similar items included as part of the original construction of a unit and/or improvements required to repair and maintain existing fixtures, appliances, plumbing and mechanical fixtures. painting, and other similar items, wliess replacement is energy efficient or for safety and health reasons. 3. All Permitted Capital Improyement items and costs shall be approved by the APCHA staff prior to being added to the Maximum Resale Price as defined herein. In order to get credit for an improvement where a building permit is required. the improvement will not be counted wliess a Letter of Completion was obtained by the Building Department. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 39 of 72 I! MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR SELLER TO RECEIVE FULL VALUE . Clean unit . Carpets steam-cleaned two or three days prior to closing · All scratches, holes, burned marks repaired in hardwood floors, linoleum, tile, counter tops etc. . No broken or foggy windows . All screens in windows (if screens were originally provided) . All doors will be in working order with no holes . All locks on doors will work . All keys will be provided; e.g., door, mail box, garage . All mechanical systems shall be in working order . Walls paint ready · Normal wear and tear on carpet; if carpet has holes. stains, etc., the carpet and padding shall be replaced or escrow funds at current market value per square foot for a comparable product shall be held at the time of closing to be used by the new buyer . No leaks from plumbing fixtures . No roofleaks . Any safety hazard remedied prior to closing · Satisfaction of radon issue if found at time of inspection . All light fixtures shall be in working order DEFINITIONS: Clean Unit: All rooms will be cleaned as stated below: . Kitchen: . Range - Inner and outer services will be cleaned. . Range hood and Exhaust Fan · Refrigerator and Freezer - Inner and outer surfaces of refrigerator and freezer will be clean. Freezer will be defrosted. · Cabinets and Countertops - Exterior and interior surfaces of cabinets and drawers will be clean. Door and drawer handles, if provided, shall be clean and in place. · Sink and Garbage Disposal - Sink and plumbing fixtures will be clean. If garbage disposal provided. this must be in working order. . Dishwasher ~ If provided, must be in working order and inner and outer surfaces shall be clean. . Blinds. Windows. Screens: · Mini-blinds, Venetian Blinds, Vertical Blinds, Pull Shades ~ Will be clean. . Windows - All window surfaces, inside and outside of the window glass. shall be clean. . Screens - Screens will be clean and in place with no holes or tears. · Closets: Closets. including floors. walls, hanger rod, shelves and doors, shall be clean. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 40 of 72 . Lieht Fixtures: Light fixtures will be clean and shall have functioning bulbs/florescent tubes. . Bathrooms: . Bathtub, Shower Walls. Sinks - Bathtubs, shower walls and sinks shall be clean. . Toilet and Water Closet - Water closets, toilet bowls and toilet seats will be clean. If the toilet seat is broken or peeling, the seat shall be replaced. . Tile - All tile and grout will be clean. . Mirrors and Medicine Cabinets - Mirrors and medicine cabinets shall be cleaned inside and out. . Shelves and/or Other Cabinetry - All other shelving or cabinetry shall be cleaned inside and out. . Walls. Ceilines. Painted Doors and Baseboards: Painted surfaces must be cleaned with care to ensure the surface is clean without damaging the paint. . Floors: Floor cleaning includes sweeping and mopping and could include stripping, waxing and buffing. Types of floor surfaces include wood, wood parquet tiles, linoleum, asphalt tile, vinyl tile, mosaic tile, concrete and carpet. If carpet, all carpets shall be cleaned at least two days prior to closing. . Interior Storaee/Utility Rooms: Storage/utility rooms shall be cleaned. Properly cleaned storage/utility rooms will be free from odors, removable stains, grease marks or accumulations. Safetv Hazard: Any item that provides a safety hazard shall be fixed. This would include, but is not limited to, exposed electrical wiring, satisfaction of any radon issue found, ventilation for gas hot water system, etc. Walls Paint-Readv: All holes shall be patched; all posters, pictures, etc., shall be removed from all walls; all nails, tacks. tape, etc., shall be removed from all walls; and all walls shall be clean and ready for the new buyer to paint. If wallpaper has been placed on the wall and in good condition, the wallpaper can remain; if the wallpaper is peeling off, the wallpaper must be removed. Windows: If a window is broken, including the locking mechanism, the window shall be replaced. If the . window has a fog residue in the inside, it shall be replaced. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 41 of 72 II PART VI SPECIAL REVIEW A Special Review for a variance from the strict application of these Guidelines may be requested if an unusual hardship can be shown, and the variance from the strict application of the Guidelines is consistent with the Housing Program intent and policy. In order to request a Special Review, a letter must be submitted to the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority stating the request, with documentation regarding the unusual hardship. The applicant shall submit any additional information reasonably requested by APCHA and a Special Review meeting will be scheduled in a timely manner. The Special Review Committee may grant the request, with or without conditions, if the approval will not cause a substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Guidelines, and if an unusual hardship is shown. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 42 of 72 PART VII INFORMATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING Private sector development is critical in order to meet our employee housing goals. The Housing Office Operations Manager will track employee housing zone projects through the Planning and Building Permit process in order to aid in communication between the developer and government. This tracking system will ensure that all employee housing developments are treated as expeditiously as the City and County policies intend. Part VII of the Guidelines contains information to be used by developers of employee housing units in the City of Aspen and Pitkin County. This section applies to development applications for free-market development, residential subdivisions, under the Multifamily Housing Replacement Program, Chapter 26.530, of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, and in calculating the dedication fee (payment-in-lieu fee) for exempt single-family home and exempt duplex units, and for calculating mitigation requirements as stipulated under the growth management quota system. Units developed by a private developer under the Affordable Housing Zone District will have the option to choose a qualified employee(s) for one-third of the deed-restricted units being developed. The one-third chosen by the developer must meet the minimum occupancy requirements, and all other requirements for the specific category. All other units will be placed in the general housing lottery. SECTION 1 PRIORITIES FOR EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS The Housing Board establishes the following equal priority unit types based on current needs. The private sector priorities for development should be as follows: I. For-sale type units whereby the average sales price is no higher than Category 3 and the units consist of one-bedroom and two-bedroom units, with associated RO units 2. Family-oriented sales units (Categories 3 and 4) The public sector priorities for development should be as follows: I. 2. 3. Entry-level rental units consisting of I-bedroom Categories I and 2 For-sale units consisting of Categories 2 and 3 I-bedroom and two-bedroom Family-oriented sales units consisting of Categories 3 and 4 I ' The Housing Board has established the following options, in order of preference depending on the site location, available to obtain credit for providing deed-restricted employee housing units under the City's or County's Growth Management Quota System (mitigation units): a. On-Site Housing Employee housing units located either on the same site as or attached to the proposed development. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 43 of 72 ~ --~~~---~.----!~I--~ b. Off-Site Housing - Employee housing units located within the City of Aspen or the Aspen Metro Area, as defmed by the Aspen Area Community Plan and approved by the APCHA. c. Cash-in-Lieu or Land-in-Lieu - Payment of an employee housing dedication fee or a donation of land. The preference of cash or land shall be determined on a case-by-case basis. SECTION 2 EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS REQUIRED FOR MITIGATION The following provisions shall apply to all employee-housing units required as mitigation for residential or commercial development. All such employee housing units must meet the size, type, income and occupancy requirements as contained in these Guidelines. Applicants are encouraged to schedule a pre-application conference with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority staff to obtain guidance regarding the application of these Guidelines to specific development projects. The following applies to, and credit shall be given for. Category I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and Resident Occupied housing as defined in these Guidelines, and as amended from time to time. 1. Mitigation Credit: Credit under the Growth Management Quota system may be obtained by any of the following methods or combination thereof: a. Production of new dwelling units deed restricted in perpetuity to rental and sale price terms as defmed in these guidelines. b. Conversion of existing dwelling units to deed restricted status by recording a deed restriction in perpetuity upon those units restricting them to the rental and sale price terms, qualification and occupancy requirements of these guidelines (such units may not already be deed restricted by APCHA guidelines). c. Payment or Land-in-Lieu may be accepted on a case-by-case basis. Payment shall be made to the City of Aspen for projects in the City, or Pitkin County, for projects in the County. Such payment shall be made prior to and on a proportional basis to the issuance of any building permits for the non-deed restricted dwelling units of the proposed development. Applicants may choose to prepay the employee housing dedication fee prior to issuance of any building permits for the project and receive a discount on the fee, based on the present value index included within these Guidelines. Approval of the present value discount shall be at the option of the APCHA and the City Councilor Board of County Commissioners, depending on the location of the project. d. Should a proposed development cause the displacement of housing units that are currently deed restricted to employee housing guidelines, !fteft the 8flflliellBt shall eBly reeei':e eFeait fer hellsiBg fer the Bent lllIlBller ef empleyees te Be aellsea BY the pre138Sea aevelefJB:leBt, re:Reeting the ftameer t8 Be ReuseS. ia the ae\": l.mits miHlis these aBasee iB the 81[istiBg l:lftits, Father than fer Rel:lsiBg the grass lHll'H88f sf elB:flleyees aellsea iB the Be'^, lIBits. Emplovee housing mitigation credit of new free market Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 44 of 72 development that is on a site where deed-restricted employee housing was demolished is only given for the deed-restricted units that are constructed in excess of the deed- restricted units required to replace the deed-restricted units that were demolished. e. The deed restrictions created to obtain credit for employee housing may be amended by agreement between the property owner and the City Council upon the recommendation of the Gro.:.'th ManagemeRt CemrnissioR Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. Unit Location: Employee housing units must meet the "Acceptance of Employee Housing Units" policies set forth in the Housing Board Policy Statements. 3. Unit Size: Employee housing units must meet the minimum size requirements set forth in Part VII, Section 8. Reductions in the minimum square footage shall be allowed based on the criteria specified. 4. Unit Price: Rental or sales prices shall be no greater than allowable under these Guidelines (Tables III and IV). Should a unit be proposed that is larger than the minimum sizes set forth in these Guidelines, the rental or sales price shall be no greater than the prices specified. 5. Buy-Down of Existing Units: rfthe employee units are proposed to be provided off-site through the deed restriction of existing units, the applicant shall be required to document the feasibility of this off-site location by demonstrating that they have an interest in the property or dwelling units and by specifying the size and type of units to be provided and any physical upgrade to be accomplished. Future buy-down requests for deed-restricted units shall be accepted only in existing complexes at Categorv 3 or above. if at all. and shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. In any new proiects that consist of free-market and deed-restricted units. the homeowners' assessments shall be based on the value of the free-market units compared to the deed-restricted units. This language shall be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the proiect. No changes to these requirements would be allowed without APCHA's approval. 6. Mitigation Requirements for Lodge Developments: Lodge developments shall not be restricted to housing employees of their own business, but shall also be required to house qualified employees of the community at large. It should be anticipated that the housing units proposed will be required to be restricted to Category 2 price and occupancy guidelines unless the housing unit is restricted to use by an owner or manager. The category requirement is subject to review of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority based on current community housing needs and wage rates. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 45 of 72 II SECTION 3 REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS IN RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS 1. ~AA least (:iQ~{' Elf tee ee~ems iB an)" FesiEieBtiaI sae6i.,isien aJ3ftFEI....e8 l:lIlset' the City sf :\SfleB'S gFe.,~:th maf:lagemE regHlatieBS shall Be in \Hlits FesHietea as emplsyee hSliSiBg. 'The w:et=age FeHt aT sale pries sf tee eFBfllElyee he1:HliBg liBits shall net Meeea the CategsfY 2 H1:a3'am.um ams1iftts set feFth iB these Gl:1iElslines, eBB as teey are amenaea Rem time t8 time. 2. ~^Jl writs pFe9,ided wuler this Seetien mu.st meet eRe Elf meFe Elf the pRenties stated aee9;e iR Seetien -h 3. These FeEIHH=Smeflts are Ret saejeet to anytYfle ef9/aflanee BY Speeial Reviev/. 1. Ne Resident OS6l:lf'ieEl (RO) 1:H1its Me permittea iR the elB131eyee helisiag eefBf38ReHt. The reQuirements relatinl! to emplovee housing units in residential subdivisions relates to Section 26.470.C.8 & 9 of the Citv of Aspen Land Use Code and is stated below: · Residential Develooment - 60 Percent Affordable. The development of a residential project. or an addition of units to an existinl! residential project. in which a minimum of sixtv (60) percent of the additional units and thirtv (30) percent of the additional Floor Area is affordable housilll! deed restricted in accordance with the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authoritv Guidelines shall be approved. approved with conditions. or denied bv the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a) Sufficient l!fowth manal!ement allotments are available to accommodate the uses. pursuant to Section 26.470.030.C. Development Ceilinl! Levels and Section 26.470.030.D. Annual Development Allotments. Q.l...A minimum of sixtv (60) percent of the total additional units and thirtv (30) percent of the project's additional Floor Area shall be affordable housing. Multi-site projects are permitted. Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7. Affordable Housing and shall averal!e Categorv 4 rates as defined in the AspenlPitkin Countv Housing Authority Guidelines. as amended. An applicant mav choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Categorv designation. >l.lf the proiect consists of onlv one (J) free-market residence. then a minimum of one (J) ajIordable residence reoresenting a minimum of thirty (30) percent of the project's total Floor Area and deed restricted as a Categorv 4 "for-sale" unit. accordinl! to the provisions of tl:e Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. shall qualify. f!.L..Ihe project reoresents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated throul!h improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes. but is not limited to. water supplv. sewage treatment. energy and communication utilities. drainage control. fire and police protection. solid waste disposal. parkinl!. and road and transit services. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 46 of 72 . Residential Develooment - 70 Percent Affordable. The development of a residential proiect. or an addition to an existing residential project. in which seventy (70) percent of the proiect's additional units and seventy (70) percent of the proiect's additional bedrooms are affordable housing deed restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved. approved with conditions. or denied bv the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the uses. pursuant to Section 26.470.030.C. Development Ceiling Levels and Section 26.470.030.D. Annual Development Allotments. b) Seventy (70) percent of the total additional units and total additional bedrooms shall be affordable housing. At least forty (40) percent of the units shall average Categorv 4 rates as defined in the Aspen Pitkin Countv Housing Authority Guidelines. as amended. The remaining thirty (30) percent affordable housing unit requirement may be provided as Resident Occupied (RO) units as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. as amended. Multi-site projects are permitted. Affordable housing units provided shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7. Affordable Housing. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Categorv designation. c) The proiect 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 supplv. sewaee treatment. enerey and communication utilities. drainage control. fire and police protection. solid waste disposal. parking. and road and transit services. Note: A proiect comprised of one free-market residence. one RO residence. and one Categorv residence shall be considered meeting the 70 percent unit standard. A proiect comprised of two free-market residences. two RO residences. and two Categorv residences shall be considered meeting the 70 percent unit standard. SECTION 4 REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS UNDER THE MUL TI-FAMIL Y HOUSING REPLACEMENT PROGRAM I. The average price of employee housing units required under Chapter 26.530 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, Multifamily Housing Replacement Program, shall not exceed Category '6;2 maximum rental or sales prices as set forth in these Guidelines, and as they are amended from time to time. 2. All units provided under this Section must meet one or more of the priorities stated above in Section 1. 3. These requirements are not subject to any type of variance by Special Review. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 47 of 72 ~---~----~...._-~_.~.I----~ 4. No Resident Occupied (RO) units are permitted in the employee housing component. SECTION 5 REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT The reQuirements for the Affordable Housing Zone District are required by Section 26.710.110 of the Citv of Aspen Land Use Code and is stated below: A. PU17Jose. The purpose of the Affordable HousingJplanned Unit Development (AHlPUDl zone district is to provide for the use of land for the production of Category affordable housing and resident occupied lots and units. The zone district also permits a limited component of free market lots/units to off-set the cost of developing affordable housing. It is contemplated that land mav also be subdivided in connection with a development plan. The AHlPUD zone district is intended for residential use primarilv bv permanent residents of the communitv. Recreational and institutional uses customarilv found in proxirnitv to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the AHlPUD zone district should be scattered throughout the Citv to ensure a mix of housing types. includimz those which are affordable bv its workinl! residents: at the same time the AHlPUD zone district can protect the Citv's neil!hborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non-communitv oriented zone districts mav produce. Further. lands in the AHlPUD zone district should be located within walkinl! distance of the center of the Citv. or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The followinl! uses are permitted as of ril!ht in the AHlPUD zone district: I. Residential uses restricted to Categorv affordable housinl! l!Uidelines and resident occupied units which comply with the following requirements: a. Miuimum Bedroom Mix. A minimum of seventy percent (70%) of the proiect's total bedrooms shall be deed restricted affordable housing consistent with the Affordable Housing Guidelines. The mix between categories of housing shall be consistent with the Affordable Housing Guidelines. The remaining bedrooms that are not deed restricted to affordable housing mav be free market residential units. b. Permissible reduction in bedroom mix for exemplarY proiects. A proiect may be eligible for a reduction of the minimum affordable housing bedroom mix requirement to a level of sixty percent (60%) of the proiect's total bedrooms if the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that the proiect meets the requirements for an exceotional proiect as set forth in the Affordable Housing Guidelines. 2. Home occupations; 3. Accessory buildinl!s and uses; and 4. Accessorv dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 48 of 72 C. Conditional uses. The followings uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) zone district. subi ect to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: I. Park and open use recreation site; 2. Child care center; 3. Satellite dish antennae; 4. Dormitorv; and 5. Transit facilities. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall be established bv adoption of a Final PUD Development Plan and shall applv to all permitted and conditional uses in the Planned Unit Development: I. Minimum Lot Size. 2. Minimum Lot Area per dwelling unit. 3. Maximum allowable density. 4. Minimum lot width. 6. Minimum front yard. 7. Minimum side yard. 8. Minimum rear yard. 9. Maximum site coverage. 10. Maximum height (including view planes). 11 . Minimum distance between buildings on the lot. 12. Minimum percent open space required for the building site. 13. Trash access area. 14. Allowable Floor Area. 15. Minimum off-street parking spaces. 16. Other dimensions determined necessarv to establish through the PUD process. Note #1: The maximum allowable density permitted in this zone shall be established bv adoption of a Final PUD Development Plan. by using the following table applied to the proposed fathering parcel as a guide: Unit Type Minimum Lot Area* per dwelling unit (square feet) Dormitorv 300 Studio 400 One Bedroom 500 Two Bedroom 1000 Three Bedroom 1500 3+ Bedrooms 500 !Bedroom Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 49 of 72 n_II__~_ Note #2: The allowable floor area permitted in this zone shall be established bv adoption of a final PUD Development Plan bv using the following table applied to the proposed fathering parcel as a guide: fathenD.l! parcel Lot Area. Allowable Floor Area Ratio 0-1 S .000 sauare feet l.l: I 15.001-25.000 sauare feet lJ. 25.001-43.560 sauare feet .8:1 > I acre 3 acres ,2J. >3 acres 6 acres .36:1 a . . * Lot Area as dermed in the Land Use Code. (Ord. No. 55-2000. & 22) The felde~.\'iBg req\:1.ireffieBts ElfJfJly t8 eHlfJleyee B.011SiRg \mils in any ~\fferaaele IIstlsiflg Z0R6 Dismat fJrejeet that ineltlaes Hee HUH'ket units. 1. Fer eF8fJleyee hSllSiRg aeyelepmeats, the 8e'.relefler shall fJF81'ide at least a 79%. empleyee he1:lsi:a~/30~<' fi=ee maFket 8efBfl8aeat. la the eIBfJloyee B.elisiBg miJr, at least 19%. 8f~he units mast be sategery 1:IfH.tS .,\'it:R an w;emge f'riee Bet t8 e1~eeea tJ3.e BHHffiBlHR f'Ree of Categary 4. ~\ mH[ sf eategeries is prefeHea. T1rirty ller-ecftt (3()~q sf the eHlfllsyee aSlioiBg lHlits IBBij Be elaosified as Resideftt OeC1illieG. HS\9:eysr, anIy 30~<' Elf a l3fsjeet's eeareems may Be laemed ..vithin free marlEet 1:Hlits. Categsfj' hStlsing aHa Residem: Oe8l::l:J3ieEi 1:mits must eeFfl13RSe ;9%. ef the bedr00ffi min. PFSj eets may ee 6eHlfJrised of all eategsf)' seed FesH'ieted aT resiEleat e6e1.iJ3iea l::l:Hits. In t.he 6y;eftt that ao free marlEet develepmeat is proposed as part of the pF8jeet, the limitatiea eft Resiaeat Oe61:lfJiea emits ana BeEkssm mil[ shall RElt llflll1y. In order to be eligible for a reduction in the requirement to the level of 60% Employee Housing and 40% Free Market Housing, the project shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Council that all of the following criteria have been met: . The quality of the proposed development substantially exceeds that established in the minimum threshold for the scoring established in the GMQS Scoring section of the City of Aspen Municipal Code; . The proposal maximizes affordability, consistent with housing needs established as priority through these Guidelines; . The proposal integrates a mixture of economic leyels and housing for a variety of lifestyles (e.g., singles, seniors and families); . The proposal minimizes impacts on infrastructure by incorporating innoyative, energy-saying site design, structural design characteristics or other techniques that minimize the use of water, heating and sewage disposal; . The proposal incorporates or integrates with an existing local based economy (i.e., sustainable local businesses); . The proposal accomplishes a leyel of design and site plan ingenuity that advances the conununity goals expressed in the Aspen Area Conununity Plan; Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 50 of 72 . The proposed project represents an exceptional commitment to advancing the visions. goals and specific actions items of the Aspen Area Community Plan, particularly those addressed in the scoring criteria under the Growth Management Quota System as stated in the City of Aspen Municipal Code; and . No RO units are included in the project; only category units are included in the project. In any mixed project that contains an employee housing and a free market component, as a condition of condominiumization or subdivision rights, voting rights and fees will need to be determined and agreed to by the APCHA. The Declaration of Covenants must require one vote per unit, and handling of the homeowners' association dues and the types of improvements the employee-housing component will be responsible to pay. Homeowners' dues can be based on a sliding scale based on the square footage of the unit, the number of bedrooms, the cost of the home, or one fee across the board. This will be decided upon at the time of final approval for the development and incorporated into the Declaration of Covenants. All projects that involve an employee-housing component shall provide all documents to the Housing Office for review and approval. All units provided under this Section must meet one or more of the priorities stated above in Section 1. SECTION 6 DEDICATION FEE FOR EXEMPT SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AND DUPLEX UNITS See Part VII, Section 12, Employee Housing Dedication Fee (payment-in-Lieu Fee) under these Guidelines. SECTION 7 RESIDENT OCCUPIED UNITS This category was created to offer the private sector an incentive to produce employee housing for the community. RO units shall be occupied by persons and families who qualify as stated below. RO units shall also be subject to their own deed restrictions recorded prior to the establishment of the RO Guidelines and are subject to their individual deed restrictions. This includes, but is not limited to, Smuggler Park Subdivision, Aspen Village. and the AABC Rowhouses. Williams Ranch contains 10 "RO Category 5" units, which limits gross income to $181,000 and net assets to $424,000. RO Units shall meet the following criteria: I. No income requirements, but the total net assets cannot exceed $900,000. 2. Initial Sales Price will be set by the developer. 3. Maximum Resale Price/Appreciation: The maximum resale price is the purchase price plus 3% or the Consumer Price Index (Cpn appreciation. whichever is less (simple, not compounded) of the purchase price for each year or portion thereof, that the unit is owned. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 51 of 72 II 4. Unit Size: A maximum of 2,200 gross square feet. In addition, a maximum 500 square foot garage and a maximum 800 square foot basement are permitted. If a larger garage or basement is constructed, then all square footage over 500 or 800 square feet, respectively, will be considered as a part of the 2,200 square feet of space allowed. 5. Employment Requirement: Applicants must demonstrate that they are qualified employees and that they have four years of consecutive full-time employment, as defmed by the Guidelines, in Pitkin County immediately prior to application. Individuals who are retired are required to demonstrate that they were qualified employees based upon the defInition in these Guidelines for four years immediately prior to their retirement. 6. Primary Residence: A RO unit must be the owner's primary residence. Proof of residency, including but not limited to. voter registration and automobile registration. shall be required. 7. IncomelEarnings: Applicants must demonstrate that their income/earnings are earned primarily in Pitkin County (75%). Applicants must demonstrate that they pay Colorado Income Tax as a Colorado resident. 8. The owner carmot own any other developed residential property in Eagle, Garfield, Gunnison or Pitkin Counties, or must list for sale, at competitive prices, the residential real estate or mobile home prior to or simultaneously with closing on the RO unit. Such other developed property must be sold to another buver within 180 davs. otherwise. said deed-restricted property must be sold as stipulated in the deed restriction. 9. Sales and Marketing: The APCHA shall market all RO units the same as the category units, unless specifically specified in the respective deed restriction, with the exception of the sales fee. The sales fee charged will be 2+% of the sales price. 10. All other Qualification requirements as stated in Part ill. Section L 1 through 4. Ill). Each owner shall be required to prove compliance with their deed restriction as to employment, residency, and ownership of other property as specified in the Guidelines and as they are amended from time to time, by completing the Compliance Affidavit. and providing documentation when requested. SECTION 8 NET MINIMUM LIVABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR NEWLY DEED RESTRICTED EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS Table IT sets forth the allowable Minimum Net Livable Square Feet (see Defmitions) for each unit type and category. Developers may choose to construct larger units; however, allowable rent and sale prices for such larger units may not exceed the maximum set forth in Tables ill and IV. PLEASE NOTE: Subject to approval by the Housing Office, the minimum net livable square foot requirements may be reduced. It must be demonstrated that the development satisfies, or is required to Aspen/Pitkin COUl1ty Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 52 of 72 adjust to other physical factors or considerations including, but not limited to, design for livability, common storage, other amenities, location or site designs. TABLE IT MlNIMUM NET LIVABLE SQUARE FEET FOR EACH UNIT TYPE AND INCOME CATEGORY Unit Type Studio I Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom Single-Family Detached Categories I & 2 Square Feet 400 600 850 1,000 1,100 Cateeories 3 & 4 Square Feet 500 700 950 1,200 1,400 Categories 5 & 6 Square Feet 600 800 1,000 1,300 1,700 Categorv 7 Square Feet 700 900 1,100 1,400 1,900 In order to calculate mitigation requirements. 400 square feet of employee housing units shall be used to equate to one full-time employee in determining the required employee housing mitigation for the free- market residential component of a mixed use development. Net Livable Square Footage (see Definitions) calculations are required for the employee housing component of a project. The Community Development Department prior to issuance of any building permits for either the free market or employee housing component of the project must verify square footage. The Community Development Department shall retain a set of approved building permit drawings for the project. The Community Development Department or Housing Office may check the actual construction of the employee housing units for compliance with the approved building permit plans. The conditions under which reductions may be made are stated below. However, no reduction greater than 20% of the category minimum will be allowed. . Significant storage - additional storage outside the unit; . Above average natural light ~ more windows than the Code requires; . Efficient and flexible layout -limit to space used for halls and staircases; . Site amenities - pool, near to park or open space. etc.; . Location within the project ~ above ground versus ground level or below ground; . If the applicant can achieve higher density of deed restricted units with this variance. Square footage adjustments will be subject to APCHA approval. A written analysis and recommendation will be completed during the Development Review Committee referral. Staff comments will be used in developing the project's approval ordinance. Applicants will be allowed to appeal decisions to the Housing Board, followed by City Councilor the BOCC. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 53 of 72 'I SECTION 9 MAXIMUM SALES PRICES FOR NEWLY DEED RESTRICTED EMPLOYEE LOTS AND HOUSING UNITS Table III sets forth the maximum sales price for newly deed-restricted employee housing units and employee lots to the initial purchaser. The maximum resale price of a unit shall be controlled by the Deed Restriction covering the unit executed by the initial purchaser upon closing of the initial purchase. TABLE ill - MAXIMUM UNIT SALES PRICES Unit Type Categorv I Categorv 2 Categorv 3 Categorv 4 Studio $35,000 $79,000 $132,000 $224,000 I Bedroom $44,000 $95,000 $145,000 $239,000 2 Bedroom $53.000 $117,000 $172,000 $266,000 3 Bedroom $62,000 $144,000 $199,000 $293,000 SF Detached $75,000 $171,000 $226,000 $318,000 SF Lot N/A N/A N/A N/A Unit Type Categorv 5 Categorv 6 Categorv 7 Categorv RO Studio $313,000 $349,000 $391,000 N/A I Bedroom $339,000 $375.000 $417,000 N/A 2 Bedroom $366,000 $402,000 $444,000 N/A 3 Bedroom $391,000 $427,000 $470,000 N/A SF Detached $418,000 $454,000 $496,000 N/A SF Lot $91.000 $127,000 $130,000 $159,700 NOTES: I. Single-family lots shall be developed with homes of three bedrooms or larger and shall be prioritized for lottery as set forth in Part III, Section 6 herein. 2. Category I, 2, 3 and 4 single-family lots are not allowed. Lot prices for Category 5 through RO include the cost of access and utilities for the lot as set forth in Part vn, Section 13 herein. 3. Sale units will be offered for sale through the Housing Office to all qualified persons under the procedures established by the Guidelines. 4. Persons employed by an owner/operator shall be given fIrst priority to purchase employee-housing units associated with a lodge, agricultural operation, or commercial development, when ownership has been retained by the owner/operator of the development. Employees must meet the Housing Office's Guidelines for occupancy, income and assets criteria in order to qualify to occupy the unites). In the event there are no persons directly employed by the owner who qualify, the unit shall then be offered to other qualified persons according to the Guidelines. (Employee Housing [AH] Zone development is exempt from this section.) All resales will go into the general lottery and be sold by the APCHA per the deed restriction. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 54 of 72 5. Newly deed restricted employee-housing sales units must be in marketable condition. Properties must comply with the Uniform Building Code and all rules, regulations. and codes of all governmental utilities and agencies having jurisdiction. Prior to sale, the unit must be inspected and approved by a certified building inspector, architect or engineer approved by the APCHA. Cost of such inspections shall be the responsibility of the applicant. The APCHA must approve the results of the inspection. SECTION 10 MAXIMUM MONTHLY RENTAL RATES FOR NEWLY DEED RESTRICTED EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS Table IV sets forth the maximum montWy rental rates for newly deed-restricted employee housing units. The rental rates apply and shall be in effect for a twelve (12) month period from the commencement date of the initial lease. Thereafter, the maximum monthly rental rate may be increased only to the extent that the Guidelines then in effect permit. TABLE IV MAXIMUM MONTHLY RENT Unit Type Categorv I Categorv 2 Category 3 Categorv 4 RO Studio $421 $748 $1,117 $1,482 $2,032 I Bedroom 519 879 1,245 1,626 2,176 2 Bedroom 615 1,009 1,377 1,757 2,307 3 Bedroom 713 1,129 1,510 1.889 2,440 SF Detached 813 1,273 1,639 1,952 2,503 NOTES: I. Units constructed prior to the effective date of these Guidelines shall charge rents that do not exceed those set forth in Part VIII, Table VI. 2. Rental rates shall apply whether the units are provided furnished or unfurnished. 3. Rental rates in Table IV include. and may not be increased to pay for, the cost of utilities in common areas, condominium dues, management costs and taxes. In the event that utilities are commonly metered, a charge to the tenant may be made in addition to the maximum rents in Table IV for the tenant's share of such utilities attributable to the tenant's net living area. Tenants shall be responsible for individually metered utilities. 4. Prior to occupancy of a deed restricted rental unit, the Housing Office must qualify the tenant. All verification required under these Guidelines must be provided. The tenant must provide the owner/landlord with proof of verification and qualification by the Housing Office prior to occupancy. The owner shall be required to provide a copy of the lease agreement to the Housing Office for approval. The Housing Office will approve or deny the agreement within five working days. Leases shall meet occupancy standards and allowable rental rates, and shall be for a minimum term of six Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 55 of 72 -------JI- consecutive months. Tenant shall provide an executed copy of the lease to the Housing Office prior to occupancy. 5. Persons employed by an owner/operator shall be given first priority to rent employee housing units associated with a lodge, agricultural operation, or commercial development. when ownership has been retained by the owner/operator of the development. Employees must meet the Housing Office's Guidelines for occupancy. income and assets criteria in order to qualify to occupy the unites). In the event there are no persons directly employed by the owner who qualify, the unit shall then be offered to other qualified persons according to the Guidelines. (Employee Housing [AH] Zone development is exempt from this section.) 6. All newly deed restricted employee housing rental units must comply with the Uniform Building Code and with all rules, regnlations and codes of all governmental bodies and agencies having jurisdiction. The owner of employee housing rental units, at its cost and expense, must keep and maintain the interior and exterior of the total structure (including all residential units therein) and the adjacent open areas in a safe and clean condition and in a state of good order and repair, reasonable wear and tear and negligent or intentional damage by tenants excepted. SECTION 11 REQUIREMENTS FOR DORMITORY/LODGE (Seasonal Units) Pursuant to the applicable City or County Land Use Codes, an applicant for a development may. under certain conditions and subject to certain requirements, satisfy the employee housing requirements by provision of dormitory/lodge units designed for occupancy by seasonal employees. Acceptance of such dormitory/ lodge units shall be at the sole discretion of the respective governing body at the recommendation of the Housing Office. The dormitory/lodge units must satisfy all requirements of the applicable Guidelines and shall be required to meet the following minimum standards: I. Occupancy of a dormitory unit shall be limited to no more than eight persons. 2. There shall be 150 or greater net livable square feet of living area per person, including sleeping and bathroom. For purposes of this requirement, Net Livable square footage shall not include interior or exterior hallways, parking, patios, decks. cooking, lounge used in common, laundry rooms, mechanical areas. and storage. Rents for dormitory/lodge units and units developed for seasonal occupancy only pursuant to a plan approved by the Housing Office shall be calculated on the net livable square footage as described above and computed at the rates set forth on a case-by-case basis. 3. Notes 3, 4, 5 and 6 under Table IV, Part vn, Section 10, apply to Dormitory/Lodge units. 4. At least one bathroom shall be provided for shared use by no more than four persons. The bathroom shall contain at least one water closet, one lavatory, one bathtub with a shower, and a total area of at least 60 net livable square feet. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 56 of 72 5. A kitchen facility or access to a common kitchen or common eating facility shall be provided subject to the Housing Office's approval and determination that the facilities are adequate in size to service the number of persons using the facility. 6. Use of 20 net leasable square feet per person of enclosed storage area located within, or adjacent to, the unit. 7. A manager's or assistant manager's rent shall be calculated based on the income category of the respective manager. 8. Rents for dormitory units wiJI be set by Special Review on a case-by-base basis, given the unique and varying characteristics of dormitory units, with affordability as the key issue. SECTION 12 EMPLOYEE HOUSING DEDICATION FEE (payment-In-Lieu Fee) I. Pursuant to the applicable City or County Land Use Codes. an applicant for a development may, under certain conditions and subject to certain requirements, satisfy the employee housing requirement by payment of an employee housing dedication fee (payment-in-lieu fee). The number of employees (employee housing residents) required to be housed is determined by the Employee Generation schedules contained in the applicable City and County Codes, or included herein. The time of payment of the fee is prior to the issuance of a building permit. Acceptance of the payment- in-lieu fee shall be at the sole discretion of the respective governing body at the recommendation of the Housing Office. 2. All County fees shall be paid to the Pitkin County Finance Director and all City fees shall be paid to the City Finance Director. A receipt shall be issued by the Finance Directors to the applicant for submission to the Community Development Director as verification of payment, with a copy of the receipt supplied by the developer to the APCHA prior to issuance of a building permit. The number of employees generated wiJI be dictated by the applicable City and County codes or included herein. The City and County Codes will prevail in any conflict between the Guidelines and the Codes. The Employee Generation Table is included in the City Code for the specific zone districts. 3. Payment-In-Lieu Fee: Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 $252,244 $211,045 $199,132 $124,307 The fee required for the construction of an exempt single-family home or duplex unit shall be calculated as follows: Average of the Category 2 and Category 3 payment-in-lieu fee as stated in the Table above, divided by 3,000 square feet X the net increase in FAR of the new structure will equal the payment-in-lieu payment for replacement structures. The formula assumes that for every Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 57 of 72 Ij 3,000 square feet of new single-family or duplex floor area, the public will be required to provide housing for one moderate income employee. Currendy, that amount is $211,045 + $199,132 +2 ~ $205,089 +3,000 ~ $68.36 per square foot of new structure. When any other payment-in-lieu fee is required and the category is not specified, an average of Category 2 and 3 wilJ be used to calculate the amount owed. 4. Deferral of the Emplovee Housing Impact Fee: If the owner of a single-family or duplex unit for which an employee housing impact fee is due is a qualified working resident, as that t= is defined in the Guidelines, the obligation to pay the impact fee may be deferred, at the owner's request, until such time as the dwelling unit is sold to a buyer who is not a qualified working resident. Furthermore, the amount of the impact fee that was deferred shall be recalculated at the time of sale based on the Guidelines in effect at the time of sale. The obligation for the fee and the procedures for calculating the fee shall be set forth in a written document, signed by the owner or owners of the subject dwelling unit, approved by an APCHA representative and the Community Development Department Director, and recorded in the records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. For the purposes of calculating payment-in-lieu fee, the following occupancy standards shall apply: TABLE V OCCUPANCY STANDARDS BY UNIT TYPE UNIT TYPE Dormitory/Lodge Studio One Bedroom Two Bedrooms Three Bedrooms OCCUPANCY 1.00 employeell50 sq. ft. 1.25 employees 1.75 employees 2.25 employees 3.00 employees For each bedroom in excess of three, the occupancy standard increases by .5 employees. SECTION 13 CONVEYANCE OF VACANT LOTS Pursuant to the applicable City or County Land Use Codes, an applicant for a development, under certain conditions and subject to certain requirements, may satisfy the employee-housing requirement by the conveyance of vacant lots. Acceptance of the lots shall be at the sole discretion of the respective governing body upon recommendation of the Housing Office. I. All lots must be fully developed and ready for construction, i.e., improved lots with water or well, sewer or septic, roads, and telephone, electricity and gas (if available) in place to the property line. A soils report, prepared by a qualified engineer and based upon test holes within the building envelope of each lot, stipulating that the lot is suitable for construction of the intended dwelling type without requiring unusual excavation, foundation work or accommodation of other unusual conditions shall accompany the conveyance. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 58 of 72 2. All lots shall be conveyed to the Housing Office concurrent with recordation of fInal plat for the proj ect. 3. At the time of conveyance, the developer shall establish an escrow account in an amount sufficient to cover 125% of the estimated costs required to complete the improvement of the lots in accordance with number I above. Improvements as noted in number I above, shall be completed within one year from the date of conveyance of the property to the Housing Office. 4. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement and the Protective Covenants shall incorporate the conditions stated in I. 2 and 3, directly above this paragraph. SECTION 14 DEED RESTRICTING EXISTING DWELLING UNITS I. Pnrsuant to the applicable City or County Land Use Codes, an applicant for a development, under certain conditions and subject to certain requirements. may satisfy the employee housing requirement by deed restricting existing unrestricted housing to comply with the Guidelines. Acceptance of existing units shall be at the sole discretion of the respective governing body upon recommendation of the APCHA. 2. If accepted by the City or County. existing units must be upgraded in accordance with the following criteria, (unless a variance from these requirements is approved by the applicable governing body upon the recommendation of the APCHA): a. The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. b. The interior Appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good and working condition. c. Carpet must be less than five year old and be in good condition and repair, or be replaced. d. The exterior walls shall be freshly painted within one year of dedication. e. A general level of upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. f. Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures and equipment shall be in good and working order. g. The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten (10) years. h. All units shall meet the International Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequate code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 59 of 72 II 1. All units shall be approved by the APCHA and verified by a qualified Building Inspector accepted and approved by the APCHA. j. Applicant shall bear the costs and expenses of any required upgrades to meet the above standards as well as any structural/engineering reports required by the APCHA to assess the suitability for occupancy and compliance with the APCHA standards of the proposed units. SECTION 15 EXECUTION OF DEED RESTRICTIONS BY APPLICANTS Deed Restrictions must be submitted by the applicant to the APCHA according to the following time schedule: I. Conditional Use Applications - Prior to issuance of aRj' lllli!diag pemlitfmal building insoection or certificate of occupancv for a caretaker or accessorv dwellinl! unit ~, the APCHA shall have an approved, executed and recorded Deed Restriction for the required commitment by the applicant. For any other proiects. sDecificallv new subdivisions. new emDlovee-housing proiects. new develomnents requiring filing a condominium Dial. the deed restriction must be recorded simultaneouslv with the Final Plat. but Drior to Certificate of Occupancv. 2. Growth Manaeement Plan Applications - Prior to issuance of any llllihling pellll#final building inspection or certificate of occupancv for a project. the APCHA shall have an approved, executed and recorded Deed Restriction for the required commitment by the applicant. A copy of the recorded Land Use Code and Resolution and Deed Restriction shall be sent to the APCHA. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the Deed Restriction shall be amended, if necessary. The amendment shall reflect changes approved by the APCHA and governing bodies that may have occurred during construction or conversion of the unit(s). (i.e., net livable square footage). The amendment will then be executed and recorded, with the original returned to the APCHA. 3. Others - Prior to issuance of aRy lleildiag lle..,.;lfmal building inspection or certificate of occupancv for a project, the APCHA shall have an approved, executed and recorded Deed Restriction for the required commitment by the applicant. A copy of the recorded Land Use Code Resolution and Deed Restriction shall be sent to the APCHA. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the Deed Restriction shall be amended. if necessary. The amendment shall reflect changes approved by the Housing Office that may have occurred during construction or conversion of the unit(s) (i.e., net livable square footage). The amendment will then be executed and recorded. with the original returned to the APCHA for their files. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 60 of 72 SECTION 16 MAXIMUM VACANCY Deed restricted rental units are required to be occupied. They may be vacant between tenancies for a maximum period of forty-five (45) days, unless authorized by the APCHA. If the owner exceeds the forty- five day limit without APCHA approval, then the APCHA will place a qualified employee by advertising the vacancy in the classified section of the local newspaper on Mondays and Tuesdays. Any interested party may sign up for that unit in the Housing Office. The sign-up for an advertised unit ends at 3:00 p.m. that following Wednesday. Staff reviews the sign-up list and contacts the household with the most years worked full-time in Pitkin County. The interested applicant must provide proof of their work history in Pitkin County for all the years stated on the sign-up sheet. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 61 of 72 II PART VIII MAXIMUM ANNUAL RENT INCREASE FOR EXISTING DEED RESTRICTED RENTAL UNITS The maximum montWy rent for an existing employee housing unit is calculated using the maximum montWy rent permitted under the Guidelines in effect at the time the unit was first occupied. The rent is increased each year by the maximum percentage permitted by the Guidelines. Maximum rent increases allowed for existing units are as folJows: TABLE VI PERMITTED INCREASE IN MAXIMUM RENT FOR EXISTING EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS Year Increase Year Increase Year Increase 1978-1982 0.0% 1992 2.0% 2000 1.08% 1983 6.6% 1993 1.2% 2001 1.40% 1984 5.0% 1994 1.0% 2002 1.63% 1985 3.3% 1995 1.1% 2003 2.15% 1986-1988 0.0% 1996 .99% 2004 1.6% 1989 4.7% 1997 1.31% 2005 3.0% 1990 3.0% 1998 .73% 2006 3.0% 1991 0.0% 1999 .54% The 3.0% increase is based on the lesser of the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (Urban Wage Eamers), November 2004 - November 2005, or 3%, whichever is less. The index increased at the rate of 3.7% during this period, but because the increase is 3% or the cpr whichever is less. the increase is 3% for this period of time. Prior to 2002, operating costs for rental housing, which are subject to the cpr increase, were assumed to be 40% of rental income. In order to maintain the efficient running of existing deed restricted units, rental rates can increase at the rate of cpr, or 3%, whichever is less, on a yearly basis. Please contact the APCHA for the actual maximum rental rates available and the APCHA will assist any applicant in determining their maximum permitted rent. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 62 of 72 PART IX. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES A grievance is any dispute that a tenant or purchaser (see Definitions) may have with the Housing Office with respect to action or failure to act in accordance with the individual tenant's or purchaser's rights, duties, welfare or status. A grievance may be presented to the Housing Office Board of Directors under the following procedures. I. FILING A GRIEVANCE A. Any grievance must be presented in writing to the Housing Office. It may be simply stated, but shall specify: I) the particular ground(s) upon which it is based; 2) the action requested; and 3) the name, address, telephone number of the complainant and similar information about hislher representative, if any. B. Upon presentation of a written grievance, a hearing before the Housing Office Board of Directors shall be scheduled for the next scheduled Board meeting. The matter may be continued at the discretion of the Board. The complainant shall be afforded a fair hearing providing the basic safeguard of due process, including notice and an opportunity to be heard in a timely, reasonable marmer. C. The complainant and the Housing Office shall have the opportunity to examine and, before the hearing at the expense of the complainant, to copy all documents, records and regulations of the Housing Office that are relevant to the hearing. Any document not made available after written request may not be relied upon at the hearing. D. The complainant has the right to be represented by counsel. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines II. CONDUCT OF THE HEARING A. If the complainant fails to appear at the scheduled hearing, the Board may make a determination to postpone the hearing l!! make a determination based upon the written documentation and the evidence submitted. B. The hearing shall be conducted by the Board as follows: Oral or documentary evidence may be received without strict compliance with the rules of evidence applicable to judicial proceedings. C. The right to cross-examine shall be at the discretion of the Board and may be regulated by the Board as it deems necessary for a fair hearing. D. Based on the records of proceedings. the Board will provide a written decision and include therein the reasons for its determination. The decision of the Board shall be binding on the Housing Office that shall take all actions necessary to cany out the decision. AMENDED 01/06 Page 63 of 72 I! PARTX DEFINITIONS Accessorv Dwellinl! Unit - The unit must be a totally private unit, with a private entrance, a full bath and a kitchen as defined in these Guidelines. Also see City of Aspen Land Use Code, Chapter 26.520.070. MfordablelEmployee Housinl! - Dwelling units restricted to the housing size and type for individuals meeting asset, income and minimum occupancy guidelines approved by the Aspen City Council. Board of County Commissioners and/or the Housing Office. whichever shan apply. Affordable Housinl! Zone District - See Aspen Land Use Code. Chapter 26.710. Aspen/Pitkin County Housml! Authority ~ APCHA and/or Housing Office. Assets - Any thing owned by an individual that has commercial or exchange value. Assets consist of specific property or claims against others. in contrast to obligations due others. See also defmition for Gross Assets and Net Assets. Basement - As defmed by the applicable City or County Land Use Code. Bedroom - Designed to be used for sleeping purposes that shan contain closets, have access to a bathroom and meets applicable City or County International Building Code requirements for light, ventilation. sanitation and egress. Buy down Unit - Free-market that the government (Aspen, Pitkin County, Housing Office) and/or private sector acquired and deed restricted to employee housing. Capital Improvements - Unless otherwise defmed in the Deed Restriction covering the employee housing unit, any fixture erected as a permanent improvement to real property excluding repair, replacement, and maintenance costs. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines Caretaker Dwellinl! Units - The unit must be a totally private unit, with a private entrance, a full bath and a kitchen as defined in these Guidelines. See Section 3-150-130, County Land Use Code. Catel!orv - Income limits, sales prices or maximum rental rates as determined by the APCHA according to household income and net assets. Consumer Price Index (Cpn - The Consumer Price Index that is used for purposes of the Guidelines and for purposes of the Deed Restriction is the Consumer Price Index - u.s. City Average and Regions, Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), All Items (1967=100). Updated information is received on a monthly basis from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bnreau of Labor Statistics. Co-sil!ner - A joint signatory of a promissory note who shan not occupy the unit unless qualified by the APCHA. Deed Restriction - A contract entered into between the APCHA and the owner or pnrchaser of real property identifying the conditions of occupancy and resale. Dependent - a "dependent" IS either a "qualifvinl! child" or a "qualifvinl! relative." Generallv. a "qualifving child" is: (a) a child (including stepchild. adopted child. or eligible foster child). or a sibling (or steosibling) of the taxpaver. or a descendant of either: (b) has resided in the principal abode of the taxpayer for at least 100 davs out of a calendar vear: (c) has not attained al!e 19 (or is a student who has not attained age 24 as of the end of the year): and (d) has not provided more than half of his or her support for that year. A child who does not satisfy the qualifvinl! child definition mav be a "qualifving relative." AMENDED 01/06 Page 64 of 72 Generally, a "qualifYing relative" is an individual who: (a) is a child (including stepchild. adopted child. or eligible foster child). a sibling (including stepsiblings). the taxpaver's father or mother or an ancestor of either of them. a stepparent. a niece or nephew. an aunt or uncle. certain in-laws of the taxpaver. or an individual. other than a spouse. who resides in the principal abode of the taxpayer and is a member of the household; (b) has gross income in the relevant calendar vear not exceeding the exemption amount ($3.200 for 2005); (c) receives more than half of his or her support for the year from the taxpayer; and (d) is not a qualifYing child of any other taxpayer for the calendar vear. .^. miner ell.i1d (18 years er yeunger) or ether relati'.'e ef the reater or 8\','ner ef an em131eyee heHGing HRit, which shild er relative iG taken al'l!j listed as a d8j3endent fer federal ineeme ta)[ 13l1f!loses BY sHeh realer er ev,'ner er his er her 13r-esent 0f fo_er S130liGe (Gaid d8j3eRdent must aloo Be related B:l Bleed er aae13tioR). In the case of divorced families with children, to obtain a bedroom, each child shall be used once for proving minimum occupancy. Should both parents enter the same lottery, the top winner only shall be allowed to purchase the unit; the other parent shall be able to use the child(ren) to obtain one additional bedroom only. The parent may request a Special Review to purchase a unit that has more than two bedrooms. Disabled Person - .^. !lerson 'l,'ha meetG the aefinitien ef "indi','idual ';,'ith a disaBility" sontained ill aeelliReatatien lasated in the HOlising Offise 8lld oBlained by the Stale of Celemae. See definition for Handicap. Dormitory - A structure or portion thereof under single management that provides group sleeping accommodations for occupants in one (I) or more rooms for compensation. Standards for use, occupancy, and design of such facilities shall be approved by the APCHA. See Part ill. Sec. 4. Emerl!encv Worker - An employee or volunteer (on call 24 hours/day, 7 days a week for human, Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines life threatening emergencies) of a community based organization that provides on-scene assistance giving personal care to victims, including, but not limited to the following: Fire Department Workers, Mountain Rescue, Sheriff's Deputies, Police Officers, Hospital Emergency Room Technicians, Social Service Workers (mental health and abuse case workers), Ambulance Drivers, Emergency Medical Technicians, Communications Dispatchers through the Sheriff's Office or Police Department, etc. Emergency Service Department Head approval is required. whereby the supervisor must demonstrate the need of that agency to house another Emergency Worker in the Aspen area by requesting a formal approval with the Public Safety Council Housing Subcommittee (see Part I, Section I, #8 and Part ill, Section 6, Exeptions). Employee/Oualified ResidentlBuyer - A person who is employed for an employer as defmed below on the basis of a minimum of 1,500 hours worked per calendar year in Pitkin County, which averages 35 hours a week, 10 months a year; or 32 hours a week, II months a year, physically working in Pitkin County and must reside in the unit a minimum of nine (9) months out of the year. If self-employed, the worker must provide verification of the work done in Pitkin County. Employer (pitkin County Employer) - A business whose business address is located within Aspen or Pitkin County, whose business employs employees (as defined herein) within Pitkin County, who work in Pitkin County, and whose business taxes are paid in Aspen or Pitkin County. If an employer is not physically based in Pitkin County, an employee must be able to verify that they work in Pitkin County a minimum of 1500 hours per calendar year for individuals, businesses or institutional operations located in Pitkin County. AMENDED 01/06 Page 65 of 72 11 Employee (Non-Profit) - A person who works! performs for a non-profit organization. Employees include artists, performers, musicians, organizers, bookkeepers, etc., but excluding construction workers. Non-profit organizations include any certified non-profit organization providing services to and located in Pitkin County. Emplovee Dwellinl! Unit - This is a deed- restricted unit that is required to be rented out. Also see the Pitkin County Land Use Code, Section 3-150-120. Emplovee Housinl! See defmition for AffordablelEmployee Housing. Familv - For purposes of transferring property only, a family (or immediate family) is defined as husband, wife, mother, father, brother, sister, son, daughter, either biologically or by legal adoption. Any transfer to a family member must fall under this definition. Family-Oriented Unit - A dwelling unit attached or detached, 3 bedrooms or more, with direct ground floor access to a useable yard area. Fannie Mae (FNMA) - Federal National Mortgage Association. a quasi-governmental agency that purchases mortgage loans in the secondary loan market. Fee Simple Estate - The maximum possible estate that one can possess in real property; complete and absolute ownership of indefinite duration, freely transferable, and inheritable. Financial Statement - A statement detailing all personal assets, liabilities, and net worth (the difference between assets and liabilities) as of a specific date. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines Fixture - I) A tangible thing which previously was personal property and which has been attached to or installed on land or a structure thereon in such a way as to become a part of the real property; 2) Any non-portable lighting device built in or attached securely to the structure; 3) The permanent parts of a plumbing system and fixtures. Gross Assets - Anything which has tangible or intangible value, including property of all kinds. both real and personal; includes among other things, patents and causes of action which belong to any person, as well as any stock in a corporation and any interest in the estate of a decedent; also, the entire property of a person, association, corporation, or estate that is applicable or subject to the payment of debts. Gross assets shall include funds or property held in a living trust or any similar entity or interest, where the person has management rights or the ability to apply the assets to the payment of debts. Gross assets shall not include, pension plans Gross Income - The total income to include alimony and child support derived from a business, trust, employment and from income- producing property, before deductions for expenses, depreciation, taxes, and similar allowances. Handicap - With respect to a person, a phvsical or mental impairment. which substantiallv limits one or more maior life activities; a record of such impairment: or being regarded as having such impairment. This term does not include current. illew use of or addiction to a controlled substance. For purposes of these l!Uidelines. an individual shall not be considered to have a handicap solelv because that individual is a transvestite. Further explanations of "phvsical or mental impairment". "maior life activities". and "has a record of such an impairment" can be found in the APCHA Office. Household - All individuals who will be occupying the unit regardless of legal status and/or a married couple. whether both will be livinl! in the unit or not. AMENDED 01/06 Page 66 of 72 Household Net Assets - Combined net assets of all individuals who will be occupying the unit regardless of legal status. Household Income - Combined gross income of all individuals who will be occupying the unit regardless of legal status. Adjustments to the gross for business expenses can be made for persons who are self-employed. In-Complex an House) Bid - Priority bid granted to person( s) having lived in their unit in a given complex for a minimum of one year. If a new project is built in phases, the in-complex priority does not go into effect until all employee housing phasing of the project is completed. Joint Tenancy - Ownership of real estate between two or more parties who have been named in one conveyance as joint tenants. Upon the death of one tenant, surviving joint tenant(s) have the right of survivorship. Kitchen - For Accessory Dwelling Units and Caretaker Dwelling Units, a minimum of a two- burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a milli_ e elffiie feot refrigerator plus freezer. The oven must be able to bake and broil and be at least 5 cubic feet: the sink must measure at least I 4"WXI 6"DX5.25"H; refrigerator must be at least 5.3 cubic feet and include at least a .73 cubic foot freezer. Leasehold Interest - A less than fee simple estate that a tenant possesses in real property. Lottery - A drawing to select a winner from equal applicants of highest priority. Maximum Bid Price - Unless otherwise defmed in the Deed Restriction covering the unit, the owner's purchase price multiplied by the appreciation (as permitted by the Deed Restriction) plus the present value of capital improvement costs including labor, if profes- sionally provided, and for which verification of the expenditure is provided. Minimum Occupancy - One person (with a leasehold/ownership interest) per bedroom. A Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines minor child or dependent shall be granted equal status as a person with leasehold/ownership interest. In a two adult household, both adults must be working in Pitkin County in order to qualify for an additional bedroom. Morteaeee - A lender in a mortgage loan transaction. Morteaeor ~ A borrower in a mortgage loan transaction. Net Assets - Gross assets minus liabilities. Retirement accounts will be reviewed on a case- by-case basis to determine whether or not they shall be included as a net asset. Net Livable Square Footaee - Is calculated on interior living area and is measured interior wall to interior wall. including all interior partitions. Also included, but not limited to, habitable basements and interior storage areas, closets and laundry area. Exclusions include, but are not limited to, uninhabitable basements, mechanical areas, exterior storage, stairwells, garages (either attached or detached), patios, decks and porches. Nondiscrimination Policy - APCHA shall not discriminate against anvone due to race. color. creed. religion. ancestrv. national origin. sex. age. marital status. physical handicaps. affectional or sexual orientation. family responsibility. or political affiliation. resulting in the unequal treatment or separation of any person. or deny. prevent, limit or otherwise adversely affect. the benefit of eniovment by any person of employment. ownership or occupancv of real propertv. or public service or accommodations. On-Site / Off-Site ~ Location of deed restricted property used for mitigation purposes: either next to or attached to the development (on-site) or at a separate location approved by the Housing Office (off-site). PreQualification - A borrower's tentative mortgage approval from a lender. AMENDED 01/06 Page 67 of 72 II Present Value - For the purposes of these Guidelines and any Deed Restrictions containing such terms, the present value shall be the cost or price of any capital improvements as established at the time of such improvement and shall be neither appreciated nor depreciated from such time. Primary Residence - The sole and exclusive place of residence. The owner or renter shall be deemed to have ceased to use the unit as his/her sole and exclusive place of residence by accepting permanent employment outside of Pitkin county, or residing in the unit fewer than nine (9) months out of any twelve (12) consecutive months. Purchaser - A person who is buying or has purchased a deed restricted unit which is subject to these Guidelines. and any qualifying potential purchaser or past owner of any such deed restricted unit, but only with respect to any issue arising under these Guidelines. Qualified Resident - Person(s) meeting the income, asset, employment, and residency requirements and property ownership limitations, including retired and ElisableAh.ndicaooed persons, or dependent(s) of any of these (as such terms are defmed herein) established by the APCHA. Reaualification - Requirements which renters/ tenants and owners of employee housing must meet bi-annually to ensure continued eligibility. Resale Al!reement - A contract entered into between the Housing Office and the owner or purchaser 0 f real property identifying the conditions of occupancy and resale (also commonly referred to as a Deed Restriction). Retirement Al!e - Should an owner or tenant of a deed-restricted unit retire before the age of 65. that individual must sell the ownership or move from the deed restricted rental unit. Such individual may go through Special Review to ask for a waiver to maintain ownership/occupancy of his/her unit. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines Roarinl! Fork River Drainal!elRoarinl! Fork Vallev - The Roaring Fork River Drainage and/or Roaring Fork Valley, as used herein, includes the Roaring Fork River Valley and the valleys with tributary streams or rivers, including the Frying Pan River, the Crystal River. Snowmass Creek, Capital Creek, Maroon Creek and Castle Creek and includinl!. but not limited to. the towns of Aspen. Snowmass Village, Woodv Creek. Snowmass, Basalt. Meredith. El JebeL Carbondale. Redstone, Marble, Glenwood Springs.~ Seasonal Employee - A person working not less than 35 hours per week during the Winter Season (generally November through April) and/or Summer Season (generally June through August). Self-Emploved: You are self-emploved if vou Carry on a trade or business as a sole proprietor or an independent contractor: vou are a member of a partnership that carries on a trade or business: vou are otherwise in business for vourself: and YOU work for profit or fees. You must show a profit on an income tax return at least three out of every five vears. The trade or business is required to provide goods and services to individuals. businesses or institutional operations in Pitkin Countv. Special Review Committee - A Special Review Committee, as established from time to time by the Housing Office, is composed of three or more persons -- one person from City staff, one person from County staff, and a Housing Board member. The Committee shall have the authority to review special circumstances with respect to matters specifically designated in the Guidelines that are eligible for special review, including, but not necessarily limited to, the priority system; financial and asset limitations; verifications and qualifications; self-employment financial considerations; occupancy; admission; etc. Storal!e Space - Space intended and commonly utilized as location for preservation or later use or disposal of items. To be used for storage purooses only and shall not contain plumbing fixtures or mechanical equipment that support the principal residential use. AMENDED 01/06 Page 68 of 72 Student - A student enrolled in an accredited school full-time. and/or an intern who is a student or recent graduate undergoing supervised practical training full-time and working in a temporary capacity for a Pitkin County business: and/or a full-time combination of work in Pitkin County and school: such student shall be 18 years of age or older. Tenancv In Common - Co-ownership in which individual holds an undivided interest in real property as ifhe were sole owner. Tenant - A person who is leasing or has leased a deed restricted unit which is subject to these Guidelines, and any qualifying potential lessee or past lessee of any such deed restricted unit, but only with respect to any issue arising under these Guidelines. Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 69 of 72 II APPENDlXA MAXIMUM INCOMES BY CATEGORY (January 2006) Maximum rental incomes are different than maximum sales incomes. Due to the nature of the working adult in Pitkin County and the wages that are required to maintain a consistent employee base, the APCHA and Housing Board have recognized the need for a higher allowable income adjusted by the number of adults and the bedroom mix. Maximum sales incomes are not attributed to the number of bedrooms, but will remain the same per household, with an adjustment to dependents only. However, should a household's net assets exceed $900,000, that household will be ineligible for deed- restricted housing. No. Of Adults Maximum Incomes for RENTAL Units Only (See Income Verification, Part 11, Section 2, No.1) Cate ory I Cate 0 2 Cate ory 3 One Adult Two Adults Three Adults Net Assets not in Excess of $30,000 44,000 52,000 100,000 $47,000 70,000 82,000 125,000 $76,000 114,000 133,000 150.000 Maximum Incomes for SALES/OWNERSIDP Units Only (See Income Verification, Part ill, Section 2, No.1) Cate 0 I Cate 0 2 Cate ory 3 $30,000 $47,000 $76,000 37,500 54,500 83,500 45,000 62,000 91,000 52,500 69,500 98,500 100,000 125,000 150,000 No. Of De endents o Dependents I Dependent 2 Dependents 3 or More Dependents Net Assets Not in Excess of Cate 0 4 $123,000 184,000 214,000 175.000 Cate 0 4 $123,000 130,500 138,000 145,500 175,000 Maximum Incomes for SALES/OWNERSHIP Units Only (See Income Verification, Part ill, Section 2, No.1) No. of Dependents Category 5 Category 6 Category 7 Category RO o Dependents $132.000 $145,000 $159,000 N/A I Dependent 139,500 152,500 166,500 N/A 2 Dependents 147,000 160,000 174,000 N/A 3 or More Dependents 154,500 167,500 181,500 N/A Net Assets Not in Excess of 200,000 225,000 250.000 $900,000 Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 70 of 72 APPENDIX B CHART OF PRINCIPAL OWNERSHIP PROJECTS PROJECT NAME No. & Type of Units Max. Income Category Required Residency 1000 East Hopkins 3 2-Bedroom Units Category 4 Per Gnidelines AABC Pitkin Park Place 14 Condos - 1, 2 & 3 Bedrooms Category I, 3 & RO Per Guidelines AABC Rowhouses 12 Townhomes No Income Guidelines See Covenants Alpine Cottages 10 Townhomes Category 4 and RO Per Guidelines Alpine Grove I 2-Bedroom Category 3 Per Guidelines Annie Mitchell Homestead 39 I-Bedrooms Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines Aspen Highlands Village 67 Units Category I, 2, 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Aspen Village Subdivision 150 Units Resident Occupied See Deed Restriction Aspen West #5 I 2-Bedroom Category 3 Per Guidelines Bavarian Inn Condos 19 Studios 1,2 & 3 Bedrooms Category 2, 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Benedict Conunons 27 Studios & I-Bedrooms Category 2, 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Billings Place 7 Studios, 2 & 3 Bedrooms Category 2, 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Castle Creek Valley Ranch 4 Single-Family Homes Category 4 Per Guidelines Cemetery Lane (City) 3 Duplex Units RO - City of Aspen Employment City of Aspen Emp. Centennial 92 Studios, 1, 2 & 3 Bedrooms Category 4 Per Guidelines Chapparra1 Ranch 3 SFH. 4 2-Bedrooms (2 duplexes) Category 4/5 Employees of Ranch Cipriano-Taylor I Duplex Unit RO Per Deed Restriction Conunon Ground 21 Townhomes (land lease) Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines Curton Condos I 3-Bedroom Category 4 Per Guidelines East Cooper (1230) I Single-Family Home Category 4 Per Guidelines East Cooper Court 2 Single-Family Homes Category 3 & RO Per Guidelines East Hopkins 4 Townhomes Category 4 Per Guidelines East Owl Creek 4 Single-Family Homes Category 4 Per Guidelines Fairway 1lI 30 Townhomes Category 4 Per Guidelines Five Trees 31 Single-Family Homes Category 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Highland Villas 16 2-Bedrooms Category 4 Per Guidelines Hopkins Roan 2 I-Bedroom & 2-Bedroom Category 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 71 of 72 11---- PROJECT NAME No. & Type of Units Max. Income Category Required Residency Hunter Creek 79 Condominiums Category I, 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Juan Street 6 Units; 2 Duplexes, 2 SFH Category 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Lacet Court (East Cooper) 14 TownhomeslSFH Category 3, 4 & RO Per Guidelines Lazy Glen 100 Mobile Homes! Own Land RO Per Deed Restriction Little Victorian/634 W. Main II-Bedroom Category 3 Per Guidelines Lone Pine 28 Condominiums Category 4 Per Guidelines Maroon Creek Club/i151 Tiehack I Single-Family Home Category I Per Guidelines Marthinsson-Nostdahl 10 Condominiums Category 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Midland Park 37 Condominiums Category 4 Per Guidelines North 40 72 - 59 SFH, 13 Townhomes RO Per Guidelines Oh-Be-Joyful 5 Single-Family Homes Category 3 Per Guidelines Park Avenue - 407-B I 3-Bedroom Category 4 Per Guidelines Park Circle / 425 A-I I 2-Bedroom Category 2 Per Guidelines Park Place - 411 E. Cooper 2 I-Bedrooms Category 4 Per Guidelines Pitkin Iron 15 Units Category 2, 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Red House Enclave 6 1,2 & 3 Bedrooms Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines Sagewood Condo I 2-Bedroom Category 4 Per Guidelines Seventh & Main 12 Units; ] I I-Bdrm; I 2-Bdrm Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines Shadow Mountain OOA 13-Bedroom Category 3 Per Guidelines Shady Lane Condominium 1 3-Bedroom Category 4 Per Guidelines Smuggler Cove 3 2-Bedroom & 3-Bedroom Category 2 & 4 Per Guidelines Smuggler Park SubdIvision 87 Single-Family (Modular) RO Per Deed Restriction Smuggler Run 17 Single-Family (Modular) Category 4 Per Guidelines Snyder 151- and 3-Bedrooms Category 2, 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Sopris Creek Meadows (Cabins) 6 Units - SFH & Duplexes Category I & 3 Per Guidelines Stillwater 13 Units - I & 3-Bedrooms Category 2, 3, 4 & 5 Per Guidelines Tom Thumb 3 Studios Category 3 Per Guidelines Trainor's Landing (aka Barbee) 7 Units - SFH & Duplexes Category 4 & RO Per Guidelines Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 72 of 72 PROJECT NAME No. & Type of Units Max. Income Category Required Residency Twin Ridge 12 T ownhomes; 13 SFH Category 4 Per Guidelines Two Moon 1 Single-Family Home Category 4 Per Guidelines Ute Park 7 Townhomes Category 3 & 4 Per Guidelines Valley Condo /1135 Cemetery Lane 1 3-Bedroom Category 3 Per Guidelines Victorians at Bleeker 5 Condominiums Category 4 & RO Per Guidelines Villas at Elk Run, Basalt 2 - I I-Bedroom / I 3-Bedroom Category 2 & 4 Per Guidelines Vincenti Condos 2 ~ Studio & I-Bedroom Category 1 Per Guidelines Water Place (City) 22 ~ Studio, 1,2 & 3 Bedrooms City of Aspen Employment City of Aspen Emp. West Hopkins 11 Townhomes Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines Williams Ranch 35 Units . Category 2,3,4, RO-5 & RO Per Guidelines Williams Woods 18 Townhomes Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines Winfield Arms I Studio Category 2 Per Guidelines W/J Ranch 56 Single-Family Homes Category 4 & RO Per Guidelines Woody Creek Mobile Home Park 58 Mobile Homes Category 6 Per Guidelines I TOTAL I 1,346 Units I I I Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 73 of 72 II APPENDIX C CHART OF PRINCIPAL RENTAL PROJECTS AND REQUIREMENTS PROJECT NAME No. & Type of Units Max. Income Category Required Residency 715 CEMETERY LANE I Units School Dist. Priority Per Ordinance 985 MAROON CREEK (City) I 2-Bedroom City of Aspen Employment Per Ordinance AABC APARTMENTS 8 Units Category 3 ~ School Dist Priority Per Deed Restriction ALPINA HAUS 44 Units . RO Per Deed Restriction ANDERSON PARCEL I Units Category 3 Per Gnidelines ANIMAL SHELTER (AABC) 2 Units Category 2 Per Gnidelines ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SAN. DISTRICT 9 Units ACSD EMPLOYEES ONLY Per Gnidelines ASPEN COUNTRY INN 40 Units Category I & 2 Per Guidelines ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE 8 Rooms/13 Donn Rooms Category I & 2IRO Per Gnidelines ASPEN RECREATION CENTER I I-Bedroom Category 2 Per Guidelines ASPEN V ALLEY RANCH 7 Units Category I & 3 Per Guidelines BEAUMONT 24 Units Hospital Priority Per Deed Restriction BELL MOUNT AlN LODGE 5 Units Category 2 Per Guidelines BRUSH CREEK 2 Units Category RO Per Guidelines BURLINGAME - Pennanent 8 Units Category 2 Per Guidelines Seasonal 92 Units (184 beds) CASTLE RIDGE 80 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines CENTENNIAL 148 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines CITY PLAZA BLDG. 4 Units Category I Per Resolution CLARENDON (625 WEnd St) I Unit Category 3 Per Guidelines COMCAST (AABC) 8 Units Category RO Per Guidelines .COPPER HORSE 13 Units NI A - Resident Occupied Per Resolution CORTINA (Hotel Jerome) 16 Units Category I Per Resolution GUIDO'S 3 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines HEATHERBED 21 Donn-Style Units RO Per Deed Restriction HOLlDA Y HOUSE 35 Donn-Style Units RO Per Deed Restriction HOPKINS I Units Category 2 Per Guidelines Aspen/Pitkin COLmty Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 74 of 72 PROJECT NAME No. & Type of Units Max. Income Category Required Residency HUNTER LONGHOUSE 33 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines ISIS 2 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines KATY REID 2 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines LAZY GLEN 3 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines MAROLT HOUSE (City) I Unit City Employee Per Guidelines MAROLT RANCH - Pennanent 4 Units Category 3 Seasonal 96 Units Pitkin County Employee Per Guidelines MAROON CREEK CLUB 42 Units Maroon Crk Club Priority Per Guidelines MILL STREET STATION 7 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines MILL STREET PLAZA 3 Units Category RO Per Guidelines MOCKLIN 7 Units Category I, 2 & 3 Per Guidelines MOUNTAIN OAKS/HOSPIT AL 21 Units Hospital Priority Per Hospital PlTKIN CENTER BLDG. (520 E. Hyman) 4 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines PUPPYSMITH APARTMENTS 18 Units Resident Occupied Per Resolution RITZ (prospector) I Unit Category 2 Per Guidelines RIVER GLEN (1015 E. Durant) 12 Units Category I & 2 Per Guidelines RIVER PARK 3 Units Category 2 & RO Per Guidelines ST. MORITZ . 2 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines SEGUIN (Range Restaurant) 2 Units Category 2 Per Guidelines SMUGGLERMTN APARTMENTS 11 Units Category I Per Guidelines STARRY PINES 2 Units Category 2 Per Guidelines SUNDECK 2 Units Category 2 Per Guidelines TENTH MOUNTAIN 2 Units Category 3 Per Guidelines TOWNE PLAZA 4 Units Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines TRUSCOTT PLACE 108 Units RO & Category 3 TRUSCOTTPLACELLLP 87 Units Category 2 & 3 Per Guidelines ULLR LODGE 26 Units Category 3 & 4 - Employer Owned Per Guidelines UTE CITY PLACE 22 Units Category 2 & 3 - St. Regis Priority Per Guidelines WATER PLACE (City) 3 Units City Employee Per Guidelines Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 75 of 72 II PROJECT NAME T RANCH (School District) TOTAL No. & Type of Units 10 Units 955 Units Permanent 282 Units Seasonal 1,237 Units Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines Max. Income Category Category 4 - School District AMENDED 01/06 Required Residency Per Guidelines Page 76 of 72 APPENDIX D LISTING OF PRINCIPAL RENTAL PROJECTS AND PROPERTY MANAGERS (as of January 2006) Aspen Country Inn Cindy Tucker-Davis, Property Manager Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 E. Main, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-2700; 920-1745 Fax Hunter Longhouse Apartments Terry Kappeli, Property Manager 101 Lone Pine Road, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 963-6494 AABC Apartments Austin Laurence Partnership Contact person: Tamara Rauch Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-4988 XII Marolt Ranch (Seasonal Housing) John Mickles, Property Manager Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 E. Main, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-3499 (Jan.-May & Sept.-Dec) (970) 920-0849 Fax Alpina Haus Kevin DeCarlo, Property Manager 935 East Durant, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-3975; 920-2396 Fax Maroon Creek Apartments Stephanie Thurston, Property Manager 305 Stage Court, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 544-1885; 544-0558 Fax Burlingame Seasonal Housing Bill Dillon, Property Manager 050 Harmony PI., Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-0171 North Mill Station M& W Realtors. Attn: Debbie 355 Puppysmith, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-8032; 925-6995 Fax Castle Ridge Apartments Maxine Jacobs, Resident Manager 1175 Doolittle Circle, #603 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-6851; 925-6851 Fax Smuggler Mountain Apartments Bruce Nethery, Property Manager Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 E. Main, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 379-6048; 920-5580 Fax Centennial Apartments Kim Keilin, Property Manager 100 Luke Short Ct, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-1876; 920-2691 Fax Truscott Place Apartments Bruce Nethery. Property Manager Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 E. Main, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-5139; 920-5358 Fax Copper Horse Kevin DeCarlo, Property Manager 328 W. Main St., Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-3975; 920-2396 Fax Highlands Village (Seasonal) Steve Elliott, Property Manager 0115 Boomerang Rd. #5201D Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-1776; 925-4349 (Fax) Truscott LLLP - Phase II Units Janet Kraznoff, Property Manager Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority 530 E. Main, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 544-8035; 544-4854 Fax Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines AMENDED 01/06 Page 77 of 72 MEMORANDUM I lEt TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council I Chris Bendon. Community Development Director CJA Vv\ Joyce A. Allgaie~~ty Director of Community Development Second Reading of Ordinance No.6, Series of 2006, "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" Rezoning and Lot Split-Public Hearing-Continued from March 27 THRU: FROM: RE: DATE: April 10, 2006 ApPLICANT /OWNER: Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC, represented by Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC LOCATION: South side of West Hopkins Avenue between 4th and 5th Streets. PARCEL ID NUMBER: 2735-124-66-00 I CURRENT ZONING: R-15 (Moderate- Density Residential) Zone District with a PUD and Lodge Preservation Overlay. PROPOSED ZONING: R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone District. SUMMARY: The Applicant requests to rezone the subject property from the R-15 Zone District to the R- 6 Zone District in order to split the parcel into two (2) parcels for the construction of three (3) detached residential dwelling units. along with housing mitigation. ApPROVED AND CURRENT LAND USE: The subject property is currently vacant but has PUD approval and vested rights to construct seventeen (17) lodging bedrooms in seven (7) lodge units and two (2) affordable housing units. P&Z AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions. SUMMARY: "'Please Bring Packet Material Provided for the March 27'h hearing.'" · At the City Council hearing conducted on March 27th, the Applicant asked for a continuation in order to address the Council's request to make the ADUs associated with the development "for sale". Based on phone discussions with the Applicant, they are acceptable to this request and are preparing a proposal to the CounciL (As of this writing this has not been has not been received by the Community Development Department.) Staff has amended proposed Ordinance No.6 to require the "for sale" ADU/Carriage houses. ORDINANCE NO. 6 (SERIES OF 2006) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZONING THE "BOOMERANG VACANT PARCEL" TO THE R-6 (MEDIUM-DENSITY) ZONE DISTRICT AND APPROVING A LOT SPLIT, CREATING LOTS 1 AND 2 OF THE BOOMERANG LOT SPLIT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. ParcellD: 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC, requesting to rezone the "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" located on the south side ofW. Hopkins Avenue, containing portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen from the R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential) Zone District with a PUD and Lodge Preservation Overlay to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone District and requesting approval of a Lot Split to divide the 19,737 square foot property into a parcel of approximately 12,237 square feet and a parcel of approximately 7,500 square feet; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended approval with condition of the proposed rezoning and lot split application; and. WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal during a duly noticed public hearing opened on January 17. 2006, and continued to January 24. 2006. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No.3, Series of 2006. by a five to one (5-1) vote. recommending that City Council rezone the subject property to the R-6 Zone District. and recommending that City Council approve the requested lot split with conditions, under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety. and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Land Use Section 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, the City Council hereby rezones the "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" containing portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen, from the R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential) Zone District with a PUD and Lodge Preservation Overlay to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone District. Ordinance No.6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel", Page 1 '1 Section 2: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Land Use Section 26.480.030(A)(2), Subdivision Exemptions: Lot Split, the City Council approves a lot split to divide the "Boomerang Vacant Parcel" into Lot I of approximately 7,500 square feet and Lot 2 of approximately 12,237 square feet for the construction of a total of three (3) detached dwelling units, with the conditions contained herein. Lot I is limited to one (I) single family residence and Lot 2 is limited to two (2) detached residences. All dimensions including allowable floor area and the manner in which ADUs are calculated, shall be as specified in the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District, as amended. Section 3: Subdivision Exemption Plat The Applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption plat that meets the terms of Land Use Code Section 26.480 in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after final approval is obtained. The Lot Split Plat shall clearly label the proposed lot line that separates Lot I from Lot 2, housing type and density per lot, and show all easements of record. The plat may also include a note indicating that the land area contained within the trail easement may count in calculating lot size and floor area. Section 4: Subdivision ExemDtion Al!:Teement The Applicant shall submit and record a subdivision exemption agreement that meets the terms of Land Use Code Section 26.480.030, in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder no later than 180 days after final approval is obtained. Section 5: Buildinl!: Permit ADDlication The building permit application for each of the residential units shall include the following: I. A copy of the final Ordinance and P&Z Resolution. 2. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. 3. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. 4. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. Additionally, a right-of-way landscaping plan shall be provided as part of the building permit application identifying that any trees removed from the right-of-way will have to be relocated. Any disruption or damage to the right-of-way irrigation system during construction shall also be repaired to the satisfaction of the Parks Department. Ordinance No.6, Series of2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel", Page 2 5. 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. 6. A construction management plan pursuant to the requirements of the Community Development Department. The construction management plan shall include a plan for protecting the Midland and W. Hopkins Avenue Trails during construction. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Department prior to building permit issuance. 7. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department. Section 6: Growth Manal!:ement Allotments The Applicant shall obtain Administrative Growth Management approval and provide affordable housing mitigation by developing one (I) "for sale" accessory dwelling unit or carriage house per residential dwelling unit. as contained within the Applicant's proposal. This mitigation would be found as acceptable mitigation measures for each of the residential dwelling units to be constructed on Lots I and 2 of the lot split pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(B)(I), Administrative Growth Management Review: Detached single-family or duplex dwelling units, as amended from time to time. Section 7: Use and Dimensional Requirements The lots created by the lot split shall be subject to the use and dimensional requirements of the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District and as specified in Section 2 of this ordinance. The residential dwelling units to be developed on Lot 2 shall be constructed as two (2) detached dwelling units rather than in a duplex configuration. Section 8: Residential Desil!:n Standards All residential dwelling units to be constructed on Lots I and 2 shall meet the residential design standards in place at the time of building permit, unless any variance(s) is duly obtained. Section 9: Vehicular Access Vehicular access to Lot I shall be taken from the South Fourth Street stub located directly to the east of the property. There shall not be any vegetation taller than 30 inches from existing grade planted within the area fifteen (IS) feet south or north of the driveway to be accessed from 4th Street, at the property line or in the public right-of-way to maintain a sufficient view corridor for trail users to see vehicles crossing the trail. The Applicant shall also relocate the existing Midland Trail sign to the south side of the driveway and attach a new sign on the backside of the Midland Trail sign indicating the presence ofthe driveways crossing the trail to trail users. Ordinance No.6, Series of2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel''' Page 3 Vehicular access to Lot 2 shall be taken from West Hopkins Avenue via a single curb cut. The residential units on Lot 2 shall share a single driveway and the curb cut shall be designed and constructed such that it will not provide a net loss in on-street parking in the W. Hopkins Avenue Right-of-Way (it may be necessary to reconstruct and realign a portion of the existing sidewalk/trail to ensure no net loss of on-street parking). The driveway access shall meet the City Engineering Department's standards for drive ramps. The driveway entrance points shall be in substantially the same location as they are shown in the addendum to the application. Section 10: Curb and Gutter The Applicant shall construct curb, and gutter along the West Hopkins Avenue frontage of the property being divided prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of the units in the project. The timing of this installation may be changed if approved by the City Engineer. If the W. Hopkins Pedestrian Trail is altered during construction, the Applicant shall repair the trail to the condition it was in prior to construction while allowing for the potential for modest realignment. The radii of the curb cut shall be the minimal that functions for the purpose of a driveway. The applicants shall gain approval from the Community Development Engineer to determine an appropriate sizing. Section 11: Trail Easement The Applicant shall grant a four (4) foot wide public trail easement to the City of Aspen along the western side property line of Lot 2 and on the westernmost 90 feet of Lot 2, running directly adjacent to the southern property line. A slightly wider easement shall be granted at the southwest comer of Lot 2 to allow for a moderate turning radius on the trail. The exact location of this easement shall be approved by the Parks Department prior to recordation of the final subdivision exemption plat. This easement shall be shown on the subdivision exemption plat and shall be described in the subdivision exemption agreement. The easement shall not affect allowable FAR or density. Section 12: LandscaDinl!: The Applicant shall install a tree root barrier on the trees that are to be planted within ten (l0) feet of the W. Hopkins trail to prevent future root damage and trail upheaval. The Applicant shall also install tree saving construction fences around the drip line of any trees to be saved subject to the following provisions: a. The City Forester or his/her designee must inspect this fence before any construction activities commence. b. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction equipment, construction backfill, foot or vehicular traffic shall be allowed within the drip line. Section 13: Soil Subsidence and Rock Fall Hazards The Applicant shall submit geotechnical and soil stability reports performed by a qualified. licensed engineer demonstrating the land is suitable to handle the proposed development. The Applicant shall also submit a report from a qualified, licensed engineer demonstrating that rock fall from the slope above the proposed development Ordinance No.6, Series of2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel", Page 4 will be sufficiently mitigated to prevent rock fall hazards. This report shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of full structural building permits. Section 14: Fire Mitieation The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system that meets the requirements of the Aspen Fire Marshal in any residential unit that is 5,000 square feet or more. Use of charcoal grills shall be prohibited in this development because of fire danger concerns. This prohibition shall be included in the Subdivision Exemption Agreement for the development. Section 15: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Reauirements The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. Section 16: Impact, Park Development. and School Land Dedication Fees Park Development Impact Fees shall be assessed on each residential unit constructed on Lots I and 2 at the time of building permit issuance. The park development impact fees shall be calculated by the City Zoning Officer at the time of building permit issuance using the fee schedule in place at said time. School Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, and a proportionate amount of all applicable impact fees shall be due at the time of building permit issuance for each residence within the lot split. Other Impact Fees, as applicable, shall be due at the time of building permit application submittal. Section 17: Exterior Liehtine All exterior lighting shall meet the City's Lighting Code Requirements pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 18: Previous Approvals Upon recordation of the subdivision exemption plat, the previous approvals including PUD. Subdivision and any others associated with the subject property will become vacated, null and void for good cause found, and the provisions of this approval will be in place. Section 19: Vested Property Riehts The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Ordinance No.6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel", Page 5 II City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval ofa site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen, by Ordinance No.6, Series of2006, of the Aspen City CounciL Section 20: 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 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 21: 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 22: 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 23: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 27th day of March, 2006, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen 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 13th day of February, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Ordinance No.6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel", Page 6 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 10th day of April, 2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Ordinance No.6, Series of 2006 "Boomerang Vacant Parcel", Page 7 HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC April 4, 2006 Aspen City Council c/o Joyce Allgaier, Community Development 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Boomerang Vacant Parcel, Amendment of the RezoningILot Slit Application Dear Mayor Klanderud and the City Council: As a result of the March 27 City Council hearing regarding the Boomerang Vacant Parcel Rezoning and Lot Split request. the applicant has decided to revise the proposed development plan. The revised plan more greatly forwards City goals and objectives while continuing to provide enhanced neighborhood compatibility. The request that was before Council on March 27 was two-part: it sought first to rezone the property from R-15ILP/PUD to R-6, and second, to split the lot into two parcels for development of three single-family homes. Proposed Lot I has an area of 7,500sf, an allowable FAR of 3,450sf, and would accommodate development of one free- market single family home; required mitigation would have been either a standard (rental) ADU of at least 300 net livable sf (the floor area of the ADU would count against what is allowed on the lot) or cash-in-lieu. Proposed Lot 2 has an area of 12,237sf, an allowable FAR of 4,274, and would accommodate development of two free-market single family homes (splitting the allowable FAR); required mitigation would have been either a standard ADU of at least 600 net livable sf. two standard ADU of at least 300 net livable sf each, or cash-in-lieu. In total, the property would have been developed with 5 or 6 detached structures. In response to Council's review of March 27, the applicant has made several revisions to the proposal outlined above. The proposed lot areas and allowable floor areas have not changed. Instead, the proposed means of mitigating the development is the subject of the changes. The applicant is now proposing to mitigate the entire development with construction of two (2) "for sale" ADU or Carriage Houses (CH) on the west end of Lot 2 (essentially on the "Lot A" portion of proposed Lot 2). The two ADU/CH units will be developed as a duplex structure, attached to one another in either a side-by-side or top-and-bottom configuration. As a result, the total property (Lots I and 2 combined) will be developed with 4 detached structures. To mitigate development of a single-family residence on Lot I, a "for sale" ADU/CH of 300-1,200 net livable square feet will be built. To mitigate development of two detached single-family residences on Lot 2, a "for sale" ADU/CH of 600-1,200 net livable square feet will be built. Pursuant to Section 26.520.020 of the Code, "Accessory , 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108' ASPEN, COLORADO' 81611 . PHONE: (970) 925-7819 . FAX: (970) 925-7395 . April 4, 2006 Page 2 Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses are separate dwelling units... located on the same parcel [as the primary residence] or on a contiguous lot under the same ownership." The two proposed contiguous lots remain under common ownership and, as such, the Code allows for development of the Lot I ADUlCH on Lot 2, as proposed herein. The two ADU/CH units will be attached to one another. The Code provides that an ADU/CH must be detached from the primary residence (Section 26.520.050(5)), but does not require that two ADU/CH be detached from one another. As provided above, the ADU/CH mitigating the Lot 1 development will be detached from the primary residence on Lot 1; likewise, the ADU/CH mitigating the Lot 2 development will be detached from the primary residences located thereon. Both ADU/CH units will function as individual dwellings, separately accessible from the exterior and with separately accessible utilities. The finished floor height(s) of the ADU/CH units will be entirely above grade on all sides, and the units will be located in compliance with the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zoning. Roof designs will prevent snow/ice from shedding upon the entrances. Both ADU/CH units will be deed restricted as "for sale" units in accordance with Section 26.520.070 of the Code. Lot 2 will be condominiumized to allow for individual sale of each dwelling unit located thereon. Floor area calculations for the ADU/CH units will be as dictated by Section 26.575.020(A)(6) and (7) of the Code. Pursuant to Section 26.520.070 of the Code, the initial developer of the ADU/CH units will retain the right to select the first qualified purchasers, and subsequent conveyances will be according to the lottery sales procedures specified in the APCHA Guidelines. The revisions proposed herein will more greatly forward City goals and objectives while enhancing neighborhood compatibility. While ADU/CH do not count as units of density for zoning purposes. added density will be achieved in an appropriate location, and two permanently affordable dwelling units will be added to the housing inventory. The duplex-style development of the two ADU/CH units adjacent to the Little Ajax development will provide an appropriate transition from multi-family down to single- family residential. Overall, the proposed development pattern is wholly consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. which includes everything from lodges to multi-family, single-family and duplex residential development. If I can be of further assistance in any way. or if you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mitch Haas, AICP Owner/Manager cc: Steve Stunda and Mike Hoffinan C:lMy Documents/City ApplicationslBoomerang/B-rang StundaIRevised Proposal _ CC