HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20061023
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
October 23, 2006
5:00 P.M.
I.Call to Order
II.RoIICall
III.Moment of Silence
IV.Scheduled Public Appearances
a) Green Tree Award
V.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) Councilmembers' Comments
c) City Manager's Comments
d) Board Reports
Vll.Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion)
a) Board Appointments
b) Resolution #87, 2006 - Contract Change order Jenny Adair - WRC Construction
Observation
VIII.First Reading of Ordinances
a) Ordinance #42, 2006 - Hotel Jerome PUD Amendment
IX.Public Hearings
a) Ordinance #39, 2006 - Aspen Institute Conference Center SPA Amendment
(withdrawn)
b) Ordinance #33, 2006 -Impact Fees (cont'd from 10/10)
X.Action Items
a) Resolution #88, 2006 - Planning Consultant Contract - White & Smith
XI.Executive Session
XII.Adjournment
Next Regular Meeting November 13. 2006
COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M.
..1-.......
VIJ:'J)
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
DATE:
October 18, 2006
RE:
Board Appointments
By adopting the consent calendar, Council is making the following
appointments:
Historic Preservation - Brian McNellis - Regular member
Wheeler Board - Ron Erickson - Regular member
..-........
lIrA)
~
. __ ........ 'U' .,..._........- . .
PaJ,:kS and Recreation
.... Department .." .... .."
Memorandum
To: Mayor and Council
Thru: Jeff Woods, Manager Parks and Recreation
Thru: Stephen Ellsperman, Deputy Director of Parks and Open Space
From: Scott Chism, Parks Planner/Project Manager 5~-
Date: 10/16/06
Re: Resolution #2006ij7. Approval of a Contract Addendum to the Engineering
Professional Services Contract for the Jenny Adair Regional Stormwater
Quality Project
CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager
John Worcester, City Attorney
Paul Mentor, City Finance Director
Bentley Henderson, Assistant City Manage
SUMMARY:
The City of Aspen has made a strong commitment to managing stormwater and the Aspen City
Council has directed staff to begin to implement long-term solutions to ensure that the community,
being at the head of the watershed, is responsible for clean stormwater discharge into the
watershed. Stormwater from the central core of the city and Aspen Mountain currently discharges
directly into the Roaring Fork River from three major drainages, carrying non-point source
pollution into the river. One of the three drainages flows from the street gutters and into the
existing Jenny Adair pond before reaching the river.
On June 6th earlier this year, Council reviewed this project as well as a Contract for Construction
to build the stormwater infrastructure portion of the project. Council approved a Contract for
Construction with Western Slope Utilities, Inc. at that time. The initial steps of construction are
currently underway with a projected completion time in mid-late November, as weather conditions
allow.
The Engineering Consultant that the City has utilized for all of the Aspen area stormwater
drainage design and the construction documentation of the Jenny Adair Stormwater Quality
Facility has developed an expanded scope and fee that should be acceptable to the City in order to
complete the construction observation/management engineering services necessary during the
construction period. An Engineering Consultant is required to assist city staff to fully manage the
construction of the specialized stormwater infrastructure design components.
1
At this time we are requesting you to authorize a CONTRACT ADDENDUM to the
Professional Services Agreement for the ENGINEERING SERVICES OF THE JENNY
ADAIR STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT for the amount of $34,500.00.
BACKGROUND:
The acquisition/manufacture process for many of the stormwater components has been underway
with the General Contractor since the contract for construction was approved in June. During that
time a great number of design related questions have surfaced that have required the Design
Engineer of Record, WRC Engineering, Inc., to respond to. Staff anticipates that many more
resolutions will be necessary through the remainder of the construction period that will be outside
of capabilities and expertise of the City's in-house resources. As a result, staff requested a
proposal from WRC, Engineering, Inc. to provide construction observation/management
engineering services to compliment city staffs overall construction management of the project.
(Refer Attachment "B", Proposal for construction observation/management services.)
The existing pond basin on the Jenny Adair parcel is the last stop for one of the City's three major
storm water basins (West Drainage) and is in a state of environmental degradation resulting in
poor quality water draining into the Roaring Fork River. This project is a demonstration that is
expected to be the precursor for bringing an entire stormwater system online for the City of Aspen.
Significant water quality improvement will occur because the stormwater collected on the City's
streets will get cleaned in the sediment removal (pre-treatment) vaults and wetland pond areas.
From 2004-2006, site landscape and civil engineering design work was completed to achieve a
project that integrates well into the community. ACES and the Aspen Open Space and Trails
Board have endorsed this project as an important project that would either act as a stand-alone
beneficial project or could be easily incorporated into future stormwater management activities. In
November 2005, the voters of Aspen approved a TABOR exemption for City property tax to keep
the tax rate at 5.41 mils and use all excess revenues on four items that included, "improving the
quality of stormwater run-off entering the Roaring Fork River through construction of the Jenny
Adair Wetlands Project and associated improvements to the City's stormwater run-off retention
and sediment removal systems. " This TABOR exemption will provide the majority of funding for
this proposed project with a smaller percentage (approximately 35%) sourced from previously
appropriated Parks project funds.
DISCUSSION:
The approval of a construction observation/management engineering services contract is important
at this time in order to successfully construct the project as approved by Council on June 6th, 2006.
This engineering scope of services will be associated with the initial underground stormwater pipe
conveyance system only. The underground stormwater pipe conveyance system includes (3) large
water quality pre-treatment vaults, a significant amount of reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) ranging
in size from 18" dia. - 54" dia., and a water quality outfall structure adjacent to the Roaring Fork
River.
In an effort to minimize consultant costs related to this project, staff has pursued all of the
necessary federal, state and local (Access Infrastructure Permit) permits necessary for the
construction of this project. Staff believes that the engagement of the Engineering Consultant,
WRC Engineering, Inc., is necessary due to the unique character of stormwater cleaning and
conveyance design created by WRC Engineering, Inc. Representatives from WRC Engineering,
Inc. will be providing oversight services for the successful implementation of the stormwater
infrastructure design.
2
Council approved a Contract for Construction for this project on June 6th, 2006 with the
GeneralJUtility Contractor, Western Slope Utilities, Inc. The initial steps of construction are
underway, which have included the acquisition/manufacture of the concrete pipe and specialized
components of the pre-treatment vaults, the demolition of the dilapidated house at 220 Puppy
Smith Street, and general contractor mobilization. Infrastructure installation will occur from late
October through November 2006, which is the time that the construction observation/management
engineering services are necessary.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
This proposed Engineering Services Contract Addendum for Thirty-four Thousand Five
Hundred Dollars ($34,500.00) is within the comprehensive project budget. (Refer 'General
Conditions', page I, Attachment "C", Comprehensive Project Budget/Construction Costs). This
project would be funded from a combination of TABOR. property tax collections and $450,000 of
previously appropriated Parks Department project funds. The anticipated comprehensive project
cost exceeds the currently available $450,000 Parks Department project funds and the first year
$450,000 TABOR tax collection contribution.
The current TABOR collection projections indicate that the actual collections will exceed the
original projection by a wide margin. The City Finance Director has determined that the five (5)-
year voter approved time frame for TABOR exemption projects will result in an additional $1.45
million over the initial projections. The difference between the initial projections and current
forecast is large because actual growth in assessed value for 2006---to be collected in 2007-is
going to be much higher than the original annual growth assumptions upon which the ballot
measure was projected. The original annual growth assumptions were based on the assumption of
a 13-year average (1992-2004 assessment years) of 7.9% annually between CPI and new
construction. The City Finance Director has strong indications that taxable values may increase as
much as 26% for 2007 collections.
Significantly higher tax revenues will result next year and likely in the years to follow but no
increase in TABOR dollars will result this year. As a result, staff is suggesting that the difference
between anticipated construction cost and available project funds be covered by borrowing the
necessary funds from the City Open Space and Trails Fund until 2007 when TABOR tax
collections can be used to repay the open space fund.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS:
The environmental implications of this project are significant. The creation of this project will
have multiple environmental benefits including significant cleansing of major amounts of
stormwater through the community, establishment and restoration of critical riparian and wetland
habitat along a degraded section of the Roaring Fork River corridor, a receptacle which can handle
discharge from future storm water conveyance systems, significant ability to handle stormwater
retention needs, and excellent opportunities to interpret these actions to the community.
The federal government has stormwater quality mandates that are currently being enforced in
larger metropolitan areas around the country. Representatives from both federal and state agencies
that enforce these mandates have indicated that smaller, resort communities with a large bed base
and population range of 8,000-10,000 will be the next areas subject to compliance within the
foreseeable future. Completion of the Jenny Adair Stormwater Quality Project will be another
step toward achieving the stormwater management multi-objective plan to improve stormwater
quality in the Aspen community.
The Engineering Consultant, WRC Engineering, Inc. is prepared to assist the City in the
construction implementation stages of this project
3
ALTERNATIVES:
Council could choose not to approve the Contract Addendum to the Professional Services
Agreement for the ENGINEERING SERVICES OF THE JENNY ADAIR STORMWATER
QUALITY FACILITY PROJECT for the amount of $34,500.00, which would significantly impair
staff's ability to efficiently address design issues during the construction process for this project.
The successful completion of the Phase I work (underground stormwater pipe conveyance system)
within a reasonable time frame in 2006 in anticipation for the Phase 2 work, (2.3 acre constructed
wetland) planned to begin in spring 2007, would be jeopardized.
Approval of the Contract Addendum would facilitate the design implementation and construction
process.
PROPOSED MOTION:
I move to approve the Contract Addendum as part of the Professional Services Agreement for the
Jenny Adair Stormwater Quality Facility Project between the City of Aspen and the Engineering
Consultant, WRC Engineering, Inc., for the construction observation/management services for the
Jenny Adair Regional Stormwater Quality Facility Project for the amount of Thirty-four
Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($34,500.00).
CITY M~GER COMMENTS:
",~p L -~J '-<- ,,^,,--..5I C-,,,--:ff'J I/'d
_ j..J ). r !I iJ
€'. ,-- ,A {> 1,( A... I ;,-L.t-
e'\
I
",' tf;?)
C-<)ytJh~
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment' A' - Original Professional Services Agreement
Attachment 'B'- Proposal for construction observation/management services for Jenny
Adair Regional Stormwater Facility Project
Attachment 'c' - Comprehensive Project BudgetJConstruction Costs
4
I _c'''~___ --~-,,,--,~->-
RESOLUTION NO. 87
Series of 2006
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
APPROVING JENNY ADAIR STORMWATER QUALITY FACILITY PROJECT
CHANGE ORDERS FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, BETWEEN THE
CITY OF ASPEN AND WRC ENGINEERING INC., AND AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR OR CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID CHANGE ORDERS ON BEHALF
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council, proposed change
orders for the Jenny Adair Storm water Quality Facility Project, between the City of
Aspen and WRC Engineering, Inc., a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit "A";
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves proposed change
orders, between the City of Aspen and WRC Engineering, Inc., a copy of which is
annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the Mayor or City
Manager to approve said change orders on behalf of the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Aspen on the _ day of
,2006.
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 on the day hereinabove stated.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
. .
. A t:t:achment: ' A'
. -,-..-..-..---.'--. ---~._----
, AGRFFMFN'i PIJ'R 'P~Mt'~~TtiNAT ~FRVTr:P~
This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter sta,ted, between the CITY OF
ASPEN, Colorado, ("CitY") and WRC Engineering, Inc, ("Professional").
F or and in consid,eration of the mutual coyenants contalJ1ee! he,rein, the parties agree as
follows:
1. Scnp'" nf Wnrk. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional
manner the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein.
2. ' 'f'nmpl"'tirm. Profess~onal shall COrrnnence workimme<!iately upon receipt of a
\VrittenNotice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as
expeditiously as is Consistent with professional skill imd care ane! the orderly progress of the
Work in a timely manner., The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to this llgreement shall be
completed no later than per project agreement. Upon request of the City, Professional'sliall'
submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's serVices which
"shaube 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 a1J1:horities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule, when
approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Professional.
3. p"l""'""t.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 $50,000:00 . 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 clays from receipt of the
Professional's bill. '
4. Nnn_A<<;gn.hility. 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. SubcContracting, 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.
5.
specifying
T",r;"inAtinn. ,The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement, without
the reason therefor, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party,
Page 1
PSl-97Ldoc
" .
specifying the effective dlite of the termination. No fees shal1 be earned after the effective date of
the terinination. Upon any termination, all finished, 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-offuntiJ such time as the exact
amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined.
6. ('nv",nont A g"in<:t ('nnting",nt ""''''. 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 s/he has not paid or agreed to pay any
company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage,
brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the. award or
making of this contract '
"c..;~,.
t)';~:~
~~:T
7. Tnrl"'fl",nrl""t ('nniT"dnT ~t"tll' 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 thls
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 he 'soli::1y arid 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 ProfessioiiaI and/or Professional's
employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein.
8.. Tnri",mnifip."rion. 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 claimcid to be
caused in whole or in part by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence,
or other fault of the Professional, any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer,
'employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any subcontractor of the
Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any bmployee of the
Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The Professional
PS 1-971. doc
Page 2
agrees to investigate, handle, reSpond to, and to provide defens,e for and defend against, any such
liability, claims or demarids 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 fmal 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 ernployees,the City shall
reimburse the Professional for the portion of thejudgment attributable to such act, omission, or
other fault of the City, its' officers, or employees.
9. Prnf"..inMl'. Tn<mr"n~". (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its
own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against iillliability, claims,
demands, and other obligations aSsumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such
insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requii-ements imposed by this contract or by
law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, elainis, demands, or ether obligations
assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failureto procure or rnaint!un 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 shali be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other
obligations assumed by the Professional pursUant to Section 8 above. !n. ilieca.se of any claims-
made policy, the necessary retroactive dates - and extended reporting periods shall be procured to
maintain such continuous coverage.
(i) Workers' Compensation insurance, to cover obligations imposed by
applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and
'Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNbRED THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($500,000;00( for each ~ccident,FIVE HUND~D tH2YSAtl'I5t!~L~A1tS'
($500,000.00) disease - policy linut, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS
($500,000.00) disease -eacl, ernployee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be
substituted for theW orkers' 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 include coverage for bodily injUry, broad forrn
property damage (including cornpleted operations), personal injury (inCluding coverage
for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors,
products, arid completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests
provision.
I,
(iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined
single limits for bodily injUry and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION
Page 3
PSI-971.doc
t... '.:~
.'..:.j"
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 iIlSlll"lince carried by the City; its officers or employees, or carried
by or provided through imy lnsurance 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.
6i~'"
\,:~.,.,,,),,
~{~;r.
(d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be cornpleted by the
Professional's inSurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, condi-
tions, 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 bi: 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 tmrty (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 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 limitatious(presently
$150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other rightS, immunities, and
protections provided by the Colorado Governmental 1mmunitji Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq.,
PSI-97Ldoc
Page 4
C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise-available to-City, its officers," or its
employees.
10. rity'. Tn"lT"n~... The parties hereto understaiid that the City is a member of the'
Colorado IIltergoyernmental 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 Departm~nt 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 chimges in its
membership or participation in CIRSA. '
..
11. rnmrl..t..n....,nf A gr....mP.11t. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains
the entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof aIld'tllere are no verbar
or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter
thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. .
12. Natice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered to the
respective persons and/or addresses listed below or rnailed by certified mail return receipt
, requested, to: .
City:
, Steve Barwick. City Manager
City of Aspen' ; . '.
South Galena Street
, ,
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Professional:
WRC Engineering, Inc
950 South Cherry Street, Suite 404
Denver, CO 80246
13. Nnn-ni.~r;min~tinn. No discriIDination becauSe of race, color, creed, sex,
marital status, affectionalor 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 memployffient. '
14. W"iv..r, The waiver by the City of any term, . covenant, or condition hereofshall
not operate as a' waiver of any subsequent' breach of the same or any other term.' No term,
covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the
City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City m 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 Professio1)al of said terIIl, covenant or condition,
the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law
despite any such forbearance or indulgence.
15. FY"~lItinn ')f Agr....m..nt h)l'rity This agreement shal.lbe binding upon all parties
hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwith-
standing anything to the cbntrary con!ained herein, this agrepment shall not be binding upon the
PSl-971.doc
Page 5
City unless duly executed by the Mayor ofth~ CitY of Aspen Cor a dl.11y authorized official in his
, absence) follciwing a Motion or Resolution of the COJmciI' of the City of Aspen authorizing the
Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute the same. ' '
'16. r",n"'T.l T~,rm..
Ca) It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms, provisions,
conditions, representations or covenants can be rnodified, 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.
~t~ii"1-".'
.' ':c:,~...,
'~;;:,..l
(d) Thi~ 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 inthIee copies each of which shall be . deemed an'
original on the date hereinafter written.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGEl
,
PSl-97Ldoc
Page 6
~.!-.."._-,.
ATTESTED BY:
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
/J~tJ;U
~
B/~_~_f /2.i;L;
Title: C. f7 i=7/1t2rZr
Da~: ?/f~/ .z~a 2-
PROFESSIONAL:
WITNESSED BY:
LV~c. e'""~N.....r""'J' ~c..
'/7"7i / ;11/Y7)~ ~b
By:
~d:U
, / '
Title: Pt''- ~ rheA +
Date:
J9prr/
I;) ~O~
.
Page 7
PS 1-971. doc
I,:,":"
'1>:<',
~n. '
~,{_'~l
-~{~/'
CITY OF ASPEN
ADDENDEM
. This Professional Services Agreement is for a period of one year with two (2) one year renewals if
mutually agreeable between theProfessioniil and the City.
. Certificate of Insurance must be returned with the signed contracts. Failure to do so will result in the
termination of this agreement.
. A license to do business within the City of Aspen must be obtained and presented before any project
may begin. Failure to 'do so will result in the termination of this agreement.
,
PSl-97Ldoc
. Page 8 ,
c;
(:<,2,'.'"
\~r ~/
J!u
w~(" . ~N6IN~~~ING, I~C,
May 23, 2003
Mr. Nick Adeh,
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
WRC File: P-1304B
RE: Phase II Constiuction Documents and Permitting of
The JelUlY Adair Regional Water Quality Facilities
Dear Mr. Adeh:
WRC Engineering, Inc. (WRC) is pleased to provide this proposal to provide engineering design
services for preparation of the Phase II Construction Documents and Permitting for the JelUlY Adair regional
water quality basins. The basis of this proposal is the City of Aspen Master Drainage Plan prepared by WRC,
our recent conversations regarding the design elements of these facilities, and our experience in design of these
facilities. Based upon this information, we propose the following:
Phase II- Construction Documents and Permittine
A. Project Coordjnation ~ WRC wi,U coordinate with the City staff on the final design and
construction aspects of the project. Coordination meetings will be held in WRC's office with
one meeting in Aspen. This task includes refinement of the cost models prepared in Phase I.
B. Final Desigri ''WRC will provide final design of the project facilities including grading, inlet
and outlet structures, treanent ponds. mechanical structures, landscaping, piping, and other
design features. Technical design review meetings will be held in WRC's office.
C. Contract D~ents and Specifications - WRC, win provide contract documents and
speCificationS to allow the City to publically bid the project.
D. Permitting - WRC win coordinate and provide ,the n,ecessary documents to allow the City to
obtain the permits necessary to build the project.
WRC estimates our fees to perform the above described tasks to be as follows:
CONSULTING ENGIN~~flS
950 SOUTH CHERRY STREET' SUITE ,404' DENVER. COLORADO 80246. (303) 757'8513' FAX (303) 758.3208 . wrceOwrceng.com
Mr. Nick Adeh
WRC File:P-1303B
May 23,2003
Page 2
Work Task
Phase n - Construction D</cumentsand Pennittin2
A. Project Coordination
B.Final Design
C. Contract Documents SpiJcifications .
D. Permitting
Estimated Fee
Total.:F~ Estbn,ate ,
$3,750
$29,000
$5,375
$3,500
,$41,625
WRC will perform phase II Tasks A through D for a not to exceed fee of $41,625. WRC's estimilted
time needed to complete Phase II Tasks A through ri is 10 weeks.
G';:::'::.
,....,..,',
"'.":.'-
WRC appreciates the opportunity to provide these services. If you have any questions, please call.
Respectfully submitted,
WRC ENGINEERIl'1G, INC.
~J~
Alan 1. Leak, P.E.
, President
Approved By:
r-ja,me
Title
Date
( .
~~~
P'.-.'*.
t:..._~;.:
'.'
.~
~
w~c !;NGIN!;!;~ING, I~C.
May 23, 2003
Mr. Nick Acleh
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
WRC File: P-1303B
RE: Phise II COnStructionDocumenls and Permitting of
,The Rio Grande Regional Vy'ater Quality Facility
Dear Mr. Adeh:
WRC Engineering, Inc. (WRC) is pleased to provide thiS proposal to provide engineering design
services for Preparation of the Phase n conStrUction boi:Un1eniS'and Pernuttingfor itie Rio Grinde regional
water quality basins. The basis of this proposal is the Citji of Aspen Master lJrainage Plan prepared by WRC,
our recent conversations regaiding the design elemenrs of these facilities, and our experience in design 6fthese
facilities. Based upon this information, we propose the following:
phase n. Construction Documents and Permittin"
A. Project Coordination - WRC will coordinate with the City staff on the fmal design and
construction aspecrs of the project. Coordination meetings will be held in WRC's office with
one meeting in Aspen. TJristask includes refInemern: of the cost models prepared in Phase 1.
B. Ymal Design- WRC will provide fmal c1esign of the projeci facilities including grading, inlet
and outlet strUctures, treatment ponds, mechanical structures, landscaping, piping, and other
design features; Technlcal design review meetings will be held in WRC's office.
C. Contract D~cuments and Specifications . WRC will provide contract documenrs and
specifIcations to allow the City to publically bid the project.
D. Permitting - WRC will coordinate and provide the necessary documents to allow the City to
obtain the petmirs necessary to build the project.
WRC estimates our fees to perform the above described tasks to be as follows:
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
950 SOUTH CHERRY STREET. SUITE 404' DENVER. COLORADO 80246' (303) 757.8513' FAX (303) 758.3208 owrceOw,ceng,com
Mr. NickA.cleh
WRC File: P-1304B
May 23, 2003
Page 2
Work Task
Estimated Fee
Phase n - Construction Documents and Perniittinl!
A.. Project Coorclination
B. Final Design
C. Contract Documents Specifications
D. Permitting
Total Fee Estimate
. $1,750
, $29,000
$2,500
$3,500
$36,750
WRC will perform Phase II Tasks A through D for a not to exceed fee of $36,750. WRC's estimated
time needed to complete Phase II Tasks A through D is 10 weeks. Our proposed fees are based upon the entire
Phase II clesign of both the RiO Grande arid the Jenriy Adair facUities being completed concurrently. If Phase
II of the Jenny Mair facUitiei is to be comPleted separate from Phase II of the Rio Grande facilities, then oUr
fees will be greater. This is'due to our stated fee including the economy of Shared costs such as project
meetings, bid documents, and permitting which' can not be, achieved when completed separately.
CEt?:
WRC appreciates the opportunity to provide these services. If you have any questions, please ca1l.
RespectfuJJy submitted,
WRC ENGINEERING, INC.
~~~
AlanJ.cLeak, P.E.
President
Approved By:
Name
Title
Date
EXJ;IIBIT "B" to Professional Services Agreement
, ,
Rate Schedule
Please refer to 'attached rate schedule. '
PSl-971.doc
Page 9
k
em.
,'.'"....
:i:/+;
w~c ,~N6IN~~~IN6, I~'
WRCFonn20: 10/01R
~~
~~;
('~"
~~~~
CURRENT FEE SCHEDULE
(EFFECTIVE DATE 09/22/01)
A.
PERSONNELSERVlCES
Principal Engineer
Senior Associate Principal Engineer
Associated Principal Engineer
Senior Water 1l.esourcesiHydrologistlCivil Engineer
Senior Design'Engineer
Water ResourcesIHydrologistlCivil Engineer-III
Senior Designer
Design Engineer-II ,
Water ResourcesIHydrologistlCivil Engineer-ll
Water ResourceslHydrologistlCivil Engineer-l
Water ResourceslHydrologistlCivil Engineer
CAD Technician-llJiDesigner '
Engineering Technician-I
CAD Technician-lI/Designer
CAD'Technici'an-ll
CAD Technici,an-l
Draftsperson
ClericaYSecretny-II
ClericaYSetretary-I
RATEIHOUR
$115,00
$105.00 '
$100.00
$95.00
$90.00
$85.00
$80,00
$70.00
$70,00 '
$65.00
"$60;00
$60,00
S55.00
$55.00
S53,OO
S50.00
$45.00
$42.00
S38.00
B.
TRAVEL & TRANSPORTATION EXl'ENSES
Travel Expenses, Lodging and Subsistence
Automobile
At ACtual Cost
S0.35tMile
C.
OTHER REIMBuRSABLE ExPENSES
Long DistanceTelephone and Postage
Filillg Fees and Permits '
Maps, Reports, and Other Docwnents
Duplicating 8 \1," x 11"
Duplicating 8 ~II'X 14"
Duplicating II" x 17"
. Blueline
SepialVellwn
BondIPlotter
Vellum/Plotter
MylarlPlotter
FAX
Special Supplies
At Actual Cost
, At Actual Cost
At Actual Cost
SO.15/Sheet
$0.15/Sheet
SOJO/Sheet
$0.30/Square Foot,
SO.50/Square Foot
$l.OO/Square Foot
S2,OO/Square Foot
$3.00/Square Foot
S0.50/Sheet
At Actual Cost
D.
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
Fees and all other charges will be billed IIlonthly as the ,work progresses and the amoUnt of
each bill sball be 'due thirty (30)daysafteiih'e date of such billing: Ariy portion ofa bill not
paid within 30' days of the billing date will be billed an additional charge of one percent
(1%) per month (annlll!l percentage 'rate of 12%) on the unpaid balance.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
950 SOUTH CHERRY STREET. SUITE 404 . DENVER. COLORADO 80246' (303) 757-8513' FAX (303) 758-3208' wrce@wrceng,com
A't'tachmen't
'B'
~
IJJ~C !;NGIN!;!;~ING, I~c.
August 29, 2006
Mr. Scott Chism
City of Aspen Parks Department
585 Cemetery Lane
Aspen, Colorado 81611
WRC File: 2128/3
RE: Construction Management Services for
Jenny Adair Regional Stormwater Quality Facility Improvements
Dear Scott:
WRC Engineering, lnc, (WRC) is plcased to present this proposal for providing construction management
services for the Jenny Adair Regional Stonnwater Quality Facility Improvements project. Our proposed scope-of-
services is based upon our understanding of the project and the City's requested services on this project Based
upon this understanding, we propose tbe following scope-of-services:
1. Submittals ReviewIPre-Construction Contractor Coordination-WRC will review project
submittals for compliance with the project technical specifications and construction drawings. WRC
will provide responses. as-needed, to contractor's questions regarding material specifications and
de~ign options prior to actual construction.
2. Construction Obsenation-WRC will provide Construction Observation Services during
construction of the storm sewer segments, three CIP sedimentation basins, pond outlet works, and
overflow spillway crest walls. For budgeting, we have assumed full time construction observation
for an estimated 5 weeks continuous duration of construction of these facilities, We havc also
included an estimated 3 hours per week for 10 weeks of on-calltechnical assistance for the entirc
project. Budget includes travel expenses,
3. Record Drawinl!:s-WRC will prepare Record Drawings from contractors' red-lines, City provides
surveyed as-built elevations and grading information for our use in the record drawing preparation,
4, Final InsDection/Walk-throul!:h-WRC will attend the final walk-through/inspection with the City
and the Contractor and prepare a punch list. City will follow-up on completion of the punch list
items.
WRC's estimated fees for the above scope-of-services is as follows:
TASK ESTIMATED FEE
1. Submittals ReviewlPre-construction Contractor Coordination $3,500
2, Construction Observation $27,200
3. Record Drawings $2,800
4, Final lnspection/Walk- Through $1,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE $34,500
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
950 SOUTH CHERRY STREET' SUITE 404 . DENVER, COLORADO 80246 . (303) 757-8513' FAX (303) 758.3208' wrce@wrceng,com
Mr. Scott Chism
City of Aspen Parks Department
WRC File:2 ] 28/3
August 29. 2006
Page 2
WRC proposes to complete the services for Tasks I to 4 for a IlOHo-exceed fee of $34,500.
WRC invoices for our services on a monthly basis, Payment for said scrvices is expected within 15 days
of rcceipL of invoice, Your signature below signifies your acceptance of this proposal and our Notice To Proceed.
If tbis proposal is acceptable. plea~e sign botb copies and return one copy to WRC for our files.
We apprcciate the opportunity to provide these services, We bope this proposal meets your needs and
desires, If you bave any questions. please call
Respectfully submitted,
WRC ENGINEERING, lNe.
~y;U
Alan J. Leak, P.E.
President
Signature
Title
Date
ajVell
At:t:achment: 'c'
JENNY ADAm REGIONAL STORMW ATER QUALITY PROJECT
Cornprehensive Project Budget / Construction Costs Aspen Parks Department
6-Jun-06
WORK ITEM QTY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST
GENERAL CONDITIONS - COA scope
City Parks Project Management I LS 35,000.00 35,000.00
(Design & Construction 2006-2007)
City Engineering Proj. Oversight/Inspect I LS 9,000.00 9,000,00
Consult. Engineer Const. Observation I LS 34,500.00 34,500.00
Geotechnical Inspections I LS 12,500.00 12,500.00
Permitting I LS 8,000.00 8,000.00
Construction Surveying (easements, pond) I LS 8,000,00 9,000.00
Construction Traffic Control I LS 5,000.00 ,5,000,00
Construction Fencing 1,200 LF 1.00 1,200.00
Subtotal 114,200.00
SITE PREPARATION - COA scope
Demolition-Puppy Smith House I LS 28,000.00 28,000.00
Clearing and Grubbing 2.58 AC 6,500,00 16,770.00
Unclassified Excavation '6,200 CY 10,00 62,000.00
Rock Retaining Wall (3' avg. height) 1,140 LF 30,00 34,200.00
Fine Grade (350 SF Picnic Area) (1 day) I LS 901.00 901.00
Fine Grade Wetland Benches (16,692 SF) I LS 10,565.00 10,565.00
(3.5 weeks landscape restoration crew)
Screen and Place Topsoil 720 CY 6.50 4,680.00
Erosion Control I LS 10,000,00 10,000.00
Subtotal 167,116.00
SITE CONSTRUCTION - COA scope
Concrete Pavement (3,032 SF 5" colored) 46.7 CY 500.00 23,350.00
8" PVC pipe outlet/8" valve (62 LF) I LS 6,500.00 6,500.00
12" Cobble Pond Bottom 12,947 SF 1.10 14,241.70
Subtotal 44,091.70
OVERLOOK #1 - COA scope
Crusher Fines paving (582 SF) 10,1 TN 15.40 155.54
Crusher Fines install labor (2 days) I LS 1,802.00 1,802.00
Sodding (Picnic Area) 350 SF 1.50 525.00
Irrigation (Sod Picnic Area) 350 SF 0.80 280,00
Masonry@Overlook#1 I LS 15,000.00 15,000.00
Subtotal 17,762.54
OVERLOOK #2 - COA scope
Crusher Fines paving (315 SF)
Crusher Fines install labor (2 days)
Concrete paving (216 SF 4" colored)
Masonry @ Overlook #2
Subtotal
OVERLOOK #3 - COA scope
Crusher Fines paving (547 SF)
Crusher Fines install labor (2 days)
Masonry @ ACES/Overlook #3
Subtotal
PLANT MATERIALS - COA scope
Seeding (Native: 57,371 SF)
Irrigation (Native Areas)
Deciduous Riparian Trees (2" cal.)
Native Area Trees (1-1/2" cal.)
Coniferous Trees (8' height)
Native Area Shrubs (5 gal.)
Wetland Edge Plantings
Native Area Mulching
Subtotal
5.4 TN 15.40 83.16
I LS 1,802.00 1,802.00
2.6 CY 500.00 1,300.00
I LS 20,000.00 20,000.00
23,185.16
9.4
I
I
TN
LS
LS
15.40
1,802.00
15,000.00
144.76
1,802.00
15,000.00
16,946.76
STORMW A TER INFRASTRUCTURE SITE PREP ARATION-COA scope
Clearing and Grubbing - infrastructure area I LS 9,500.00
Spillway/Riprap @ 'dam' landform 665 CY 30.00
(66 haul trips) + cobble placement-I week
Gravel Parking area labor (932 SY)
(2 weeks labor)
Class 6 Aggregate Base Course-parking
Gravel Drive area behind Electric (944 SY)
(1.5 weeks labor)
Class 6 Aggregate Base Course-drive
Hot Mixed Asphalt (grading SX)(ACIOF)
Puppy Smith road repair (By others)
Subtotal
LS
155
I
CY
LS
9,500,00
19,950.00
11,840.00
11,840.00
157
56
CY
SY
10.50
8,880.00
1,627.50
8,880.00
1.32 AC
57,371 SF
40 EA
60 EA
18 EA
550 EA
16,692 SF
1.32 AC
10.50
68.85
1,648.50
3,855.60
57,301.60
4,000.00
0.55
450.00
200,00
400,00
25.00
2.00
3,500.00
5,280.00
31,554,05
18,000.00
12,000,00
7,200.00
13,750,00
33,384.00
4,620.00
125,788.05
STORMW ATER INFRASTRUCTURE SITE RESTORATION-COA scope
Seeding (Native: 8,500 SF) 0.2 AC 4,000.00
Native Area Mulching 0.2 AC 3,500.00
Subtotal
Grand Subtotal - City work scope
Contingency - City work scope
800.00
700.00
1,500.00
12%
567,891.81
68,147.02
ITotal City of Aspen Work Scope
636,038.831
STORMW A TER INFRASTRUCT. GEN. CONDITIONS - Bid by W.S.U., Inc.
Mobilization (crane time, lodging, bonding) I LS 89,087.00
Construction Traffic Control 1 LS 4,515.00
Construction Surveying 1 LS 8,000,00
Subtotal
89,087.00
4,515.00
8,000,00
101,602.00
STORMW ATER INFRASTRUCTURE PREPARATION - Bid by W.S.U., Inc.
Erosion Control 1 LS 3,438.00
Remove existing 36" CMP 1 LS 23,141.14
Remove manholes - (qty=2) 1 LS 7,606.00
Dewatering 1 LS 61,982,00
Common Excavation-infrastructure I LS 12,642.00
Sewer Line protection I LS 2,295.00
Subtotal
3,438.00
23,141.14
7,606.00
61,982.00
12,642.00
2,295.00
111,104.14
STORMW A TER INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION -Bid by W.S.U., Inc.
Concrete crest wall
54" RCP
38"x60" RCP
36" RCP
30" RCP
24" RCP
18"RCP
18" FES
72" Manholes (qty=3)
60" Manholes (qty=7)
Diversion Manhole
Headwall-dual 24" @ outfall
Sedimentation Basin/vault 1
Sedimentation Basin/vault 2
Sedimentation Basin/vault 3
Water Quality Ouftall Release Structure
Subtotal
Grand Subtotal- W.S,U" Inc. work scope
Materials increase allowance (Items 108-123)
1
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
23,707.35
38,421.50
77,379.72
23,759.68
18,887,04
6,379.50
4,939.44
497.00
30,786.51
40,807.83
16,978.00
12,956.00
66,169,00
66,169.00
66,169.00
23,621.00
23,707.35
38,421.50
77,379.72
23,759.68
18,887,04
6,379.50
4,939.44
497.00
30,786.51
40,807.83
16,978.00
12,956,00
66,169.00
66,169,00
66,169.00
23,621.00
517,627.57
5%
730,333.71
25,881.38
Total W.S.U., Inc Coutract Work Scope
756,215.09
1,392,253.92
Grand Total Jenny Adair Project Construction Estimate
IPROJECT FUND SOURCES
Parks Department previously appropriated funds
TABOR funds available for 2006
City Open Space and Trails Fund
(to be repaid from 2007 TABOR excess tax collections)
Grand Total Jenny Adair Project Development Budget
AMOUNT I
450,000.00
450,000.00
492,253.92
1,392,253.921
~
TO:
MEMORANDUM
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner B \r
Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development cMM
THROUGH:
RE:
PUD Amendment: Hotel Jerome, 330 East Main Street Public Hearing,
First Reading of Ordinance No.Q, Series of 2006
DATE:
October 23, 2006
ApPLICANT:
Hotel Jerome Inc,
REPRESENTATIVE:
Vann Associates LLC
LOCATION:
330 East Main Street.
CURRENT ZONING:
Commercial Core
SUMMARY:
The applicant requests that the City
Council approve a PUD Amendment. This
proposal would allow three new lodge
suites of approximately 2,000 square feet
each, as a new addition atop the west side
of the Annex building, at the comer of
Bleeker and Monarch. This proposal
would also allow for 2,644 square feet of
additional commercial space, largely for
spa services in the basement, and would
eliminate a previous PUD requirement that
27 parking spaces be set aside for hotel
employees.
On October 3, the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 5-0 to approve a
Growth Management Review and
Commercial Design Review, and
recommended that Council approve a
PUD Amendment.
On March 8, 2006, the Historic Preservation
Commission voted 3-0 with one abstention
to approve a Major Development
(Conceptual). After City Council review,
the applicant will seek approval for a Major
Development (Final) from HPC.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that City Council find the
project complies with the PUD Amendment
Standards of Review 26.445.050 (A-J).
Staff supports this application. The public
benefits of providing additional lodging
rooms, the interior renovation of the Cortina
Lodge for the benefit of employees, the
Historic Landmark Designation of the
Cortina Lodge and the implementation of a
respectful stewardship philosophy to
maintain the Hotel Jerome as a signature
historic building are an appropriate trade-off
for the additional height, commercial space
and reduction of employee parking
re uested in this ap lication.
HISTORY:
The Hotel Jerome, a three-story red brick hotel occupying a prominent corner location in
downtown Aspen, was built in 1889 and named in honor of its owner, Jerome B.
Wheeler, one of Aspen's greatest benefactors. A financier from New York, lB. Wheeler
was president of the famous Macy's Department Store. Wheeler invested in several
mines in Aspen and was responsible for the construction of other important buildings in
town, in particular the Wheeler Opera House. The Jerome was built to rival the Ritz in
Paris, but after the Silver Crash, demand for luxury hotel rooms in Aspen disappeared
and Mansor Elisha took over the building as a boarding house. When the Washington
School in the West End was tom down and the Red Brick School was under construction,
some rooms in the Hotel Jerome we re-used for classes in 1941. Walter Paepcke
purchased the building in 1946 and completed a badly needed renovation. The project
was overseen by Herbert Bayer and included painting the exterior a pale gray with blue
trim. In the mid-1980's the Jerome was restored and remodeled again, including removal
ofthe paint and construction of the north addition. Some ofthe period finishes that exist
today on the interior were added at this time, although many original interior
appointments still exist on the first floor level. The Hotel Jerome is one of the most
important public buildings in Aspen, and was built to equal the grand hotels of major
cities. In June 2005, the Hotel Jerome was purchased by the Oklahoma Publishing Co.,
which also owns the Broadmoor Hotel in Colorado Springs, another historic hotel.
HISTORIC PRESERV A nON COMMISSION REVIEW:
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT: This review is required for the
construction of a new structure within a Historic District, and requires approval by the
HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan, pursuant to
Section 26.4l5.070(D)1(a-f). Final Review Authority: Historic Preservation Commission
On March 8, 2006, the Historic Preservation Commission voted 3-0 with one member
abstaining to approve a Major Development (Conceptual) for the Hotel Jerome
application, finding the application was consistent with review standards and the City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The applicant will return to the HPC
after P & Z and City Council Review for approval of a Major Development (Final).
Although the HPC review included a variety of discussions, the element of the proposal
that is relevant to the land use reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council is the rooftop addition to the west side of the Annex building. The relevant
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines for this addition are:
10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
o An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is
preferred.
10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the
historic building.
o If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the
addition should be similar.
o Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or
structure.
2
The application to the HPC included a maximum height of 54 feet for the proposed
addition on the west side of the Anne building, which is equal to the roof height of the
east side of the Annex, The highest point in the proposed addition was a four-foot "pop-
top" element near the center of the addition. At that time, Historic Preservation Officer
Amy Guthrie expressed concem about the "pop-top" or "clerestory" element of the
proposal on the new addition, not primarily due to the additional height, but because it
appeared out of character with the existing roof-line.
After HPC granted approval for a Major Development (Conceptual) in March 2006,
Community Development staff expressed concem regarding the 54-foot height of the
new &ddition, and recommended that the height be lowered. The applicant agreed to
eliminate the "pop-top" or "clerestory" element, and has submitted an amendment to the
original application showing a Height Plan that will be filed with the Final PUD
Development Plan (see Exhibit F). Further discussion on roof height is included under
"Key Issues" later in this memo.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW:
GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW: ENLARGEMENT OF A HISTORIC LANDMARK FOR COMMERCIAL.
LODGE OR MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT This review determines whether sufficient growth
management allotments are available to accommodate the expansion, and establishes
required housing mitigation, pursuant to Section 26.470.040(C)I(a-e). Final Review
Authority: Planning and Zoning Commission
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW This review determines whether a commercial, lodging or
mixed-use development features proper commercial district scale and character, pursuant
to Section 26.412.050(1-3). Final Review Authority: Planning and Zoning Commission
PUD AMENDMENT This review determines whether an application meets the standards for
a Final PUD, outlined in Section 26.445.050 (A-J). The Planning and Zoning
Commission shall adopt a resolution recommending that City Council approve, approve
with conditions or disapprove a final development plan. Final Review Authority: City
Council.
On October 3, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to approve a
Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review, and recommended that
Council approve a PUD Amendment.
Growth Management Review
The employee generation calculation shows (10) employees will be generated by this
proposal, with two (2) that are required to be mitigated. This relatively low mitigation
requirement is due to the lower rate of housing mitigation for the expansion of
commercial, lodging or mixed-use development in a Historic Landmark, pursuant to
Section 26.470.040(c)1. The intent was to provide some benefits for Historic Landmarks,
which are constrained in their ability to expand,
3
Because this is a Historic Landmark, the first four employees generated in this proposal
are not required to be mitigated, the next four employees are mitigated at 30%, and the
final two employees are mitigated at 60%. This calculation requires the applicant to
mitigate for two (2) employees.
In August 2006, the Housing Board indicated its preference that all employee mitigation
be provided at the Cortina Lodge. However, the HPC has indicated its preference that the
exterior of the Cortina Lodge not be further altered, and the applicant has agreed to a
condition of approval that requires the applicant to apply for Historic Landmark
Designation of the Cortina Lodge. During P&Z discussion, the applicant stated that
considering the various physical restrictions of the Cortina Lodge site taken together with
various code requirements, the applicant would prefer to renovate the existing Cortina
Lodge rather than apply for an addition or replacement of the structure. The extensive
renovation will bring the lodge into conformance with Housing Authority guidelines, and
will add one housing unit, bringing the total to 21.
P&Z approved conditions that require one of the two employees to be mitigated at the
renovated Cortina Lodge, with the applicant making a payment-in-lieu for the other
employee. All units at the Cortina will be Category I.
The employee generation calculation was based on the expansion of the hotel's
commercial area by 2,644 square feet, and the addition of two lodge "keys" to the prior
PUD approval. Most of the commercial square footage is to be located in the basement,
for spa services, and there are sufficient growth management allotments to accommodate
the additional net leasable area.
According to the Hotel Jerome's May 2006 application to P&Z and Council, the number
of lodge units was to remain the same, at 93 units. However, staff expressed concems
about the size of the 6,000 square foot "Presidential Suite" atop the west side of the
Annex building, and suggested several smaller units instead. The applicant ultimately
agreed, and amended its application to the P&Z and Council to propose three lodge units
as part of the expansion, at approximately 2,000 square feet each. This added two "lodge
keys" to the prior POD approval.
Commercial Design Review
Although Commercial Design Review is technically required ofthis application, the
application does not propose to alter the exterior condition of the building relative to the
five categories in the Commercial Design Standards: I) The building's relationship to the
Primary Street; 2) Pedestrian Amenity Space; 3) Street-Level Building Elements; 4)
Parking; 5) Utility, Delivery and Trash Service Provisions. As a result, staff has made
minimal findings regarding Commercial Design Review Standards (See Exhibit B). The
P&Z agreed that the application technically requires Commercial Design Review, but
does not include elements that relate to the Commercial Design Standards.
4
1--- -
KEY ISSUES:
The following describes key issues as identified by staff regarding the PUD Amendment
review procedure. The review process to approve a PUD Amendment requires a number
of steps, including the establishment of proposed dimensional requirements, using the
underlying Zone District dimensional requirements as a guide: In this case, the
Commercial Core Zone District.
5
This application includes four significant changes from existing conditions as defined
under the previous PUD approval: I) An increase in height for the rooftop addition to the
west side of the Annex building, which provides for three new lodge units; 2) A net
increase of two (2) lodge units; 3) An increase in commercial floor area of 2,644 square
feet; and 4) Eliminating the requirement that 27 parking spaces be set aside for employee
use.
The original application filed for P&Z and Council review in May 2006 proposed a new
addition on the west side of the Annex building that would be setback from the lot line by
15 feet or more, and would be a maximum height of 54 feet. In the Commercial Core
Zone District, the maximum height limit for structures that are setback from the lot line
by 15 feet or more is 46 feet.
The highest structural element in the May 2006 application was created by a "pop-top" or
"clerestory" element. Staff expressed concern about the "pop-top" element, both with
regard to its inconsistency with the rest of the building's roofline and the overall height of
the addition. The applicant has agreed to amend its application to eliminate the pop-top,
and make the great majority of the roofline no higher than 50 feet.
Although the applicant still proposes a maximum height of 54 feet, this maximum height
would only be present on I % of the rooftop - this small area is located directly adjacent
to the existing east side of the Annex, where the existing roof height is 54 feet. An
additional 2% of the roof would measure between 50 and 52 feet; 86% of the roof would
measure between 48 and 50 feet; and II % of the roof would measure 48 feet or lower.
The range of roof heights on the proposed addition are graphically shown in Exhibit F, on
page 6: "Height Calculation, Proposed Roof Plan."
This amendment to the original application addresses the previous concern raised by
Historic Preservation Officer Amy Guthrie during the HPC process and subsequent
concerns regarding the overall height of the addition expressed by other Community
Development staff. Staff now believes the proposal is an appropriate height for the
addition to the west side of the Annex building, considering that the east side of the
Annex building has an existing maxirnum height of 54 feet, and because the proposal
meets the City's Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
Regarding the new lodge rooms, the applicant's original application of May 2006
included one large Presidential Suite that was 6,000 square feet in size. Staff expressed
concern about the size of this unit, and suggested several smaller units instead. The
applicant agreed to establish three units of approximately 2,000 square feet each. Because
the additional units exceeded a previous PUD approval by two "lodge keys," this change
also increased employee generation by I employee, thus increasing the applicant's
responsibility for housing mitigation.
Regarding the proposed increase in commercial floor area, staff believes the addition of
spa services in the basement ofthe hotel is a consistent use for a hotel of this type.
6
Regarding parking, the applicant is proposing to change one of the conditions of a prior
PUD approval, which required that 27 below-grade parking spaces be set aside for
employees. Staff agrees that this condition, established in 1981, was intended to address
parking problems experienced in the downtown at that time. Staff believes that the
construction of the Rio Grande Garage, paid parking, the substantial improvements in
public transit and the provision of parking spaces at the Cortina Lodge combine to make
this condition unnecessary. Staff supports eliminating this condition.
Applications for a PUD Amendment are typically a trade-off: The applicant may seek to
exceed the dimensional requirements of the zone district, while offering public benefits in
exchange. The criteria for a PUD Amendment requires consistency with the Aspen Area
Community Plan (AACP) as one method of measuring those public benefits. The
consistency of this application with the AACP is reviewed below and in Exhibit A.
Although the extensive interior renovations planned at the Hotel Jerome do not fall under
the review of the P &Z or City Council, the applicant is stating that this extensive
renovation is a community benefit because it will be done under a stewardship
philosophy that is respectful of the historic hotel, both for the interior and the exterior,
while making the Hotel Jerome sustainable over the long-term. Staff believes that a
respectful stewardship philosophy is necessary to maintain this critically important
historic resource, and is an appropriate public benefit considering the iconic status of the
Hotel Jerome as a signature historic building located in a place of prominence in
downtown Aspen.
In addition, the applicant is proposing an extensive interior renovation of the nearby
Cortina Lodge in order to substantially improve living conditions for its employees, and
to meet the standards of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority. The applicant has
also agreed, as a condition of approval, to apply for Historic Landmark Designation for
the Cortina Lodge. Staff believes the interior renovation and application for Historic
Landmark Designation status also represents a public benefit.
Regarding consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), Staff finds this
proposal is:
. Consistent with the AACP Community Theme of "Preserving and enhancing historic
resources" through the interior renovation of the Hotel Jerome, considering the
applicant's stewardship philosophy of preserving interior and exterior features;
. Consistent with the AACP Community Theme of "Preserving and enhancing historic
resources" by improving the long term sustainability of this iconic landmark through
interior renovations and additional lodge units;
. Consistent with the goal of locating commercial activity and affordable housing
within the Urban Growth Boundary and adjacent to major public transit routes
through the renovation of the Hotel Jerome and the Cortina Lodge;
. Consistent with the goal of quality design and construction of affordable housing
through the extensive interior renovation of the Cortina Lodge;
. Consistent with the Community Theme of "Preserving and enhancing historic
resources" through the Designation of the Cortina Lodge as a Historic Landmark.
7
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Ordinance No.l..f2., Series of 2006, upon first reading."
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Staff Findings - PUD Amendment, Standards of Review
Exhibit B: P&Z Resolution
Exhibit C: P&Z Minutes (to be provided in 2nd Reading packet)
Exhibit D: Housing Authority Review
Exhibit E: Application
Exhibit F: Amendment to Application, including Height Plan
ORDINANCE NO!-lJ...
(SERIES OF 2006)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PUD
AMENDMENT, WITH CONDITIONS, FOR THE PROPERTY AT 330 EAST
MAIN STREET, LOTS A-I, AND O-S, AND THE EASTERLY 20' OF LOT NAND
THE EASTERLY 170' OF THE VACATED ALLEY, BLOCK 79, CITY OF
ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
ParcellD: 273707321001
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Hotel Jerome Inc., represented by Vann Associates LLC, requesting approval of a
PUD Amendment, Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review for 330
East Main Street; and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards,
the Community Development Department recommended approval of the proposed PUD
Amendment, Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and
considered the application 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 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 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, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular
meeting of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission on October 3, 2006, at which
time the Cornmission considered and found the application to meet the review standards,
and approved a Commercial Design Review and Growth Management Review, and
recommended City Council approval of a PUD Amendment, by a vote of 5-0 to the Hotel
Jerome Inc., located at 330 East Main Street, City and Townsite of Aspen; 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 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 noticed public hearing on November 27, 2006, the
Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and approved Ordinance No. 'iJ- Series of
2006, by a _ vote, approving with conditions the PUD Amendment for the Hotel
Jerome, located at 330 East Main St., Lots A-I and O-S, and the easterly 20; of Lot N,
and the easterly 170' ofthe vacated alley, Block 79, City and Townsite of Aspen; 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 Section 26 of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves with conditions, a PUD Amendment
in order to construct additions to the Hotel Jerome, located at 330 East Main St., Lots A-I
and O-S, and the easterly 20; of Lot N, and the easterly 170' of the vacated alley, Block
79, City and Townsite of Aspen.
Section 2: ADDroval ofthe DeveloDment Plans
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the applicant shall record the Hotel Jerome Final PUD Development Plan, subject to the
following conditions:
1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval
by City Council and shall include the following:
a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement,
pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C).
b. A Height Plan with elevations as approved at all roof corners,
c. Dimensional approvals as described in Section 3.
2
.1
Section 3: Dimensional Approvals
The following dimensional requirements of the PUD as required
26.445.040(c) are approved and shall be printed on the Final PUD Plan:
by Section
..~;li3lit)ij$~Jiatli.jt(i!\>; ....
47,735 sq, ft,
NI A: No Dwelling Units
95 lodge units
Per Final PUD Plan
Per Final PUD Plan
Per Final PUD Plan
Per Final PUD Plan
Per Final PUD Plan
54 reet: Per Height Plan / Final PUD Plan
N/ A: One structure
Per existing conditions
Per existing Conditions
TOTAL: 122,411 sq, ft,
Commercial: 15,985 sq, ft,
Hotel Units: 65,053 sq, ft,
Other: 41,373 s , ft,
47 spaces; underground
Section 4: Buildinl! Permit Submittal
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
a. The building permit application shall include the following:
b. A copy of the final recorded ordinance
c. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the
building permit set.
d. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District.
e. 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.
f. A fugitive dust control plan which includes proposed
construction fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed
areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads, construction
speed limits, and other measures necessary to prevent
windblown dust from crossing the property line.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit:
3
a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community
Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have
been read and understood.
b. All tap fees, impact fees, housing fees and building permit fees shall be
paid. If an altemative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap
and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable
according to the agreement.
3. The Applicant shall complete (prior to any demolition) the Building
Department's asbestos checklist, and if necessary, a person licensed by
the State to do asbestos inspections must conduct an inspection. The
Building Department cannot sign any building permits until submittal of
this report. If there is a finding of no asbestos, the demolition can proceed.
If asbestos is present, a licensed asbestos removal contractor must remove
it.
Section 5: Utility and Service Conditions of Approval
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
1. The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System
Standards, with Title 25, and with 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.
2. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof,
foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed to ACSD,lines.
3. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal.
Section 6: Enl!ineerinl! Reauirements and Conditions:
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
I. The Applicant and contractors are hereby notified that there will be no
construction material or dumpsters stored on the public rights-of-way
unless a temporary encroachment license is granted by the City Engineer.
2. The Applicant shall submit a construction management plan as part of the
building permit application, and the management plans shall include a
noise, dust control, and construction traffic and construction parking
management plan which addresses, at a minimum, the following issues:
a. Defining the construction debris hauling routes and associated
impacts on local streets; and
b. Construction parking mitigation, except for essential trade trucks, no
other personal trucks are to be parked in the area around the site. The
city encourages that site workers be shuttled in from the airport
parking area,
4
1..--.-...--...----
3. The Applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction.
A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during
construction.
4. The Applicant shall submit financial assurance in an amount and form
acceptable to the City Engineer and City Water Department Director for
excavation in the public right-of-way. The Applicant shall also schedule
the abandonment of the existing water tap prior to requesting a new water
tap.
5. The Applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is
limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Monday thru Saturday.
Section 7: Environmental Health
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
I. Pay City of Aspen Air Quality Impact Fee (if in place by building permit
submittal).
Section 8: Lil!:htinl!:
All exterior lighting shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code requirements set forth in
Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, as may be amended from time to time. A lighting
plan will be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development
Department prior to building permit issuance.
Section 9: Landscapinl!: Improvements
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
1. All landscaping in the public right-of-way shall meet the requirements as
set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 21.20, Trees and Landscaping on
Public Right-of-Way. Any landscaping in the public right-of-way shall be
approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. The
Applicant shall obtain a revocable encroachment license from the City
Engineering Department prior to installation of any landscaping or
improvements in the public right-of-way,
2. The applicant shall submit a Landscape Plan to be reviewed and accepted
by the Parks Department.
3. The Applicant shall install tree saving construction fences around the drip
line of any trees to be saved or at other points associated with the limit of
the foundation as approved by the Parks Department.
a. The Parks Department must inspect and approve of the fence
location before any construction activities commence.
5
b.
No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction
equipment, construction backfill, foot or vehicular traffic shall be
allowed within the fenced drip line.
Section 10: Emplovee Housinl!
The following conditions are applicable to this approval:
I. The Applicant shall renovate the Cortina Lodge to accommodate 21
employees. The applicant shall establish four studio units, ranging from 264
square feet to 299 square feet in the Lodge's one-story structure; four
dOITD;itory suites that will each contain two bedrooms with a shared bath and
individual closets, with suites ranging from 535 square feet to 659 square
feet in the Lodge's two-story structure; a common kitchen dining area and
laundry.
2. The units will be deed restricted to APCHA's Category I income and
occupancy guidelines. A certificate of occupancy will be issued for the units
prior to or concurrent with the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the
renovated Hotel.
3. The applicant shall mitigate the remaining one (I) employees via a cash-in-
lieu payment.
4. The applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the AspenlPitkin County
Housing Authority and City of Aspen from any claims, liability, fees or
similar charges related to ownership in the deed restricted affordable
housing units.
Section 11: Historic Landmark Desil!nation
Applicant shall submit an application for Historic Landmark Designation for the Cortina
Lodge, pursuant to Section 26.415.030.B of the Municipal Code, Criteria for listing on
the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, prior to building permit
issuance for Hotel Jerome.
Section 12: Hotel Suites
The Final PUD Development Plan shall represent that in the event of
condominiumization of the three new hotel suites on the top floor of the west side of the
Annex building, these three suites shall remain available for nightly rentals unless a PUD
Amendment is approved pursuant to Section 26.445.1 OO(B).
Section 13: 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. The City of Aspen Zoning Officer shall
calculate the amount due using the calculation methodology and fee schedule in effect at
the time of building permit submittal.
6
.,
Section 14:
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 cornplied
with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity.
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 conducted 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 was held on the 27th day of November, 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.
Attest:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
Helen Kalin K1anderud, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by the Aspen City Council this 27th day of
November, 2006.
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
7
Exhibit A
Review Criteria & Staff Findings
26.445.050 Review Standards: Conceptual, Final, Consolidated, and Minor PUD.
A development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and
Final, or Minor POO shall comply with the following standards and requirements.
The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the
development application, and its conformity to the standards and procedures of
this Chapter and this title.
A.Generalrequ"ement~
I. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The
renovation of the hotel is:
. Consistent with the MCP Community Theme of "Preserving and enhancing
historic resources" through the renovation of the Hotel Jerome;
. Consistent with the MCP Community Theme of "Preserving and enhancing
historic resources" by improving the long term economic sustainabiJity of this
iconic landmark;
. Consistent with the goal of locating commercial activity and affordable
housing within the Urban Growth Boundary and adjacent to major public
transit routes through the renovation of the Hotel Jerome and the Cortina
. ~is;tent with the goal of quality design and construction of affordable
housing through the renovation of the Cortina Lodge;
. Consistent with the Community Theme of "Preserving and enhancing historic
resources" through the Designation of the Cortina Lodge as a Historic
Landmark.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses
in the surrounding area,
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The addition
of a commercial spa and three lodging units is consistent with existing uses in
the downtown area.
3, The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the
surrounding area.
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. This area is
effectively fully developed, and the additions to the Hotel Jerome will not
adversely affect future development.
I
-,.
4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from
GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development
and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan
review.
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. GMQS
allotments are available for the increase in commercial net leasable space.
B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements:
The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all
properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445,040,
above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a
guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD, During review of the
proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and
existing development patterns shall be emphasized The proposed dimensional
requirements shall comply with the following:
1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and
compatible with the following influences on the property:
a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the
surrounding area. .
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The only
proposed dimensional requirement that exceeds the underlying Commercial Core
Zone District is for height. The east side of the Annex building is already 54-feet
tall. The proposal would establish an addition on the west side of the Annex
building that would range in height from 46 feet to 50 feet in some places, and
would be set back from the facade of the building to minimize visual impacts.
Considering the existing height of the east side of the Annex building and the
setback of the proposed addition, the proposal is consistent with the character of
existing and future land uses in the area.
b) Natural or man-made hazards,
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard, as this
proposal would not impact any natural or man-made hazards in this area.
c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep
slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms,
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard, as this
proposal is in a fully developed urban area.
2
d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding
area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical
resources,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The PUD
Amendment reflects a minimal change in existing conditions regarding these
elements.
2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open
space and site coverage appropriate andfavorable to the character of the proposed PUD
and of the surrounding area,
StaffFindinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The only
proposed dimensional requirement that exceeds the underlying CC Zone District
is for height, and the Historic Preservation Commission has determined that it
meets required guidelines.
3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the
following considerations:
a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including
any non-residential land uses,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The Hotel
Jerome is located along a major transit route, utilizes a shuttle service and is
located adjacent to the Rio Grande Garage. The proposal includes 50 existing,
below-grade parking spaces. The proposal requests the conversion of 27 parking
spaces set aside for employees in a previous PUD, to be used for lodge-related
purposes. If constructed today, the Hotel Jerome would be required to establish
15 off-street parking spaces, related to commercial uses only.
b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed.
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard, as the joint
use of common parking is not proposed.
c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for
pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive
techniques in the proposed development.
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The Hotel
Jerome is located along a major transit route, utilizes a shuttle service and is
located adjacent to the Rio Grande Garage.
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general
activity centers in the city,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The Hotel
Jerome is directly proximate to the commercial core and general activity centers.
3
4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists
insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may
be reduced if:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to
service the proposed development
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal
does not request a reduction in density.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road
maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal
does not request a reduction in density.
5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural
hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may
be reduced if:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or
the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls or avalanche dangers,
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal
does not request a reduction in density.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due
to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution.
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal
does not request a reduction in density.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the
surrounding area and the City,
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal
does not request a reduction in density.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the
proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful
disturbance to critical natural features of the site,
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The proposal
does not request a reduction in density.
6, The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a
significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development
pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's
4
physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if:
a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in
the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the
property is subject,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. This proposal
does not request an increase in density.
b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists
no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5,
above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated
StaffFindinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. This proposal
does not request an increase in density.
c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with,
and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern,
land uses, and characteristics,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. This proposal
does not request an increase in density.
C. Site Design.
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is
complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public
spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety, The proposed development shall
comply with the following:
1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual
interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are
preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner,
StaffFindinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. The large
evergreen trees in the Hotel's courtyard are to be preserved. The rninimal visual
impact of the set back addition on the west Annex building preserves the Hotel's
historic identity. The HPC has granted Conceptual approval for this proposal. The
addition also helps to make it financially possible to preserve and enhance the
historic nature of the Hotel through a major interior renovation intended to make
the building economically viable.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and
vistas,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. This is one
structure.
5
3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or
rontext where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and
pedestrian movement,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. The Hotel is a
classic example of a building that contributes to the urban context.
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and
yefNirle access,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. Emergency
and service vehicle access will not be changed under this proposal.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
StaffFindinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. The proposal
will comply with all relevant code requirements.
6. Site drainage is accommodatedfor the proposed development in a practical and
reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. Site drainage
is adequate and is not expected to change.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to
accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. This is one
structure.
D. Landscape Plan.
The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with
the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed
features of the subject property, The proposed development shall comply with the
following:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves
existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental
plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate,
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds this proposal complies with this standard. The courtyard
is to be extensively landscaped. A detailed Landscape Plan must be submitted
and approved by the Parks Department prior to building permit issuance.
2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness
inttirest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner.
6
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. All of the
existing evergreen trees in the courtyard are to be preserved. A detailed
Landscape Plan must be submitted and approved by the Parks Department prior
to building permit issuance. The HPC has granted Conceptual Approval for all
exterior changes to the building.
3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is
appropriate.
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. A detailed
Landscape Plan must be submitted and approved by the Parks Department prior
to building permit issuance.
E. Architectural Character.
It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while
promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability
of a buildingfor its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed
massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of
materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the
proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an
architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed
development. The proposed architecture of the development shall:
I, be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to
existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for,
and indicative of the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby
historical and cultural resources.
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The addition
atop the west side of the Annex building is compatible with the visual character
of this area of the City, relates to the existing architecture of the property, and
respects the scale and massing of nearby historical resources because the
addition will be slightly lower than the existing east side of the Annex building,
and because the addition will be set back from the building fa<;ade to minimize
visual impacts.
2. incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage
of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive
mechanical'systems,
Staff Findinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The north-
south orientation of the proposed addition allows significant solar access, and will
comply with the City's energy conservation guidelines.
7
3. accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and
appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
StaffFindinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard, as the
proposal does not include pitched roofs. On-site snow storage will not be
required.
F. Lighting.
The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in
an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns,
The following standards shall be accomplished:
1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any
kind to adjoining streets or lands, Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is
proposed in an appropriate manner.
StaffFindinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The lighting of
the new addition will be limited to safe access to the outdoor decks and pools.
The development will comply with Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the
Land Use Code. Compliance with said sections will provide consistency with this
PUD review standard. Any lighting installed will not cause direct glare on or
hazardous interference of adjoining streets or lands.
2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless
otherwise approved and noted in the final P UD documents, Up-lighting of site features,
buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is
prohibitedfor residential development.
Staff Findinl!:: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The
development will comply with Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the Land
Use Code. Compliance with said sections will provide consistency with this PUD
review standard. Any lighting installed will not cause direct glare on or
hazardous interference of adjoining streets or lands, and a lighting plan will be
submitted for review and approval prior to building permit issuance.
G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area.
If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for
the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall
be met:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or
recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering
existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides
visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the
various land uses and property users of the P UD.
8
StaffFindin~: This requirement does not apply as the proposal does not include
common park, open space or recreational areas.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded
in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the
PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner,
Staff Findin~: This requirement does not apply as the proposal does not include
common park, open space or recreational areas.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the
permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and sharedfacilities
together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial
development.
Staff Findin~: This requirement does not apply as the proposal does not include
common park, open space or recreational areas.
H. Utilities and Public facilities.
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue
burden on the City's irifrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an
unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with
the development shall comply with the following:
1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development
StaffFindin~: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. All required
utilities currently serve the building and are adequate to serve the proposed
development.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the
necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer.
Staff Findin~: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. Any adverse
impacts on public infrastructure will be paid for by the applicant. The final POO
Development Plan will include a new POO Agreement that will memorialize any
required financial contributions, and will be submitted to the Community
Development Department for review and approval prior to building permit
Issuance.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately
and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement
Staff Findin~: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. All utility
improvement will be sized according to the requirements of the respective utility
compames.
9
1. Access and Circulation.
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not
unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and
recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access
and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria:
I. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public
street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other
area dedicated to public or private use,
StaffFindine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The existing
street system and access points are adequate to handle the addition of the three
lodge suites and the expanded commercial area.
2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not
create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such
surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development,
Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. The existing
street system and access points are adequate to handle the addition of the three
lodge suites and the expanded commercial area.
3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections
to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public
lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are
proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance,
Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. No public trail
easement are existing or required.
4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans
regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths. and transportation are
proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner,
Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. There are no
specific City of Aspen plans regarding recreational trails, or pedestrian and
bicycle paths in this area.
5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private
ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and
emergency access,
Staff Findine: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. There are no
private streets in this PUD proposal.
10
6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots
within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical.
StaffFindinl!: Staff finds the proposal complies with this standard. There are no
security gates, guard posts or entryway expressions proposed.
1. Phasing of Development Plan.
The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an
unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an
individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is
proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adoptedfinal PUD development plan. The
phasing plan shall comply with the following:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete
development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases.
Staff Findinl!: No phasing plan is proposed.
2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical,
occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases.
Staff Findinl!: No phasing plan is proposed.
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to
public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to
be usedjointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing,
and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts
associated with the phase.
Staff Findinl!: No phasing plan is proposed.
II
e~h~b;~ ~
RESOLUTION NO. 29
(SERIES OF 2006)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION APPROVING A COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW, AND RECOMMENDING THAT CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE A PUD AMENDMENT, WITH CONDITIONS, FOR THE
PROPERTY AT 330 EAST MAIN STREET, LOTS A-I, AND O-S, AND THE
EASTERLY 20' OF LOT N AND THE EASTERLY 170' OF THE VACATED
ALLEY, BLOCK 79, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
Parcel/D: 27370732/001
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Hotel Jerome Inc., represented by Vann Associates LLC, requesting approval of a
PUD Amendment, Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review for 330
East Main Street; and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards,
the Community Developrnent Department recommended approval of the proposed PUD
Amendment, Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and
considered the application 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 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the
developrnent 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, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular
meeting of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Comrnission on October 3, 2006, at which
time the Commission considered and found the application to meet the review standards,
and approved a Commercial Design Review and Growth Management Review, by a vote
of 5-0 to the Hotel Jerome Inc., located at 330 East Main Street, City and Townsite of
Aspen; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission 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 OF ASPEN PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:
I
1_".,__.,_,._,____.
Section 1
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves with conditions,
a Commercial Design Review and a Growth Management Review for the Enlargement of
a Historic Landmark for Commercial, Lodge, or Mixed-Use Development, and
recommends that City Council approve with conditions a PUD Amendment for the Hotel
Jerome, located at 330 East Main Street, Lots A-I, and O-S, and the easterly 20' of Lot N
and the easterly 170' of the vacated alley, Block 79, City and Townsite of Aspen.
Section 2: Approval of the Development Plans
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the applicant shall record the Hotel Jerome Final PUD, subject to the following conditions:
I. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval
by City Council and shall include the following:
a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement,
pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C).
b. A Height Plan with elevations as approved at all roof comers.
Section 3: Dimensional ADDrovals
The following dimensional requirements of the PUD as required by Section
26.445.040(c) are approved and shall be printed on the Final PUD Plan:
47,735 sq, ft,
N/A: No Dwelling Units
Per PUD Agreement: Improvement Survey
Per PUD Agreement: Improvement Survey
Per PUD Agreement: Improvement Survey
Per PUD Agreement: Improvement Survey
54 reet: See PUD Agreement Height Plan
NI A: One structure
TOTAL: 122,411 sq, ft,
Commercial: 15,985 sq, ft,
Hotel Units: 65,053 sq, ft,
Other: 41,373 s . ft.
47 spaces; underground
2
Section 4: Buildinl!: Permit Submittal
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
a. The building permit application shall include the following:
b. A copy of the final recorded ordinance
c. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the
building permit set.
d. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District.
e. 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.
f. A fugitive dust control plan which includes proposed
construction fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed
areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads, construction
speed limits, and other measures necessary to prevent
windblown dust from crossing the property line.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit:
a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community
Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have
been read and understood.
b. All tap fees, impact fees, housing fees and building permit fees shall be
paid. If an altemative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap
and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable
according to the agreement.
3. The Applicant shall complete (prior to any demolition) the Building
Department's asbestos checklist, and if necessary, a person licensed by
the State to do asbestos inspections must conduct an inspection. The
Building Department cannot sign any building permits until submittal of
this report. If there is a finding of no asbestos, the demolition can proceed.
If asbestos is present, a licensed asbestos removal contractor must remove
it.
Section 5: Utility and Service Conditions of Approval
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
I. The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System
Standards, with Title 25, and with 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.
2. The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District's rules and regulations. No clear water connections (roof,
foundation, perimeter drains) shall be allowed to ACSD lines,
3
3. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal.
Section 6: Enl!ineerinl! ReQuirements and Conditions:
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
I. The Applicant and contractors are hereby notified that there will be no
construction material or dumpsters stored on the public rights-of-way
unless a temporary encroachment license is granted by the City Engineer.
2. The Applicant shall submit a construction management plan as part of the
building permit application, and the management plans shall include a
noise, dust control, and construction traffic and construction parking
management plan which addresses, at a minimum, the following issues:
a. Defining the construction debris hauling routes and associated
impacts on local streets; and
b. Construction parking mitigation, except for essential trade trucks, no
other personal trucks are to be parked in the area around the site. The
city encourages that site workers be shuttled in from the airport
parking area.
3. The Applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction.
A washed rock or other style mud rack rnust be installed during
construction.
4. The Applicant shall submit financial assurance in an amount and form
acceptable to the City Engineer and City Water Department Director for
excavation in the public right-of-way. The Applicant shall also schedule
the abandonment of the existing water tap prior to requesting a new water
tap.
5. The Applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is
limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Monday thru Saturday.
Section 7: Environmental Health
The following conditions are applicable to this approval.
I. Pay City of Aspen Air Quality Impact Fee (if in place by building permit
submittal),
Section 8: Lil!htinl!
All exterior lighting shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code requirements set forth in
Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, as may be amended from time to time. A lighting
plan will be submitted for review and approval to the Community Development
Department prior to building permit issuance.
4
I _
Section 9: Landscapinl! Improvements
The following conditions are applicable to this approvaL
1. All landscaping in the public right-of-way shall meet the requirements as
set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 21.20, Trees and Landscaping on
Public Right-of-Way. Any landscaping in the public right-of-way shall be
approved by the City Parks Department prior to installation. The
Applicant shall obtain a revocable encroachment license from the City
Engineering Department prior to installation of any landscaping or
improvements in the public right-of-way.
2. The applicant shall submit a Landscape Plan to be reviewed and accepted
by the Parks Department.
3. The Applicant shall install tree saving construction fences around the drip
line of any trees to be saved or at other points associated with the limit of
the foundation as approved by the Parks Department.
a. The Parks Department must inspect and approve of the fence
location 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 fenced drip line.
Section 10: Emplovee Housinl!
The following conditions are applicable to this approval:
I, The Applicant shall renovate the Cortina Lodge to accommodate 21
employees. The applicant shall establish four studio units, ranging from 264
square feet to 299 square feet in the Lodge's one-story structure; four
dormitory suites that will each contain two bedrooms with a shared bath and
individual closets, with suites ranging from 535 square feet to 659 square
feet in the Lodge's two-story structure; a common kitchen dining area and
laundry.
2. The units will be deed restricted to APCHA's Category I income and
occupancy guidelines. A certificate of occupancy will be issued for the units
prior to or concurrent with the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the
renovated HoteL
3. The applicant shall mitigate the remaining one (I) employees via a cash-in-
lieu payment.
4. The applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the AspenlPitkin County
Housing Authority and City of Aspen from any claims, liability, fees or
similar charges related to ownership in the deed restricted affordable
housing units.
5
Section 11: Historic Landmark Desil!nation
Applicant shall submit an application for Historic Landmark Designation for the Cortina
Lodge, pursuant to Section 26.415.030,B of the Municipal Code, Criteria for listing on
the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, prior to building permit
issuance.
Section 12: Hotel Suites
The Final PUD Development Plan shall represent that in the event of
condominiumization of the three new hotel suites on the top floor of the west side of the
Annex building, these three suites shall remain available for nightly rentals unless a PUD
Amendment is approved pursuant to Section 26.445.100(B).
Section 13: 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. The City of Aspen Zoning Officer shall
calculate the amount due using the calculation methodology and fee schedule in effect at
the time of building permit submittal.
Section 14:
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 15:
This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or
amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
Section 16:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions thereof
Attest:
Jackie Lothian, Assistant City Clerk
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
6
-..j~~~
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by tbe Planning and Zoning Commission
this 3rd day of October, 2006.
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
7
-+-...__.._~_..__... --.-..."
C~~;b,.+ I)
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Ben Gagnon, Community Development Department
FROM:
Cindy Christensen, Housing
DATE:
August 17, 2006
RE:
HOTEL JEROME GMQS/PUD AMENDMENT
Parcel ill No. 2737-073-21-001
ISSUE: The applicant is requesting to amend the existing PUD approval to accommodate various
proposed improvements to the Hotel, including a new presidential suite to be constructed on the
roof of the Hotel's existing west wing.
BACKGROUND: The proposed development is to include the following:
. allow for the applicant to substantially renovate and refurbish the existing Hotel;
. add a presidential suite to the roof of the three-story portion of the Annex at the rear of the
project site;
. the lobby, Jerome Bar, Library Bar and all of the guest rooms and Hotel corridors will
receive upgraded finishes and furnishings;
. direct-vent gas fireplaces will be installed in all guest rooms;
. the existing dining areas (i.e., Jacob's comer, Century Room and Wheeler Room) together
with an adjacent office will be reconfigured to create a new restaurant space;
. the Elisha Room and an adjacent ski storage area will be converted to restrooms to serve the
Hotel's lobby and dining areas;
. five guest rooms will be modified to comply with current ADA standards;
. existing administrative offices located on the second floor will be reconfigured to create a
new public corridor to link the historic portion of the Hotel to the Annex;
. the basement will be reconfigured and part will be converted to a spa which will contain a
reception area, a pre/post treatment waiting area, men's and women's locker rooms, and
several treatment areas;
. the laundry area will be eliminated and out-sourced;
. additional parking will be provided in the basement along with expanded mechanical,
electrical and pool equipment facilities.
The Presidential Suite is proposed to contain two master bedroom suites, a junior bedroom suite, a
great room, a kitchen, a media room and a wine room. A small rooftop pool and several outdoor
terraces will abut the new addition. The remodeled Hotel will contain a total floor area of
approximately 124,398 square feet. This represents an increase of 10,837 square feet, or 10% when
compared to the Hotel's existing floor area of 113,561 square feet. The conversion of a portion of
the Hotel's basement to a spa and various revisions to its existing commercial areas will expand the
Hotel's net leasable commercial area from 12,247 square feet to 15,073 square feet, an increase of
2,826 square feet - 2,513 square feet will be located in the new basement spa while the remaining
313 square feet will be located within the Hotel's reconfigured ground floor commercial areas.
MITIGATION REOUIREMENTS:
Based on the CC zone district, the employee generation rate is 4.1 employees per 1,000 square feet
of net leasable area. Provisions of Section 26.470.050 permit a 25% reduction in the generation
rate for basement commercial space, therefore the additional net leasable commercial area (NLA)
will generate a total of9 employees calculated as follows:
2,513 Sq. Ft. Basement Net Leasable Area + 1,000 Sq. Ft. = 2.51
2.51 X 3.08 Employees/l,OOO Sq. Ft. = 7.73 Employees
313 Sq. Ft. Ground Floor Net Leasable Area + 1,000 sq. Ft. = 0.31
0.31 X 4.1 Employees/l,OOO Sq. Ft. = 1.27 Employees
7.73 Employees + 1.27 Employees = 9 Employees
Pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.l.c) of the Regulations dealing with historic structures, no
affordable housing mitigation is required for the first 4 employees generated by the Hotel's
additional net leasable commercial area; 30% of the next 4 employees generated, and 60% of aU
additional employees generated thereafter must be mitigated via the provision of affordable housing
or cash-in-lieu. As a result, a total of 1.8 employees must be mitigated calculated as follows:
9 Employees - 4 Employees = 5 Employees
4 Employees X 30% = 1.2 Employees
I Employee X 60% = 0.6 Employees
1.2 Employees + 0.6 Employees = 1.8 Employees
The Hotel's prior approval required that 20 employees be housed in the Cortina Lodge. A site
inspection by the applicant foUowing the acquisition of the property indicated that 15 units in the
Lodge are presently being used for affordable housing purposes. The units theoreticaUy housing
18.75 employees based on APCHA's current employee housing guideline of 1.25 employees per
studio unit. The Lodge is in very poor shape and no longer capable of housing the previously
required number of employees. The applicant is proposing to renovate the Lodge's existing two
structures and to reconfigure them to house as many employees as reasonably possible.
The applicant met with Staff to review the proposed renovation of the Lodge and the following is
being proposed:
. Five existing studio units in the Lodge's one-story structure will be reconfigured as four
larger studio units to range from 264 square feet to 299 square feet.
2
I
. Ten existing studio units in the Lodge's two-story structure will be converted to four
dormitory suites that will each contain two bedrooms with a shared bath and individual
closets. These suites will range from 535 square feet to 659 square feet.
. A common kitchen/dining area and a laundry will also be provided.
Based on APCHA's guidelines, the four studio units will house 5 employees (4 X 1.25 FTE's = 5).
The four dormitory units will house 16 employees, or four employees per unit. The Lodge will
accommodate the 20 employees that are required to be housed in connection with the Hotel's prior
approvals and one for the 1.8 additional employees as a result of the increase in net leasable
commercial area. The applicant is proposing to mitigate the remaining 0.8 employee via a cash-in-
lieu payment as provided for in Section 26.470.040.C.I.c.) of the land use code.
The configured studios and two ground floor suites contain somewhat less net livable area than
would be required for new construction; however, the proposed remodel is constrained by the size
of the existing structures. At the request of the City's Historic Preservation Officer, the applicant
has agreed to retain the structures due to their contribution ton the Main Street Historic District.
Due to the impossible nature to retain the existing buildings, maximize the number of employees
housed therein, and strictly conform to current APCHA requirements, the applicant has attempted
to maximize the available living space and to make the units as functional as possible. The units
will be deed restricted to APCHA' s Category I income and occupancy guidelines. A certificate of
occupancy will be issued for the units prior to or concurrent with the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for the renovated Hotel.
The Housing Board has prioritized mitigating employee housing impacts as follows:
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-In-Lieu or Land-in-Lieu - that the applicant for a development may, under certain
conditions and subject to certain requirements, satisty 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,
RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board reviewed the application at their August 16,2006
Regular Meeting. The Housing Board would prefer new construction of the Cortina Lodge. The
applicant, at the request of the City's Historic Preservation Officer, has agreed to retain the
structures due to their contribution to the Main Street Historic District. The Cortina is in need of
massive renovation. The remodel of the Cortina will allow the units to be more livable, but most of
3
the units are substandard in size, Redevelopment of the Cortina could possibly allow for a third
story creating additional units and a potential for an' opportunity for the City to do additional
housing in a combined effort. Should City Council side with the City's Historic Preservation
Office, the Board would recommend approval with the following conditions:
1. The mitigation requirement is 1.8 FTE's - I FTE to be mitigated in the newly remodeled
Cortina Lodge and the balance of 0.8 to be mitigated via a payment-in-lieu fee. An
additional unit would be preferred, as on-site housing is a priority, but the Code allows for a
fractional mitigation requirement to be satisfied by a payment-in-lieu fee. Currently, the fee
is $164,070.80 ($211,045 + $199,132.;- 2 X 0.8).
2. As rental units, the following conditions shall apply:
a, The units shall be deed restricted at Category I.
b. APCHA or the arPlicant shall structure a deed restriction for the units such that an
undivided III at of I percent of the Cantina property is deed restricted in
perpetuity to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority; or the applicant may
propose any other means that the Housing Authority determines acceptable.
3. A new deed-restriction shall be recorded at the time of recordation of the Condo Plat and
prior to Certificate of Occupancy.
4
......_.~-.,,,.~..,,.'>4"_,..~,_._._.._~._.__~___.I...
t'j~/'h ,-+ F
VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC
Planning Consultants
September 21, 2006
HAND DELIVERED
Mr. Ben Gagnon
Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: The Hotel Jerome GMQS/PUD Amendment Application Revisions
Dear Ben:
The applicant wishes to make several revisions to the Hotel Jerome GMQS/PUD
Amendment application prior to its consideration by the Planning and Zoning Com-
mission. The revisions are proposed in response to the Community Development
Department's initial review comments, and to address the escalating cost of the
proposed project improvements. As we have discussed, the Hotel Jerome is in need
of significant renovation if it is to maintain its prominent place within the commun-
ity's lodging inventory. The applicant is prepared to undertake an extensive list of
improvements to the Hotel's infrastructure and to both the interior and exterior of the
building. A summary of the various improvements to be undertaken is attached
hereto.
There are three specific revisions to the original application which the applicant
proposes to make at this time. The applicant wishes to: 1) reconfigure the proposed
rooftop presidential suite as three 2-bedroom hotel suites, 2) reduce the height of the
rooftop suites, and 3) eliminate the proposed expansion of the Hotel's subgrade garage
beneath the Main Street courtyard. The conversion of the presidential suite to three
separate suites will increase the Hotel's unit count from 92 units to 96 units. As the
Hotel has previously been approved for a total of 94 units, a two unit lodge GMQS
allocation will now be required. The three suite configuration will provide more
flexible use of the space in question while still allowing for an increase in potential
revenue to offset project costs. Please note that the footprint of the three suites is
essentially the same as that of the single presidential suite, and that the original fifteen
foot setbacks from both Monarch and Bleeker Street have been maintained.
As the attached building elevations illustrate, the presidential suite's clearstory has
been removed resulting in a four foot height reduction in this area of the proposed
230 East Hopkins Ave, . Aspen, Colorado 81611 . 970/925-6958 . Fax 970/920-9310
,t-,..-.-,
Mr. Ben Gagnon
September 21, 2006
Page 2
fourth floor addition. The Hotel's previously approved height at the northwest corner
of the existing fourth floor is 54 feet. As the attached roof plan illustrates, one
percent of the proposed fourth floor addition's roof will now measure between 52 and
54 feet. An additional two percent of the roof area will measure between 50 and 52
feet. The majority of the roof, or approximately 86 percent, will measure between 48
and 50 feet. The remaining 11 percent of the roof will be 48 feet or lower. feet.
With respect to the additional parking which was originally proposed beneath the
existing courtyard, the approximately ten spaces which would have been gained
simply do not justify the cost of the expansion. Please note, however, that the
existing garage has been reconfigured so as to contain a total of 47 spaces which
exceeds the 38 spaces which are presently provided. As no off-street parking is
required for lodge uses in the CC, Commercial Core, zone district, and nine addition-
al spaces are to be provided in the existing garage, the proposed elimination of the
courtyard spaces should be acceptable. The revised garage parking layout is depicted
on the attached floor plans.
As the floor plans illustrate, the revised Hotel will contain a total floor area of
approximately 122,411 square feet. This figure represents an increase of 8,850
square feet, or approximately eight percent, when compared to the Hotel's existing
floor area of 113,561 square feet. Similarly, the Hotel's floor area ratio will increase
from approximately 2.6:1 to approximately 2.8:! when calculated based on the City's
current definition of Lot Area (i.e., excluding vacated alleys). The conversion of a
portion of the Hotel's basement back -of-house area to a spa, and various revisions to
its existing commercial areas, will expand the Hotel's net leasable commercial area
from 12,247 square feet to 14,891 square feet, an increase of 2,644 square feet. Of
this amount, 2,549 square feet will be located in the new basement spa while the
remaining 95 square feet will be located within the Hotel's reconfigured ground floor
commercial areas.
Based on the CC, zone district's employee generation rate of 4.1 employees per one
thousand square feet of net leasable area, and the provisions of Section 26.470.050
which permit a 25 percent reduction in the generation rate for basement commercial
space, the Hotel's additional net leasable commercial area will generate a total of 8.26
employees calculated as follows.
2,549 Sq. Ft. Basement Net Leasable Area + 1,000 Sq. Ft. = 2.55
2.55 x 3.08 Employeesll,Ooo Sq. Ft. = 7.85 Employees
95 Sq. Ft. Ground Floor Net Leasable Area + 1,000 Sq. Ft. = 0,10
0.10 x 4.1 Employees/! ,000 Sq. Ft. = 0.41 Employees
7.85 Employees + 0.41 Employees = 8.26 Employees
~.~I-
Mr. Ben Gagnon
September 21, 2006
Page 3
In addition, the revised Hotel's two additional lodge units will generate one additional
employees based on the applicable generation rate of 0.5 employees per unit.
Together, the Hotel's additional net leasable area and lodge units will generate a total
of 9.26 employees.
Pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.l.c) of the Regulations, no affordable housing
mitigation is required for the first four employees generated by the Hotel's additional
lodge units and net leasable commercial area. Thirty percent of the next four
employees generated, and 60 percent of all additional employees generated thereafter,
however, must be mitigated via the provision of affordable housing or cash-in-lieu
thereof. A total of two employees, therefore, must be mitigated calculated as follows.
9.26 Employees - 4 Employees = 5.26 Employees
4 Employees x 0.30 = 1.26 Employees
1.26 Employees x 0.60 = 0.76 Employees
1.26 Employees + 0.76 Employees = 2.0 Employees
As discussed in the original application, the remodeled and reconfigured Cortina
Lodge will house 21 employees. The Lodge will accommodate the 20 employees that
are required to be housed in connection with the Hotel's prior approvals and one of
the two employees that must be housed as a result of the two additional hotel units
and increased net leasable commercial area. As no additional employees can realisti-
cally be accommodated in the Lodge, the Applicant proposes to mitigate the remaining
one employee via a cash-in-lieu payment as provided for in Section 26.470.040.C.1.c)
of the Regulations. The amount of the payment would be $124,307.00 calculated
pursuant to current APCHA guidelines.
The revised Hotel's development data is summarized in Table 1, below.
Table 1
DEVELOPMENT DATA
Hotel Jerome
1.
Existing Zoning
CC(PUD), Commercial Core, Planned
Unit Development
2. Existing Development
Lodge Rooms!
Net Leasable Commercial Area
92
12,247
3.
Existing Lot Size (Sq. Ft.f
47,735
-~..."-" "I
Mr. Ben Gagnon
September 21, 2006
Page 4
4. Existing Lot Area (Sq. Ft.)3 44,335
5. Minimum Required Lot Size (Sq. Ft.) No Requirement
6. Minimum Required Lot Area/Dwelling No Requirement
Unit (Sq. Ft.)
7. Minimum Required Lot Width (Feet) No Requirement
8. Minimum Required Setbacks (Feet)
Front Yard No Requirement
Side Yards No Requirement
Rear Yard No Requirement
9. Proposed Setbacks (Feet)
Front Yard As Previously Approved
East Side Yard As Previously Approved
West Side Yard As Previously Approved
Rear Yard As Previously Approved
10. Maximum Allowable Height (Feet)4 46
11. Proposed Maximum Height (Feeti 54
12. Required Pedestrian Amenity Space (Percent)6 Not Applicable
13, Maximum Allowable Floor Area 133,005
@ 3:1 (Sq. Ft.)
Commercial Uses @ 1.5: I 66,503
Lodging @ 3:1 133,005
Free Market Housing @ 44,335
1:1
14. Proposed Floor Area (Sq. Ft.) 122,411
Commercial Uses 15,985
Hotel Units 65,053
Other 41,373
Free Market Housing None
--,,". , --,-,-
Mr. Ben Gagnon
September 21, 2006
Page 5
15. Minimum Required Parking Spaces
14,891 Sq. Ft. Net Leasable Commercial
Area @ 1 Space/l,OOO Sq. Ft.
96 Hotel Units
15
No Requirement
16.
Proposed Parking Spaces
47
A total of 94 lodge rooms were approved pursuant to the Butera 1986 PUD
amendment.
2
Per the Improvement Survey prepared by Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc., dated
June 6, 2005.
3
Excludes the vacated alley lying within the project site.
4
For areas of a building set back 15 or more feet from lot lines adjoining a
street right-of-way.
5
Measured at the northwest comer of the Hotel's existing fourth floor.
Should you have any questions, or if I can be of any further assistance, please do not
hesitate to call.
Yours truly,
Vann, AICP
c: loldclbus\city ,I'rll'r49505, bgl
-_..---,I,-..~~-
pOSS ARCHITECTURE + PLANN!
605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(t) 970/925~4755 (f) 970/920~295D
MEMORANDUM
TO, Sunny Vann
BY HAND
5 Pages Including Cover
CC, Chris Ridings, Beth Fults, Monique Agnew
FROM, Richard L de Campo, AlA, PE
Bill Poss and Associates Architecture and Planning, p,c.
DATE, September 18, 2006
R[ Summary of Proposed Renovations for Amended Land-Use Application
Hotel Jerome Renovation
#2518,00
D ENCLOSURE
Sunny - Per your request, here's a summary of the overall hotel modifications, grouped by infrastructure,
exterior modifications and interior modifications. Please call if you have any questions,
Prooosed Develooment - Infrastructure:
The infrastructure renovations are comprised of the following,
. Electrical Service, Re-vamped electrical utility service and service entry equipment, This will involve a
transformer upgrade, reconfiguration of the main service switchboard, updated integration with fire
alarm controls, ete.
· Emereencv Powe" The old emergency generator will be replaced with one that's five times the
existing capacity to put more services on emergency power, mostly life-safety systems such as elevators,
lighting, smoke control systems, ete. The hotel will also put restaurant refrigeration equipment,
garage sump pumps, security and telecommunications equipment on emergency power.
. Electrical Distribution, These systems will undergo significant upgrades and control to existing
conditions that sometimes don't meet code, For example, There are electrical busways routed
through fire stairs and up over the roof to serve roof-mounted mechanical equipment, These will be
removed and new, proper distribution provided up to current codes.
. Liehtine UmITades: These will be discussed under "Proposed Development - Interior", although
things like garage and back-of-house lighting replacement might be considered "infrastructure,"
. Low-Volta~e Svstems, The infrastructure for telephone, data, security, point-of-sale, cable TV and
interactive control systems will be completely re-done,
. Boiler Replacement: All the existing boilers are 20 years old and need to be replaced, The boiler flues
will be replaced, Current source of combustion air no longer meets current code requirements, so a
pass ARCHITECTURE + PLANNiNG
new rooftop air supply unit will be located on top of the roof and ducted down through the building,
A new plenum for discharging the relief air from the boiler room will be provided under the
courtyard,
. Heatin~ Water Disrribution: All the existing heating water pumps will be replaced with larger pumps
to accommodate the additional flow requirements, Other new components will be added to make the
system more functionaL New heat exchangers will be provided for the main pool, each hot tub, and
the water features. The snowmelt system needs to be replaced in its entirely, save for that recently
installed at the loading dock. New conrrol systems will be provided
. New Chillers: The existing air-conditioning capacity is undersized, and a new chiller will be added to
the roof to provide adequate cooling to the hoteL The piping and pump disrribution system will be
re-worked in its entirety, Conrrols will be added to allow "free cooling" with ambient air.
. Chilled Water Disrribution: In order to provide for better climate conrrol in all areas of the hotel,
public, lodge units, and back-of-house, the existing system needs to be removed in its entirety, and
new chilled water mains and branch disrribution provided throughout the building,
. Air Handlin~ Svstems: All these systems need to be replaced and upgraded, including the following:
o Garage exhaust systems,
o All guest room fan coil units,
o All rooftop toilet exhaust fans,
o All corridor make-up air units,
o Replacement of most of the existing Kitchen exhaust and make-up air units
. Domestic Water Svstems: Existing hot water generators need to be replaced, as well a the disrribution
system in its entirety.
. Waste and Vent/Storm Water: Necessary upgrades include the following:
o New sandi oil interceptor for the garage;
o Replacement of existing cracked sanitary mainsj
o Removal of old drywell and re-routing of storm drainage to new storm drain system in Mill
Srreet.
o Exiting grease trap needs to be upgraded or replaced,
. Plumbin~ Fixtures: Almost all the plumbing fixtures within the hotel need to be replaced,
. Utility Yard: This will be re-worked in its entirety, with only the gas meters being re.used, New gas
disrribution equipment and lines will service the hoteL
. Fire Protection Svstem: The existing fire protection system will be expanded and updated to bring up
to current NFPA codes.
poss ARCHITECTURE ~ PLANNING
. Buildin~ Automation Svstem: The existing building has a very limited control system. Direct digital
controls will be provided for all areas of the hotel for controlling space temperatures and energy
efficient operation.
. Water Softenin~ System: This will be replaced in its entirety,
Prooosed DeveJooment . Exterior:
The exterior renovations are comprised of the following:
. Former "Garden Lobbv": Reconfiguration of the Garden Lobby connecting the historic building with
the mid 80's addition; including:
o Recess of the exterior doors of the Garden Lobby, but leaving the existing colonnade in
place,
o A new second-story addition above the Garden Lobby that interconnects the historic
building with the Annex on that level and adds a Fimess Room overlooking the courryard;
o An 8' extension of the existing "bump-out" of the Annex at the end of the Garden Lobby,
which will enclose a Bar on the Pool Courtyard level, and will enable more generous hotel
rooms above.
. Main Street Courtyard: A complete re-configuration of the courtyard off Main Street that maintains
the existing functions of outdoor dining, swimming, and spa!leisure activities. As part of these
functions, there will be a new steam-room pavilion, a small structure adjacent to the hot tub at the
northwest end of the courtyard, There will also be a courtyard bar strucrure in the southeast section
of the courtyard near Main Street. A screen wall adjacent to the Aspen Times and the alley will be a
visual divider, and it becomes a waterfall wall at the pool and hot tub locations. Under part of the
new courtyard, the lower level of the hotel will be extended to accommodate the expanded
mechanical, electrical and pool equipment facilities, as well as some back-of-house functions such as
an employee dining area. None of the expanded underground space will be visible, except for
reconfiguring the existing exterior exit stair from the basement in a more efficient layout that ties in
with the new courtyard design.
. Mill Street CourtYard: A re-configuration of the courtyard off Mill Street to facilitate increased use as
a dining and special function space, This will include the following:
o An 8' extension off of the Kitchen for table & chair storage and an outdoor fireplace;
o A visual screen between the opening of the courtyard and the street, consisting of a low wall
to block the view of street traffic, with a water feature for "white noise II to offset the street
and mechanical equipment noise, The center section will be grass to soften the hard surfaces
of the courtyard and absorb sound,
o A cable or bracket system to facilitate serring up tent-type coverings for special events, instead
of independently erected tents currently used,
pOSS ARCHITECTURE T PLANNING
. Additional Suites: An addirion of three lodge suites on top of the current 3" floor roof of the Annex,
The roof of this penthouse will tie in with the parapet of the existing 4"' floor Annex roof, and
nowhere will its overall height be greater than the existing maximum building height of 54',
Furthermore, it will be set back 15' from the property lines on Bleeker and Monarch streets, thereby
minimizing the mass as viewed from across those streets. These suites will have rooftop terraces with
private hot rubs.
· Window and Door Reolacement, There will be a complete replacement of all exterior windows and
doors, save the ]-Bar, Library and Main Entry, which will be refurbished. Some areas will have added
railings and/or awnings on selected windows, All of the windows on both the historic section and
Annex are over 20 years old; many have needed maintenance, and almost all sashes and frames are
fading, All of the hotel room windows are double- or single-hung type, With the very low sills of these
windows, opening them presents a safety problem, Addition of a wrought-iron railing in front of
windows with key views will enable a substirution of an in-swing casement type window (bur with a
sash pattern to simulate a double-hung), such that the rooms can open up to the street or courtyard
more, with the railings serving as a guardraiL Furthermore, awnings will be added to key first-floor
commercial spaces and arch-top windows above, both for sun control as well as enlivening the
exterior with some color. These window additions are in keeping with historic use - awnings were on
the Jerome at various times in the past, and railings, although not part of the Jerome previously
(except for the Annex), were used in this way in 19'" cenrury residential buildings.
· Masonry Enclosures for Mechanical Chases: Masonry enclosures for current unsightly mechanical
items, such as boiler flues, chilled water and other piping draped over building facades, and for new
mechanical shafts that need to connect rooftop equipment to spaces below. These will be simple
brick enclosures (of minimum size required) to hide essential mechanical components, many of
which are exposed on the building now, and have simply been painted to match the brick
Prooosed Develooment - Interior:
The interior renovations consist of the following:
. Lower Level: Lower level back-of-house spaces will be reconfigured to accommodate a new spa, with
five separate treatment rooms, men's and women's locker rooms, reception area, pre/post~treatment
waiting area, office, and supplies storage. The back of house functions will eliminate the in-house
laundry service (this will be our-sourced) and re-arrange the offices, storage, employee locker roOms in
a more efficient configuration. As mentioned above, the lower level of the hotel will be extended
under the new courtyard to accommodate expanded mechanical, electrical and pool equipment
facilities, an employee dining room, and two offices. Utilitarian functions currently occupying
original parking spaces in the garage will be re-located to reclaim as many of those parking spaces as
possible.
· Main Level: The main level changes involve aesthetic upgrading of the Lobby, ]-Bar and Library at the
Main Street side, In the middle of the historic building, rhe existing dining spaces Qacob's Corner,
~_____----l
poss ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING
the Cenrury Room, and Wheeler Room) together with an existing office will be expanded into one
large restaurant space, with the removal of the interior bearing walls to be replaced with a steel frame
supporting the above floors, Part of the Elisha Room will become new toilet rooms servicing the
restaurant, so patrons won't be required to go downstairs or way back toward the ballroom to use
restrooms, There will be a service bar at the South end of the Courtyard, accessed off the elevator
lobby. The lodge rooms will be renovated, mostly in terms of finishes rather than reconfiguration,
except for two rooms at the West end (#130 and #132) being modified to comply with ADA
standards, Lodge corridors will be upgraded,
. Second Level: The second level changes include the same vertical circulation reconfiguration as the
first floor (open architectural stair, fire/egress stair and penthouse elevator), and the Manager's office
in that location will be converted back into a guest room (#213.) All lodge rooms will be renovated
with new interior finishes and fixtures. Two rooms, one at the west end and one in the historic
section will be modified to comply with ADA standards. The accounting offices will be reconfigured
to provide a public circulation link between the historic and annex sections of the hotel (with ramps
and a handicapped lift to make the route accessible). A fitness room will be added on top of where
the Garden Lobby roof was. The lodge room directly over the front entry portico will be reconfigured
as a parlour room to allow the second floor front rooms to function as a multi.room suite, Direct-vent
gas fireplaces will be added to all lodge rooms, with those in the historic building being vented out
the roof, and those in the annex being vented out through the exterior waiL
. Third Level: The third level changes include the above-mentioned ADA-room modifications and
fireplace additions, Again, all lodge rooms will be renovated with new interior finishes and fixtures,
. Fourth Level: The fourth level will have the same vertical circulation changes and lodge unit
upgrades, Three lodge suites will be added at the current 3" floor roof on the west side, They will be
set back 15' from the property line to be less visible, and will require major structural renovations to
accommodate them. They will be completely new construction on top of the existing Strucrure,
. Liehtilw: Newly renovated and expanded public area will be provided with new, energy-efficient
lighting, with lighting levels complying with IES recommendations and wattages conforming to
Energy Code standards, All guest room lighting will be replaced.
=:
!: c::I
;~ ~
~~ 2
;: ::.'
i~ ~
.. t"'1
_ ::2
8'l!~>:
s n () Q
o~~S:rn
::-t ilj ~!i:"'"
~ ~ ;t (5 ~
;;: "<: ~
" & ii t;J
.."
~~.~,
~...U
~~~~
:'
~G
=
.
A,,",~
l:Il' ~..
~~~~t:)
~ ~ ~ ~
.
.1\) N
~ ~ ~ t:)
~ ~
__ AS!'DI"'1lUIlJllNIO
~" "I"
'i"il'
I'"
, '- --"
1
I
'"
H
<><::t:l
~ ;!1
~~
;o~
~Co
~
~
" ~
~
P79
I
~
..
~
"
"
~
T
TiTii ii
i
.
.
;
"
=
T~"':':~'"''
, "
, "
. l-~
!, "
II"---lio
lln~<l
.. 111---11I
I..\~.r!!l-'\~J" ~ ' _.=_-::i
~~Ii" II -_ _.?1
\ ' \ ;" I/J{ ,><'r, :
, '" '-//~ ",,' -- .
'- ......~ --""Q----=~
.
"
.
"
.
"
.
"
"
;
C>--
I
,
I
,
> I
~
~ ,
>
n I
>
r 0
n
c I
r t
>
~ 0 ,
0 I
z .
~
~ , . ,
~ :c , ~- ,1 ~
0 0 1
~
0 -l
~ ... ')(
~ ....
0 - r
...
. m ;:c
I > 0 e-
i~ s:
p~ ... ..
. z ;:c ~
~ ....
~2
r ~o
~ :; "< ~
R::' ~>
'-l
~-
.0
02
.;;
~~ ;:
~~ ~
~E -.~
~~ ~
.~ "
~ :;
~G
,
,
.
>
~
~
>
n
>
~
n
c
~
>
~
o
z
e~
N"
o
~~
~
E~
p~
."
, >
:c
o
.....
",
....
-
",
;:a
z 0
s:
~ ",
~
< ,;:a
~ .",
r- ~z
..."'D ~ 0
~ r- ~ <
~;IO ~:J>
~ z 2.....
.-
~O
.:z:
P81
() ~ R
llnille;
o $: ~.s::: ii1
:d!il ~ ~
"h':t::;::!!;:
:;;: 0 ~ ~
~ " )j 01 ~
~ " ~
~ ;;::.to) ~!o I~ 16
- ~~~~
..
~ ~~H ~~
~~ :..
$<.I ~ ;!I ~ ~
~~ ~~~~
_ II ;;t '" ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~~ ~
U
~~ l::I l::I l::I ~
~
~
~,~
li~ .
~ ~
,. ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
:~
, =
. ~
~ "'"
I ~
:: ~
: ;;.~
~G
.
,
.
>
=
~
>
n
>
~
n
c
~
>
~
-
o
z
w
~
=
o
~
o
w
~
o
::J:
o
-I
",
00 r-
~ ~
n ",
i~ ;:a
E: ~
p~ :;;
~ -",
.- ~:z
c"'ll ~o
is'- ...<
;::,. ~>
ii: Z z......
~6
"iz
" 'l: R
,,>lQ2l~
0;;:: -.. s:: ~
:;;;! rri ~ ~ ....
".n:t:;t "
~ <:l ~ ~
~ ~ " 01
~ ~toS1l~~tb
~,,~~~~~
~ ~~~~~
" ~ Cj
'" ),.
...... .to ~ ~ ;!J ~
L~~H",
~ ~~~:...
" ~
~
t::l l:::l l::) l::l l::l ~
~
I
.
~
1'!
'"
~
~
~
o
II
II
"
','
~d
P83
~~ ~~
~~
.
J
'I
"
I;
'I
I,
Ii
I' I
i
II
-0
o
M
M
"
~
I
"8
~
8 ~ :;; '"
. n () C
(j~~~fil
);! ~ ~ ~ ...
r--"';r::"'" :::;:
R " ~ "
~S:::i1C;J
~!::
~ ....:ltr.t>.l~tl:J
~ .....~~~~
~~~~8lij!:l
~ ~~~~~
'li:.,.
l!: ,.,,~;O~
~<>HH",
'" !(! '" '" "
." .,."." ~
~
~
l::l (;:) ~ t.:ll c;:. ~
~
'"
.
,
,
P85
I
.
"
~
..
~
l!
"
"
~
~!
[i]!
>
~ [i]~
~
> .
n
>
r
n
~
r
>
~ ~! [i]!
0
z
~
~
0 ::I:
~ 0
0
~ -I
~ '"
0 ....
~ -
'"
. = ;:a
I ~ 0
i 0 s:
, ~ '"
;:a
0 '"
~ :z:
o ~ 0
~ r <:
~~ ~
is
:z:
~:~
.. =
;= c.
:: .,.
~;; ".
i! ~
~i f
iG
o
,
,
:
P87
B~h I
<l~"U!
5l!ijIil::l "
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
I' ~ 1} ~ ),.
I1j " g
.... ~ .... ~ S!! ~
'" 10>''''''''''
~~iS~l~b ~
~ ~~H~ ~
!Ii:.. "
.'^ 10 ~ j;l ~ ~ ~
ii: <5<:lO?~",
.... t:l ~ ~
~ '"l1 ~ ~ ~
!Ii
~
~
~ l;) l;) l;) ~ ~
\'1
iO
..
D
>
~
m (
> tE
n
>
r
n
" )
r
>
=
0
z
~
~
0
~ . ~
0 ::c .
~ 0
m -t
0 "'
~ r-
0 ~
" "'
. ~ ;:c
I ~ 0
i: s:
"'
pg ;:c
"'
~ z:
~ ~ 0
~
~ ~
5
z:
._,-,--,..
,. H ; ~~ PSg
~~]
=t"" ;
=- "
., ..
.- ~~ =
;; "
,- ~ z ,
.- ~ . ' 0
,
-
:.~
~ 4'
-,
iG
.
z " Z >-
... , ... 0
~ , ~ 0
" , "
." ." ~
0 , 0
, 0
~ , ~ C
Z
~ ~ "
0 0 m
" r "
" "
>- ~ >-
"
0 ~ 0
~ "1 ~
." ."
<; 0 <;
~ X
Z " < Z
~ " ~ "
... ...
Z ~ Z
;::
" 0 "
" < "
" ~ "
>- 0 >-
0 0
~ ~
.
,
e:
I
r
~
~
r
"
n
>
r
n
c
r
>
"
0 :c
z 0
-I
~ '"
= r-
0 ~
, '"
. 0 ;0
I ~ 0
E ~ :s:
0
g '"
;0
, 0 .'"
~ ~Z
~ ~ 00
"<
~~ ~>
~:::!
.0
aZ
,
,
,
,
.
,
-~~
~~~-1 :n.;1J~
C/HhtIHf.lE:! OOOCO
~~~~F= ;;;;;
r-tDQlCJ~ ::tI:;C;lJ%I
~~~~~ ~~~);!
;or'lr'l~> ~~~~~
1s;1~~ril ~:E=:::!:
>';"tJ1U'1~ ::Ol'TllTIlTl
zCJi!q"!3: --l~~~
.:->->~-~~
~ZZZI'T'l ZOOON
>CDO:;c - - -
~g:~~ ~~~~
~>>> ~:;:;:;
G)~~~ DOl\)';"
~<<< ~>>
Cr'lf'T11Tl CIl-al-tilJ
fTlC>c;')(;) ~OOO
~~~ E;~ri'ir;;j
000 I'TlG"lGlG)
fTlr'lfl'\ ~~~~
000
~~~
C;WOON.;>-
OO'lCoN-...I
:....a~W......f"
CXl~ Ii Il-!.ej
11- u- ~^ -
~~~~
....
11l0000N.;>--..J
NCXlOWOO
OOUlCl)-..J
",';>-(1)....,1\)
;~;1I~
....11 N^
~gpe;;t
..
~!!l
;:..
.-
">
,"
~~
,~
~~
d
~'"
D!';!
~~
">
,.
.0
.
'\
.
3
-=
_0
, ~
,~- ~
~
~
~
"
~
'"
l'
;t
~
lG
j
>
;:
'"
z
"
'"
"
"
0
z
"
'"
."
-<
C
>
r
"
'"
"'
'"
z
"'
0
C
-<
:I:
"
0
C
'"
-<
-<
>
'"
"
"'
'"
"
-<
io
,~ ::J:
.r
.'" Q
i< -
l:; CD
~o ....
Uz CD
..
Q
3
CD
;
,
,
t n
:$2
~
.~
,0
~
o
~
o
~
n
~
5
z
~
~
5
z
o
.'
zn
o~
n~
~~
-~
<~
~o
Z"
<<
.~
T,
"
:'
"
:'1
.'
.'
::)~
.'
.'
.'
.'
.'
.'
.'~
-Lll1
.....--"I~
~!
I!
h
II
!!
,.
"
;~
~u;
~
,
o
~
n
o
~
~
5
z
1-
,
i
~
n
P91
II
II
"-'
""'
-co
_.0
~~:
~L:
i;~
!~ ~
:'-'
~~
Z
0,
j
fm
I;;
N-;
,-
,0
.z
F
r
. .
,.
'"
m
z
"
m
"
"
o
z
"
m
~
-;
c:
,.
,..
>
~
z
"
Q
~
>
o
~
o
";jil::t
,,~
'-"c:
~~
<r
~
':::~\
Tj II
',~
"
"
:1 )
" (
"
:: i
"
"
"
.: )
" }
l: ?
"
'.
+
"
m
"'
"
z
~
,..
m
m
'"
m
'"
"'
-;
'"
m
m
-;
~
'"
o
~
o
"'
m
o
2'~
~~~
5~~
Onr
~rn~
S f1
" ,
, ~
~ ~
~
"
>
z
o
jm
r
:z:
Q
-
~CIl
o
!m
z ....
~a
i~
€6d
f
~
c
~
~ ;
-
I
,
,
,
, ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~
" ,
,
,
~ ,
,
,
IG , ~~ ~~ -m- 111;
,
,
,
] , ~! ~! ~! ~!
,
,
~l _5 : '\ 001
)
, 1iI~ fiI~ ~ ilL J!1i
. ,
, , \
, ,
, ,
, , \
: 1
.
~l , fiI! ~l ~l
,
~! : )
, )
. )
. JcJ::Y
~ ~
~ ~
~ HI
. ~
~ ~ ii~
^ g z
~ 0
~ ~ ~
~
a ~
~ "
, .
~
"
z
,.
.,
'"
z
e
'"
e
" ilIII ,\l:Il I
0
z ~nn 1\l:Il ,
" I
'"
~
~ ~:: ! \l:Il ,
c: -1-
,.
~ ,
e tcdnn\l:Il I
'"
~ ! ,
" OO! nn J):::I:JI _:.+
z I
i
, ,
'" ~nn I
'"
"'
~ ~nn \l:Il ,
" -1-
0
c: , ,
'" Inn \l:Il I
...
-<
,. , ,
'" !nn -I-
e \l:Il
"' ,
'" I I
"
...
, ,
.0 Inn \l:Il I
I Z
~~ ,
:c -~-
. '" CI
-< ~
!,. -
r:' CD
00 ....
iz CD
....
CI
3
CD
P95
.
.
~
I):IU
nn \I:DI
ilIII \l:Il
I):IU \l:Il
nIl \l:Il
N
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~
FROM: Jessica Garrow, PlannerOlY'Q
RE: Doerr-Hosier Building (Aspen Institute Conference Center) Height
Increase - SPA Amendment - Second Readinl!. of Ordinance 39. Series
2006
(APPLICATION WITHDRAWN)
MEETING DATE: October 23,2006
The Aspen Institute (Applicant) has decided to withdraw the land use application
requesting an Amendment to their SPA Agreement for an increase in height of two (2)
feet six (6) inches. The height increase was requested in order to hide mechanical
equipment from view. It is anticipated that the equipment will be within permitted noise
(decibel) levels without the increase in parapet wall height. Should sound from the
mechanical equipment exceed permitted decibel levels, the Applicant will explore
possible mitigation measures at that time.
CURTIS
"& ASSOCIATES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Jessica Garrow, Planner
Aspen Community Deve. Office
FROM:
Jim Curtis
Owner's Representative, Aspen Institute
DATE:
October 13,2006
RE:
Doerr-Hosier Center Parapet Wall Height
Withdraw of Minor SPA Variance Application, Dated 8/28/06
Please withdraw the above referenced application. Based on the Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) comments at their meeting of October 11,2006,
the Aspen Institute will lower the parapet wall by 2' -6" to be in compliance with the
SPA drawings recorded April 18, 2005, We will strive to lower the parapet wall
within the next two weeks. Once the wall is lowered, I will notify you for an
inspection, As discussed at the HPC meeting, iflowering the parapet wall results in
sound/noise problems, the Aspen Institute will want to revisit this issue.
Please email or call on any questions.
cc: Amy Guthrie
300 East Hyman Avenue. Second Floor . Aspen, Colorado 81611. ph, (970) 920-1395. fax, (970) 925-5046
.
MEMORANDUM
1Yb)
FROM:
Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director~~~
Jennifer Phelan, Senior Long Range Planner ~
Proposed Code Amendments: Repeal and Re-enactment of Existing
and New Impact Fees and School Land Dedication, 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 33, Series of 2006 -Continued from Public Hearinl!: on
October 10, 2006
TO:
THRU:
RE:
DATE:
October 23,2006
SPECIAL NOTE: This staff report is new since the October 10th report and
addresses the issues raised by Council at the first public hearing on this application.
It contains the following:
. A summary of the issues from the last meeting with additional
information provided by staff;
. Staff recommendation & motion;
. a letter from the Aspen School District; and
. a revised ordinance.
Also attached is the original staff report of October 10, 2006. This is attached so that
Council has this information at hand.
SUMMARY:
At the October 10th, public hearing for Ordinance No. 33, Series 2006, City Council
reviewed the ordinance and moved to continue the meeting to October 23,2006. At the
October loth hearing, a number of questions were raised by the CounciL
Below, the concems voiced by the City Council are itemized issue by issue. Comments
frorn staff follow in a separate, paragraph.
1) Can an assessed irnpact fee payment be deferred until the sale of the property?
An irnpact fee is a one-time assessrnent used to cover the cost of capital infrastructure
that new development requires of the city. Hypothetically, by deferring payment of an
impact fee the cost to the city of servicing the new growth would need to be covered
by other revenue sources or capital expenditures could be delayed, lowering the level
of service provided to existing and new citizens. As proposed, residential
development is provided a credit for existing bedrooms and an impact fee is only
assessed when additional bedrooms are added. Although the city could consider a
policy of deferring payment of an impact fee, the administration and tracking of such
I
a program would require additional staff time to manage such a program. Also,
without sorne adjustment for inflation over time, the future dollars collected would
not cover the cost of the capital infrastructure required by the new development. The
Community Development Department does not recommend such a deferral system.
2) Should an impact fee waiver for a historic structure on the inventorv be based upon a
sliding scale related to the amount of square footage added?
Currently, the Park Development impact fee is not applied to a property on the
historic inventory. In the case where a vacant historic lot split lot is created and a new
structure is proposed on it, the new structure would be exempt from any impact fees.
Staff is recommending that this be modified so that only the historic structure is
provided any waiver of impact fees. Although any incentive is a benefit for a historic
property, the Historic Preservation Officer felt that an incentive of greater value to a
historic property is the allowed reduction of minimum lot sizes and an allowed
greater density for historic property.
The Community Development Department recommends keeping the policy simple:
waived, waived for the historic resource only (recommendation), or not waived. If a
scaled system is desirable, staff recommends waiving the impact fees for the first
bedroom added rather than based on a floor area amount.
3) How does bonding and debt service applv to the creation of an impact fee?
In developing a value for capital infrastructure associated with an impact fee, the
number needs to take into consideration those assets that the city does not own
outright. With assistance from the Finance Department, BBC Research and
Consulting determined the equity percentages for bonded assets based on interest
rates and debt service schedules.
4) What is the methodology behind the value of park and recreation assets?
The value of the park and recreation asset list is based upon purchase price ofthe land
updated to 2005 dollars using a three (3) percent annual inflation rate when the
purchase price is known. The list and value of assets was provided by the Parks
Department. Where no purchase price was provided, the consultant used a median
number based upon the known open space cost per acre or park cost per acre. Using a
median value is an established, conservative, and legally defensible basis for
allocating a value to unknown purchase costs.
In the case of Francis Whitaker Park, no value was provided to the consultant. With
additional research, staff found that the purchase price of 3.5 million was bond
financed. With an estimated equity interest of twenty-five percent, the city's capital
investment in the park is approximately $875,000.00. By adding that amount to the
allocated value of the parks and recreation infrastructure, the Park Dedication Impact
Fee would be increased by approximately five percent per residential bedroom.
2
I -
If City Council wishes to add the equity the city has in the park to the fee structure,
the City Council will need to delay adopting the impact fee and staff will need to
have the consultant review and amend the study. Another option would be to wait
until the next time the study is completely updated (every three to five years) and
ensure that the data for the park is included.
5) How does the impact fee get updated on a regular basis?
The impact fees can be updated annually based on an index of infrastructure cost
inflation; however, the fees should undergo a complete review and update every five
years.
6) School Board recommendation for the School Lands Dedication.
Background: In 1995, the Aspen School District submitted a land use application to
the city proposing adoption of a school lands dedication. This request was the result
of growing enrollment that the school district was experiencing. The district had
completed the necessary studies for the dedication and as a result the City of Aspen
adopted Ordinance No. 32, Series 1995, which codified the dedication. According to
the minutes and staff memos from those meetings, it appears that due to concerns
with regard to the high cost of land associated with the dedication the district had
included a not to exceed cap of $4,260.00 for a cash-in-lieu payment. Between first
and second reading, the ordinance was revised so that the not to exceed cap was
amended to assessing a percentage (33%) of the total fee. The dedication has not been
updated since passage of the original ordinance.
In updating the school land dedication, the high cost of land still impacts the cash-in-
lieu payment and staff recommends that a percentage of the maximum allowable be
charged. The Aspen School District Board is recommending continuing with the
same percentage of 33% of the maximum cash-in-lieu payment. As noted in the
memo of October lOth, rather than assessing a school lands dedication solely during
the subdivision process, a scllOol lands dedication will be assessed whenever a
bedroom is added. Below, a number of hypothetical examples are provided which
show the school land dedication as recommended by the Board as well as associated
impact fees,
1. 3,168 sq. ft. Burlingame lot, sale price: $119,400, new 3-bedroom residence
896 sq. ft. x 0.310 = 227.76 sq. ft. required to be dedicated
37.69 $/sq. ft x 227.76 sq. ft. = $8,584.27 x 0.33 = $2,832.81
School Lands Dedication
Park Development Impact Fee
TDM/Air Quality Impact Fee
2,832.81
13,287.00
1,494.00
$17,613.81
2. 3,269 sq. ft. Burlingame lot, sale price: $150,000, new 4-bedroom residence
896 sq. ft. x 0.452 = 404.99 sq. ft. required to be dedicated
3
45.89 $/sq. ft x 404.99 sq. ft. = $18,584.99 x 0.33 = $6,133.05
School Lands Dedication
Park Development Impact Fee
TDM/Air Quality Impact Fee
6,133.05
17,716.00
1,992.00
$25,841.05
3. 4,572 sq. ft. historic lot split lot, assessed market value: $1,377,000, new
4-bedroom
896 sq. ft. x 0.452 = 404.99 sq. ft. required to be dedicated
301.18 $/sq. ft x 404.99 sq. ft. = $121,974.88 x 0.33 = $40,251.71
School Lands Dedication
Park Development Impact Fee
TDM/Air Quality Impact Fee
40,251.71
17,716.00
1.992,00
$59,959.71
4. 6,000 sq. ft. lot, assessed market value: $1,942,460, scrape and replace a 3-
bedroom dwelling with a 4-bedroom dwelling
896 sq. ft. x 0.142 (difference between generation rates) = 127.23 sq. ft.
required to be dedicated
323.74 $/sq. ft x 127.23 sq, ft. = $41,189.44 x.33 = $13,592.52
School Lands Dedication
Park Development Impact Fee
TDM/ Air Quality Impact Fee
13,592.52
4,429.00
498.00
$18,519.52
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
With any impact fee or school lands dedication, calculations must be undertaken to
develop the maximum legally allowable fee or dedication to be assessed to accommodate
new growth. The report prepared by BBC Consulting and Research establishes the
maximum allowable fee or dedication that may be assessed on new development;
however, the City Council must be cornfortable with the fee or dedication amount. For
example, the Aspen School Board is recommending continuing with the cash-in-lieu
payment for the school lands dedication to be charged at thirty-three percent of the
maximum allowed.
In addition to adopting a new impact fee, the update of the Park Dedication impact fee
and School Lands Dedication represent substantial increases to the existing adopted
standards. If Council is uncomfortable with the maximum allowable fee or dedication,
staff would recommend that the Council consider reducing any of the fees or dedication
by an agreed upon percentage,
4
.
City Manager's Comments:
Recommended Motion:
"I move to approve Ordinance No. 33, Series of2006, upon second reading."
Attachments (All Attachments are provided in the October 10th staff memo):
Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B -- Existing Land Use Code: Part 600- Impact Fees and Dedications
Exhibit C -- Impact Fee Work Session Minutes (III 0/06)
Exhibit D -- Impact Fee Work Session Minutes (3/20/06)
Exhibit E -- P&Z resolution
Exhibit F -- P&Z minutes, June 13,2006
Exhibit G -- School Lands Dedication Cash-in-Lieu Scenarios
Exhibit H -- BBC Study - Final Report
INFORMATION FROM OCTOBER 10, 2006 STAFF REPORT:
Back2round:
On January 10, 2006, a work session was jointly held by the City Council and the
Planning and Zoning Commission to review the draft impact fee report. The reason for
conducting this work session was due to the fact that the City, which has had an adopted
Park Dedication Fee and School Lands Dedication since the eighties, had not updated
either the fee or dedication since their inception. Prior to the work session, staff hired a
firm (BBC Research and Consulting) to update both the adopted impact fee and land
dedication and study the feasibility of a number of additional fees. The draft proposed an
update of the Park Development Impact Fee and School Lands Dedication and also
looked at the feasibility of creating a new Transportation Demand Management
(TDM)/Air Quality Impact Fee, a new Storm Drainage Impact Fee and, at the school
district's request, a new School Capital Cost Recovery Fee.
City Council followed with a final work session on the draft report on March 20, 2006,
where a potential new Fire Impact Fee along with other policy issues was discussed. At
this point and time staff and Fire Chief Grob are working with BBC to make changes to
the proposed fire irnpact fee so that the fee is based on the height and mass of a building
as well as geographic location. Staff will then schedule a work session with Council to
review the consultant's study and recommendations. An ordinance would be submitted to
Council at a later date.
As a result of the work sessions, a number of policy issues were discussed and direction
to staff was provided and incorporated into a resolution that was reviewed and approved
by the Planning and Zoning Commission, The content (except for the storm drainage
impact fee) of the resolution is incorporated into the proposed ordinance before City
Council. The policy direction included in the ordinance is sumrnarized below:
5
. Impact fees should be assessed on a per bedroom rather than per unit basis; and,
. The discretion of Council to provide waivers from the impact fees (but not the
School Lands Dedication) should remain; and,
. Studio units should be assessed at .8 of the per bedroom fee.
Impact fees can only be used to maintain the city's current level of service with regard to
capital infrastructure and cannot be used for operating expenses and maintenance costs.
In essence, an impact fee ensures that the current level of service, whether for parks,
transportation, roads, or utilities is maintained as growth occurs and prevents the level of
service from being diminished. This is often referred to as, "growth paying its own way."
These fees cannot be used to remedy existing deficiencies in the provision of services.
For exarnple, an impact fee can be used to expand a trail system but should not be used to
maintain or repair an existing stretch of trail. An impact fee cannot be used towards
paying an employee's salary.
Impact Fees:
Section I of the attached ordinance will repeal and reinstate Chapter 26.610, Impact Fees.
The new language for the chapter will update the Park Development Impact Fee and
adopt a new Transportation Demand Management (TDM)/Air Quality Impact Fee. These
fees are assessed by the number of bedrooms or the amount of net leasable space created
by a development project. Below, staff is highlighting important aspects of the new code
language.
Exemptions (Proposed Section 26.610.030)
Currently, the language in the Land Use Code that pertains to the Park Development
Impact Fee waives the fee for the development of essential cornmunity facilities and
development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structures. Also excluded from the assessment of impact fees is the alteration or
expansion of a building that does not create any additional bedrooms or the replacement
of a destroyed structure that does not create any additional bedrooms (the existing code
language neglects to mention an equivalent exemption for net leasable space). Staffis
recommending amending the code section to allow exemptions for:
. Any alteration, expansion, or replacement of a structure or site improvement that
does not create additional bedroorns or net leasable space. An example would be
an interior remodel of a house that does not add additional bedrooms.
. Development involving a structure listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures. Under the current code any development of an
historic property, an example being a new house built on a lot created by a
historic lot split, would be exempt from the assessment of the Park Development
Impact Fee. Staff is recommending that only the historic resource (i.e. the
historic building) be exempt from impact fees.
6
. The eXlstmg Park Development Impact Fee exempts essential community
facilities which really should be called an 'essential public facility' as defined in
the Land Use Code. An essential public facility is, "a facility which serves an
essential public purpose, is available for use by, or benefit of, the general public
and serves the needs of the community." An example of an essential public
facility is the fire station or the Wheeler Opera House. Staff has amended the
ordinance language to allow any fees to be waived through the discretion of City
Council review.
Imposition, calculation and collection offees/charges (Proposed Section 26.610.050)
Both the current Park Development Impact Fee language and the proposed impact fee
code language require the payment of impact fees at the time of issuance of a building
permit. The proposed language also provides for the impact fees to be updated annually.
When assessing an impact fee for a studio, City Council has recommended that a studio
unit be assessed at a slightly lower amount than the per bedroom fee. A studio would be
charged at eighty percent of the per bedroom fee; the underlying premise being that a
studio unit will accommodate less people than a one bedroom unit.
When calculating impact fees for lock-off units in a lodging project, staff currently
assesses the impact fee based upon the largest number of bedrooms in a unit that could be
configured rather than the smallest number of bedrooms in a unit that could be created
with lock-off units. Staff recommends that this practice continue in the future, levying a
fee based on maximum potential occupancy. For example, a three bedroom lodge unit
that can be locked-off into a one bedroom unit and two studio units would be charged a
fee based upon the three bedroom lodge unit configuration.
Fee Schedule (Proposed Section 26.610.090)
The following fee schedule is proposed to be adopted and is provided in additional detail
in the impact fee report prepared by BBC (Exhibit H) and provides for a substantial fee
increase for the Park Development Impact Fee as a result ofthe City's extensive
investment in park and recreation capital facilities.
Table I: Proposed Irnpact Fee Schedule
Park Development Fee: Proposed Existinl!
Residential and Hotel (studio) $3,543.20 1,520.00
Residential and Hotel (per bedroom) $4,429.00 2,120.00(1 bedroom)
2,725.00(2 bedroom)
3,634.00(3+bedroom)
Nonresidential (per net leasable sq. $4.10 1,168.00 - 2,163.00
ft.) per 1,000 square feet
TDMlAir Quality Fee:
Residential and Hotel (studio) $398.40
Residential and Hotel (per bedroom) $498.00
7
I~-~."
Park Develo ment Fee:
Nonresidential (per net
ft.)
Pro osed
leasable sq. $0.46
Credits (Proposed Section 26.610.080)
Currently, any person can receive a credit from an impact fee if the person elects to
construct or dedicate part of a capital facility (for example a trail easement). This
allowance for credit is included in the new impact fee language. Additionally, how a
credit would work in the case of someone adding bedrooms or net leasable space is
included in the impact fee language. For example, in the case where a house is
demolished and replaced with a new house with a net gain oftwo bedrooms, the applicant
will be charged for the two additional bedrooms.
Appeals and waivers (Proposed Section 26.610.100)
The City has the ability to waive or reduce impact fees and the present code language
allows for the waiving of impact fees for affordable housing. At the March work session,
Council's direction was to continue this allowance for affordable housing and include the
potential for lodging projects to be exempted. Staff would also suggest that "essential
public facilities" be considered for the waiving of impact fees on a case by case basis
rather than being automatically exempted from the impact fees. The proposed ordinance
reflects this suggestion. Also included in the ordinance is the ability to appeal the
imposition of an impact fee.
School Lands Dedication:
Section 2 of the attached ordinance will repeal and reinstate Chapter 26.630, School
Lands Dedication, as Chapter 26.620. The new language for the chapter will update the
School Lands Dedication. Below, staffis highlighting the important aspects of the new
code language.
Exemptions (Proposed Section 26,610.030)
Any non-residential development (including lodging) is exempt from assessment of the
school land dedication as non-residential development does not generate school children.
Imposition, calculation and collection offees/charges (Proposed Section 26.610.050)
The existing School Lands Dedication is only applied to subdivision applications. When
a house adds bedrooms, it creates the potential of additional student generation. At the
March work session Council agreed that anv development that creates additional
bedrooms should contribute to the School Lands Dedication, not just development in a
new subdivision, Currently, the dedication is collected at issuance of building pennit and
staffis recommending that this practice continue.
8
Dedication schedule (Proposed Section 26.610.070)
The School Lands Dedication is calculated based upon the number of school children
generated by different types of dwelling units, for example a studio or two bedroom unit,
and the amount ofland necessary to serve the school children. An important part of the
study conducted by BBC was updating student generation rates based upon housing type
and the land area necessary per student. If a developer does not wish to provide a land
dedication or if Council determines that the land dedication is not adequate or suitable for
school purposes, the developer can make a cash payment in-lieu. This cash payment is
based upon the market value of the subject land rather than an average cost. In updating
the School Lands Dedication, BBC calculated the land area per student at 896 square feet
and the following student generation rates by type of residential dwelling. Additional
detailed background information can be found in the impact fee report prepared by BBC
(Exhibit H).
Table 2: Student Generation Rates
Bedrooms Total Number of Students Generated
Studio 0.049
1 bedroom 0.062
2 bedroom 0.115
3 bedroom 0.310
4 or more bedrooms 0.452
Credits (Proposed Section 26.610.080)
A credit will be assessed for existing bedrooms. In a case where a house is demolished
and replaced with a new house with a net gain of bedrooms, only the difference between
the previous number of bedrooms and the proposed number of bedrooms will be assessed
the School Lands Dedication.
Appeals (Proposed Section 26.610.090)
Included in the ordinance is the ability to appeal the imposition of an impact fee. City
Council is the final decision-making body with regard to an appeal.
Development Example:
To provide a better picture of what type of numbers could be assessed with the adoption
of the Impact Fees and School Lands Dedication, staff has provided the example below.
9
Table 3: Impact Fees and School Lands Dedication Comparison
Proposed Parks & TDM/Air Subtotal School Total
Development Rec. Quality Land
Impact Impact Standard
Fee Fee
New Three Existing 3,634.00 NA 3,634.00 10,692.00 14,326.00
Bedroom Max. 13,287.00 1,494.00 14,781.00 100%= 107,367.66
Dwelling Unit Allowed 92,586.66
33%=
30,553.60
Lodge Existing 22,800.00 NA 22,800.00 NA 22,800.00
redevelopment Max. 53,148.00 5,976.00 59,124.00 NA 59,124.00
with 15 new Allowed
studio units
NOTES:
. Assumes the land cost for the single-family residence is $2,000,000.00 on a 6,000
square foot lot.
10
ORDINANCE NO. 33
(Series 2006)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, APPROVING
REPEAL AND RE-ENACTMENT OF TITLE 26, PART 600, IMPACT FEES AND
DEDICATIONS, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE.
WHEREAS, new development imposes increased demands on City facilities and
infrastructure needed to provide necessary public services; and,
WHEREAS, City staff has provided an update, through a consultant, to the previous
study of the Park Dedication Impact Fee and the School Lands Dedication which shows the level
of fees needed to generate sufficient funds to provide capital facilities and infrastructure to serve
new development and the amount of school lands necessary to serve new developrnent; and,
WHEREAS, the City projects new development to continue which will place ever-
increasing demands on the City to provide capital facilities and infrastructure to serve new
development; and,
WHEREAS, to the extent that new development places demands upon capital facilities
and infrastructure, those demands should be satisfied by shifting the responsibility for financing
such capital facilities and infrastructure from the public to the development creating the
demands; and,
WHEREAS, impact fees and dedications collected pursuant to Title 26, Part 600, Impact
Fees and Dedications, of the Aspen Land Use Code may not be used to cure existing deficiencies
in capital facilities and infrastructure; and,
WHEREAS, the impact fees and school lands dedication are the result of the "City of
Aspen Impact Fee Study and Update of School Lands Dedication" study, which was sponsored
by the City of Aspen and completed by BBC Research and Consulting on August 7, 2006; 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 June 13, 2006, as required by Section 26.310.020, Procedure for amendment, approved
Resolution No. 23, Series of 2006, by a six to zero (6-0) vote, approving the recommended repeal
and reinstatement to the above referenced title and part of the Land Use Code, and
recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendments.
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council is vested with the authority to adopt changes to the
Land Use Code and 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 October lO, 2006 and on October 23, 2006; and,
WHEREAS, the code amendments proposed are of general applicability and are calculated
at the time of building permit application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO:
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Chapter 26.310 of the City of Aspen Municipal
Code, the City Council hereby approves the Code Amendment sections initiated by the
Community Development Department as outlined below:
Section 1:
Chapter 26.6lO, Park Development Impact Fee, of the Municipal Code, which chapter sets forth
how an impact fee is assessed towards new development, is hereby repealed in full and re-
enacted to read as follows:
Sections:
26.610.0lO
26.610.020
26.6lO.030
26.6lO.040
26.6lO.050
26.6lO.060
26.6lO.070
26.610.080
26.6lO.090
26.610.100
26.610.llO
Chapter 26.610
IMPACT FEES
Purpose and intent.
Applicability.
Exemptions.
Definitions.
Imposition, calculation and collection offees/charges.
Impact fee accounts.
Use of impact fee proceeds.
Credits.
Current impact fees.
Waiver of fees.
Appeals.
26.610.010. Purpose and intent.
For residents and visitors, parks and recreation facilities make up a significant part of the
community character of the City of Aspen. As a result of growth, increased pressure is placed on
existing parks and recreation facilities necessitating acquisition of new park lands and
development of additional recreation facilities in order to maintain the current level of service. In
order to maintain the current community standards for acquisition of open space and
development of parks and recreation facilities, the City of Aspen finds it necessary to impose a
park development impact fee on new development.
Transportation demand management and air quality capital facilities ensure the mobility of
residents, workers, and visitors through multi-modal solutions as well as clean air for the
Page 2 of 15
community. The Aspen Area Community Plan directs Aspen to maintain traffic levels at or
below 1993 levels in order to protect our environment and quality of life and the City of Aspen
has invested in capital facilities to do so. As new development and growth occurs, increased
pressure is placed upon our existing facilities necessitating expansion ofthese capital facilities to
maintain the current level of service. In order to maintain the current community standards for
transportation demand management and air quality, the City of Aspen finds it necessary to
impose a Transportation Demand Management! Air Quality impact fee on new development.
This Chapter is enacted for the purpose of implementing the City's plans for capital facilities by
requiring that new development pay for its fair share of such facilities through the imposition of
impact fees that will be used to finance, defray, or reimburse all or a portion of the costs incurred
by the City to serve new development.
26.610.020 Applicability.
Unless expressly exempted, the Park Development Impact Fee and the Transportation Demand
Management (TDM)/Air Quality Impact Fee shall be assessed upon all development within the
City of Aspen which contains new residential units or net leasable space.
26.610.030 Exemptions.
This Chapter does not apply to:
A. Development involving a property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structures. This exemption is solely for a historic structure and its accessory
structures. Development on a historic landmark property involving a non-historic or new
building shall not be exempt.
B. Alteration, expansion, or replacement of a structure which does not create additional
bedrooms or net leasable space.
26.610.040 Definitions.
When used in this Chapter, the following words, terms, and phrases, and their derivations, shall
have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a
different meaning. Other words and terms shall be defined under the Definition section of this
title:
A. Capital facilities means land, structures or equipment for purposes of parks and
recreation, transportation demand management, and air quality. "Capital facilities" also
includes design, engineering, inspection, testing, plalU1ing, legal review, land acquisition, and
all other costs associated with the construction or purchase ofland, structures or equipment.
B. Collection means the point at which the impact fee/charge is actually paid to the City.
C. New development or development project means any project undertaken for the purpose
of development, including without limitation, a project involving the issuance of a permit for
construction, reconstruction, or change of use, but not a project involving the issuance of a
permit to operate or to remodel, rehabilitate, reconstruct or improve an existing structure,
Page 3 of 15
j..
which does not change the number of bedrooms, amount of net leasable space, density or
intensity of use.
D. Impact fee means a monetary exaction imposed by the City pursuant to this Chapter as a
condition of or in cOlU1ection with approval of a development project for the purpose of
defraying all or some of the City's cost for capital facilities associated with that development
project.
E. Impose means to determine that a particular development project IS subject to the
collection of impact fees as a condition of development approval.
F. Nonresidential development project means all development other than residential
development projects.
G. Residential development project means any development, inclusive of hotel
development, undertaken to create a new dwelling unit or add one or more additional
bedrooms to an existing dwelling unit.
H. Building permit means any City permit that involves increases In the number of
bedrooms, net leasable square footage, and/or changes to land use.
26.610.050 Imposition, calculation and collection offees/charges.
A. Imposition. Except as provided in this Chapter and any amendment to this Chapter, the
City may impose impact fees as a condition of approval of all new development projects.
B. Updated AlU1ually. The base amount of each impact fee for each type of development
project may be calculated annually and adopted by City Council ordinance. The City may
choose to update its fee schedule based on the change in the Engineering News Record
inflation index that occurs between annual updates.
C. Collection. Impact fees shall be collected by the Building Department at the time and as a
condition for issuance of a building permit.
26.610.060 Impact fee accounts.
A. Individual Accounts. The City shall establish an impact fee account for each type of
capital facility for which an impact fee is imposed. The impact fees collected shall be
deposited in each such account according to type of improvement. The funds of the account
shall not be commingled with other funds of the City.
B. Interest Bearing. Each impact fee account shall be interest-bearing, and the accumulated
interest shall become part of the account.
26.610.070 Use of impact fee proceeds.
Impact fees may be expended only for the type of capital facilities for which they were imposed,
Page 4 of 15
calculated, and collected and according to procedures established in this Chapter. Impact fees
may be used to pay the principal, interest, and other costs of bonds, notes, and other obligations
issued or undertaken by or on behalf of the City to finance such improvements.
26.610.080 Credits.
A. A property owner who dedicates land or improvements or agrees to participate in an
improvement district or otherwise contributes funds for capital facilities as defined in this
Chapter may be eligible for a credit for such contribution against the impact fee paid.
I. The City Council shall determine:
a. The value of the developer contribution;
b. Whether the contribution meets capital facilities needs for which the particular
impact fee has been imposed; and
c. Whether the contribution will substitute or otherwise reduce the need for capital
facilities anticipated to be provided with impact fee funds.
In no event, however, shall the credit exceed the amount of the applicable impact fee.
B. When additional residential bedrooms, hotel bedrooms, or net leasable space are proposed,
either individually or in combination, a credit for the existing bedrooms or net leasable space
shall be credited towards the development. A credit may only be allocated towards the
development on an individual lot and cannot be assigned towards development on a separate
lot.
C. Any application for credit must be submitted on forms provided by the City before
development project approval. The application shall contain a declaration under oath of
those facts which qualify the property owner for the credit, accompanied by the relevant
documentary evidence.
26.610.090 Current impact fees.
The following impact fees are the result of the "City of Aspen Impact Fee Study and Update of
School Lands Dedication" study, which was sponsored by the City of Aspen and completed by
BBC Research and Consulting on August 7, 2006. This study is available at the Community
Development Department. Impact fees are hereby established as follows:
Table 610.1, Impact Fee Sc e ule
Parks Develonment Fee:
Residential and Hotel (studio) $3,543.20
Residential and Hotel (per bedroom) $4,429
NonresidentiaC(per net leasable sq. ft.) $4.10
TDM/Air Qualiiv Fee:
Residential and Hotel (studio) $398.40
h d
Page 5 of 15
Residential and Hotel(Der bedroom) $498
Nonresidential{Oer net leasable sa. ft.) $0.46
Notes:
- An Accessory Dwelling Unit or Carriage House, as defined by and meeting the requirements
of this Title, shall be calculated as an additional bedroom or bedrooms of a single-family or
duplex dwelling.
- . When a hotel proposes "lock-off' units, the fee shall be calculated based upon the largest
possible bedroom configuration for a lodging unit. For example, a three bedroom hotel unit
that can be locked-off into a one bedroom unit and two studio units will be charged a fee
based upon the three bedroom hotel unit configuration.
26.610.100 Waiver offees.
Whenever the City Council determines that any part of a proposed development constitutes an
affordable housing development or an Essential Public Facility, as defined by this Title, and
wishes to subsidize the construction, the City Council may exempt that part of the development
from the application of the impact fees, or may reduce by any amount the fees imposed by this
Chapter. As an economic development incentive, a lodging development may apply for a waiver
of the impact fees. An application for a waiver must be made and acted upon by the City Council
prior to the submission of a building permit application. Retroactive waivers are not permitted.
26.610.110 Appeals.
A. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant may challenge the imposition of a fee
imposed pursuant to this Chapter by filing with the Community Development Director a written
notice of appeal as provided in Section 26.316.030, Appeals procedures, with a full statement of
the grounds and an appeal fee as may be fixed from time to time by ordinance by the City
Council. The City may continue processing the building permit application. If the building
permit is available for issuance by the City and the Appeal has not been heard, the building
permit may be issued if a bond or other security in an amount equal to the challenged/unpaid
portion of the impact fee/charge is provided to the City. The appeal shall be heard by City
Council.
Section 2:
Chapter 26.630, School Lands Dedication of the Municipal Code, which Chapter sets forth how
the School Lands Dedication is assessed for new development, is hereby repealed in full and
reinstated to read as follows:
Chapter 26.620
SCHOOL LAND DEDICATION
Sections:
26.620.010
26.620.020
26.620.030
Purpose and intent.
Applicability.
Exemptions.
Page 6 of 15
26.620.040
26.620.050
26.620.060
26.620.070
26.620.080
Definitions.
Imposition, calculation and collection of dedications.
Procedures for Land Dedication and/or Cash Payment.
Current Land Dedication or Cash in lieu fees.
Appeals.
26.620.010. Purpose and intent.
The Aspen School District requires land for necessary school functions, which may include, but
is not limited to, school buildings, support facilities, open space and recreation areas and housing
for employees and their immediate families. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that as
development occurs and enrollment in the schools grows, the current level of service provided to
students can be maintained. This is accomplished by the adoption of standards for new
development to provide land, or cash-in-lieu thereof to the City, for use by the Aspen School
District. The standards are based on the number of students the development generates and the
current level of service standard within the Aspen School District for land area provided per
student.
26.620.020 Applicability.
Unless expressly exempted, the School Land Dedication standard shall be assessed upon all
development within the City of Aspen which contains residential units.
26.620.030 Exemptions.
Any development considered nonresidential development, as defined by this Chapter, is exempt
from the School Land Dedication.
26.620.040 Definitions.
When used in this Chapter, the following words, terms, and phrases, and their derivations, shall
have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a
different meaning:
A. Collection means the point at which land or a cash payment in-lieu is actually transferred
or paid to the City.
B. New development or development project means any project undertaken for the purpose
of development, including without limitation, a project involving the issuance of a permit for
construction, reconstruction, or change of use, but not a project involving the issuance of a
permit to operate or to remodel, rehabilitate, reconstruct or improve an existing structure,
which does not change the number of bedrooms..
C. Land dedication means a land exaction imposed by the City pursuant to this Chapter as a
condition of or in cOlU1ection with approval of a development project for the purpose of
defraying all or some of the Aspen School District's cost for capital facilities associated with
that development project.
D. Impose means to determine that a particular development project IS subject to the
collection of a land dedication as a condition of development approval.
Page 7 of 15
+--.--><
E. Nonresidential development project means all development other than residential
development.
F. Residential development project means any development undertaken to create a new
dwelling unit or add one or more additional bedrooms to an existing dwelling unit, excluding
Hotel units.
G. Building permit means any City permit that increases the number of bedrooms and/or
changes to land use.
26.620.050 Imposition, calculation and collection of dedications.
A. Imposition. Except as provided in this Chapter and any amendment to this Chapter, the
City may impose a school lands dedication as a condition of approval of all new development
projects. All lands dedicated to the City pursuant to this Section shall be held by the City for
the Aspen School District, until such time as they shall be requested by the School District
for school purposes. The Aspen School District shall be responsible for maintenance of said
lands in a reasonable malU1er while they are being held by the City.
B. Collection. Land dedications shall be finalized and completed prior to building permit
application. A cash payment in-lieu; however, shall be collected by the Building Department
at the time and as a condition for issuance of a building permit.
I. Funds. All funds collected pursuant to this division shall be transferred by the
Community Development Director to the Finance Director. All funds so collected shall
be properly identified and promptly deposited in a designated account. Funds withdrawn
from this fund shall be used exclusively for the purposes specified herein.
2. City Shall Transfer Funds to School District. Funds collected pursuant to this division
shall be remitted monthly to the Aspen School District. The Aspen School District shall
deposit said funds into an interest-bearing account authorized by law. The Aspen School
District shall be the owners of the funds in the account, but the signature of the chief
financial officer of the Aspen School District, or his or her designee, and the signature of
the finance director of the City of Aspen, or his or her designee, shall be required for the
withdrawal of monies from the account.
3. Administrative Fee. The City shall be entitled to retain two (2) percent of the funds
collected to compensate it for its administrative expenses of collecting the fees. Said fees
shall be deposited in the City's General Revenue fund to be expended as the City shall
determine in its sole discretion.
C. Updated AlU1ually. The land dedication standard imposed may be updated annually and
adopted by City Council ordinance.
Page 8 of 15
26.620.060 Procedures for Land Dedication and/or Cash Payment.
A. Land Dedication. Lands to be dedicated to the City to fulfill the standards of this Chapter
shall be identified on the subdivision plat and shall be dedicated to the City at the time of
final plat approval.
I. Acceptance. Acceptance of the lands to be dedicated shall be at the discretion of the
Aspen City Council.
2. Criteria. Prior to acceptance, the City shall consider the comments of the Aspen School
District, to determine whether the lands proposed to be dedicated are of adequate size and
can be suitably developed for school purposes or whether the lands have the capability of
being sold, with the proceeds being used for school purposes. City shall also consider the
probable impacts on neighboring properties of the development of the land for school
purposes. When the lands proposed to be dedicated are not adequate or suitable for
school purposes and cannot feasibly be sold, the City shall require a cash payment in-lieu
of the land dedication.
B. Cash-in-Lieu Payment. Payment of cash in-lieu of a land dedication shall be made to the
City prior to and on a proportional basis to the issuance of any building permits for the
residential dwelling units.
26.620.070 Current Land Dedication and Cash in-lieu fees.
A. The following land dedication is the result of the "City of Aspen Impact Fee Study and
Update of School Lands Dedication" study, which was sponsored by the City of Aspen and
completed by BBC Research and Consulting on August 7, 2006. This study is available at the
Community Development Department.
The current land area required per student equals 896 square feet. Table 620.1 provides the
student generation rates as follows:
Table 620.1, Student Generation Rates
Bedrooms Total No. of Students Generated
Studio 0.049
I bedroom 0.062
2 bedroom 0.115
3 bedroom 0.310
4 or more bedrooms 0.452
Note:
- An Accessory Dwelling Unit or Carriage House, as defined by and meeting the
requirements of this Title, shall be calculated as an additional bedroom or bedrooms of
a single-family or duplex dwelling.
- When redevelopment of a property adds bedrooms, the difference between the
generation rates of the existing dwelling unites) and the proposed dwelling unites) shall
be the number of students generated.
Page 9 of 15
Figure 620.1, School Land Dedication Calculation
Land Area per Student Standard (square feet)
multiplied by
Total Students Generated (Provided in Table 620.1, Student Generation Rates)
equals
Total Square Feet to be Dedicated
B. Cash Payment-in-Lieu. An applicant may make a cash payment in-lieu of dedicating land
to the City, or may make a cash payment in combination with a land dedication, to comply
with the standards of this Chapter. Because of the extraordinary cost of land within the City,
the School District and the City of Aspen agreed to require payment of a cash-in-lieu amount
which is less than the full market value of the land area. The formula to determine the
amount of cash-in-lieu payment for each residential dwelling unit is as follows:
Figure: 620.2, Cash-in-Lieu Formula
Total Square Feet to be Dedicated
multiplied by
Appraised Per Square Foot Value of Land Being Developed
multiplied by
Percentage of Fee to be Charged (0.33 )
equals
Cash-in-Lieu Payment
Figure 620.3, Cash Pavrnent-in-Lieu Example
The following example provides a development scenario in which an eXlstmg three
bedroom detached residential dwelling is remodeled creating one additional bedroom and
the same parcel is also developed with an additional two bedroom detached residential
dwelling.
Students Generated
Bedrooms
4 bedroom (1 bedroom added)
(4 bedroom Student Generation Rate minus 3 bedroom
Student Generation Rate)
plus
2 bedroom (new)
equals
Total Student Generation Rate
0.142
0.115
0.257
Land Dedication Calculation
Page 10 of 15
..I
Land Area per Student Standard (sq. ft)
multiplied by
Total Students Generated (from above calculation)
equals
Total Square Feet to be Dedicated
896
0.257
230.27 sq. ft.
When calculating a cash payment in-lieu of a land dedication (assuming a total land value
of $1,942,460.00 for a 6,000 sq. ft. lot containing the two dwelling units), the following
calculation would be used to determine the cash payment in-lieu.
Market Value of Land per Sq. Ft.
multiplied by
Total Square Feet to be Dedicated
Multiplied by
Percentage of Fee to be Charged
equals
Cash Payment-in-Lieu
$323.74 per sq. ft.
230.27 sq. ft.
0.33
$ 24,600.71
1. Current Market Value. Current market value means the value of the land at the time of
the cash-in-Iieu payment, including site improvements such as streets and utilities, but
excluding the value of residential dwelling units and other structures on the property.
2. Substantiation. Market value may be substantiated by a documented purchase price (if
an arms length transaction no more than two (2) years old) or other mutually agreed upon
recognized means.
3. Appraisal. In the event the developer and the City fail to agree on market value, such
value shall be established by a qualified real estate appraiser acceptable to both parties.
The developer shall pay for the appraisal.
C. Mixed Use Developments. When the proposed development contains a mix ofresidential,
commercial, or other uses, the required dedication shall be based on the number of proposed
residential units. The estimated land value for the residential units will be calculated on a
proportionate share of residential net livable area of the project compared to the total net
livable and/or net leasable commercial and office space of the project as a whole. For
example, if a new building proposes a mix of uses and the net livable area or net leasable
areas are as follows: residential (6,000 sq. ft), lodging (20,000 sq. ft.), and commercial (3,000
sq.ft.), the proportion of land associated with the residential component is 20.6% of the total
land area.
26.620.80
Appeals.
A. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant may challenge the imposition of a land
dedication imposed pursuant to this Chapter by filing with the Community Development
Director a written notice of appeal as provided in Section 26.316.030, Appeals procedures, with
a full statement of the grounds and an appeal fee as may be fixed from time to time by ordinance
Page II of 15
1...
by the City Council. The City may continue processing the building permit application. If the
building permit is available for issuance by the City and the Appeal has not been heard, the
building permit may be issued if a bond or other security in an amount equal to the
challenged/unpaid portion of the land dedication is provided to the City. The appeal shall be
heard by City Council.
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.
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 5:
A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 101h day of October, 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 II Ih day of September, 2006.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen K. Klanderud, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of
,2006.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen K. Klanderud, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Page 12 of 15
City Attorney
Page 13 of 15
.... ...1. . ,.....
~
ASPEN
S~~htloi DiSlrivl
.
October 17,2006
Dear City Council Members:
In early 2005, the Aspen School District began working directly with the Community
Development Department to update the school land dedication standard. This included
retaining BBC Research and Consulting to calculate impact fees, identify new impact
fees and update the school land dedication standard using methodologies in accordance
with Colorado state legislation. We have followed this process closely and support the
findings in BBC's final report and the proposed code amendments.
As you know, the Aspen School District requires land for essential school functions
including school buildings, transportation and maintenance facilities, open space and
recreation areas, and housing for employees and their immediate families. The school
land dedication standard requiring new development to provide land or cash. in-lieu of
land ensures that as development occurs and enrollment in the schools grows, the current
level of service provided to students can be maintained. The District has worked hard
over the last decade to achieve small class sizes, enhanced programs and one safe
community campus.
It was unfortunate tbat errors in calculating the revised school land dedication were not
discovered until very recently. We appreciate City Council continuing the 2nd reading of
Ordinance No. 33 until October 23, 2006 to allow the school board to meet with the
City's Senior Long Range Planner and deliberate this issue at our regular scheduled
board meeting.
All of us on the school board have given careful thought and deliberation to this issue.
We agree with the methodology and recommendations put forth by BBC Research and
Consulting regarding the maximum allowable school land dcdication fees. At the same
time we understand that the high dollar amount of the school land dedication standard,
when combined with the City of Aspen's equally important impact fees, may pose an
undue burden on new development. Therefore, we are recommending that City Council
amend Ordinance No. 33, to assess the school land dedication at 33% of the maximum
allowable. We feel this very large concession is both reasonable and supportable for the
following reasons:
. Our current facilities on the Maroon Creek campus represent $105 million in
construction and other capital costs. Adding in the 29 acres at our site at a
replacement cost of $1 million per acre, suggests a total cost of $134,000,000.
Spread over our current enrollment of 1,460 students, suggests a capital facilities
cost of approximately $92,000 per student.
0235 High School Road. Aspen, Colorado 81611
970/925.3760 x4001 . Fax 970/925-5721
. Just in the last five years, Pitkin County taxpayers have approved almost $74
million dollars in new debt for capital infrastructure to improve and expand
school buildings on our campus.
. The Maroon Creek campus represents approximately 29 acres. On average,
school districts with similar enrollment have facilities and recreation areas
comprising 52 acres ofland.
. The current school land dedication standard is collected only when there is a
subdivision review. This narrow focus in the school land dedication standard has
led to under-collecting cash-in-lieu payments requiring general taxpayers to
shoulder the burden of increased enrollment generated by new development.
. It is consistent with the ordinances approved by City Council passed in 1995
which limited the school land dedication standard to 33% of the maximum
allowable
The school board supports the concept behind both impact fees and the school land
dedication standard. By assigning the responsibility for financing capital facilities to the
development that causes the need for new or expanded facilities, the financial burden is
shifted away from the general taxpayer to those who are creating the need for new
facilities. This is especially important given increases in enrollment expected with the
following residential development projects underway within the school district.
. Burlingame Ranch
. Bar/X Ranch
. Snowmass Base Village including affordable housing in Sinclair Meadows
. Numerous approved free market and affordable housing projects.
We fully appreciate City Council's past and current support of both impact fees and the
school land dedication standard that ensures that the current high levels of service,
whether for parks, transportation, utilities or schools is maintained as new growth and
development occurs. We are also prepared to enter into and comply with the terms of an
intergovernmental agreement that fully protects the City, and fairly compensates the
Community Development Department for administering the school land dedication
standard.
Respectfully,
The Aspen School District Board of Education
Laura Kornasiewicz
Ernie Fyrwald
Sail y Hansen
Elizabeth Parker
Charla Belinski
... 1
MEMORANDUM
A)
TO:
Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council (\ I.
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director\JJVWJ
Paul Menter, Finance Director
FROM:
COPY:
RE:
Contract for Consultant Services for Land Use Code Revisions
- White & Smith
Resolution No. ~ g, Series of 2006
DATE:
October 23, 2006
SUMMARY: Attached is a contract for professional service related to the moratorium and
amendments to the Land Use Code. Mark White of White and Smith, LLC, will be
working with Community Development staff and Alan Richman on continued work
sessions on Land Use Code revisions and will work hand-in-hand with staff on proposed
legislation. The contract is for $50,000.
Community Development staff will be submitting a supplemental request as part of the
last 2006 supplement appropriation to cover the costs of additional needed services for
the moratorium, including funding for Winter and Associates to complete an update to the
Commercial Design Standards.
Mark White is a former partner with the firm Frielich, Leitner & Carlisle - a nationally
renown plalU1ing law firm that dissolved roughly a year ago. Tyson Smith is a former
associate with Freilich Leitner and has worked as a planner in resort environments.
White and Smith specialize in land use and development codes and come highly
recommended by current and former clients. Please see attachment for additional
information on White & Smith or visit their web site - www.plalU1ingandlaw.com . Mark
White is expected to attend tonight's meeting and can elaborate on his background.
Staff is requesting approval of a service contract with White and Smith, LLC.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ail("~~V
C,/) -) -..., v--r__,t '
1 r
ii' /
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No.~, Series of 2006, the contract for services with
White and Smith. LLC, for professional consulting services related to amendments to the
Land Use Code.
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Resolution
A - Information on White and Smith, LLC.
-----~~-.,'---,--
RESOLUTION~
(Series of 2006)
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
AND WHITE AND SMITH, LLC, FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES RELATED
TO AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE.
WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an "Agreement for
Professional Services" between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and White and Smith, LLC,
a copy of which agreement is attached hereto and made a part thereof, for consulting
service related to the Land Use Code.
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 "Agreement for
Professional Services" between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and White and Smith, LLC,
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 K1anderud, Mayor
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing
is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of
Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held October 23,2006.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Attachments
A - Proposed service contract with White and Smith, LLC.
-~."~-
LAND USE CODE PLANNING SERVICES
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY OF ASPEN,
Colorado, ("City") and White and Smith, LLC ("White & Smith").
For and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
I. Scope of Work. White & Smith, LLC shall assist the City in preparing targeted updates to
its Land Use Code codified as Title 26 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen,
Colorado (hereinafter "LUC"). White & Smith, LLC shall perform in a competent and
professional manner the following Scope of Work The City designates the Director of the
Department of Community Development as the City's Project Manager for this Agreement.
White & Smith, LLC designates Mark White as the Project Manager for White & Smith,
LLC. In performing the Scope of Work, White & Smith, LLC shall coordinate with Alan
Richman Planning Services. The Scope of Work may be amended by mutual agreement of
the City and White ~ Smith, LLC. The Scope of Work is as follows:
(a) Review and assist City staff in preparing community character, downtown and
commercial design guidelines or standards;
(b) Assist City staff in drafting revisions to the LUC that address lodging
development and incentives;
(c) Assist City staff in addressing revising the LUC to address multi-family,
accessory dwelling, infill, and affordable dwelling units.
(d) Assist City staff in developing tools and LUC revisions relating to the mix of
uses, and in particular the mix of commercial uses.
(e) Assist City staff in developing tools and LUC revisions to address the rate of
growth.
(f) Assist City staff in developing other revisions to the LUC, as requested by the
City's Project Manager, up to the remaining contract amount.
For the tasks described in subsections (a) through (e), above, the City staff will have
primary responsibility for preparing the draft revisions to the LUC, with review,
comment, suggestions, and additional language provided by White & Smith, LLC.
White & Smith, LLC shall make up to three (3) trips to the City for purposes of
coordinating with City staff and making presentations to the City Councilor other
departments or agencies. A trip includes one full day and evening presentafion by fhe
Project Manager for White & Smith, LLC or other staff member of White & Smith, LLC
Contract for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith
Page 1
that is acceptable to the City's Project Manager. The Project Manager may authorize, in
writing, additional trips or services on a time and expense basis at the rates described in
paragraph 3, below.
2. Completion. White & Smith 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 March 2007. Upon request of the City, White & Smith
shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of White & Smith'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 Contract Administrator 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 White & Smith.
3. Payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay White & Smith on a time
and materials basis for all work performed. The rates for work performed by White & Smith
shall not exceed $185 per hour for work performed by a Principal of White & Smith, $150
per hour for work performed by an Associate of White & Smith, and $60 per hour for work
performed by Support Staff of White & Smith. All materials and incidentals, including
reasonable travel and lodging expenses, shall be billed at 100% of cost with no additional
administration fee. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties, the total
payments made to White & Smith shall not initially exceed $50,000. White & Smith 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 White
& Smith within ten days from receipt of White & Smith's bill.
4. 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. Authorized sub-contracting shall not relieve White & Smith of any of the
responsibilities or obligations under this agreement. White & Smith shall be and remain
solely responsible to the City for the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of any
subcontractors officers, agents and employees, each of whom shall, for this purpose be
deemed to be an agent or employee of White & Smith 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. It is understood White & Smith may subcontract professional
services and such subcontracting may be authorized by the City's Contract Administrator,
named herein.
5. Termination. White & Smith or the City may terminate this Agreement, without specitying
the reason therefore, by giving two weeks notice, in writing, addressed to the other party,
specitying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after fhe effecfive
date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfinished documents, data,
Contract for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith
Page 2
--1.
studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepared
by White & Smith pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. White
& Smith retains the right to use such materials for business marketing purposes. Notwith-
standing the above, White & Smith 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 White & Smith,
and the City may withhold any payments to White & Smith for the purposes of set-off until
such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from White & Smith may be
determined.
6. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. White & Smith warrants that s/he has not employed or
retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for White &
Smith, to solicit or secure this contract, that s/he has not paid or agreed to pay any company
or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee,
gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of
this contract.
7. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties
that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an
employment relationship. White & Smith 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 White & Smith 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 cO,nducting the work are under the sole
control of White & Smith. 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 White & Smith.
White & Smith shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of White
& Smith's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this
contract. White & Smith shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in cOlU1ection
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 White & Smith and/or White & Smith's employees engaged
in the performance of the services agreed to herein.
8. Indemnification. White & Smith agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its
officers and employees, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of
injury, loss, or damage, including claims arising from. bodily injury, personal injury,
sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss which arise out of or are
in any manner cOlU1ected with this contract, if such injury, loss, or damage is caused by, or
is claimed to be caused by, the negligent act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, or
other fault of White & Smith, any subcontractor of White & Smith, or any officer,
employee, representative, or agent of White & Smith or of any subcontractor of White &
Smith, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of White
& Smith or of any employee of any subcontractor of White & Smith. If it is determined by
Contract for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith
Page 3
the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was
caused in whole or in part by the negligent act, omission, or other fault of the City, its
officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse White & Smith for the portion of the
judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or
employees.
9. White & Smith's Insurance. (a) White & Smith 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 by White & Smith pursuant to Section 8 above. Such
insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract
or by law. White & Smith shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other
obligations 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) White & Smith shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any consultant of White &
Smith 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 by White & Smith 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) Workmen's Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable
laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and
Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of ONE HUNDRED
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000.00) for each accident, ONE HUNDRED
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000.00) disease - policy limit, and ONE
HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000.00) disease - each employee.
Evidence of qualified self.insured status may be substituted for the Workmen's
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 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
Contract for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith
Page 4
I ___
($1,000,000.00) aggregate with respect to each White & Smith's owned, hired and
non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The
policy shaH contain a severability of interests provision.
(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 in (ii) and (iii) shaH be endorsed to include the
City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required
above shaH 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 White & Smith. No additional insured
endorsement to the policy required above shaH contain any exclusion for bodily injury or
property damage arising from completed operations. White & Smith shaH be solely
responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above.
(d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shaH be completed by White & Smith's
insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and
minimum limits are in fuH force and effect, and shaH be reviewed and approved by the City
prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shaH be used. The
certificate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the
policies shaH not be canceled, terminated until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice
has been given to the City.
(e) Failure on the part of White & Smith to procure or maintain policies providing the
required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shaH constitute a material breach of
contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract.
(f) City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any
endorsement thereto.
(g) The parties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on, and does not waive or
intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently
$150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and
protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et
seq., C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its
employees.
10. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado
Intergovemmental 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 White & Smith for inspection during
normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific
Contracl for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith
Page 5
coverages offered by CIRSA. City shall provide White & Smith reasonable notice of any
changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA.
II. Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire
undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or
written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter
thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing.
12. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered to the respective
Contract Administrator listed below or mailed by certified mail return receipt requested, to:
City of Aspen:
Chris Bendon
Community Development Director
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
970.429.2765 - office
970.920.5439 - fax
White & Smith, LLC:
Mark White
Partner
White & Smith, LLC
230 SW Main Street, Suite 209
Lees Summit, MO 54063
816.221.8700 - office
816.221.8702 - fax
13. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status,
affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap,
or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this
contract. White & Smith agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code,
Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment.
14. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate
as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or
condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and
forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver
of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by White & Smith to which the same
may apply and, until complete performance by White & Smith of said term, covenant or
condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this
Agreement or by law despite any such forbearance or indulgence.
15. Execution of Agreement bv Citv. This agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto
and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.
16. 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.
Contract for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith
Page 6
I ~.~ . ..
(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.
ATTESTED BY:
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Steve Barwick, City Manager
Date:
WITNESSED BY:
White and Smith, LLC:
Mark White, Partner
Date:
Contract for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith
Page 7
....~. ,,'
Certification and Supplemental Conditions to Contract for Services -
Conformance with &8-17.5.101. et sell.
Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bill 06-1343
that added a new article 17.5 to Title 8 of the Colorado Revised Statutes entitled "Illegal Aliens -
Public Contracts for Services." This new law prohibits all state agencies and political subdivisions,
including the City of Aspen, from knowingly employing or contracting with an illegal alien to
perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly
employs or contracts with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new law also
requires that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. This
Certification and Supplemental Conditions has been designed to comply with the requirements of this
new law.
Applicabilitv. The certification and supplemental conditions set forth herein shall be required to be
executed by all persons having a public contract for services with the City of Aspen.
Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated
herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen.
"Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in
Public Law 208, 1041h Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as
amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security.
"Contractor" means a person having a public contract for services with the City of Aspen.
"Public Contract for Services" means any type of agreement, regardless of what the agreement
may be called, between the City of Aspen and a Contractor for the procurement of services. It
specifically means the contract or agreement referenced below.
"Services" means the furnishing oflabor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not
involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the
required performance.
PURSUANT TO SECTION 8-17.5-101, C.R.S., et. seq.:
By signing this document, Contractor certifies and represents that at this time:
(i) Contractor does not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien; and
(ii) Contractor has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in
order to verify that it does not employ illegal aliens.
The Public Contract for Services referenced below is hereby amended to include the following
terms and conditions:
1. Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work
under the Public Contract for Services.
2. Contractor shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to certify to the
Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to
perform work under the Public Contract for Services.
3. Contractor has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic
Pilot Program that Contractor does not employ any illegal aliens; and if Contractor has not been
accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to entering into the Public Contract for
Services, Contractor shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall
in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Contractor
shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify
same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Contractor is accepted or the public contract
for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be
required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued.
4. Contractor shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment
screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed.
5. If Contractor obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the
Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien, Contractor shall:
(i) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Contractor
has actual knowledge that the subcontractor is employing or contracting with an
illegal alien; and
(ii) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the
notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or
contracting with the illegal alien; except that Contractor shall not terminate the Public
Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the
subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not
knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien.
6. Contractor shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor
and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and
Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8.17.5.
102 (5), C.R.S.
7. If Contractor violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the
duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public
Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable
for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Contractor's violation of
Subsection 8-17.5-lO2, C.R.S.
Public Contract for Services: Moratorium - White and Smith, LLC
Contractor Signature:
By: Mark White
Partner
White and Smith, LLC
JPW- saved: 8/3/2006-867-M:\city\cityatty\contract\fonns\certification - hb-06-1343.doc
I ,.,..."......_
Z';dnhii- 4
Mark White
S. Mark White is recognized as an expert in zoning and
subdivision law, form-based zoning and New Urbanism,
land use and takings litigation, housing, development of
comprehensive growth management plans, and
implementation systems. He has represented clients at
every level from city, state and local governments, as well
as major private developers, many of whom are involved in
environmental permitting proceedings and takings litigation.
Mr. White is a former partner of Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle.
He received his Bachelor of Arts degree, magna cum laude,
in History and Political Science from Bethany College in
Lindsborg, Kansas, and holds a Juris Doctor and Master of
Regional Planning from the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill. While in law school, Mr. White was a Research
Editor for the North Carolina Journal of International Law
and Commercial Regulation, and worked at the Department
of City and Regional Planning as a Research Assistant in
the Center of Urban and Regional Studies. He is a former
President of the board of directors of the nonprofit
community development group Westside Housing
Organization, and is a member of the North Carolina and
Missouri Bars, the American Institute of Certified Planners,
the American Planning Association, and the Institute of
Transportation Engineers.
Mr. White publishes extensively on planning and land use
issues. Mr. White's articles have appeared in a variety of
notable publications, including "Using Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinances for Traffic Management" (American
Planning Association); "State and Federal Planning
Legislation and Manufactured Housing: New Opportunities
for Affordable, Single-Family Shelter" (THE URBAN
LAWYER); "The Interaction of Land Use Planning and
Transportation Management: Lessons from the American
Experience" (with Freilich) (Transport Policy); and
"Affordable Housing: Proactive and Reactive Planning
Strategies" (American Planning Association, Planning
Advisory Service Report No. 441). Mr. White is also a
frequent speaker at the national meetings of the American
Planning Association, the American Center for National and
International Law, the Congress of New Urbanism, the
University of Wisconsin, and various other professional
organizations.
Tyson Smith
E. Tyson Smith has a diversity of experience in local
government and land use planning law, with particular
focus on growth management and plan implementation. Mr.
Smith's practice in both the public and private sectors has
involved rate of growth ordinances, impact fees,
concurrency management, affordable housing, agricultural
preservation, telecommunications planning, bike and
pedestrian planning, and growth management systems.
Mr. Smith is a former associate at Freilich, Leitner &
Carlisle. He received his Bachelor of Arts degree in
Economics from the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, and he holds a Master of Urban and Regional Planning
and a Juris Doctor from the University of Florida. While in
planning school, Mr. Smith worked as a geographic
information systems research assistant at the University of
Florida's GeoPlan Center. His thesis research centered on
impact fees and their potential usefulness as a tool for
protecting the environment at the local planning level. While
in law school, Mr. Smith's research focused mainly on
growth management issues, techniques, and trends in
Florida and around the nation. As a participant in the
University of Florida Conservation Clinic, he consulted with
local communities on matters of rural preservation and
community redevelopment, employing such innovative
techniques as transfer of development rights, purchase of
development rights, less than fee acquisition, overlay
districts, and tax increment financing.
Before joining W&S, Mr. Smith was a planner with the
Monroe County Division of Growth Management in the
Florida Keys. He later served as the Assistant City Planner
for the City of Key West, Florida. In these positions, Mr.
Smith gained experience in matters of affordable housing,
growth management, transportation, and concurrency, as
well as a number of other local government issues.
I ~..~...... .'.----
Heather Price Smith
Heather heads up our Maryland office, where she has
practiced law since 1991. She brings a wealth of
experience in local government and land use issues. She is
the former Chief Legal Services Officer for the City of
Frederick, and Assistant County Attorney for Anne Arundel
County, Maryland. She holds a Juris Doctor and Master of
Public Administration from the University of Baltimore.
While at Frederick (Maryland's second largest city), Heather
successfully handled a number of issues, including: crisis
management of severe drought; enacting a moratorium on
development; drafting and enactment of a water allocation
ordinance; defending a challenge to a ten commandments
statue within a City park; defending constitutional
challenges based upon the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA); negotiations of
major contracts including the allocation of withdrawals from
the Potomac River and for corresponding sewer allocations;
creation of a noise ordinance used as a model for other
municipalities in Maryland; and enactment of a massage
parlor ordinance.
Heather's speaking experience and publications include a
wide range of topics such as water allocation, adult uses,
intergovernmental agreements, and historic districts. She
has been active in numerous organizations such as the
International Municipal Lawyers Association, Maryland
Municipal League, American Law Institute, and American
Bar Association. Heather is also fluent in Spanish. .
LAND MANAGEMENT
CODES
WHITE & SMITH, LLC
White & Smith's approach to Land
Management Codes produces effective.
user-friendly regulations. Our approach is
based upon the following key principles:
o Community Values. Land
Management Codes should reflect
the values of the community as
expressed during an extensive public
participation process. This process will
involve input and feedback from the
community before key regulations are
drafted.
o Appropriateness. Land Management
Codes should be tailored to the
unique needs of the City's
demographics, environmental
resources, and development
potential.
o Consistency. Land Management
Codes should be consistent with and
implement the Comprehensive Plan.
o Flexibility. Land Management Codes
should accommodate different types
ot development concepts and
standards while maintaining flexibility
in adminisfration.
o User.Friendly. Land Management
Codes shouid will be organized and
graphically illustrated to ensure it is
user-friendly for developers. residents.
staff, and governing bodies. Matrices
will consolidate technical information.
. Legally Enforceable. Land
Management Codes are the
community's legal authority to
approve, deny. or apply conditions to
development proposals. As such. it will
be consistent with state law and
consfitutional principles.
I
Table of Contents
INTRODUCfION .................................................................................3
DEVELOPMENT CODE PROJECfS..................................................... 4
/. SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE............................................... 5
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA COMMUNITY DESIGN REGULATIONS.................. 6
ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.............................. 6
. FREDERICK, MARYLAND LAND MANAGEMENT CODE ................................................ 7
# NORTH AUGUSTA, SOUTH CAROLINA ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS........ 7
QUEEN CREEK, ARIZONA ZONING ORDINANCE ......................................................... 8
ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO ..................................................................................8
SUMMIT COUNfY, UTAH ....................... ....................................................................9
BOZEMAN, MONTANA ........................ ... ............................... ..................................... 9
NYE COUNTY, NEVADA............ ................. ................................................................. 9
CITY OF SUFFOLK, VIRGINIA SMART GROWfH MANAGEMENT STRATEGy................ 10
LIVINGSTON COUNTY, MISSOURI.......... .............. ............................................ .........11
CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA LAND MANAGEMENT CODE.................................. 11
CONCORD/CABARRUS COUNfY, NORTH CAROLINA UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE .......................................... .................................................................. 12
CATAWBA COUNfY, NORTH CAROLINA LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS........... 12
HARFORD COUNTY (2004-PRESENT) AND QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY (2002),
MARYLAND ............. ............................................................................................ .... 13
FORT SMrrH, ARKANSAS PLANS AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.............. 13
CONSULTANT PERSONNEL..............................................................14
MARK WHITE (PARTNER - KANSAS CITY)................................................................ 14
TYSON SMITH (PARTNER - KANsAS CITY)................................................................20
HEATHER PRICE SMITH (BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON) ............................................. 22
REFERENCES ....................................................................................24
TYPICAL CHARGES AND COSTS.......................................................25
White & Smith, LLC I Land Development Codes
Introduction
White & Smith, LtC is a planning and law group with an innovative. national practice.
Prior to the formation of White & Smith. LLC. the principals worked together for five years
at Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle (FL&C). the leading national law and planning firm. White &
Smith continues the tradition that was started by their former firm: a national land use law
practice focused on municipal representation. From 1996 to 2004, former Freilich partner
Mark White was responsible for preparing nearly all of the development code work for
that firm.
White & Smith has consistently demonstrated the ability to work with staft, development
community. citizen groups and governing bodies to develop strategies and alfernatives,
and to achieve consensus. The Project Manager. Mark White, works extensively with
citizen and stakeholder committees in nearly every code drafting project. This involves
preparing and leading committee workshops, charrettes. public meetings. and private
focus groups. Our Codes. such as the San Antonio. Texas Unified Development Code.
have been adopted unanimously even in highly contentious political environments.
(The San Antonio Code was adopted unanimously by the Planning Commission. Zoning
Commission and City Council during a mayoral election).
Through its combination of public tacilitation, expertise in the substantive issues. and
design experience, White & Smith has the tools and personnel to build a successful
constituency for adoption of the Unified Land Development Code.
One of White & Smith's unique assets is an enormous digital library. Our digital library
contains over 67.000 research reports and other documents related to planning issues,
27,800 ordinances and plans from jurisdictions in the United States and internationally.
28,500 digital photographs of innovative development and other situations, and 3.000
urban design and planning graphics. Partnering with professional architects and urban
designers gives White & Smith enormous depth in graphics production.
3
White & Smith, LLC I Land Development Codes
.______1......_.__._._
Development Code Projects
The principals of White & Smith. LLC have unparalleled experience and translating urban
planning policies and objectives into user friendly, enforceable zoning regulations and
land development codes. Their approach features public parficipation and consensus
building, followed by the drafting and facilitation ot developmenf standards and
procedures that work together. Representative clients include:
St. Petersburg, Florida
San Antonio, Texas
Hillsborough County, Florida
City of Suffolk, Virginia
North Augusta, South Carolina
Chapel Hill. North Carolina
Concord/Cabarrus County,
North Carolina
Bozeman. Montana
Ada County (Idaho) Highway
District
Catawba County, North
Carolina
Roanoke. Virginia
Fort Smith. Arkansas
Frederick. Maryland
Queen Creek, Arizona
Albuquerque, New
Mexico
Prince George's County.
Maryland
Nashua. New Hampshire
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina
Roanoke, Virginia
Harford County.
Maryland
Queen Anne's County.
Maryland
Livingston County.
Missouri
Not only have these projects involved comprehensive development codes. they have
also been adopted and implemented. often in the tace ot very challenging political
and legal environments. In addition to being implemented locally, these Codes have
won acclaim from national smart growth and planning organizations as models for other
communities.
Specific project descriptions begin in the next page.
4
White & Smith, LLC I Land Development Codes
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS UNIFIED DEVElOPMENT CODE
Mark White prepared a Unified Development Code
tor San Antonio (pop. 1,144.646) to implement the
City's Master Plan. This Code is the most extensive
application of Smart Growth principles by any large
jurisdiction in the nation.
The Code incorporates principles of New Urbanism.
establishing not only a Traditional Neighborhood
Development (TND) use pattern. but also
Commercial Centers in residential districts, transit-
oriented development. and grayfield development
guidelines.
The Code establishes maximum parking and "build-
to" lines. as well as street design guidelines for New
Urbanist developments. conservation subdivisions.
and convenlional development. Environmental
criteria include tree preservation and floodplain
management. Historic design guidelines protecl
the City's rich historic heritage. Urban design
guidelines also protect the City's renowned
Riverwalk district.
The Unified Development Code is included in the
Congress for the New Urbanism, New Urbanist
Codes list and recognized as a model New Urbanist
code in American Planning Association. Codifying
the New Urbanism (Planning Advisory Service Report
No. 526. 2004).
The Unified Development Code is online at
http://www.sanantonio.gov/dsd/udc/index.asp.
Award: 2001 Texas/American Planning
Association Award.
Budget - $250,000
Status - Adopted.
Reference:
Bill Telford
Planning Manager
PO Box 839966
San Antonio. TX 78283
(210) 207-7879 phone
wtelford@ci.sat.tx.us
5
I
\Nbite & Smith, LLC I Land Development Codes
HlllSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA COMMUNITY DESIGN REGULATIONS
Hillsborough County (Tampa. Florida) (pop. 940.484)
embarked on an ambitious program to provide effective
community and civic design regulations that reflect its
diverse neighborhoods and communifies.
Mark White assisted the Hillsborough County Planning
Commission to provide updated Smart Growth principles
for the County's Comprehensive Plan. Concurrent with
this effort, the County also prepared community and
sector plans which incorporate principles ranging from the
New Urbanism to rural design. To implement these plans.
Mark White prepared community design regulations to
provide state-of-the-art processing procedures and
development standards for these diverse development
forms. These included the following: Traditional
Neighborhood Development Ordinance, transfer of
development rights regulations, commercial retrofit
regulations. and rural design regulations. The reguiations
are included in the Congress for the New Urbanism, New
Urbanist Codes list and recognized as a model New
Urbanist code in American Planning Association. Codifying
the New Urbanism (Planning Advisory Service Report No.
526,2004).
The Community Design Regulations are online at
municode.com ' click Article V (Development Options)
(http://www.municode.com/Resources/gateway.asp ?pid
=1 2399&sid=9).
PETER , F D DEVEl
Mark White and HDR collaborated to prepare a form.
based Land Management Code to implement a vision
driven plan in this primarily built out City of 248,000. The
zoning districts follow the City's Vision 2020 plan's division of
the City into Neighborhoods. Corridors and Centers. Form
based design standards are included for both the City's
traditional neighborhoods and corridors and its suburban
areas. Additional design standards apply to three distinct
Centers.
The proposed Land Development Regulations are online
at http://www.stpete.org/LDRproposed2.htm (note: the
graphics are removed in order to keep file size
manageable). Information on the code update process Is
online at the Development Services Department website
at http://www.stpete.org/devserv.htm.
Budget - $200.000
Status - Pending adoption
Status: Adopted
Budget - $198.000
Reference:
Steve Gouldman (former Senior Planner)
Molloy & James
325 South Boulevard. Tampa. Florida. 33606-
2150
(813) 254.7157
sgouldmam@mjlaw.us
Reference:
Bob Jeffrey
Manager. Urban Design & Historic
Preservation
City of St. Petersburg
PO Box 2842
Sf. Petersburg. FL
(727) 551-3254 phone I
bob.jeffrey@stpete.org
6
-I
White & Smith, LLC I Land Development Codes
FREDERICK, MARYlAND LAND MANAGEMENT CODE
The City of Frederick (population 52.7 67) hired Mark White
to draft a Land Management Ordinance that ties
together the zoning, subdivision, environmental and urban
design regulations in this historic city. As part of the code
development process. Mark White identified cutting edge
codes for similar cities around the nation. developed an
initial code outline. and prepared the development code
drafts. The Code updates the City's historic district
regulations (Frederick has the nation's largest historic
district I. establishes performance-based based standards
for new uses (a technique known as "impact zoning"). and
has completely reformatted the City's disjointed zoning
and subdivision regulations into a cohesive and coherent
document. In addition. Mr. White drafted a design overlay Status _ Adopted
district for Frederick's emerging riverwalk economic
development area, Carroll Creek. This ordinance was
adopted in 2004.
The Land Management Ordinance is online at
http://www.cityoffrederick.com/departments/ c urrenlPlan
ning/bboard.htm.
Budget. $150.000
Reference:
Catherine Parks
Chief of Current Planning
Department of Planning
101 North Court Street
Frederick, MD 21701
(30 I) 694-1770 phone
cparks@cityoffrederick.com
NORTH AUGUSTA, SOUTH CAROLINA ZONING AND DEVElOPMENT
STANDARDS
The City of North Augusta. South Carolina (pop. 15.574)
retained Mark White to update the City's Zoning and
Development Standards Ordinance. Mr. White modified
the Ordinance to include urban design and "use patterns"
which provided a visually-oriented and consolidated
regulatory framework for typical or innovative
development patterns; updated the procedures,
administration and definitions to provide a more user-
friendly process; updated the zoning districts; and
developed an adequate public facilities ordinance. Key
concepts from the development code are being
incorporated into a corridor study and implementing
ordinances pursuant to a separate contract with the City
and Aiken County.
White & Smith. LLC. through separate contracts. has
performed several additional tasks for the City:
Drafted corridor overlay regulations that establish
form-based zoning standards and infrastructure
requirements along the City's major corridors; and
Drafted a vested rights ordinance to implement a
new state vested rights statute.
Status - Draft Development Code and
corridor overlay regulations under staff review.
Vested rights ordinance adopted.
Budget. $159.000 ($99.000 for Code. $60.000
for corridor study and form-based
code)
Reference:
G. M. "Skip" Grkovic. AICP, Director
803-441-4221
400 East Buena Vista A venue
P.O. Box 6400
North Augusta. South Carolina 29861,6400
(803) 441-4288 I Fax 441-4232
7
...
White & Smith, LLC I Land Development Codes
QUEEN CREEK, ARIZONA ZONING ORDINANCE
Mark White drafted the Zoning Ordinance tor the Town of
Queen Creek Ipopulation 4.500) in the Phoenix. Arizona
metropolitan area. The Zoning Ordinance implements a
General Plan recently completed for the Town. The
Ordinance is tied to a "tiered" growth management
system developed for Queen Creek by FL&C which
encourages growth in the Town Center and protects its
rural and agricultural areas.
The Zoning Ordinance includes adequate public facilities
standards and urban/architectural design requirements.
Innovative concepts include site design requirements for
retail uses, illustrated lighting standards. and transfer of
development rights (TDRs) procedures designed to
protect agricultural lands and environmentally-sensitive
areas. The ordinance permits cluster developments and
density bonuses for open space and agricultural
preservation. The ordinance features numerous pictures
and graphics. Its design requirements for big box retail
were featured in a recent Zoning Practice article by the
American Planning Association [see "Regulatory
Strategies for Big Boxes" [December 2005)).
The Zoning Ordinance is online at
http://www.queencreek.org/T ownHall/DocsOrdinances/
ZoningOrdinance .shtml.
ALBUQUERQU
NEW MEXICO
Mark White is preparing a set of "mixed use" zones to
implement the City's Planned Growth Strategy (PGS) and
a planning study for the Volcano Heights area. The PGS is
a comprehensive citywide growth management strategy
that addresses development impacts on infrastructure.
regional growth patterns. and urban design. The Volcano
Heights study was prepared in response to a charrette
that establishes new planning policies in an area
surrounding the Petroglyph National Monument.
The mixed use zones are a set of form,based design
standards that establish regulations for planned villages,
commercial centers, conservation subdivisions, campus
and employment development. and infill development.
As part of this process, impact fee reductions and
procedural incentives will be established to encourage
development efficiencies.
In addition. White & Smith. LLC has also been retained to
identify growth management strategies for Volcano
Heights and throughout the City. Potential strategies
include an adequate public facilities ordinance (APFO).
permit allocations. and similar tools.
Status: Adopted.
Budget - $89.000
Reference:
John Kross. Assistant Town Manager
22350 S. Ellsworth Road
Queen Creek. AZ 85242
(480) 987-9887
jkross@queencreek.org
#"
..IJ
~r, , .
t
'I'
Budget - $100,000
Status - staff review
Reterence:
Susan Johnson, Planned Growth Strategy
Manager
City Council. 9th Floor
City County Government Building
One Civic Plaza
Albuquerque. NM 871 03
[50S) 768-3189
8
White & Smith, LLC I Land Development Codes
SUMMIT COUNTY, UTAH
Mark White prepared a General Plan update and a
development code for the Snyderville Basin. The
Snyderville Basin of Summit County (population 33.B43) is a
rapidly growing area outside of Park City. The Snyderville
Basin Development Code replaced a generic point
system that had proven ineffective at controlling growth
with a predictable zoning system. It established
procedures for resolving vested rights claims. and included
updated and progressive growth management controls.
The code was followed by a comprehensive update of
the County's zoning regulations.
Mr. White also prepared an update of the General Plan's
Housing Element. school concurrency regulations. and
landscaping regulations.
The current version of the Snyderville Basin Development
Code is online at
http://www.summitcounty.org/communitydevelopment/
snyderville.html
N.
While at Freilich. Leitner & Carlisle. Mark White and Tyson
Smith assisted the City of Bozeman (population 27.509) in
preparing a new Unified Development Code (UDO). The
UDO combines the City's zoning and subdivision
regulations. It includes standards for entryway corridors,
casinos. signs and telecommunications. and updated
design and neighborhood preservation standards.
The Unified Development Ordinance is online at
http://www.bozeman.net/planning/UDO/UPDA TE/ Adopte
d~TexC 1 O~ 1~2005/UDO_I O~ 1_2005.htm.
NVE COU ,N ADA
Mark White assisted Nye County (population 32.485) in
developing impact fees and negotiating development
agreements. Mr. White drafted the County's impact fee
ordinances, and Impact Fee Manual and an
intergovernmental agreement. Mr. White preparing
revised development agreement ordinances and a
Unified Development Code.
Budget. $50.000 (code revisions)
BOZEMAN
UNIFIED
DEVElOPMENT
ORDINANCE
Reference:
Candice Trummell. Chair. Nye County
Commission
250 North Highway 160. Suite 3. Pahrump, NV
89060
(775) 910-9532
9