The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.council.regular.20061211 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA December 11, 2006 5:00 P.M. I. Call to Order II. Roll Call 11/. Moment of Silence IV. Scheduled Public Appearances a) All Star Commuter Awards 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 VII. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) a) Apres X Concerts - Noise Variance Request b) Resolution #100, 2006 - Y, Sales Tax Transit Budget for 2007 c) Minutes - November 27,2006 VIII. First Reading of Ordinances a) Ordinance #49,2006 - Wienerstube GMQS; Subdivision P.H. 1/8/07 b) Ordinance #50,2006 - Water Service Agreement - Gardner Bishop P.H. 1/8/07 IX. Public Hearings a) Resolution #101,2006 - Temporary Use - Sleigh Rides at Golf Course b) Ordinance #48,2006 - 2007 Fees c) Ordinance #47, 2006 - Supplemental Appropriations d) Ordinance #42, 2006 - Hotel Jerome PUD Amendment e) Ordinance #44,2006 - 134 E. Hyman Hearthstone House Historic Designation continue to 2/26/07 . f) Ordinance #46, 2006 - Civic Master Plan Adoption X. Action Items a) Resolution #98, 2006 - Failed Motions and Tie Votes - Sky Hotel b) Resolution #102,2006 - Contract to Purchase 312 West Hyman XI. Adjournment Next Regular Meeting January 8. 2007 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. V, \ a.. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk DATE: December 5, 2006 RE: Aspen Ski Company/ESPN Apres X Concert Series January 26 and 27, Wagner Park SUMMARY: Aspen Skiing Company in conjunction with ESPN has requested a special event permit for two Apres X concerts January 26 and 27, 2007, in Wagner Park (map ofthe venue attached). Friday concert starts at 10:30 p.m. and the X-games events at Buttermilk end at 9:30 p.m. Saturday concert starts at 10:00 p.m. and events at Buttermilk end at 9:00 p.m. These concert times are scheduled to give people at least an hour to get into town if they are at the X games at Buttermilk. The special event committee reviewed and recommended approval of the Apres X concerts with some conditions as a result of experience with previous concerts in Wagner Park. The concerts are proposed to start past the time allowed for noise under the City Code. Council has to review and approve or disapprove the request for a noise variance from 9:30 p.m. to II :45 p.m. for the Apres X concerts. The applicants have asked to be allowed to do some site breakdown between the close of the concert until 2 a.m., only following Saturday's concert. This late activity will be specified in the notification to property owners. DISCUSSION: The Special Event Committee met with the Ski Company, Avalanche Production and ESPN November 9th The applicants do not yet know who the entertainers will be. Section 18.04.050(a)(3) allowed noises states (3) Special Events or other events to which the public is invited with the following conditions: (a) The maximum decibel level at the perimeter of the event does not exceed 100 decibels; and (b) Amplified noise shall be created only between the hours of9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.; and (c) Neighbors within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the site of the proposed sound source are notified. Such notification must be in writing and be done seven (7) days prior to the starting time of the event; and (d) The arrangement of loud speakers or the sound instruments must be such that it minimizes the disturbance to others resulting from the position or orientation of the speakers or from atmospherically or geographically caused dispersal of sound beyond the property lines. This event is open to the public and is free and is advertised as such. The decibel level will exceed 100 decibels at times. The applicant states the sound will be directed south, toward the middle of the park, and downward, which should help with the noise levels at the edges of the park. If approved, this will be the third year of Apres X concerts in Wagner Park. There have been no noise complaints. The applicants have worked with the Wheeler and the Crystal Palace during sound checks to make sure the sound did not interfere with either business's show and have met with the Wheeler and Crystal Palace about this year's event. The Ski Company and ESPN have met with Mountain Chalet and Prospector Lodges and the construction at Dancing Bear and discussed noise and parking mitigation. Council should have review authority on requested noise variance for these concerts because of the proposed hour until 11 :45 p.m., breakdown until 2 a.m. and the location in the middle of the commercial core. Council should be aware of the approved closure of Durant street. Council has previously approved noise variances for the Core Party in 2004, 2005 and 2006 at the corner of Cooper and Galena, which went until midnight, as well as the Apres X concerts in Wagner Park until 11 }O p.m. Council allowed the applicants to go until 2 a.m. for breakdown in 2006. OTHER ISSUES: The Special Event Committee addressed issues arising from past concerts in Wagner Park. The most serious issue from 2005 was the amount of broken glass left in Wagner Park. For 2006, the applicants fenced the entire venue with a fence that met the requirements of the parks department. There were security personnel checking bags for glass at these entrances. This helped with broken glass in the park. This issue will never be totally mitigated. The applicants worked with RFT A and the police department on their transportation plan as loading of buses after the concert at Rubey Park was a mess. The applicants request Durant street between Hunter and Aspen streets be closed to all but bus traffic to facilitate transportation and crowd management. The special event committee has a policy NOT to allow closure of Durant street; however, the applicants worked with RFT A and with the police department and this is a strong recommendation from those departments. A map is attached showing how the staging and loading of local and down valley buses would work. The applicant will provide security presence at Rubey Park until 2:30 a.m. There will also be additional security on the mall before, during and after the event. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There will be overtime costs to the police department, the parks department and the parking department. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends support of this event. The applicants continue to work with staff to refine the event and to try and make it work more smoothly for the community. ALTERNATIVES: The alternative is not to approve the concert. The Skiing Company states they "hope to continue creating exceptional spectator venues which establish Aspen/Snowmass as a cutting edge leader in resort activities". PROPOSED MOTION: By approving the consent calendar, Council is approving a noise variance for the Aspen Skiing Company Apres X concerts in Wagner Park January 26 and 27 from 9:30 p.m. to 11 :45 p.m. (or to 2 a.m. for breakdown) CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachment Map of venue Special Event Application APRES X CONCERT SERIES JANUARY 26 AND 27, 2007 Special Event Checklist 1 Summary of Event YES 2 Parks Permit or Evidence of Permission to Use Premises TBD 3 Contact Information YES 4 Sales Tax/Business License TBD 5 Site Plan Route Map YES 6 Security Plan YES 7 Medical Plan YES 8 Proof of Insurance Naming City Co-insured YES 9 Accessibility Plan YES 10 Alcohol Permit Yes 11 Food Permit NOT APPLICABLE 12 Sanitation and Recycling Plan YES 13 Notification to Adjacent Property Owner(s) of Anticipated Noise YES 14 Parking and transportation Plan YES Page 1 of? Summary of Event Event Title APRES X CONCERT SERIES JANUARY 26 AND 27, 2007 W agner ~ark Free Concerts Over Two Nights Location Type of Event Setup Event Starts Event Ends Dismantle 1/22 Day of the Week: Monday 9am 1/26 1/27 Day of the Week: Friday Day of the Week: Saturday 10:30 pm 10:00 pm 1/26 1/27 Day of the Week: Friday Day of the Week: Saturday 11 :45 pm 11 :45 pm 1/27-1/28 1/28 1/29 11 :45 pm -2:00 am 9 am- 5 pm Day of the Week: Sun 9 am - 5 pm Day ofthe Week: Monday DESCRIPTION The concerts will be held on Friday and Saturday nights, January 26 and 27, 2007 as part of the celebration for the Winter X Games 11. Friday night's concert will be held from 1 0:30pm until 11 :45pm with events at Buttermilk ending at 9:30pm. Saturday night's concert will be held from I 0:00pm until 11 :45pm with events at Buttermilk ending at 9:00pm. Attendance each night is estimated at 5,000 - 7,000. There will be an opening act for 15-30 minutes, a 10-20 minute changeover followed by the main act playing for about 40-50 minutes. At this time no artists have been confirmed. Friday's artists will be of the Alternative Rock/Pop/Dance genre and Saturday's artists will be of the Urban/R&B/Dance genre. Expected Attendance: 5,000 - 7,000 The concert is free and open to the public of all ages. Contact Information First Event contact person: Business phone number: Home phone number: Cell phone number: Mailing address: David Laughren, Avalanche Productions, Inc. 970-544-2068 970-925-1461 970-948-9930 Box 1265, Aspen, CO 81612 Second Event contact person: Michelle Plotkin Business phone number: 310-642-1506 Cell phone number: 860-559-3707 (primary) ESPN contact person: Business phone number: Cell phone number: ASC contact: Business phone number: Cell phone number: Mailing address: Deane Swanson, ESPN 860-766-7610 213-305-9849 John Rigney 970-300-7030 970-618-9165 C/O Aspen Skiing Company 117 AABC, Aspen, CO 81611 Page 2 of? SITE PLAN - See Attached Map WAGNERPARK A mobile 60' x 45' stage will be placed on Wagner Park at the North end. This stage is self contained within a semi trailer. It takes about 3 hours to set up and take down. The stage deck is about 5' high and there is a load bearing, hydraulic roof at about 30' high. The stage will play south towards Aspen Mountain. Behind the stage will be one construction type trailer for band dressing room or production and one 20x20 platform with a tent top attached to the back of the stage to serve as a loading dock. Power will be drawn from the existing power drop in the North East corner of the park and from generators placed on Monarch Street. The stage, trailers and other equipment will be placed in position starting Monday, Jan. 22 beginning at 9 am. The tents will be erected on Wednesday and Thursday, Jan. 24, 25. The port-a-potties will be placed on the morning of Friday, Jan 27. The stage, trailers, tents and potties will be removed from the park by the end of the day January 29. The concert venue will include the entire park. The park will be fenced on all four sides with six foot high chain link panels pounded into the ground. The fence will be grounded to insure safety for the spectators. On the west edge ofthe park (Monarch Street), about halfway south from the stage, will be the sponsor/press tent. This will be a 40'x 60' tent with a 20'x 60' patio area in front. This 60'x 60' area will be a 4' raised decking. In the south western and south eastern corners ofthe park will be clusters of 8-12 public port-a-potties. Along the south side of the park (Durant Street) will be a 20'x 60' tent for sponsor displays, which may include cars and other sponsor displays within the tent. The north wall of the sponsor display tent will be a clear side wall. On the East side of the park there will be a 10'x20' tent for sale of band, X Games, and Aspen/Snowmass merchandise. The west wall of this merchandise tent will also be a clear side wall. There will be two main public entrances to the park. One entrance will be on the Mill Street Mall at the intersection ofthe Cooper Street Mall. The second entrance (with multiple entrance points) will be off of Durant Street at the south end of the park. Once the concert is over, additional exit points will be opened along the Mill Street Mall and along Monarch Street. Emergency exits are located all along the perimeter of the park. Weare requesting the right to operate a free, open bar offering beer and mixed drinks inside the sponsor/press tent. Bar service will only be available for properly credentialed guests. Alcohol will remain within the sponsor/press perimeter fence area. We will apply for a special events liqueur license through a local non-profit organization. Weare requesting to place within the park venue Aspen/Snowrnass, ESPN and other sponsor banners. Reauested No Parkin!!: notification si!!:ns . Jan. 15-21: Signs notifying No Parking on both sides of Monarch St between Durant and Hyman from Jan. 22-Jan 29 . Jan. 22-26: Signs notifying No Parking on south and north sides of Durant St. between Hunter St. and Aspen St. on Jan. 27 from 7PM-2:30AM Reauested street and parkin!!: closures: . Jan. 22 - Jan. 29 ALL DAY: Monarch Street closed to auto traffic and parking between Durant and Hyman . One half of Willoughby parking lot on Dean Street Page3 of? . Jan. 26 & 27 - 7:00pm - 2:30am: Durant Street closed to through traffic and parking between Hunter Street and Aspen Street Both sides of Monarch St. between Hyman and Cooper will be used for the parking, storage and operation of the following: 1 Storage Container 110'x32' Office Trailer 1 10'x42' Video Truck Delivery location Dumpsters Security Stand Down/Check-in Tent (15x15) w/Heat Heavy equipment parking (1 Forklift, light towers), Gator, Back up Genie for stage Propane Storage Tour bus Parking Generator location if deemed necessary Sponsor/Press/StaffiV olunteer Check -in Locations A 15' fire lane down the middle of the street will be kept open and clear. The eastern half of Cooper St. would be used for sponsor/press parking during the shows. . Do you require a street to be posted "No Parking"? . Do you need any cones or barricades? # Cones: TBD # Barricades: 10-12 . Will you need any streets cleaned? Yes, on Jan. 24 and 25 ifthere is snow on Monarch St between Hyman and Durant Yes Yes # No Parking signs: 36 + Security Plan ESPN event security professionals will manage the event security plan. Security personnel: First Line Security Address: TBD Telephone: TBD Will law enforcement services be required? YES, to assist with a safe egress process at the end ofthe concert. Also to assist with the cross walk crossing as stated in the transportation plan and to oversee activities at Rubey Park and on Durant St. Plan to secure event: Inside The Venue A security presence will be strong in and around the venue from 1 hour before the event until 1 hour after the event. The majority of security will be provided by private security crews. Private security will number 25-50 persons and will be placed in the following areas: . Entrance / Exit Gates - From 8 pm until approximately Midnight. Security persons at these gates will be responsible for checking all bags and coats for glass bottles and other items banned from the park Also assist with a safe and orderly egress from the concert thru all exit gates. . Stage / Production Area - Continuous from the time stage and production equipment are in place until it is removed . Traffic barricades - From 8 pm until approximately 11:45 pm . Crowd barricades - From 8 pm until approximately 11 :45 pm . Front of stage barricade - From 8 pm until approximately 11 :45 pm Page 4 of1 . Sponsor Tent area - continuous coverage from the time tent is outfitted to the time the furnishings are removed Outside The Venue A security presence will be provided after the concerts on Friday and Saturday nights to assist with the egress and with security at Rubey Park for the loading of buses and communication with transit patrons Private security will number 20 persons post concert and will be placed in the following areas: . Traffic barricades - 10 guards from 7:00 pm - 2:30 am along the Durant St. closure . Bus loading locations - 8 guards from 11: 15 pm - 2:30 am; security person at each bus loading location for communication, messaging and presence . Roving - 2 guards from 11: 15 pm - 2:30 am; roving security at Rubey Park Medical Plan An ALS ambulance will be on site to handle any medical incidents. It will be positioned at the corner of Mill Street and Durant, across from McDonalds. It will act as both a first aid station and transport if needed. Staffing will be two Paramedic and one EMT. The ambulance will be on site from 8:30 pm until Y, hour after the concert is over. Insurance Requirements Event Holder Insurance Aspen Skiing Company (on file with the city) Accessibility Plan Will there be a clear path of travel throughout your event venue? There will be a.clear path of travel from the end ofthe Cooper St. mall to a reserved ADA only viewing area. Have you developed a disabled parking and/or transportation plan (including the use of public transportation or shuttle services) for your event? Yes Existing City of Aspen parking and RAFT A public transportation include required services. There will be two disabled parking spots on Mill Street between the end of the Mill St. mall and Durant St. Will a minimum of 10% of portable restrooms at your event be accessible? Yes Will all food, beverage and vending areas be accessible? Yes Will all signage be placed so pedestrian flow will not obstruct its visibility? Yes Mitil!ation of Impact A copy ofthe attached neighbor notification notice that will be hand delivered to all residents and businesses potentially affected by the concerts. Letters will be distributed 3 weeks prior to the concert. Sanitation & Recvclinl! Plan Number of trash cans with lids: 30-50 open boxes lined with bags, no lids Number of dumpsters with lids: 2 large dumpsters on Monarch where all trash will be collected Number of recycling containers: 10-12 in the park and 1 dumpster on Monarch where all trash will be collected Sanitation company: Wally's Please describe your plan: Cardboard trash box containers lined with plastic trash bags will be placed about every 50 feet on Wagner Park. These will be removed each night after the event Page 5 of? Portable Restrooms Do you plan to provide portable restroom facilities at your event? Yes If yes, total number of portable toilets: 20-30 Number of ADA-accessible portable toilets: 3, one at each cluster of port-a-johns Handwashing station: 3 If these will be on City property, describe location: Ten at the South end of the park at the corner of Monarch and Durant. Ten at the South end of the park at the corner of Mill and Durant. Five on the Mill St. Mall outside the venue fencing. Restroom company: TBD Equipment setup Date: Equipment pickup Date: Jan. 26 Jan. 29 Time: 2pm Time: 9 am Notification to Property Owners Such notification will be in writing and hand delivered prior to the Special Event permit hearing. A copy of the letter to be delivered to neighbors at addresses in close proximity to the venue will be delivered to the Aspen City Clerk. Parkin!! & Transportation Plan Methods for mitigating traffic congestion: . All advertising and event notices will encourage the use of alternative transportation and announce the street and parking closures. · Durant Street will be closed between Hunter Street and Aspen Street from 7:00pm until 2:30am on Friday, Jan. 26th and Saturday, Jan. 27th. This area will be used by RFTA and ancillary bus providers as a staging and loading area for post concert and end of evening bus service. Buses will stage between Hunter Street and Rubey Park. They will then load for downvalley routes at Rubey Park and Snowmass Village and Aspen/Brush Creek Lot routes will load in front of Wagner Park. The south end of the street will serve as a queuing area to buses. A middle lane will serve as an access and exit lane for buses getting into position to load and buses leaving on routes. The north side ofthestreet access will be controlled by security and used for local access traffic and emergency vehicle access only. · RFT A will ramp up their regularly scheduled service to support the downvalley and local routes. In addition to the increased RFTA service, ESPN and ASC will provide up to 9 additional buses to run local, Snowmass Village and Brush Creek/Intercept Lot service from 11 :30 pm - 2:30 am immediately following each show. This will free up RFTA buses to focus on downvalley routes which has historically been the primary service during these post concert hours. Noise Ordinance Special Events, if they are open to the public, can exceed the zone-district noise levels up to 100 decibels between 9 am and 9 pm. We request a noise variance until 11 :45 pm on Jan. 26 and 27, 2007. Sound checks will occur on Friday and Saturday between 5:30 and 7:30 pm. Ordinance l8-04.050(A)(3) governs permits for Special Events or other events to which the public is invited with the following conditions: (a) The maximum decibel level at the perimeter of the event does not exceed 100 decibels The maximum decibel level at the perimeter of the event will at times exceed 100 decibels (b) Amplified noise shall be created only between the hours of9:00 am and 9:00 pm We request a noise variance until 11:45 pm on Jan. 26 and 27, 2007 (c) Neighbors within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the site of the proposed sound source are notified. Such notification will be in writing and hand delivered at least fourteen (14) days prior to the start Page 6 of? of the event. (d) The arrangement of loud speakers or the sound instruments must be such that it minimizes the disturbance to others resulting from the position or orientation ofthe speakers or from atmospherically or geographically caused dispersal of sound beyond the property lines. Yes (e) All reasonable measures are taken to baffle or reduce noise impacts on the neighbors. Yes (f) Event organizers agree to cooperate with the Police Department in addressing noise complaints from neighbors, which may include the termination of the event. Yes Page 7 of? APRES X CONCERT SERIES JANUARY 26 AND 27, 2007 December, 2006 To Whom It May Concern: As the eyes of the world descend upon Aspen/Snowmass for Winter X Games 11, ESPN and Aspen Skiing Company are again planning to host the Apres X Concert Series. Based on last year's success we are again hoping to bring the excitement and energy from Buttermilk into downtown Aspen. The Apres X Concerts are two free and open to the public concerts held in Wagner Park on January 26 and 27,2007. These outdoor concerts are designed to bring the action and the influencers downtown to highlight what Aspen has to offer, and showcase what makes Aspen such a spectacular place to live and visit. In lieu of the traditional concert locations such as nightclubs, stadiums and conference centers, ESPN and Aspen Skiing Company have chosen to host the Apres X concerts in Wagner Park to accommodate a wider audience, multiple show dates and to deliver the City of Aspen's mind/body/spirit message. These concerts will feature nationally recognized recording artists in a venue unique to Aspen. We hope these concerts will appeal to local residents, visiting guests and the scores of people that will no doubt hear about this incredible event, which is important to our future growth as a resort. Please refer to the following information and the attached map for an explanation of how the venue will be set up and how it will operate. Location Wagner Park Type of Event Free Concerts Over Two Nights Setup 1/22 9am Event Starts 1/26 1/27 10:30 pm 10:00 pm Event Ends 1/26 1/27 11 :45 pm 11 :45 pm Dismantle 1/27 - 1/28 1/28 1/29 11 :45pm - 2:00am 9 am- 5 pm 9am-5pm The concerts will be held on Friday and Saturday nights, January 26 and 27, 2007 from 10:30-11:45 pm on Friday and 10:00-11 :45pm on Saturday. Attendance each night is estimated at 5,000 -7,000. There will be an opening act that plays 15-30 minutes, a 10-20 minute changeover followed by the main act playing for about 40-50 minutes. It is important to everyone that Wagner Park is handled properly during the setup, teardown and the actual concerts. A mobile 60' x 45' stage will be placed on Wagner Park at the North end. This stage is self contained within a semi trailer. It takes about 3 hours to set up and take down. The stage deck is about 5' high and there is a load bearing, hydraulic roof at about 30' high. The stage will play south towards Aspen Mountain. Behind the stage will be one construction type trailer for band dressing room or production and one 20x20 platform with a tent top attached to the back of the stage to serve as a loading dock. Power will be drawn from the existing power drop in the North East corner of the park and from generators placed on Monarch Street. The stage, trailers and other equipment will be placed in position starting Monday, Jan. 22 beginning at 9 am. The tents will be erected on Wednesday and Thursday, Jan. 24, 25. The port-a-potties will be placed on the morning of Friday, Jan 27. The stage, trailers, tents and potties will be removed from the park by the end of the day January 29. The concert venue will include the entire park. The park will be fenced on all four sides with six foot high chain link panels pounded into the ground. The fence will be grounded to insure safety for the spectators. On the west edge of the park (Monarch Street), about half way south from the stage, will be the sponsor/press tent. This will be a 40'x 60' tent with a 20'x 60' patio area in front. This 60'x 60' area will be a 4' raised decking. In the south western and south eastern corners of the park will be clusters of8-l2 public port-a-potties. Along the south side of the park (Durant Street) will be a 20'x 60' tent for sponsor displays, which may include cars and other sponsor displays within the tent. The north wall of the sponsor display tent will be a clear side wall. On the East side of the park there will be a 10 'x20' tent for sale of band, X Games, and Aspen/Snowmass merchandise. The west wall ofthis merchandise tent will also be a clear side wall. There will be two main public entrances to the park. One entrance will be on the Mill Street Mall at the intersection ofthe Cooper Street Mall. The second entrance (with multiple entrance points) will be off of Durant Street at the south end of the park. Once the concert is over, additional exit points will be opened along the Mill Street Mall and along Monarch Street. Emergency exits are located all along the perimeter of the park. Weare requesting to place within the park venue Aspen/Snowmass, ESPN and other sponsor banners. Reauested No Parkin!! notification si!!ns . Jan. 15-21: Signs notifying No Parking on both sides of Monarch St between Durant and Hyman from Jan. 22-Jan 29 . Jan. 22-26: Signs notifying No Parking on south and north sides of Durant St. between Hunter St. and Aspen St. on Jan. 27 from 7PM-2:30AM Reauested street and parkin!! closures: . Jan. 22 - Jan. 29 ALL DAY: Monarch Street closed to auto traffic and parking between Durant and Hyman . One half of Willoughby parking lot on Dean Street . Jan. 26 & 27 _ 7:00pm - 2:30am: Durant Street closed to through traffic and parking between Hunter Street and Aspen Street Paid security will be on-site to check bags and coats for items not allowed into the park and to serve as crowd control. Durant Street between Hunter Street and Aspen Street will be closed to through traffic on Friday and Saturday evening from 7pm - 2:30am. A coutrolled lane will be available for local traffic going to residences and hotels within the street closure. The street will be used as bus staging, loading, queuing and for emergency access during and after the event. The use ofRFTA bus service and public transportation will be encouraged within all concert messaging. A noise variance until 11 :45 pm on Jan. 26 and 27, 2007 will be requested. The arrangement ofloud speakers or the sound instruments will be such that it minimizes the disturbance to others resulting from the position or orientation of the speakers. All reasonable measures will be taken to baffle or reduce noise impacts on the neighbors. Sound checks will occur on Friday and Saturday between 5:30 and 7:30 pm. Event organizers have agreed to cooperate with the Police Department in addressing noise complaints from neighbors. Minimizing the impacts of our events on the surrounding homeowners and businesses in this downtown area is of concern to us. If you would like to talk to someone about any questions or issues please call Ryan Miller at 300-7035 and we will address your concerns. Our success over the last few years in executing events of this nature is largely due to Aspen's willingness to embrace opportunities that offer communal benefits. Please know that your support is greatly appreciated. Kind Regards, ~.'fh John Rigney Managing Director, Event Marketing Aspen Skiing Company (if ~m___=_=____ I_ I ~ . i i OJ '1: ; :.. 'di t: . . l!: n" __ :: j illm I 7' .--: _ ;:'::'~...~~ _:~,~_,_~_="_=,J--.!:~5'_. - \ . , - n . -----------.;:.... ~ z ~ << ~~ I u" <~ .~ .; ! " ~ .. I I I I I I ~ ... ~ ~~ ::>z B .5 .......; , Gf'13' jl i . CI -".-1 [3 [) :I ' GI 13 i 1 ~ I' r--, , \iOl1' ~-== ,. I . _ . :'J ,~ ]. -- ~ '-':' ..(JIiI[l.~#'aI1If'.. ~ ,.. I -.~ -'- - .~;I '-..., , !"~=>~.~"_=_) cr J it' '" I. I '~'I . ...~IIJa.. L HO~..J /'i /,A 'w @: i I COOPER STREET i '" ~ .LIXJ_l .,......3....-.:0 o SX,OPX,09 eBBIS . ....,- '., ........ ........... : '1' ~! I " UI l- t" u III t" 0 " . N ~ I I >< II 0 0 u ( III ell N 0 ( . UI \0 N N ii . UI I ".0 " " 0 III l- N > . >- II II II. t . . ii ( >- ( " z > D- III II 0 . . 0 ( " ( tJ o I . I - <( 0 z ~ Z " u :J > 0 . . 0 0 0 . " c Z z . ~ tJ > . <( . ~ ., . . . " ~ o >- >- I . J >- >- . ( . I ~ ~ g 0 5 ~ II: 0 ~ I ~ ~ ~ :J 10I )( Q.l C IX '<:f C) 81 m ~ II " ". .x ~ - . 0 ;;; ( " . " , ~ u . , :~ ;;; m. . C> :8 . c .u " 'c ..~ :~ .~ c :cn :u. ~ ,u. :~ ::; '8 ' . ,., ~ C ,<0 :~ " " , .~ u. , .., '" , r~ '" s , <0 , ... .. ~ , u ~.@f ~ - ~ " .~~ 8NICldS QE ,J .0 J :[? , l - I n' J r- I . l-:c , '.is 'T11l^J I i ~D- 1_, IU I DO~ Dw 1 I- I ~- ~~~ D,D c::J DO c=J '.is N3dS'v' - ---' 1 'c.... X '- <d I ] D"lJ '::--=->.- ~- ~ - - - - -- - ~ Q.,.. Do 0 ~ [J8 2J - ~ -L1 -i [T\ . )> DJJClw ~ [Jil~ U Im a - ':'.U L-r-J -- I I I (f) )> 0 :0 C1 0 () () r r 0 0 fJl fJl C C :0 :0 "' "' - ~ '.is_ ~3.iNnH ~__ L -~ - tY D __U : J I~ D CJ I M ~.~ I ~~ 00 tnJ...D-< )> ,- LI -- ::>;0 ~ Zo ~_ - ~ I] 0_ eO LlLJ I - '.is 'v'N3'l'v'8 -~ .J o ~d DOQ - ,---.- - JD '.is H:J~'v'NOl^J -. ... Z':) ..~- ~ d l~i ~ [8,_ Wl"t ~ I ffi'~ V fl- j~ () )>=< I 1- . NlJO ~)> ,,' l/lORl" ::: ~ 8 (f))> g \'lI ><~ "' z ~ '~l :l!i}, -~... -:-, '$ l~0~.' , '" ~. ". . <<, ., 'L C"-~ , L D o o D~ ~C:J l n 1\-:- :-nO 0-- "'F1-J - ~..- LJ '.'JJ l - --, -nQ 'n~-' i-1 Vl ~ C==-l- ~ +: -.--.-- ,-,-,--,uD'URANT'STREEi-' CO;'''''ShutiJ.D;'p'~ -0-' Concert Shuttle Drop . r ' I 0 I 0 0 I ._ - ,_ u'l I c I D D I . . ,- . _ \' .~ i I .. .. ',J<.-' ....__._.~ I . mmn.mmmmm:n:dm~..:.;;;;n...m~r"t':~:ij..::.~m.m ....,\. ' .m.. ,~. ~ . L:::::'~"''"T'':::::.~j ~ 0 Rmmuo ..,.~. c-' ?c rnrr9 . ...,,""---..!',,'"'-------;.---~J '{C" . I /... u ~J/-.---_....--------- _ , r- --~.J""'M ---"1 )_ _ ................_.,_ . ........ ~-' ~' lil~h ~:[>~j II 1 ..J I Display tent .. 6O'dO' ! ,.. . 0: ....uSJ.. LHO~..J , '" ~ 11>:')_J ""'"....)~ ... COOPER STREET ,,' ,1 ~ i ---1.inl :1~~~[ , ; , . , OlE , 00 , ~u ~: .~.j " ,1'f-2'~ I I - :=7:_=-==-==- ~ "' "< ," z , o . . " ~ 0 I ;. ~ ~ UJ I- r- u . .. 1; ~ r- " I I " 1~ 1; w 0 I 0 . U ( J C> ~ " N 0 0 . 0 '0 a: 0 ( " .. ,'~ 0 ,~ 0 >< W r(l N N N 0 " ~ :u. '" " 0 '(I) u. :~ :; UJ to " " " . " . ( :~ ;t! ~ UJ I I 0 ( . I ~ :<D u w l- N .. . " > a 0 '" .~ " 0 0 II. " " 2 " " ~ ," = a: a: >- ( . 0 ( .. . 0 0 1; u. r~ ;t! w 0 . I . I ~ . C Ii; ;t! a. a: . " '" <( U c " I u < I . - 0 '" <( 0 > 0 . , " x ~ u 1'1 z :J 0 . " C C . . " 0 0 z m ~ I < ~ U Z . ~ . 81 Iil B <( "'l I I 1 'J I " '. .. . ~ II I m. x o . . . < :J , -::::: --:-:.-- ~ ...37"- 8 'S! .. _~.., . s ~~~ ~ T ~~ ~ r. ,-). '.~ ~ ' . 0'. ;/" ", --=-=="=" .' ;.~~-. ,., '] i' . .... -"'--'-1--.... ( -.....: . i~~~ i ~JS\J=' ,-0 Ol-~[ ~-~ ~ 1-0 Ion ~I =fll b o M I I I I . I Ii c---,,-3 - ~l - - -~el I I c:=Jl o 1~4J 0 l i - - ..,. ~ ~I r- :Jr .J ~ LJ I CJI o "--0 rl , .J fl D .l DE] Dr' _l - -=-----:.......:l~ GALENA ST. lrJ D- O~ 0- ZQD". ~ 0 [ ~ ~ I Z ~ >- 0... <( IOW ~_8ql_!~ ~ HUNTER ST. ww 0::0:: >- :J:J I- a::: tlltll 0 ii: 0 LU 00 0:: :J tll " ...Ju...J <( U ;:; ~ U :J W 0:: " to (.j Ul w - o~ r: ~ !3 ~ Ul1I1 ~ ~ ~ i tll 0: 0:: > .........11= . - .n .r-l r' ,.~ 1=lc-::,= r:: .- r- =.=.-- -:-:::r::., rG D[ 1 ..,. ~ ..r- I BOG 1bc::::J o ---, - - - . - ...1 -'-,- , ~~:. tj~ . ~:;.- 4: - w o 0 r--..J _ r ~:~ cCi n ILJ' c/Ir= r' J _I -_. u, ~ ~JtJD ~LJ " , D UD ~ ~'I- - - --l-~..::::.....:J ASPEN ST. CJ ~O c:::J &~ DlD .' - - ~ -I - -. ----'- -, ,..-,r- MONARCH ST. --, - - ,-- - - -... ~= = QLJ \2j 12 D D - .r L r ~ -' ''0, l I !.I - - MILL ST. , -- / l- 'd ,I ~ d:,O ~..d[] DJD[] - '--------'; i------' SPRING ST. , , '-- ~ -- - - ,-~- --- - , MEMORANDUM \(\\b TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager FROM: John D. Krueger, Director of Transportation DATE: December 4, 2007 RE: EOTC 2007 1/2% Transit Sales and Use Tax Budget SUMMARY: Attached for your review and approval is a resolution and budget which, if approved, would authorize the 2007 EOTC 1/2 cent transit sales and use tax budget for 2007. This resolution and the corresponding budget reflect the decisions made by the Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) at its October 20, 2005 meeting. 2007 EOTC Bude:et Summary Total Revenues Total Expenditures Annual Surplus (Deficit) Cumulative Surplus (Deficit) $5,216,000 $3.975,705 $1,240,295 $12,662,775 *See attached 2007 budget and multi-year plan PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council as a member of the EOTC approves the EOTC annual budget each year and any additional funding requests as they are presented. BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen as a member ofthe EOTC is required to approve the Draft Budget by resolution. Each other member of the EOTC is also required to approve the Draft Budget by resolution or ordinance before the budget can be considered adopted. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications to the City as these are EOTC funds and not City funds. RECCOMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution to approve the 2007 EOTC Budget. AL TERNA TIVES: Council can decide not to approve the 2007 EOTC Budget and send the 2007 Budget back to the EOTC for further discussion and approval. I C:\Documents and Settings\randyr.ASPENPITKIN\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKBA\2007 EOTC memo bdgt reso.doc PROPOSED MOTION: "r move to approve Resolution # 1 tJ'D to approve the 2007 EOTC Budget." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 2 C:\Documents and Settings\randyrASPENPITKIN\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKBA\2007 EOTC memo bdgt reso.doc RESOLUTION NO. I (j) SERIES OF 200r A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE 2007 EOTC BUDGET FOR THE PITKIN COUNTY 1/2 CENT TRANSIT SALES AND USE TAX WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Town Council of Snowmass Village (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, by intergovernmental agreement dated September 14, 1993, the Parties agreed: a. to conduct regular public meetings to continue to refme and agree upon proposed projects and transportation elements consistent with or complimentary to the Plan; and b. that all expenditures and projects to be funded from the County-wide one- half cent transit sales and use tax shall be agreed upon by the Parties and evidenced by a resolution adopted by the governing body of each party; and WHEREAS, at a public meeting held on November 16, 2006, the Parties considered and approved the attached initial budget for the year 2007 for the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen wishes to ratifY the approval given at the January 15th meeting by adoption of this resolution. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, that the attached initial one-half cent transit sales and use tax budget for the year 2007 is hereby approved as summarized below: Total Revenues Total Expeuditures $5,216,000 $3,975,705 RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 11th dav of December. 2006, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. 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 December 11.2006. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 3 C:\Documents and Settings\randyr.ASPENPITKIN\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKBA\2007 EOTC memo bdgt reso.doc -- OJ OJ "0 :J co i"- o o N 'tl ! III Q) ::l 0000 0000 0000 r-:ciai'c6 NNCO"- Ql.i)CCN ..j to . III ! o z CQ o o N 00.,.'" 000000 OOC"')C"') mOMN O)..-cocn 1l)1.OU')CC M ..j C) s::: "C s::: ;:, LL - (,) Q) ..... o ... D.. x ~ x 0 rn'sw ~ ~ 'E "'::lo(S ?f!.':::RQ)C/J ~~~Q) 'l""""T'""o~ >'>'C:J C c'- 0 :J:Jccn o 0 Q) OOE cccn ~~~ .-.- c CLCL_ :: 111 s::: III ... I- o I- o W m-:Qu o o ro. o N ~o roo .,.0 MO CDN N'" c<i o o '" as ~ ~ - III Q) ::l C' ~ 'tl ~ '" 1: .E ~ ~ '" " 'tl ~ '" 1: .E ~ ~ '" " 'E '" 1: .E ~ ~ '" " '0 ~ - '" Xl 1: ::l 0 C'- ~ ~ '" " - III Q) ::l C' ~ coooo lOOQM mooCO ..-OOOcD (()(")(\I0"l""" T'"" N C"') m~ N N 000 000 0_00 CLOe OCDO ~ ~ N OM 00> OOC aSN ~ M M'" <Ii ,., en ~ iii o '(3 " '" Ol U. c: ~ ~ c =.... X CO (l) CO COO (j) ~g. ~ ~w ~ :J Q) m ~ Q) C 'm ~ C rJ) .~ ~~ffim ~~a58..Q .. J::cE::::R cnc.cnO '; g>D;-m~~cn~~~~~ c"O ';::c:co'l""""moc.9-~ "E- 'C Q)O> .2", ,2 a. -0 ::l U. Q) Q) Q) 9 .0. WE .ccc.ou""", "OCtl-...f:SC:._'::IZ. oC/)cc:~ ctIo.....o>\Uco.....o"C:;:<( t'lS oC:5 "c:a.c.'(i.jt!;'i:m<(~.=Q) J!3 t/'J'(;jQ)~xc ..ctl--Ccc 8~~.g ~c:Olc:~~e~~~~~~ 0> E III ~ .- .- (1) C "It c: .... .r:. 0 ~ c E.-:!:::as~-c 0>0" co 0......... c :B cZ-~~ ~~~S.e~';.o = ~ Q) en.$!! co Q)~.::.::>::9J:~:J c ~1- ~'(ij rn.b ~ Q) Q) cn.::.J:! :3-3.2 00) 00> rn()~~(/)cca'Eom'-Q) 'x~ g..Q>> cUt) ctI 8 E (l)-C.2 c,l::; ctIo......So.c:.c:E...........u-rouU) +-'Q)rJ>cuo 3:-"c W>=crJ'J ~'e~t? Co 2 2 gt l! ~ ~ ~.g'ffi ~ :JCLCll><::i:CllCllena::Clzena::c..::i::J co ;:-NM:;;tU1cot::'comS;:-NM:;;;lOo "-'I"""""-'I"'""T"""I""""I-- '" o .... .,; .... 0> c<i '" 0> N o .,. "!. ~ '" .... .... N CD "!. N ~ c;;- O o o .,. ~ ~ o ro .,. N N "'. ~ ~ t=' Q u. w e. - en :J -' CL a:: :J en -' <{ :J Z Z <{ o f- a w t: ~ u. W Cl - en :J -' CL a:: :J en w > ~ :'5 :J ::i: :J o o f- a w 'i Cll 0. ~ 'tl '0 .c c: '0 ! o c .l!l III Q) ::l C' ~ cn'CG S 'u o Cll zo. . III 'tl Q) .c " ~ .. .!!l c o .. .l!l c: Q) E ::l " o 'tl Ol c: 'f o 0. 0. ::l III >: ]j .. ~ .. 0. Cll III 'tl ~ Cll 'tl '(jj C o " Q) .c '0 Q) '0 "S; e 0. .!!l c: o S c: Q) E ::l " o '0 Ol c: :e o c. 0. ::l '" o c: ,., 'E Q) ::l c:r Q) '" c: o " '" ~ o f- a w .... o Qi Ol '0 ::l .c .... o o N .9 'E '" 1: .E '0 Q) "C ~ '" " Q) .c .;..; Q) Ol '0 ::l .c -Q) '" '" f' Q) => 2 ::l - :;::; '" c: o " '0 c: '" Q) c: :;::; ::l e ~ '" .l!l '" Q) ::l c:r ~ Qi Ol '0 ::l .c ~ Q) .c - o co "~ CD o o N E e - - Q) Ol '0 ::l .c - c: Q) c. '" c: ::l ,., c: '" - '" .c - '" c: '" Q) E 'c ~ '" 1: .E ~ ~ '" ." CD o o N (0 - N ~ l: .. a:: 0000 0000 0000 ,....M~ct5 I!)C!)O>O CJ')l.OI'-M .q- cO l: .. a:: 0000 0000 0000 NNairi 01/)0<0 I"--lOf'--m V- ..n l: .. a:: 0000 0000 0000 Lti~ttiT'"" CO""" lOCO ..q-Ll)t--t-- -o:i Ll'i l: .. a:: 0000 0000 0000 c5ocOcD .q(")('I')O Nlt)I'-1O ~ ll'i C ell a... '0 ~ III CD ::l tT CD D:: 0000 0000 0000 r-:oc>>cD NNW"- OlD(ON ~ lli "- ell (]) >- I :.=; :J ~ '" o o N oooo:::t..q OOCOCO 00('1')(") o>oC"'iN" m......com L{)lOlOCO M .q- Cl l: .- '0 l: ::::l u.. ... (J Q) ..... o ... a... x u .s III ., "E III ::loll '#. Q) (/) ~ E T'"" 8 e .?;-~.~ ::J C c+-,o :::::J ::J c: (f.) 00" U U E"~ c:coo-c ~~~c: .-.- c: ::J Cl.Cl._u. Cii - o I- ::::: III l: III ... l- t> I- o W "'1.0 0 T'"" 0'<1'<0 0>0<0 cONr-.: '<I'lO_ '<1'-0 '<1'....'" 'V t--: N_ cOo,..... '<I'lO- -to ("") 0 0"'_ _ lO co ~oicD '<1''<1'- ~r I~~; -)/:,11 ~;t~i ill" OOCDOO I'-vOO ,.....,....qc.. ail"--(oO ('I').q-T'""ID T"""OOOoo:::t OO('f'JOOO) oc.oooo NMl.C'iO~ ._.,MN.,....LO~ ili.~.,...!il. ~~ . >- 2 ~ r.n '0 o .. " u. Ol .~ ~ 10 l: Ii> X ~(I) (/) odg-19 2w ~ III l: ::l Q) co (/) Q) C .- ~ c r.n ::l en +-' 0 co eG)O ~ ~ E ai ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O .E: a.. ffi E '#. "O:J Cf) <t en CD ~l ~~fI)CD3[O<(o:g "'C 'C c: COT""" en 0 c: 0 .... 0 C,;:::: Q)OQ"""__tLQ).....Q)o "E- OJ '00 'w a. 0'" a. Q) to) <( ..0 cccEo.coc(f.lOC '0 rl >0"- ell ell "- "" '0 .- <c l: .. o/l co_"tJ ~c..a.:!::'V'i:m.A e... Q) oe:s (/) en Q).,x.,>< ~C'!.ct::"""-1: c: +oi~.c OJ (CiT'"" >.o~Lfiw co E o.<-::l OlOlo>'-CO.c a.l.L -I c: c: -- we::: Q)........ Ol E U) "'0 .- .- (l) c: "It c: '- .s:::. 0 '00 E.-~';::-c:~ 0l0'" to 0......... c >>w(l) co co co+:;:; 0 .....-- en co c..... c~ o.o.~ ::J~1- 0.0 UJI-~ C>~ ftI Q.)~~>:Q.c ~~ c: ~ '00 ~ ~ ~ Q.) Q) cn .to S ::J 0 .Q 0 Q.) ~ o.UJ() ~ ~ ~ 25 ftlet: 010 a~ +-,oQ)C:()()E(.) Q)..c:..::! U5 } ~1ii~g~~~<(c()Ci3~~c:U) ,- Q)'ocne) lo...::J::J 01- ftI ~ ~ Q).Q.- Q) ;. cn lo... ::J , co lo... lo... c: U. ... Q.) Q) Q) ~ co cn i, ~~~~:~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ _ ~NM~~~~romo~NM~~o "-~~~~~1- i;~ l~"l 2/1 "~" ~i; ~'j,!::t ;~t,~- ;;'r.'!{ jif,;~,:: ~_1\,-J; Jt~f: ~tl~~ I iiI fi{t:'; '" 0 '" 0> '" N_ .f N N - O. '<I' ....0_ 0> 0 0 "'OlO McOD N"'_ 0> CO NM ....0<0 0>0'" '<1'0'<1' NDcO NlO_ ....<0 NM NO<O "'00> <000 ~NeD N-'" lO'<I' r0 "'Co"'C~O lo...Olo...roo COroCO-q-O ~O~r00 ONOC:ON - -N"'lt ~ ~r0 ~ ~ ell ell " " O'ClO O~O ...ell.... .,;~ui .....0.... ..- - m~ '" ~ ell " 'E ell ~ .e ~ ~ ell " roooo ~OOM mooc:o OOOeD MNO~ N_ Mm N N 000 000 o O~O O~O 0<00 _ _ N 0'" 00> 0'" cON - '" "'lO en o '" N ui lO - .f '" '<I' '" en CO CO en N CO "'- - o lO en 0> '" '" <0 .... o .f o .... ....- N lO - '<I' N CO .f o lO ui - III X o I- o W .... o a; Ol '0 ::l .c N c;) '<I' '" M N ~ - - .... oj N '<I' N - N CO '" o '<I' t:::. '<I' lO ~ N lO '" r0 - - <0 CD cri N "': - <0 '" '<1'_ N 0> 0_ '<I' - lO 0> N_ O '<I' N_ - lO .... .... N <0 <0 N - Ci) o o o '<I' CO_ o CO '<I' N N '<1'_ - - :s E U u: w e. Ci5 ::J -' Cl. D:: ::J (/) -' -0: ::J Z Z <c U I- o W I- (3 u: W o - (/) ::J -' Cl. D:: ::J (/) w > ~ :J ::;; ::J U U I- o W <0 o o N - !e N - MEMORANDUM V\\l. TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director utvw\ FROM: Jessica Garrow, PlannerJrtl RE: 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision, Growth Management Review - First Readinl! of Ordinance No. Lt'" , Series of 2006 DATE: December II, 2006 Public Hearing Scheduled for January 22, 2007 ApPLICANT {OWNER: 633 Spring II, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Stan Clauson Associates, Inc LOCATION: 307 S. Spring Street (Wienerstube Property) CURRENT ZONING: C-I (Commercial) Zone District SUMMARY: The Applicant requests subdivision, and growth management review to construct a new mixed use building on the property located at 307 S. Spring Street, where the Wienerstube currently exists. Photo Above: Existing Wienerstube Restaurant and neighboring parking lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the project. Staff feels the design is heading in the right direction following some changes at Planning and Zoning, and feels this is an area for discussion by Council. LAND USE REOUESTS: The Applicant has requested the following land use approvals to redevelop the site: · A growth management review for a multi-year development allotment of free market residential allotments in the C-I zone district pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(D)(l), Exceptional Project or Multi-Year Development Allotment (Citv Council is final review authoritv after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). · Subdivision for the construction of multiple dwelling units in a mixed use building pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision (Citv Council is final review authoritv after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). . Commercial design standards review for the development of a new mixed use development with a commercial component pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.412, Commercial Design Standards (Planning and Zoning Commission approved with conditions pursuant to Resolution No. 28, Series of 2006). . A growth management exemption for the replacement of commercial development pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(A)(7), Remodeling or replacement of existing commercial or lodge development (A determination was made bv the Communitv Development Zoning Officer outlining the existing net leasable square footage; only the amount of the existing square footage is exempt from growth management). . A growth management review for the development of a new mixed use building pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(C)(2), Expansion/New Commercial, Lodge, or Mixed Use Development (Planning and Zoning Commission approved with conditions pursuant to Resolution No. 28, Series of2006). . A growth management review for the development of free-market residential units in a mixed-use building pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(C)(6), Free- Market Residential Units within a Mixed-Use Project (Planning and Zoning Commission approved with conditions pursuant 'to Resolution No. 28, Series of 2006). . A growth management review for the development of affordable housing pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(C)(7), Affordable Housing. (Planning and Zoning Commission approved with conditions pursuant to Resolution No. 28, Series of 2006). . Condominiumization is a subdivision exemption that requires approval of the Community Development Director pursuant to the Land Use Code Section 26.480.090, Condominiumization. However, the proposed ordinance acknowledges this approval for a future date (condominium plats are reviewed and approved bv the Community Development Director upon substantial completion of construction). REVIEW PROCEDURE: A growth management application for the use of Multi-Year Allotments shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(D)(l), Exceptional Project or Multi-Year Development Allotment. A development application for subdivision shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by City Council after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 2 of 10 Commission and the Community Development Director pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480.040, Subdivision. The Community Development Director shall review a condominium plat upon substantial completion of construction on the development if it is approved. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant, 633 Spring II, LLC, has requested approval to construct a new Mixed Use building at the corner of Spring and Hyman. The Applicant has already obtained approval of growth management reviews for commercial space in a new mixed use building, free market residential space, and affordable housing space from the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to P&Z Resolution No. 28, Series of 2006 (attached as Exhibit E). The Applicant has also received approval of Commercial Design Standard review from the Planning and Zoning Commission in the above mentioned Resolution. The property subject to this application is 18,000 square feet and currently contains a commercial building of 6,222 square feet of floor area and a parking lot with thirty-seven (37) parking spaces. The proposed development is to contain the following program: . Basement- 3,380 square feet of storage, mechanical area, and laundry facilities for the affordable housing units; 47 parking spaces to be dedicated to the affordable housing units and other uses in the building. . First Floor- Approximately 12,167 square feet of commercial space. . Second Floor- Split level floor containing twelve 2-bedroom affordable housing units (six as Category 3 and six as Category 4) and 10,678 square feet of commercial/office space. . Third Floor- Four 2,000 square foot free-market residential units and two (2) studio free-market residential units of 1,235 square feet and 1,570 square feet, respectively. The project has been designed to comply with the dimensional requirements permitted in the C-1 Zone District in which it is located. The chart below compares the proposed dimensional requirements with the allowable dimensional requirements in the underlying zone district. Dimensional Requirement Minimum Lot Size Minimum Lot Width Minimum Lot Area Per Dwellin Unit Minimum Front Yard Setback Dimensional . Proposed DimensioD!i.I< Re uiremelits 18,000 SF 100 Feet 1 Unit per 1,000 SF of Lot Area Adjacent to Hyman- 0 Feet Adjacent to Spring St.- o Feet Pro osed No Re uirement No Re uirement No Requirement No Requirement Unde!'l In C-l Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 3 of 10 Requirement Dimensional Zone DiStrjct . Reauil7!~ments ReaU!teme),l.t~ ... . Minimum Side Yard o Feet No Requirement Setback Minimum Rear Yard o Feet No Requirement Setback Maximum Height 42 Feet 38 Feet for Sloped Roofs, 42 Feet for Flat Roofs Allowable External Total- 2.58: 1 Total-3:1 FAR Commercial- 1.2: I Commercial- 1.5: 1 FM Multi-familv- .6: I FM Multi-familv- 1: I Minimum Off-Street Tota': 47 on-site parking Total: 19.7 Spaces Parking spaces Required Commercial- 1 Space per 1,000 SF Affordable Housing- No Spaces in C-1 Zone District FM Residential- No Spaces in C-1 Zone District Open 10% (1,800 SF) through 10% because existing Space/Pedestrian cash-in-lieu building does not contain Amenity more than 10%* see discussion about Open Space/Pedestrian Amenity in Staff Comments below. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW: Parkin!?: The Application before the City Council includes some significant changes that were a result of the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of the project. Specifically, the Commission requested the Applicant examine the amount of parking proposed for the site. The Commission stated concerns that the original proposal for fourteen (14) on-site parking spaces and a cash-in-lieu payment for 5.7 spaces was not providing the site with adequate parking. The Applicant examined different parking schemes, and in response to the Planning and Zoning Commission's comments placed two levels of underground parking with a total of forty seven (47) parking spaces on-site. Pursuant to Resolution 28, Series 2006, the affordable housing units each have one parking space reserved for their use, while the remaining parking spaces will be for use of the commercial spaces and free market residential units in the building. The Planning and Zoning Commission expressed concern that parking spaces would be able to be sold to individuals that do not live in the building or do not use the building. The above mentioned condition includes a provision that would prevent this from occurring. Desi!?n: Staff recommended that the Planning and Zoning Commission ask the Applicant to examine the design elements of the building, specifically the massing, modulation, roof line, and the transition between the modern corner element and the more traditional building elements Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 4 of 10 along Hyman. Staff also expressed concern over the arcade that was originally proposed along Hyman. The design changed somewhat between the first Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on October 17, 2006 and the second on November 7, 2006. With the parking addition discussed above, the building design was also altered to eliminate the recessed arcade and bring the building to the lot line. Staff was supportive of this change, and with the Applicant's decision to provide streetscape amenities and outdoor amenities to the proposed restaurant along Spring. Specifically, the Applicant proposed a covered outdoor eating area that would bring some vitality to the street and would create interest for diners as well as pedestrian passers-by. Despite these changes, Staff expressed continued concern over the design elements to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the November 7, 2006 hearing. In particular, Staff recommended the Applicant re-examine the building's roof line to find ways to provide more visual relief and to ensure the building did not look too massive. Staff also felt the building was struggling for an architectural identify. Specifically that the modem comer piece and the more traditional piece along Hyman did not respond to each other well and did not create a convincing dialogue. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the design and determined that it satisfied both the Commercial Design Standards and the architecture requirements in the Multi- Year Allotment Growth Management Review. The Commission liked the design and felt the building was appropriately broken into modules representative of the traditional thirty and sixty foot buildings found in Aspen. The Commission also found that the proposed design included appropriate visual relief due to the step-backs found on the upper floor and the different materials used in the modules. Given the changes made during the Planning and Zoning Commission review and the Commission's comments, Staff finds that the design is moving in the correct direction, and is improved from the original submittal. More elaboration on these points can be found below in the Staff Comments, Growth Management Review for Multi-Year Allotments, Architecture section (Page 8). Excevtional Proiect Criteria: The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the criteria for a project to receive a Multi- Year Development Allotment growth management review. The review criteria for a Multi- Year Allotment and an Exceptional Project is the same. The Planning and Zoning Commission found the project met all of the applicable criteria, and was especially supportive of the efforts to provide more than required affordable housing and to create a building that would exceed green energy requirements by 50%. Staff was also supportive of these aspects, and the ability of the project to support the Economic SustainabiJity of the city by providing commercial space, restaurant space for the current Wienerstube, and by providing space for residents to live in town. STAFF COMMENTS: Subdivision: The Applicant requires subdivision review because the proposal contains free-market residential dwelling units in a mixed use development. The Applicant has expressed that Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 5 of 10 they believe the application meets the subdivision review standards and is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) in that it creates a high quality of design, develops affordable housing within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), is mixed use development in close proximity to a transit and the commercial core of town, and is visually compatible with the surrounding area. Staff does not disagree with some of the assertions made by the Applicant about compliance with the AACP requirements. Additionally, Staff does believe that the land subject to the application is suitable for development in that it already contains a commercial building and is served by the necessary utilities to support the proposed development. Growth Manaf!ement Review for Multi-Year Allotments: The Applicant has requested five (5) multi-year free-market residential growth management allotments for five (5) out of the six (6) proposed free-market residential units in the development. If the Applicant were to receive approval of the proposed multi-year allotments, five (5) out of the six (6) free-market residential allotments in the Commercial Core and C-I Zone District allowed for the 2007 growth management year would be used up. Land Use Code Section 26.470.040(D)(l), Exceptional Project or Multi-Year Development Allotment, requires that a project requesting multi-year development allotments. The review criteria for an Exceptional Project include eleven (11) specific criteria a project should include in order to be deemed "exceptional" and thus qualify for a multi-year allotment. The code states a project does not need to meet each of the criteria, but that a project must meet enough of the criteria "to be sufficiently considered 'exceptional'." There are two (2) "exceptional" project criteria that are similar to criteria in other growth management sections - these deal with the Aspen Area Community Plan and public infrastructure impacts. In both cases, the "exceptional" project standards require the applicant to go farther than is required in the other Growth Management reviews. The review criteria for an Exceptional Project include: a. Advancing the vision, goal, or specific action items of the AACP b. Exceeding the minimum affordable housing required for a standard project c. Representing an excellent historic preservation accomplishment (Not applicable here) d. Furthering the affordable housing goals by providing units established as a priority, and providing a mix of unit types e. Minimizing impacts on public infrastructure by incorporating innovative, energy-saving techniques f. Minimizing construction impacts as possible during and following construction g. Maximizing potential public transit usage and minimizing reliance on the automobile h. Exceeding minimum requirements for the Efficient Building Code, or for LEEDS 1. Promoting sustainability of the local economy Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 6 of 10 J. Representing a desirable site plan and an architectural design solution k. Being compatible with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area and the purpose of the underlying zoning. Staff has fully analyzed the application's compliance with these review criteria as part of Exhibit A. Compliance with key elements of creating an exceptional project in Staffs mind is also discussed in the following paragraphs. Economic Sustainabilitv: Staff finds that the Applicant has proposed a project that would help maintain a sustainable economy by providing a considerable amount of commercial space to fill in a vacant commercial parking area that does not currently contribute to the City's streetscape. The twelve (12) units of affordable housing consisting of approximately 14,000 square feet would also help in creating a significant mass of year-round residents that are called for as one of the major objectives in the AACP and which is needed to help sustain the community's locally-serving businesses. Staff believes that the proposed use program of this development embodies the programming visions that were sought by the adopted infilllegislation. Affordable Housing: The Applicant has proposed twelve (12) 2-bedroom affordable housing units for the project. These will be "for sale" units and are divided evenly between Category 4 and Category 3. In total, there is 13,960 square feet of floor area dedicated to the Affordable Housing units, while there is 10,805 square feet of Free Market Residential space proposed, This exceeds the mitigation requirement by 10,719 square feet. In the original Application, the project would have required a cash-in-lieu payment for 7.8 employees generated by the commercial space. The revised application (attached as Exhibit C) decreased some of the commercial space to ensure that the Affordable Housing provided on-site exceeded what was required by code. As now proposed, the project provides housing for 27 FTEs, when housing for 25.9 FTEs is required. Staff finds this aspect of the Application contributes to the project meeting the review criteria for an Exceptional Project. Green Building: The Applicant has proposed to construct an environmentally building by providing energy efficient design and mechanical systems. The addendum to the original application proposes that the building will exceed the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) requirements by 50% since they are going to purchase wind powered electric energy, provide solar hot water heaters in the residential units, integrate photovoltaic technology, use efficient HV AC systems and use zero VOC finishes (attached as Exhibit C). Staff feels that this is an important aspect to their proposal and has consulted with the Building Department about how to insure that these representations are followed through with in developing the project if it is approved. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and GroWth Management Review Staff Memo Page 7 of10 The Building Department suggested that the development be subject to an energy audit after it has been occupied for three (3) years to verify that it is exceeding the 2006 IECC requirements by 50% as has been proposed. Therefore, Staff has included a condition of approval in the proposed ordinance that requires the Applicant to commission an energy audit by an energy consultant to be selected by the City of Aspen Building Department after three (3) years of occupation. The proposed condition further requires that if the audit shows that building is not meeting the standard that has been proposed, that the building would have to be upgraded to exceed the IECC requirements by 50% at the Applicant's expense. If the property owner fails to bring the building into compliance, enforcement would take the form of a zoning code violation. Should the property owner continue to fail to comply with the energy requirements, the owner would be taken to court to ensure the building comes into compliance with the requirement. At that point a lien could be placed on the property until it comes into compliance. Attached as Exhibit I is a sheet outlining how the new Doerr-Hosier building at the Aspen Institute will use roughly 50% less energy than if the building were built with standard Aspen/Pitkin building codes. It should be noted that Aspen currently has one of the strictest building codes in the country in terms of energy efficiency, so achieving 50% better than existing codes is significant. The systems outlined in Exhibit I will not necessarily be used in this project, but similar systems will likely be employed to achieve the same results. Staff would encourage the Applicant to examine the use of a green roof or a roof garden. This will decrease the impermeable surface on the lot and can help the building achieve greater energy efficiency. Additionally, Staff would like to see this green rooftop have the ability to be used by the occupants of the residential units (including the affordable housing units) or look at increasing the size of the decks that are available to the occupants of the affordable housing units. Architecture, Scale, Massing, and Site Planning: Architecturally, Staff feels that components of the design are compatible with the downtown streetscape such as the punched window openings, the way the building addresses the street, and the pedestrian amenities including the covered outdoor patio and streetscape improvements. Staff also believes that it is important for the commercial core and surrounding areas to have a variety of architectural styles as is embodied in the proposed design. Currently there is much discussion in the community about what constitutes appropriate and good design. At the same time, there are many discussions revolving around Aspen's history and what constitutes appropriate scale, massing, and design in relation to our history. Specifically, there is an extensive dialogue revolving around how new buildings "fit" into the community - should they clearly differentiate themselves from the past, try to replicate the past, or attempt to have an architectural dialogue between the past, present, and future. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 8 of 10 The proposed development is on a site of 18,000 square feet, with a 180 foot lot line along Hyman Ave and a 100 foot lot line along Spring Street, On a site of this size, the design difficulties are often greater than on a smaller site because it is more difficult to create a design that does not feel like a large monolithic mass. In other words, it is difficult to create one large building that matches the smaller scale that has historically occurred in Aspen without feeling like there is a fake history being created. Staff feels these concerns should be discussed at City Council as this is a larger community discussion. Staff finds that there have been many positive changes to the design through the Planning and Zoning Commission review and that the design has many positive aspects. These include the covered outdoor seating along Spring Street, the attempt to respect the traditional 30 and 60 foot building modules, the proposed streetscape improvements, the way the building appropriately addresses Hyman Avenue without a recessed arcade, the variety of architectural styles included in the building, and the way the building respects the adjacent building's entrance by providing a slight setback on the western-most wall of the building. For these reasons staff is supportive of the project in terms of design. However, Staff continues to have some concerns about the design that staff feels should be discussed at City Council. These include the lack of dialogue between the modern corner piece and the traditional fal(ade along Hyman Avenue, the lack of differentiation between materials in the modules along Hyman Avenue, and the consistent roof height on the building. Off-Street Parkin!!: As noted in the section describing the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of the Application, the proposal now calls for forty-seven (47) parking spaces in a below grade garage. Staff is in support of the additional parking spaces, and finds that it enhances the Application's conformity with the Exceptional Project criteria. School Land Dedication: The application is subject to school land dedication for the addition of the residential units to be developed within the proposed subdivision pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Land Dedication. The Applicant has proposed to pay cash-in-lieu of dedicating land. The Applicant has consented to paying the applicable school land dedication fee at the time of building permit issuance for the development. Staff has proposed a condition of approval, ensuring that the school lands dedication fee will be paid. Thus, Staff believes that the proposal will meet the land dedication standard. Park Develooment Imoact Fee: Development within the subdivision is subject to a park development impact fee upon construction of new residential bedrooms or commercial/office space pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fee. Staff has included a proposed condition of approval requiring that the applicable park development impact fee be paid prior to obtaining a building permit for new development within the subdivision based on the fee schedule established in Land Use Code Section 26.610.030 at the time of building permit Issuance. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 9 of 10 REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Fire Marshall, Water Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Streets Department, and the Parks Department have all reviewed the proposed subdivision and their comments have been included as conditions of approval as deemed appropriate. Comments from these organizations are attached as Exhibit H. RECOMMENDATION: Staff feels that there are many positive aspects to the use programming of this application that are also consistent with the goals of the AACP. Additionally, Staff is very supportive of the energy, economic sustainability, and affordable housing aspects of the Application. Staff feels the design is heading in the right direction following changes made at the Planning and Zoning Commission review, and feels this is an area for further discussion by Council. Staff finds that the Application meets the review criteria for Subdivision and a Multi-Year Development Allotment. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE MADE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No.Lf:i, Series of 2006, upon first reading." Attachments: Exhibit A n Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Application Exhibit C -- Addendum to Application dated August 16, 2006 Exhibit D -- Addendum to Application dated November 2, 2006 Exhibit E -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 28, Series 2006 Exhibit F -- Planning and Zoning Commission minutes dates October 17, 2006 Exhibit G -- Planning and Zoning Commission minutes dates November 7, 2006 (DRAFT) Exhibit H -- Referral Comments Exhibit I -- Doerr-Hosier energy efficiency information Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision and Growth Management Review Staff Memo Page 10 of 10 ORDINANCE No.1<i (SERIES OF 2006) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A SUBDIVISION AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR MULTI-YEAR ALLOTMENTS FOR THE 307 S. SPRING STREET SUBDIVISION, LOTS D-I, BLOCK 100, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel No. 2737-182-25-003 Parcel No. 2737-182-25-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 633 Spring 11, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Inc, requesting approval of Commercial Design Review, Growth Management Reviews, Multi-year Development Allotments, Condominiumization, and Subdivision to construct a three- story mixed use building on the properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-l, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned C-I (Commercial); and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department recommended denial of the multi-year development allotments, finding that the current design and massing does not meet the standards for an exceptional project necessary to obtain multi-year development allotments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 7, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No, 28, Series of2006, by a three to zero (3-0) vote, approving with conditions, a Commercial Design Review, a Growth Management Review for Mixed-Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Free-Market Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing, and recommending that City Council approve Multi-Year Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-1, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, on December 11 th, 2006 the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. 41, Series 2006, on First Reading by a _ to _ L---> vote, approving with conditions the Subdivision and Condominiumization of 625 E. Main Street, Lots E, F, G, easterly 10 feet of Lot D, Block 98, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January 22nd, 2007, the Aspen City Council approved Ordinance No. _, Series 2006, by a _ to _ L---> vote, approving with conditions Multi-Year Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, 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 Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page I 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, 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 RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council hereby approves Multi-Year Development Allotments and a Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, subject to the conditions contained herein. Section 2: Plat and Ae:reement Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant shall record a subdivision agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision, within 180 days of such approval. The Subdivision Agreement shall also include a commitment to satisfY all conditions of Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 28, Series of 2006 as well as all conditions of this Ordinance. A final Condominium Plat may be approved and signed by the Community Development Director upon substantial completion of construction and prior to transfer of ownership of individual units within the project. Section 3: Buildine: Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and P&Z Resolution. a. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. b. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. c. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 2 d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed civil engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 5- year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. e. A final construction management plan pursuant to the requirements described in Section 6 of this ordinance. f. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. g. An excavation/stabilization plan prepared by a licensed Engineer. h. Proof of energy efficiency requirement being placed on the property. Section 4: Dimensional Requirements The dimensional requirements approved for this development are as follows: Dimensional PropoSed>> Requirement Dimensiollal Requirements Minimum Lot Size 18,000 SF Minimum Lot Width 100 Feet Minimum Lot Area 1 Unit per 1,000 SF of Per Dwelling Unit Lot Area Minimum Front Adjacent to Hyman- 0 Yard Setback Feet Adjacent to Spring St.- o Feet Minimum Side Yard o Feet Setback Minimum Rear Yard o Feet Setback Maximum Height 42 Feet Allowable External Total- 2.58: 1 FAR Commercial- 1.2: 1 FM Multi-familv- .6:1 Minimum Off-Street Total: 47 Spaces Parking Prooosed On-site Open 10% (1,800 SF) * Space/Pedestrian provided by paying Amenitv cash-in-lieu Section 5: Open Space/Pedestrian Amenity The property is required to either provide open space satisfying the definition open space/pedestrian amenity equal to 10% of the property or pay cash-in-lieu thereof. If Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 3 providing cash-in-lieu, cash-in-lieu shall be provided in full based on the calculation methodology set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.030, Pedestrian Amenity. Section 6: Construction Manaeement A construction management plan shall be submitted with the building permit application that meets the requirements of the current "Components of a Construction Management Plan" handout that is available in the City of Aspen Building Department. The construction management plan shall include at a minimum, a construction parking plan, a construction staging and phasing plan, a construction worker transportation plan, a plan for accepting major construction-related deliveries with estimated delivery schedule, the designation of haul routes, and an agreement with the City to participate with other neighboring developments under construction to limit the impacts of construction. This agreement shall be prepared by the developer and accepted by the Community Development Director. As part of the construction management plan, the developer shall agree to require all dump trucks hauling to and from the site to cover their loads and meet the emission requirements of the Colorado Smoking Vehicle Law. Any regulations regarding construction management that may be adopted by the City of Aspen prior to application for a building permit for this project shall be applicable. The construction management plan shall also include a fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed by the City Engineering Department that includes watering of disturbed areas (including haul routes, where necessary), perimeter silt fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent right-of-ways, and a representation that the City has the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance during construction. A temporary encroachment license is required for use of the City's right-of-way for construction purposes. The Applicant shall also provide phone contact information for on-site project management to address construction impacts to: The City of Aspen, the Victorian Square Condominiums, the owners of the Hannah Dustin Building, the Chateau Aspen Condominiums, and the owners of the Hunter Plaza Building. Section 7: Pre-Construction Meetine The Applicant shall conduct a pre-construction meeting with the City Community Development Staff prior to submittal for a building permit application. This meeting shall include the general contractor, the architect producing the construction drawings, the Community Development Engineer, a representative of the City Building Department, and the Community Development Department's case planner. Section 8: Fire Mitieation The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system and alarm system that meets the requirements of the Fire Marshall. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System, Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 4 Section 9: Water Department Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. The Applicant shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Each residential unit shall have an individual water meters. A single water service line penetration into the building shall be allowed. The Applicant shall abandon the existing water service line and excavate it prior to installation of a new water service line. Section 10: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. The Applicant shall fund the replacement of 300 feet the main sewer line located in the alley adjacent to the project. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The driveway entrance drains shall drain to drywells and elevator shaft drains shall drain through an oil and sand separator. One tap to the main sanitary line is allowed. No soil nails shall be allowed in the public right-of-way above ACSD main sewer lines. The Applicant shall enter into a shared service line agreement. Glycol and snowmelt shall have containment areas approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Service lines being abandoned shall be abandoned from the main sewer line and excavated. Section 11: Electrical Department Requirements The Applicant shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician in order to determine if the existing transformer on the neighboring property has sufficient capacity for the redevelopment. If a new supplemental transformer is required to be installed on the subject property, the Applicant shall provide for a new transformer and its location shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to installation. The Applicant shall dedicate an easement to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the supplemental transformer for maintenance purposes, if a supplemental transformer is installed. If after the subdivision plat is recorded and in the event an easement is required, then the Community Development Director shall review and approve the easement on the condominium plat. Section 12: Enerl!Y Efficicncy The development shall exceed the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) requirements for energy usage by 50%. An energy audit shall be conducted on the development at the property owner's expense after three (3) years of occupancy. The energy audit shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department. If the audit determines that the development does not exceed the 2006 IECC requirements for energy usage by 50% or more, then the building shall be upgraded to meet this requirement. Prior to the building's occupation, a the building shall be commissioned to determine the energy efficiency prior to use. This shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department and shall be conducted at the expense of the Applicant. Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 5 Section 13: Growth Manaeement Implications and Emplovee Housine Mitieation The Applicant shall provide twelve (12) deed-restricted, two-bedroom affordable housing units, to fully mitigate for the 25.9 full time employees (FTEs) required to be mitigated for. The affordable housing units shall also contain 13,960 square feet of floor area as was proposed in the application. Section 14: Affordable Housine The Applicant shall record a deed restnctlOn on each of the twelve (12) affordable housing units in conjunction with filing a condominium plat for the property and prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the affordable housing units. Six (6) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 3 units and six (6) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 4 units. All of the affordable housing units shall be "for sale" units and sold through the APCHA lottery process. A separate Homeowner's Association shall be established for the affordable housing units. The affordable housing homeowners' association dues shall be a percentage of the free-market residential development's dues equal to the affordable housing's market value compared to that of the free-market residential component's market value in the complex. Section IS: Landscapine The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping plan as part of the building permit application. This landscaping plan shall include a plan for right-of-way landscaping and irrigation. The plan shall also include a parkway landscaping strip adjacent to all abutting public streets of at least five (5) feet in width. Appropriate street tree plantings are required along all streets adjacent to the property and shall be spaced according to the recommendation of the City of Aspen Parks Department. Section 16: Sidewalk. Curb. and Gutter Existing sidewalk, curb, and gutter adjacent to the project shall be replaced and upgraded to meet the City Engineer's design requirements. The sidewalk locations shall be in substantially the same location as is depicted on the site plan in the subdivision application. If the adjacent sidewalks are to be snowmelted, the Applicant shall also snowmelt the curb and gutter adjacent to the property. Section 17: Park Development Impact Fees Park Development Impact Fees shall be assessed at the time of building permit issuance on both the new residential bedrooms and the commercial/office space to be added to the subject properties pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact Fees. The Park Development Impact Fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Section 18: School Land Dedication Fees School Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal at the time of building permit issuance pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, because subdivision approval is required for the development of the multi-family residential units per the definition of subdivision in the land use code. The school lands dedication fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 6 Section 19: Imoact Fees All impact fees in effect at the time of building permit, as applicable, shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Section 20: Exterior Li!!:htin!!: All exterior lighting shall meet the City's Lighting Code Requirements pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 21: Wildlife Trash Containers The Applicant shall install a wildlife-proof trash container that meets the requirements of the Environmental Health Department. Section 22: Food Service Facilities Food service plans meeting the requirements of the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department shall be submitted and approved prior to serving food and prior to obtaining a Colorado Food Service License for any of the commercial space that is to be used as restaurant space. An oil and grease interceptor approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District shall be installed in any space that is to be used as a restaurant. Section 23: Off-Street Parkin!!: The Applicant shall provide forty-seven (47) sub-grade parking spaces to be accessed from the alleyway. The affordable housing units shall each have one (1) dedicated parking space in the below grade garage. The remaining spaces shall be for use by the free-market units, and the commercial/office space. At no time shall the parking structure or spaces be condominiumized other than to delineate ownership of parking spaces for the owners of the residential units and commercial/office space within the subject building. Section 24: Develooment Timin!!: The Applicant shall obtain a certificate of occupancy on all of the affordable housing units prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy on any other part of the building. Section 25: 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 iffully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 26: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 27: Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 7 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 14: Vested Rie.hts The development approvals granted pursuant to Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 28, Series of2006 and herein shall be vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of the development order. No later than fourteen (14) days following the final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a vested property right, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described properties: 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, by Ordinance No. _' Series of 2006, of the Aspen City Council. Section 18: A public hearing on the ordinance was held on the 13th day of November, 2006, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 11 th day of December, 2006. Helen Kalin KJanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 11th day of December, 2006. Helen Kalin KJanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 8 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John P. Worcester, City Attorney G:\cityV essica\Cases\ Wienerstube\Counci 1\ W ienerstube first reading. doc Ordinance No. Series 2006 Page 9 Growth Management: Multi-Year Allotments REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Exceptional Project or Multi-Year Development Allotment. The City Council, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an exceptional project or a multi-year development allotment request based on the following criteria: The proposed multi-year or exceptional development is considered "exceptional" considering the following criteria: (Note - A project need not meet all of the following criteria, only enough to be sufficiently considered "exceptional.'~ 1. The proposed project advances the visions, goals or specific action items of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: Staff does believe that the proposed project furthers some of the goals and objectives set forth in the AACP. As was discussed in the staff memorandum, Staff feels that the project develops affordable housing within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), is mixed use development in close proximity to a transit station and the commercial core of town, and is compatible with the uses in the immediate neighborhood. Staff does not disagree with the assertions made by the Applicant about compliance with the AACP requirements. Additionally, Staff does believe that the land subject to the application is suitable for development in that it already contains a commercial building and is served by the necessary utilities to support the proposed development. 2. The proposal exceeds the minimum affordable housing requiredfor a standard project. Staff Finding: The application meets the minimum affordable housing mitigation requirements related to employees required to be housed and well ex~eeds the amount of affordable housing square footage needed to satisfy the mitigation required for the free-market residential component of the development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed project represents an excellent historic preservation accomplishment. A recommendation from the Historic Preservation Officer shall be considered for this standard. Staff Finding: The property subject to the application is not designated historic. Wienerstube Redevelopment Multi-Year Allotment Review Criteria Page I of 4 4. The proposal furthers affordable housing goals by providing units established as priority through the current Guidelines of the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority, and provides a desirable mix of affordable unit types, economic levels, and lifestyles (e.g. singles, seniors, families, etc.). A recommendation from the AspenlPiktin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. Staff Finding: . The Applicant has proposed all two (2) bedroom units, but has also proposed a variety of categories. The Housing Authority has indicated that they are happy with the mix and type of units being proposed and believe that they satisfy their largest demand category. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. The proposal minimizes impacts on public infrastructure by incorporating innovative, energy-saving techniques. Staff Finding: The application proposes to exceed the 2006 IECC energy code requirements by more than 50% through purchasing wind power for a portion of the electric needs of the building, installing solar hot water systems in the residential units, and integrating photovoltaic and efficient HV AC systems in the building. 6. The proposal minimizes construction impacts to the extent practicable both during and after construction. Staff Finding: The application does not address how it will mmlmlze construction impacts on the community. 7. The proposal maximizes potential public transit usage and minimizes reliance on the automobile. Staff Finding: The application suggests that the location of the proposed development is in close proximity to Aspen Mountain, is on a bus route, and is close to a major grocery store, which would encourage pedestrian and public transit use rather than individual automobile use. Staff would also note that the building provides significant storage areas for the affordable housing unit owners, which could easily be used for accessible bicycle storage. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 8. The proposal exceeds minimum requirements of the Efficient Building Code or for LEEDS certification, as applicable. A recommendation from the Building Department shall be consideredfor this standard. Staff Finding: The application proposes to follow the LEEDS commercial and residential standards, but there is not currently a certification category for mixed use buildings. As was discussed in Staffs response to Criterion No.5 above, the application proposes to exceed the 2006 lECC energy code requirements by more than 50% through purchasing wind power for a portion of the electric needs of the building, installing solar hot water systems in the residential units, and integrating photovoltaic and efficient HV AC systems in the Wienerstube Redevelopment Multi-Year Allotment Review Criteria Page 2 of 4 building. Staff finds this criterion to be met with the condition in the proposed resolution requiring that the Applicant exceed the 2006 IECC by at least 50% and that an energy audit be conducted after three (3) years of occupation to verify this proposed condition. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 9. The proposal promotes sustain ability of the local economy. Staff Finding: Staff does believe the proposal promotes a sustainable local economy by providing a significant amount of retail space and by filling in a significant gap in the retail streetscape by developing the existing gravel parking lot with a mixed use development. Staff also feels that the proposed commercial space is designed in a manner to contain significant display windows at streetscape to provide a good retail environment. The development also proposes a significant amount of "for sale" affordable housing to help provide a permanent critical mass of local residents to help support local businesses during the off-seasons. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 10. The proposal represents a desirable site plan and an architectural design solution. Staff finding: As has been discussed throughout the Staff memorandum, Staff is concerned that the proposed design is lacking an architectural identity and creates an abrupt transition from traditional to modern architecture. However, staff finds that the design meets the requirements of this criterion through the covered outdoor seating along Spring Street, the attempt to respect the traditional 30 and 60 foot building modules, the proposed streetscape improvements, the way the building appropriately addresses Hyman Avenue without a recessed arcade, the variety of architectural styles included in the building, and the way the building respects the adjacent building's entrance by providing a slight setback on the western-most wall of the building. for these reasons staff is supportive of the project in terms of design. 11. The proposed development is compatible with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area and the purpose of the underlying zone district. Staff finding: Staff does believe that the proposed uses are consistent with the character of the existing uses in the immediate vicinity and is consistent with the purpose of the underlying zone district. The purpose of the underlying C-I Zone District as described in the land use code is to provide for mixed use development with commercial uses on the ground floor and residential density, which this proposal provides. Additionally, the majority of the buildings in the immediate vicinity contain a mix retail/office space and residential units as is described in the application. Wienerstube Redevelopment Multi-Year Allotment Review Criteria Page 3 of 4 12. The project complies with all other provisions of the Land Use Code and has obtained all necessary approvals from the Historic Preservation Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Council, as applicable. Staff Finding: The property subject to the application is not designated to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and is not located within a Historic District and does not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission. Additionally, the Applicant has applied for all of the necessary land use reviews to develop the proposed project. 13. For multi-year development allotments, the Community Development Director shall be directed to reduce the applicable Annual Development Allotments, as provided in Section 26.470.030(D), in subsequent year(s) as determined appropriate by the City Council. Staff Finding: If City Council approves the multi-year development allotment request, the Community Development Director will remove five (5) free-market residential development allotments from next year's allotment pool. Wienerstube Redevelopment Multi-Year Allotment Review Criteria Page 4 of 4 Subdivision REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. AI. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed subdivision is consistent with many aspects of the Aspen Area Community Plan. The properties to be subdivided are located close to the core area of town, which should encourage the residents of the free-market residential units and the affordable housing units to use alternative means of transportation such as walking and riding their bicycles as is encouraged by the AACP. Staff also finds that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) in that this proposal would provide a great deal of addition commercial/office space as specified in the AACP action item related to stemming the loss of commercial and office space to other uses. The project also would provide a dense development where there is currently an underutilized vacant lot in the downtown core area as is consistent with the infill goals. However, as was discussed in the memorandum, Stafffeels that the design, site planning, and massing need to be looked at to be deemed an exceptional project to obtain multi-year allotments. 2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Staff Finding Staff does believe that the uses proposed in the subdivision are consistent with the character of the existing land uses in the immediate vicinity. The majority of the development in the immediate vicinity consists of mixed-use or commercial/office buildings. The Hannah Dustin building located across Spring Street from the proposed development is currently an office building that has approval for the creation of several additional residential units. The Patio building, which contains commercial and office space is located directly across E. Hyman Avenue from the proposed development and the Victorian Square office building is located directly to the west of the proposed development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding Staff does not feel that the proposed subdivision will adversely affect the future development of surrounding properties. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria Page 1 of3 4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding As has been discussed throughout this memorandum, Staff does not believe that the proposed application meets the growth management requirements to obtain multi-year development allotments because of the design and massing issues that have been identified in the staff memorandum. Staff finds this criterion not to be satisfied by the proposal. B. Suitability of Land for Subdivision a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision. b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs. Staff Finding Staff believes that the properties are suitable for subdivision and development. There are no known geologic hazards on the site and the Wienerstube property currently contains an existing commercial building. Staff further feels that sufficient infrastructure exists to accommodate the proposed development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Improvements. The improvements setforth at Chapter 26.580 shall be providedfor the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See, Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met: I. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or the goals of the community. 2. The applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested and provide justification for each variation request, providing design recommendations by professional engineers as necessary. Staff Finding The Applicant has consented in the application to meet the applicable required improvements pursuant to Section 26.580. Staff finds this criterion to be met. D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria Page 2 of3 Staff Finding The application does not propose to replace any existing dwelling units on the site. The application has further requested the necessary growth management allocations for the proposed development. However, Staff does not believe that the review standards are satisfied for granting approval of the requested multi-year growth management allotments because of the design and massing issues that Staff has expressed throughout this memorandum. Staff does not find this criterion to be met. E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication Standards set forth at Chapter 26.630. Staff Finding The proposed subdivision is required to meet the School Land Dedication Standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630. The Applicant has proposed to pay cash-in-lieu of providing land. The Applicant has consented to paying the applicable school land dedication fee at the time of building permit issuance for development within the subdivision. Staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, 92) Staff Finding The application has requested the necessary growth management allocations for the proposed development. However, Staff does not believe that the review standards are satisfied for granting approval of the multi-year growth management allotments that are being requested. If the multi-year growth management allotments are not granted, Staff does not find this criterion to be met by the proposal. Wienerstube Redevelopment Subdivision Review Criteria Page 3 of3 p.n\ot\i v 16 August 2006 1 ' ""or ~~tr:: . i,~ /!IUD hU:.J \!....'-" STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, INC Planning . Urban Design Landscape Architecture Transportation Studies Project Management Mr. Jame~ Lindt, A1CP Senior Planner BU!LD[~'.1G OEP,!~.R.TMENT City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 200 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE: 970.925.2323 FAX: 970.920.1628 E-MAIL: info@scaplanning.com WEB: www.scaplanning.com Re: ADDENDUM 307 South Spring Street Application Dear James: Attached is an addendum to the application submitted for 307 South Spring Street. This addendum includes the additional information you requested including: . Clarification of the Open Space and Pedestrian Amenity requirements; . Clarification of the required employee housing mitigation - all mitigation provided on-site; and . Additional information regarding the exceptional status of this application for Multi- Year Development Allotments. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you require additional information. Very truly yours, Michelle Bonfils Thibeault STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, INC Attachments: 1. Addendum PLANNING AND DESIGN SOLUTIONS FOR COMMUNITIES AND PRIVATE SECTOR CUENTS ADDENDUM Open Space Requirement Clarification: The existing conditions do not provide any open space on either the developed lot or the parking lot. The existing building is developed to the property boundaries. Similarly, the gravel parking lot exists to the property boundaries allowing for no open space (as defined by the land use code). The parking lot itself cannot be considered to constitute open space. The proposed development looks to continue the commercial pattern language in a manner that is consistent with existing buildings in the Commercial Core (CC) and Commercial-l(Cl) zone districts. Most of these buildings utilize the entire parcel, allowing for little or no open space as defined by the land use code. In so doing, they present themselves in direct relation to the sidewalk and streetscape, which is supportive of the pedestrian environment. Section 26.575.030 Pedestrian Amenity. B. Applicability and Requirement. Response: There is presently no public open space on the Weinerstube and parking lot sites. Thus, it is only required that 10% of the property or 1,800 s. f. be provided for public amenity area, In the proposed redevelopment, an amenity area would consist of an arcade along Hyman Avenue and the inset for the Weinerstube outdoor seating along Spring Street, which would be publicly accessible and visible from the street and sidewalk. These amenity areas would comprise 1,060 s.f., with the balance of the requirement being met through a cash-in-lieu payment. C. Provision of Pedestrian Amenity. The applicant intends to provide a portion of the pedestrian amenity on-site and the difference in a cash-in-lieu payment. The proposed development itself will fulfill the purpose of the pedestrian amenity requirement by creating a mixed-use building that is "conducive to an exciting pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere." The proposed mixed-use project is a well-designed development that will benefit the community by enlivening the pedestrian environment in the downtown area Its extensive fenestration and varied setbacks at entrances and display windows will create an appealing fayade that will cause many pedestrians to linger. A covered walkway will run along 82 feet of street frontage to complement the adjacent 601 E Hyman Ave property. This will create a similar pedestrian amenity and experience to the covered walkway along the 200 block of South Mill Street. Moreover, nearly 90% of the ground floor commercial space street fayade is display windows. 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 1 On-Site Housing Mitigation THE SITE: The existing building is on four 3,000 SF lots totaling about 12,000 SF. The adjacent parking lot covers two 3,000 SF lots totaling about 6,000 SF. The total site is 18,000 SF. AFFORDABLE HOUSING EQUAL TO 30% OF THE ADDITIONAL FREE-MARKET FLOOR AREA IS PROVIDED IN A MANNER ACCEPTABLE TO APCHA The free-market residential floor area (limited to the third floor of the proposed building) is 10,805 square feet. 30% of 10,805 square feet is 3,241.5 Sq.Ft. The deed-restricted affordable housing floor area is 13,960 square feet, substantially exceeding 100% of the free-market residential floor area. 60% OF THE EMPLOYEES GENERATED BY THE ADDmONAL COMMERCIAL, ACCORDING TO SECTION 26.470.050(A), ARE l\fiTIGATED THROUGH THE PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR CASH-IN-LIEU. Calculated in accordance with Section 26.470.050(A) of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the current Weinerstube Restaurant and AJAX Bike and Sport uses on the property represent 23 employees in their 5,595 net leaseable square feet. The calculation is provided below: . 5595/1000SF = 5.6 . 5.6 x 4.1 = 23 employees The description for the net leaseable area of the proposed building has been revised since the original application submittal. The net leaseable area calculations provided in the original application did not account for internal storage and circulation within the office and retail spaces. The original plans show the raw space on the ground floor and the raw space on the second office floor - no internal walls, circulation/access, or storage. These raw areas are likely to be leased to multiple tenants. The owner is proposing to "build to suit" for future tenants. Therefore, this addendum provides revised calculations for the net leaseable area considering that both the ground floor and office levels will have storage areas and internal walls that are not part of the net leaseable area. Secondly, in reviewing the plans the applicant has noted that an additional emergency access is required (further separated from the main entrance) for the Weinerstube restaurant. This additional emergency access is through a corridor along the southern side of the ground floor. 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 2 The revised total amount of retail net leaseable square feet is 16,125 minus the existing 5,595 square feet equals 10,530 retail square feet generating an additional 43 employees, Sixty percent of this employee generation equals 25.9 employees. The applicant is proposing to provide on-site mitigation for 27 employees, exceeding this requirement. 6,125 net leaseable square feet 5,595 existing square feet 10,530 net leaseable square feet 10,530/1000 SF = 10.53 x 4.1 FTE = 43.1 FTE 43.1 x 60% = 25.9 Employee mitigation requirement On-site employee mitigation is in the form of 12 two-bedroom units (24 bedrooms). A two- bedroom unit mitigates 2.25 employees, therefore 12 two-bedroom units mitigates 27 employees. Commercial FAR . The ground floor will have a total of 12,176 square feet net area. . The second floor has 10,678 square feet of net commercial office. Proposed Net Leaseable . The ground floor will have 8,894 square feet leaseable area. . The second floor will have 7,231 square feet leaseable area, 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 3 Exceptional Project Criteria Growth Management Review: Multi-Year Development Allotment 26.470.040(D)(1) Note: New information since oril!inal application underlined. 1. The proposed project advances the visions, goals or speciju: action items of the AACP. The proposed development is consistent with the following Housing Goals stated in the Aspen Area Community Plan (pages 27, 28): 1. Develops affordable housing within the Community Growth Boundary 2. Develops affordable, free market housing and commercial in close proximity to public mass transit 3. is containable development compatible with neighborhood and does not promote sprawl. 4. is contiguous to existing public facilities and infrastructure 5. amenable to transit, bike and pedestrian-oriented design 6. visually compatible with surrounding area' 7. optimizes the site's development potential 8. contributes to APCHA's housing goals 9. creates a high-quality oflife with a range of income groups and mixed uses in the development 10, creates a high quality in design and construction of affordable, free market and commercial uses. 2. The proposal exceeds the minimum affordable housing requiredfor a standard project. Deed-restricted housing is provided in excess of the 30% of the additional free-market floor area requirement. The free-market residential floor area (limited to the third floor of the proposed building) is 10,805 square feet. 30% of 10,805 square feet is 3,241.5 Sq.Ft. The deed-restricted residential floor area is 13,960 square feet, exceeding 100% of the free-market residential floor area. The current proposal mitigates for 27 emplovees (12 two-bedroom units mitigating at 2.25 FTEs each). The required mitigation is 25.9 emplovees. 3. The proposed project represents an excellent historic preservation accomplishment. A recommendation from the HPC.... 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 4 The property is not historic. 4. The proposalfurthers affordable housing goals by providing units established as priority through the current Guidelines of APCHA. The proposed deed-restricted housing totals 13,960 square feet of floor area and is configured into 12 units. The units are proposed to be the following categories consistent with the APCHA Board guidelines: . 6 Two-bedroom units, Category 3, at 950 Sq.Ft. each . 6 Two-bedroom units, Category 4, at 950 Sq.Ft. each The average APCHA income category for this mix of units is Category 3.5, consistent with the APCHA policies, 5. The DroDosal minimizes inwacts on Dublic infrastructure bv inco17Joratine innovative. enerev-savine techniques. The applicant proposes to incorporate energv-efficient design into the building. The Aspen Energy Efficiency Code is not applicable to buildings containing commercial uses. Therefore, the applicant will reference appropriate sections of the LEEDS program for efficient design and mechanical system solutions. An energy efficient building will reduce impacts on public infrastructure by reducing consumption and therefore demand of services. 6. The proposal maximizes potential public transit usage and minimizes reliance on the automobile. The central location and proximity to Aspen Mountain and ski buses at RFT A make this location for free-market housing ideal for reduced individual vehicle trips and increased public transit patronage, pedestrian and bicycle activity, The subject property is also less than one block from a rnaj or grocery store. 7. The DroDosal exceeds minimum requirements of the Efficient Buildine Code or for LEEDS certirlCation. as aDDlicable. A recommendation from the Buildine Deoartment shall be considered for this standard. The applicant proposes to follow the LEEDS commercial standards and residential standards (as applicable) for this mixed-use building. Currently. there is not a certification for mixed-use buildings. The applicant has a goal of exceeding the 2006 IECC energv code by 50%. purchasing wind powered electric. including a system to deliver solar hot water to the residential units, integrating photovoltaic, an efficient HV AC system. and specifYing zero VOC finishes. 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 5 8. The proposal promotes sustainability of the local economy. The proposed development is within the Urban Growth Boundary and will promote density with both deed-restricted and free market housing on-site as well as a sustainable mix of residential and commercial uses inside the boundary, The proposed mixed-use development will create deed-restricted housing opportunities alongside free market residential contributing vitality and a greater sense of community in the downtown core. The central, downtown core location of the project will promote pedestrian circulation, particularly for the residential units, over vehicle trips that might be generated if this development were outside of the downtown core or outside of the urban growth boundary. The mixed-use proposal will support a diversified economic base for the town by providing 19,722 net leaseable square footage, proposed to include an updated location for the existing Weinerstube Restaurant and additional retail opportunities. Similarly, the integration of both deed-restricted and free market housing in the same building will support existing surrounding businesses as well as offer new retail and office opportunities. The downtown core location ofthe proposed project will not impact or consume open space or wildlife habitat. The mixed-use proposal will promote a more balanced permanent community by providing 12 units of deed-restricted housing on-site, Similarly, Work Program #5 of the AACP is to "encourage greater densities within the original Aspen town site" and "increased housing density in the form of mixed-use buildings." The proposed development of 19,722 square feet of commercial, 13,960 square feet of deed-restricted housing and 10,805 square feet of free market creates a livable density in the downtown core, The residential components will increase vitality to this edge of the commercial core and the commercial components will provide services and economic opportunities for the City. The commercial uses ofthis proposal are categorized into retail and office space. This is consistent with Work Program #20 of the AACP to "stem the loss of commercial and office space." The redevelopment of this and the adjoining property will rebuild the existing 5,595 square feet of retail space, plus an additional 4,975 square feet of retail and 9,152 square feet of office space on the second floor. This mix of uses will both promote economic vitality and encourage a diverse retail environment. Lastlv. mixed-use developments are a form of Smart Growth -- a planning practice adopted by many communities throughout Colorado. The purpose of Smart Growth is to reduce the outward spread of urbanization. protect sensitive lands, and, in the process. create true nei~hborhoods with a sense of communitv. Smart Growth encoura~es the location of stores, offices, residences. school and related vublic facilities within walkin~ distance of each other in comvact 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 6 neizhborhoods. It aims to provide a varietv of housinf! choices so that vounl! and old. sinl!le persons and families. and those of varvinl! economic abilitv mav find places to live. The proposed mixed-use development incoroorates several of these qualities. The proposed development contains development within the alreadv developed commercial core; provides a variety of housing choices bv offering both free market and affordable housing on-site; the address is within walking distance of manv retail and public services (including transit). 9. The proposal represents a desirable site plan and an architectural design solution. Empty lots have a negative impact on the pedestrian experience, Empty lots create a void in the pattern language of a neighborhood. On a fullv developed block. the pedestrian experiences a pattern of entrvwavs to store fronts or residential units. This pattern creates a connectivity of uses from one block to the next encouraging the pedestrian to explore are greater area. This connectivity defines the character of a block or larger area, Empty or undeveloped lots disrupt this connectivity. In the specific case of this application - the empty lot at 625 East Hyman Avenue creates a negative impact for the pedestrian experience on the 600 block of East Hyman Avenue. The current development of the subiect property marginalizes the pedestrian and gives priority to the automobile. Several existing conditions contribute to this unfortunate design hierarchy: 1. The storefronts along Hyman A venue at the existing subiect building are elevated three or more feet above the sidewalk. 2. The elevated storefronts and associated staircase interrupts the relationship of the sidewalk to the storefronts. 3. The elevated storefronts turn the sidewalk into a buffer zone between the storefronts and the on-street parking rathet than a pedestrian amenity. 4, The pedestrian experience is marginalized bv the lack of relationship to the sidewalk in this area -- the pedestrian is burdened with street parking to the north and the existing retaining wall to the south. This is not pedestrian-oriented. 5. The existing conditions do not meet the City of Aspen Commercial Design Standards. As the pedestrian continues west on the 600 bloc~ the hierarchv of the automobile over the pedestrian is more prominent. The empty/parking lot in the middle of the block and the related driveway further reduces the priority of the pedestrian to the automobile. The parking lot disconnects the existing commercial building at 307 South Spring to the commercial pattern within the downtown core. This empty lot acts as an informal boundary from the active commercial core to a secondary commercial area. The presence of the empty lot lends to the sense of being at the outskirts of any significant commercial activity. 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 7 Additionallv. the impacts of this empty lot are compounded by the close proximity to the other empty lot less than half a block west at the corner ofHvrnan and Hunter. The relationship of these two undeveloped lots creates a distinct void in the downtown core's pattern language and disrupts the pedestrian experience in these areas. This application would remedy one of these voids with commercial uses that appropriatelv relate to and enhance the pedestrian experience. An enhanced pedestrian experience will benefit the community in several wavs: . encourage greater economic activity in this area: . encourage more pedestrian travel than automobile travel: and . connect the area to the downtown core in both a development pattern language and in a sense of place. 10. The proposed development is compatible with the character of the existing land uses in the surrounding area and the purpose of the underlying zone district. The proposed building is located over six city lots, including the corner lot at Hyman Avenue and Spring Street. The proposed building has an articulated fa~ade along both Hyman Avenue and Spring Street. The articulation of the building gives the appearance and feel of multiple, individual buildings consistent with the character of the downtown core. The building is proposed to be at grade, consistent with the existing public right-of-way (sidewalk) for easy and accessible entrances to each retailer. GROUND FLOOR The ground floor retail space has a varying setback to articulate what might otherwise be a monolithic structure. Where the building is setback from the property line, the walkway is covered. The covered walkway brings an element of the building to the property line. The covered walkway element will create a consistent building elevation from the ground floor retail to the second floor office and residential uses. Nearly 90% of the ground floor commercial space street fa~ade is display windows and similar fenestration. This is both sensible for good business practice as well as exceeds the 60% fenestration code requirement. The ground floor has a total of 12,176 square feet net leaseable area, The expression of the Hyman Avenue fayade has a varying setback from the property line. Reading the building from west to east along Hyman Ave, the westerly side of the building is respectful to the adjacent 601 E Hyman Ave property, which has an office entrance setback approximately 31.5 feet from the property line. To maintain the quality of the neighbor's entrance, the proposed project is similarly setback approximately 31.5 feet for an access point to the second and third floors. The building continues to be consistent with the 601 E Hyman building, setback 9 feet from the property line for approximately 82 feet (the existing gravel parking lot). This 9-foot setback 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 8 provides a covered walkway to the ground floor retail spaces for this 82 feet of street frontage. This will create a similar pedestrian amenity and experience to the covered walkway along the 200 block of south Mill. The building then steps forward again to break-up the Hyman Ave fa9ade with a one-foot setback from the property line for 30 linear feet, reminiscent of the historic minimal setback development pattern of the downtown core. The corner frontage of the proposed building is an opportunity for a single retailer, with entrances on both Hyman Ave and Spring Street. The setbacks for this section of building average three-feet from the property line, varying at the entrances and major display windows. Along the Spring Street frontage, is a second entrance to the corner retail space. Adjacent to the corner retail is a restaurant space, designed to accommodate the relocation of the Weinerstube Restaurant. 46-feet of Spring Street frontage includes a l4-foot setback to allow for limited patio dining. The eastern exposure of this area will provide morning sun to the location ideal for breakfast and lunch dining. 307 South Spring Street -- Addendum 9 -ex\1 \\?It; 1:. RESOLUTION NO. 28 (SERIES OF 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR FREE-MARKET RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A SUBDIVISION AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR MULTI-YEAR ALLOTMENTS FOR THE 307 S. SPRING STREET SUBDIVISION, LOTS D-I, BLOCK 100, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Parcel No. 2737-182-25-003 Parcel No. 2737-182-25-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from 633 Spring II, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Inc, requesting approval of Commercial Design Review, Growth Management Reviews, Multi-year Development Allotments, Condominiumization, and Subdivision to construct a three- story mixed use building on the properties located at 307 S. Spring Street and 625 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots D-l, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties contain approximately 18,000 total square feet and are located in the Commercial (C-l) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director reviewed the application and recommended denial of the multi-year development allotments, finding that the current design and massing does not meet the standards for an exceptional project necessary to obtain multi-year development allotments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 7, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 28, Series of2006, by a three to zero (3-0) vote, approving with conditions, a Commercial Design Review, a Growth Management Review for Mixed-Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Free-Market Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing, and recommending that City Council approve Multi-Year Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein; and, G:\city\J essica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wienerstube ResoREVISED,doc WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission fmds 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 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: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby approves a Commercial Design Review, a Growth Management Review for Mixed-Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Free-Market Residential Units in a Mixed Use Development, a Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing, and recommending that City Council approve Multi-Year Development Allotments, and Subdivision for the development of a three-story, mixed use building on Lots D-I, Block 100, City and Townsite of Aspen, subject to the conditions contained herein. Section 2: SubdivisionlPUD Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall record a subdivision agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Section 26.480 within 180 days of approval. Additionally, a final subdivision plat shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 180 days of the final approval and shall include the following: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing: the proposed building footprint, easements, encroachment agreements and licenses (with the reception numbers) for physical improvements, and location of utility pedestals. Section 3: Building Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit tor service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings proposed on the site. G:\city\Jessica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wienerstube ResoREVISED .doc e. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed civil engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 5- year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. f. A final construction management plan pursuant to the requirements described in Section 6 of this resolution. g. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. h. An excavation/stabilization plan prepared by a licensed Engineer. 1. Proof of energy efficiency requirement being placed on the property. Section 4: Dimensional Requirements The dimensional requirements approved for this development are as follows: iIXiDienshnllll, . Proposed. !iequiremeti'(IJI/ Dimensional ..... .. Reouirements Minimum Lot Size 18,000 SF Minimum Lot Width 100 Feet Minimum Lot Area I Unit per 1,000 SF of Per Dwelling Unit Lot Area Minimum Front Adjacent to Hyman- 0 Yard Setback Feet Adjacent to Spring St.- o Feet Minimum Side Yard o Feet Setback Minimum Rear Yard o Feel Setback Maximum Height 42 Feet Allowable External Total- 2.58: 1 FAR Commercial- 1.2:1 FM Multi-familv- .6:1 Minimum Off-Street Total: 47 Spaces Parking Prooosed On-site Open 10% (1,800 SF) * Space/Pedestrian provided by paying Amenity cash-in-lieu G:\cityVessica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wienerstube ResoREVISED.doc Section 5: Open Space/Pedestrian Amenitv The property is required to either provide open space satisfying the definition open space/pedestrian amenity equal to 10% of the property or pay cash-in-lieu thereof. If providing cash-in-lieu, cash-in-lieu shall be provided in full based on the calculation methodology set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.030, Pedestrian Amenity. Section 6: Construction Management A construction management plan shall be submitted with the building permit application that meets the requirements of the current "Components of a Construction Management Plan" handout that is available in the City of Aspen Building Department. The construction management plan shall include at a minimum, a construction parking plan, a construction staging and phasing plan, a construction worker transportation plan, a plan for accepting major construction-related deliveries with estimated delivery schedule, the designation of haul routes, and an agreement with the City to participate with other neighboring developments under construction to limit the impacts of construction. This agreement shall be prepared by the developer and accepted by the Community Development Director. As part of the construction management plan, the developer shall agree to require all dump trucks hauling to and from the site to cover their loads and meet the emission requirements of the Colorado Smoking Vehicle Law. Any regulations regarding construction management that may be adopted by the City of Aspen prior to application for a building permit for this project shall be applicable. The construction management plan shall also include a fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed by the City Engineering Department that includes watering of disturbed areas (including haul routes, where necessary), perimeter silt fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent right-of-ways, and a representation that the City has the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance during construction. A temporary encroachment license is required for use of the City's right-of-way for construction purposes. The Applicant shall also provide phone contact information for on-site project management to address construction impacts to: The City of Aspen, the Victorian Square Condominiums, the owners of the Hannah Dustin Building, the Chateau Aspen Condominiums, and the owners of the Hunter Plaza Building. Section 7: Pre-Construction Meeting The Applicant shall conduct a pre-construction meeting with the City Community Development Staff prior to submittal for a building permit application. This meeting shall include the general contractor, the architect producing the construction drawings, the Community Development Engineer, a representative of the City Building Department, and the Community Development Department's case planner. G:\city\Jessica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wienerstube ResoREV1SED .doc Section 8: Fire Mitil!ation The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system and alarm system that meets the requirements of the Fire Marshall. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. Section 9: Water Department Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. The Applicant shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City and complete a common service line agreement for the residential units. Each residential unit shall have an individual water meters. A single water service line penetration into the building shall be allowed. The Applicant shall abandon the existing water service line and excavate it prior to installation of a new water service line. Section 10: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and regulations. The Applicant shall fund the replacement of 300 feet the main sewer line located in the alley adjacent to the project. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD lines shall be allowed. The driveway entrance drains shall drain to drywells and elevator shaft drains shall drain through an oil and sand separator. One tap to the main sanitary line is allowed. No soil nails shall be allowed in the public right-of-way above ACSD main sewer lines. The Applicant shall enter into a shared service line agreement. Glycol and snowmelt shall have containment areas approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. Service lines being abandoned shall be abandoned from the main sewer line and excavated. Section 11: Electrical Departmcnt Rcquircments Thc Applicant shall have an electric connect load summary conducted by a licensed electrician in order to determine if the existing transformer on the neighboring property has sufficient capacity for the redevelopment. If a new supplemental transformer is required to be installed on the subject property, the Applicant shall provide for a new transformer and its location shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to installation. The Applicant shall dedicate an easement to allow for City Utility Personnel to access the supplemental transformer for maintenance purposes, if a supplemental transformer is installed. If after the subdivision plat is recorded and in the event an easement is required, then the Community Development Director shall review and approve the easement on the condominium plat. Scction 12: Encrl!V Efficicncv The development shall exceed the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) requirements for energy usage by 50%. An energy audit shall be conducted on the development at the property' owner's expense after three (3) years of occupancy. The energy audit shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department. If the audit determines that the development does not exceed the G:\city\Jessica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wieners tube ResoREVISED .doc 2006 IECC requirements for energy usage by 50% or more, then the building shall be upgraded to meet this requirement. Prior to the building's occupation, a the building shall be commissioned to determine the energy efficiency prior to use. This shall be conducted by an energy consultant selected by the City of Aspen Building Department and shall be conducted at the expense of the Applicant. Section 13: Growth Manal!ement Implications and Emplovee Housinl! Mitil!ation The Applicant shall provide twelve (12) deed-restricted, two-bedroom affordable housing units, to fully mitigate for the 25.9 full time employees (FTEs) required to be mitigated for. The affordable housing units shall also contain 13,960 square feet of floor area as was proposed in the application. Section 14: Affordable Housinl! The Applicant shall record a deed restnctlOn on each of the twelve (12) affordable housing units in conjunction with filing a condominium plat for the property and prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the affordable housing units. Six (6) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 3 units and six (6) of the affordable housing units shall be Category 4 units. All of the affordable housing units shall be "for sale" units and sold through the APCHA lottery process. A separate Homeowner's Association shall be established for the affordable housing units. The affordable housing homeowners' association dues shall be a percentage of the free-market residential development's dues equal to the affordable housing's market value compared to that of the free-market residential component's market value in the complex. Section IS: Landscapinl! The Applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping plan as part of the building permit application. This landscaping plan shall include a plan for right-of-way landscaping and irrigation. The plan shall also include a parkway landscaping strip adjacent to all abutting public streets of at least five (5) feet in width. Appropriate street tree plantings are required along all streets adjacent to the property and shall be spaced according to the recommendation of the City of Aspen Parks Department. Section 16: Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter Existing sidewalk, curb, and gutter adjacent to the project shall be replaced and upgraded to meet the City Engineer's design requirements. The sidewalk locations shall be in substantially the same location as is depicted on the site plan in the subdivision application. If the adjacent sidewalks are to be snowmelted, the Applicant shall also snowmelt the curb and gutter adjacent to the property. Section 17: Park Developmcnt Impact Fees Park Develooment Imoact Fees shall be assessed at the time of building permit issuance on both the new residential bedrooms and the commercial/office space to be added to the subject properties pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park Development Impact G:\city\J essica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wienerstube ResoREVlSED .doc Fees. The Park Development Impact Fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Section 18: School Land Dedication Fees School Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal at the time of building permit issuance pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, because subdivision approval is required for the development of the multi-family residential units per the definition of subdivision in the land use code. The school lands dedication fees shall be calculated by the City of Aspen Zoning Officer using the fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. Section 19: Impact Fees All impact fees in effect at the time of building permit, as applicable, shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Section 20: Exterior Li!!htin!! All exterior lighting shall meet the City's Lighting Code Requirements pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 21: Wildlife Trash Containers The Applicant shall install a wildlife-proof trash container that meets the requirements of the Environmental Health Department. Section 22: Food Service Facilities Food service plans meeting the requirements of the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department shall be submitted and approved prior to serving food and prior to obtaining a Colorado Food Service License for any of the commercial space that is to be used as restaurant space. An oil and grease interceptor approved by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District shall be installed in any space that is to be used as a restaurant. Section 23: Off-Street Parkin!! The Applicant shall provide forty-seven (47) sub-grade parking spaces to be accessed from the alleyway. The affordable housing units shall each have one (1) dedicated parking space in the below grade garage. The remaining spaces shall be for use by the free-market units, and the commercial/office space. At no time shall the parking structure or spaces be condominiumized other than to delineate ownership of parking spaces for the owners of the residential units and commercial/office space within the subject building. Section 24: Development Timin!! The Applicant shall obtain a certificate of occupancy on all of the affordable housing units prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy on any other part of the building. Section 25: 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 G:\city\Jessica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wieners tube ResoREVISED.doc 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 26: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 27: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen by a _ to _ L---.J vote on this 5th day of September, 2006. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clcrk G:\cityV essica\Cases\ Wienerstube\PnZ\ Wienerstube ResoREV1SED .doc "ExhibttfltF Aspen Planninl! & Zoninl! Commission Meetinl! Minutes October 17. 2006 COMMENTS .........,."...,....."...."..........,...............,...,.............................,..,'......"...., 2 MINUTES ,...........".. ......".....,... ....,.......................,.. ........ ............ ......"..., ..........,....., 2 DECLARA nONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................. 2 ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE ........................................................................... 3 WEINERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT,.......,..................,...,..,......................"...,.... 3 1150 CEMETERY LANE....................,.................................................................... 7 1 Aspen Plannint!: & Zonint!: Commission Meetint!: Minutes October 17. 2006 Jasmine Tygre opened the regular Planning & Zoning Meeting in the Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:35 pm. Commissioners Ruth Kruger, Steve Skadron Brian Speck and Jasmine Tygre were present. John Rowland and Dylan Johns were excused. Staffin attendance were Joyce Allgaier, Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Ruth Kruger inquired about the weed control policy. Joyce Allgaier replied that she informed the Parks Department about the spot next to the Holland House and on Main Street that Ruth spoke about previously, Kruger voiced concern for the Puppy Smith COWOP. Allgaier responded there was an appeal to the City Council decision to consider the Puppy Smith COWOP eligible. Kruger asked that the commission receive a memo regarding the preparedness of P&Z for public hearings, Kruger stated the communication between Council and P&Z was of great importance and suggested a lunch meeting. Jasmine Tygre said as part of the original Rio Grande Master Plan it was stated that the vistas from the top of the steps be open to views of Aspen Mountain and Rio Grande Park; currently the blue roof cover going down the Rio Grande steps, which takes away the Rio Grand Park view, Tygre noted in cities there were clear covers on stairways to subways, Tygre said that Ron Erickson always asked about the covering over the Caribou Alley, which was now a roof and she asked what happened in this case. Allgaier stated there were a series ofletters that have gone out to the estate and manager of the club and community development was pursuing as a zoning violation, Allgaier announced a work session following their regular meeting with Mark White, a consultant, and a lodging consultant. MINUTES MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve the minutes from July 18'h, August 1't, 15th, September 5th and 1 rjh,' seconded by Steve Skadron. All in favor, APPROVED. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Dylan Johns was conflicted on the Weinerstube Redevelopment. 2 ASDen Plan nine & Zonine Commission Meetine Minutes October 17. 2006 PUBLIC HEARING: ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing. Jessica Garrow provided the proof of notice. MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue Aspen Highlands to November 21"; seconded by Steve Skadron, All infavor. APPROVED, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (09/19/06; 10/03): WEINERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing on the Weinerstube Redevelopment. Jessica Garrow stated the applicant was 633 Spring Street LLC represented by Stan Clauson. The application required Growth Management for mixed use development, for free market units in a mixed use development, for affordable housing in a mixed use development, replacement of commercial floor area, multi- year development allotments; Commercial Design Review and Subdivision, Planning & Zoning was the fmal review for the Commercial Design Review and Growth Management Reviews with the exception ofthe multi-year development allotments and Subdivision, Garrow explained the property was located at the comer of Hyman and Spring, 18,000 square feet covering 6 townsite lots. The existing property contained a 37 space gravel parking lot and a 6,000 square foot building in the C I zone district. The proposed building included a 1st floor of 12,000 square feet for commercial and restaurant space and 14 surface parking spaces along the alley. The proposed second floor contained 10,670 square feet of commercial office space and 12 two- bedroom affordable housing units (6 units were category 3 and 6 units were category 4 at 950 square feet each). The third floor proposal contained 10,805 square feet of multi-family units (4 two bedroom units at 2,000 square feet each) and two studios (1200 and 1500 square feet). The basement proposal contained storage for the affordable housing and commercial uses. Garrow said the dimensional requirements were 42 feet in height with a total FAR of2.58 to 1; the proposed development met all underlying zoning requirements. There will be cash-in-lieu for the remaining required 5.7 parking spaces. Garrow said the project met all subdivision standards and currently served by utilities; affordable housing, free market units and commercial uses were consistent with the neighborhood and were permitted uses in the CI zone district. 3 Aspen Planninl! & Zoninl! Commission Meetinl! Minutes October 17. 2006 Garrow said there were 5 Growth Management Reviews. Garrow said the project meets minimum mitigation requirements; there were 25,9 FTEs generated by the commercial uses and the 12 two-bedroom units mitigate for 27 FTEs. 30% of the free-market floor area must be mitigated through employee housing and they were providing 13,000 square feet, which exceeds the requirement. Garrow said the applicant needs a multi-year allotment for free-market housing. The project called for 6 free market units and there was only 1 allotment left for the 2006 year so they will need 5 from next year's multi-year allotment. Multi- year allotments require compliance with exceptional project criteria; the categories were to assist a sustainable economy, mitigation for affordable housing, green building and architecture and design. Stafffelt that the project met a majority of these but not all. Garrow stated the project provided a significant amount of office and commercial space, which was consistent with the AACP and will help lead to a sustainable economy, It exceeds the affordable mitigation requirement and provides all affordable housing on site. The applicant has pledged to exceed the green building requirements by 15%. Staff recommended a condition for an energy audit to insure that this has occurred, Staff felt the applicant was deficient in the design and mass; there was an abrupt change in architecture and staff would like the applicant to re-study and make changes to this transition. Staff believed the project met many of the project goals but would like Planning & Zoning to recommend that the applicant look at the massing and design before it can be deemed an exceptional project for the multi-year allotments, Garrow said the project met all the commercial design standards; it was parallel to adjacent streets; commercial space was at sidewalk grade; it satisfied the window fenestration requirements and trash and utility areas will be walled and located appropriately in the alley, The building was not setback more than the average setbacks on the block. Garrow said the required pedestrian amenity was 1600 square feet and the applicant proposed 1060 square feet of pedestrian amenity space along Spring Street, which would allow for outdoor seating for the Weinerstube Restaurant and the rest would be paid through cash-in-lieu. Stan Clauson thanked Jessica for an excellent presentation; all of the significant aspects from the unit count and the site, Clauson utilized drawings for the depiction of the fist floor with the entrances of the commercial spaces onto the street and the new proposed Weinerstube, The parking lot next door was private and the driveway cut would be restored to street parking. Clauson said the replacement development will have a valuable effect on the street. 4 Aspen Planninl! & Zoninl! Commission Meetinl! Minutes October 17. 2006 Clauson introduced Andy Weisnowski and Bill Poss the architects for the building. Clauson said the design was an enhancement to the location and complimented the existing streetscape elements and provides an exciting fusion of historical and contemporary elements. Clauson said this was entirely within the code from a parameter standpoint; it meets the height requirements and was below the allowable FAR. A~dy Weisnowski said they broke down the building into masses Ihat correlate with the grid ofthe city (30 foot or 60 foot masses), which was the traditional development pattern throughout Aspen, Weisnowski noted the corner related to Spring and Hyman with a reduced mass to a two story structure and to introduce some interest to that comer and the higher points of the building were generally set back from 8 to 10 to 15 feet. A model was presented for the sense of the scale of the project. Weisnowski said there were distinct massing breaks to scale to the town and not read as one block building. The outdoor seating for the restaurant was covered, Weisnowski said the affordable housing will have great views to Aspen Mountain and morning sun. Bill Poss said that this building has an iconic comer of interest similar to other buildings in town; there was a lot of interest and vitality in this building. Poss said they met with HPC staff and the renderings did not show all the street trees. Sieve Skadron asked the height from the street to the ceiling on the outdoor portion where the Weinerstube Restaurant would be located. Weisnowski said the smaller section was 8 to 9 foot high but the majority was about 13 feet. Ruth Kruger asked the size of the restaurant. Weisnowski replied about 3500 square feet. Skadron asked for an explanation of multi-year allotments, Garrow responded that there were certain allotments available each year; the Cl and CC zone districts 6 free market units available, Stage III took 5 of those units for 2006 so the allotments needed are borrowed from 2007; next year that would leave 1 available. Tygre said that she understood that a certain number of allotments had to be available for future years. Garrow said it was Ordinance 12 that amended this. Clauson said that Ordinance 12 amended this and reduced the growth rate by about half; the 2000 square foot limit on free market residential units, The commission and staff had different interpretations of the evaluation for the allocation process, The commission wanted to make sure they were using the same criteria, Clauson stated that this was an exceptional project and determined the allocation process. Kruger asked if the open space requirement was required to be open to the public. Garrow answered staff understood that the open space seating was for the 5 ASDen Planninl! & Zoninl! Commission Meetine: Minutes October 17. 2006 Weinerstube was open to air, which would qualify for pedestrian amenity; with this design it does not comply with a roof; the applicant would have to pay cash-in-lieu, Kruger said an audit was required in 3 years (staff memo page 5) to see if they were exceeding the international energy conservation code by 50%; how was this enforceable, Garrow said it was in the Resolution as well and at 3 years the building department would choose an energy consultant that knows how to do the audit at the expense of the applicant and ifit does not meet the requirements the applicant would be required to upgrade to those standards. Kruger said that "exceptional building" was a nebulous term and how it was defined; she said that responsible builders shOUld be building a "green building" anyway and that should not make it exceptional but other qualities shOUld make it exceptional. Allgaier responded that the application itemized how they attain greater than the code requirements. Kruger asked what was in the front of the building on the second floor. Poss replied that it was commercial, office and residential. Poss utilized drawings to show the levels for the employee housing, floor to floor at 10 feet and floor to floor for the retail was 13.6 feet. Poss said that they were meeting everything that staff asked them to do to make this an exceptional project. Brian Speck asked how they viewed the pedestrian amenity. Clauson replied there was no pedestrian amenity, the requirement was 10% that they would pay cash-in- lieu for the pedestrian amenity. Clauson noted the overhang was a pedestrian amenity. Poss stated there was angle parking right there. Speck asked if they felt they addressed the breaking up of the massing through the design of the building and asked if that was their representation for the comer being an anchor. Poss replied that was the contemporary comer on the building. Speck asked how this was an exceptional building. Clauson said there were specific criteria for an exceptional building; the criteria inClude affordable housing, the green building techniques, design, and under the FAR. Poss said that when the plan was submitted there was a form to fill out for the green building specifically, which was judged by points. Clauson said there were 8 criteria for exceptional building and 1 did not apply; the AACP goal advances, it exceeds minimum affordable housing requirements, historic (does not apply), provide the appropriate categories from APCHA, maximizes public transit uses, promotes sustainability of the local economy, locating employees within the infill area, design elernentsofa desirable site plan and compatible with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area, Tygre asked if the retail uses would be limited to those uses that were allowed under CI zoning unless they came in for special review. Garrow replied that was correct. Tygre asked where the cash-in-lieu would be used for the pedestrian amenity, Garrow replied that the money went into a fund and determined by City Council where the pedestrian amenity or streetscape improvements would take 6 Aspen Plannine & Zonine Commission Meetinl!: Minutes October 17. 2006 place. Tygre asked ifthere was a location established for the cash-in-lieu for the parking spaces. Garrow replied there was not a specific location for the money. Kruger asked if the affordable housing was for sale. Garrow replied yes for sale, category 3 and 4, No public comments. Dan Mysko sent a letter against the project. PUBLIC HEARING: 1150 CEMETERY LANE Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing. MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue the public hearing for 1150 Cemetery Lane to November 1\ seconded by Steve Skadron. All infavor, APPROVED. Resume public hearing on 307 South Spring Street. Skadron asked for more clarification on the dramatic architectural transition from the traditional component to the more modern component. Weisnowski replied the transitions occur at the corner, which was the most active part of the project and the other more modem occur on the third floor setback were more subdued, Weisnowski said the appropriateness comes from the materials, scale, and respond to the context of the neighbors. Poss said the downtown guidelines ask for contemporary buildings so this design has the more contemporary statement on the end and the more traditional towards the mall. Tygre said there were questions of the design standards. Tygre stated that the CI zone districts had problems with high end restaurants; she said that a list of allowed uses in the C 1 zone would be helpful to this discussion. Tygre requested the differences between Cl and CC Zone Districts; the current CI uses and the current CC. Skadron requested further explanation for the recessed walkway along the north fa<<;ade does not create dead space, Clauson replied it was only a slight recess (7 feet), which allows people to look into store windows and more variegation to the front fa<<;ade and at the same time keeps the store windows right at the street but provides a small sheltered area. Kruger expressed concern for the process. Kruger said she liked the architectural masses being broken up, Kruger felt the consumer experience was diminished by setting the windows back and she said that retailers did not like it either so this 7 Aspen Plannine: & Zonine: Commission Meetine: Minutes October 17. 2006 probably was not where the high end retailers would be going, Kruger said the list for exceptional project was nothing less than what a project should be anyway; there was nothing exceptional on the list. Kruger said this was a perfect place for more parking and parking was being taken away. Speck wanted the corner more traditional in nature. Speck said that he was impressed with the amount of employee housing; the breaking up of the massing was acceptable, Speck asked ifthe elevators went to the roof. Weisnowski said the two elevators went to the third floor but not to the roof, Speck said that the project fit into the neighborhood. Tygre stated that Ruth covered a lot of the items that she had especially that this site should not be under parked, which would be a great benefit to the tenants of the building. Tygre said that it was shocking to approve a project with cash-in-lieu for parking when the site can accommodate parking; that was a real black mark against this project. Tygre said the building looked attractive and had no objection to the pointy roof on the corner; she appreciated the 30/60 foot modules. Tygre commended the applicant on the fully above grade employee housing. Tygre felt the categories on the housing, the under parking and no pedestrian amenity on site were all wrong. Tygre urged the applicant to keep some pedestrian amenity on site. Tygre said that the proposal as submitted does not qualify as an exceptional project. All of the commissioners requested the list of uses, code changes and exceptional project standards, Clauson stated that they responded to all the criteria for dimensional requirements; they were not required to provide all the parking on site and the code was clear about that. Clauson said with the exceptional project the criteria were laid out and it was not something that says it has to be more exceptional than what the criteria state. Clauson said that Ordinance 12 was passed during the course of work on this project and the design had to be altered because of changes from Ordinance 12 for the size of the units; they have tried to meet the code and exceed the code. Clauson said exceeding the energy requirements by 50% was huge and meets the affordable housing. Clauson said the only way to provide more parking was to provide a deeper basement to provide a number more spaces but because of the si te constraints to ramp down would not provide that much more additional parking. They will look at the analysis of the uses and further explore the energy qualitites of the building. 8 Aspen Planninl!: & Zoninl!: Commission Meetinl!: Minutes October 17. 2006 MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to continue the public hearing on the Weinerstube Redevelopment to November 7th; seconded by Brain Speck, All in favor, APPROVED. Meeting adjourned at 7:05 pm. '- ~ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 9 Bm'ofb 01 Aspen Plannine & Zonine Commission Meetine Minutes November 7, 2006 DRAFT COMMENTS ,.,.."..,..".".".".".".,..".,..,.,..,....,..,......,...........................................,.".,2 MINUTES ..,..,..,..,."."..,..,..,..".".".,..,.".,.".".".,..,.."."..,..,..".".".."...,....,..,.".".,,.,.,,2 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST....................................,.........2 WEINERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT .................................................................,.2 1 Aspen Plannin!!: & Zonin!!: Commission Meetin!!: Minutes November 7. 2006 DRAFT Ruth Kruger opened the regular Planning & Zoning Meeting in the Council Chambers at 4;30 pm. Commissioners Steve Skadron, John Rowland, Dylan Johns and Ruth Kruger were present. Brian Speck and Jasmine Tygre were excused. Staff in attendance were Joyce Allgaier, Jessica Garrow and Stephen Kanipe, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk, COMMENTS Ruth Kruger asked about the designation of Hearthstone House and what other properties were being designated. Joyce Allgaier said there were several properties being designated; there was criteria to be met in order to qualify to be listed having to do with the history of the building, the architecture and people associated with the building, Kruger asked how the owners were involved. Allgaier replied they were contacted and there would be a hearing with Historic Preservation and then with City Council. Kruger asked that P&Z receive a notice when projects were going to public hearings. Kruger had questions about the GMQS allotments and how it works. Kruger said it was inconceivable that a building as big as the Weinerstube redevelopment could only have 20 parking spaces; she said it was one of those un- intended consequences. Allgaier suggested a lunch meeting with staff on the subject. Steve Skadron requested information on cash-in-lieu for parking, pedestrian amenity, employee housing and everything. MINUTES The minutes were postponed to the next meeting. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Dylan Johns was conflicted on the Weinerstube Redevelopment, Smuggler Racquet Club Conceptual PUD and the Sky Hotel Redevelopment. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (09/1 9/06; 10/03, 10/1 7); WEINERSTUBE REDEVELOPMENT Ruth Kruger opened the continued public hearing on the Weinerstube Redevelopment. It was made clear to the applicant that in order for a motion to be approved all three votes had to be affirmative, Stan Clauson stated that was understood and wanted to proceed. 2 Aspen Plannin!!: & Zonin!!: Commission Meetin!!: Minutes November 7. 2006 DRAFT Jessica Garrow stated at the previous meeting the commission requested some changes to the application and requested staff to clarify how the land use code related to uses in the CC and C 1 Zone Districts. Exhibit C outlined the permitted uses, Garrow said the commission asked for clarification regarding Growth Management for an exceptional project and a multi-year allotment; the review criteria were the same for multi-year allotments and an exceptional project (detailed on page 2 of the staff memo). Garrow explained that in anyone year there were 18 free market allotments for the entire city; at no point can more than 6 allotments occur in the CC or CI Zone District. Within the total 18 allotments 6 are allowed to be used for an exceptional project; an exceptional project goes through the criteria. Garrow said 5 of this year's allotments for the CC and CI Zone Districts were used by the Stage III project; the Weinerstube is requesting the I remaining allotment for this year and is requesting the rest of the allotments form the multi-year, which would draw from next year's allotments for the CC and Cl Zone District. Kruger still disagreed with the staff interpretation; she asked where it shows that they can dip into the next year. Garrow replied it said that there were only 6 allotments in the CC and CI Zone District in a year regardless ifit was exceptional so if they use those 6 allotments in that year then an exceptional project can come in but can not go in as an exceptional project in that zone district (part 400 page 112 d), Kruger said that she did not interpret this in that way. Garrow noted on page 119 it began with Planning and Zoning Commission review and d on page 126 was City Council review; part one of that was exceptional project or multi-year development allotment. Kruger said they would continue to disagree, Joyce Allgaier stated that it was the Community Development Director's interpretation. Stan Clauson stated they accepted the staff interpretation and have tried to meet the criteria for either the exceptional project or the multi-year allotment. Kruger asked what was the point of having an exceptional project if there were no extra allotments. Kruger said that was the way she understood the rule to be written; she did not know how it became diluted into this, Garrow said for regular projects there were a total of 12 allotments available. Clauson said that Stephen Kanipe was present to address the commission's requests regarding the energy component. Garrow noted that 50% was significant and how it would be enforced, Stephen Kanipe stated that this project proposed to exceed the energy code by 50%; that was a significant effort on the applicant's part and on the teams' part to include very technical state of the art designs that were measurable, Kanipe said that Burlingame was at 48% and the new building at the Meadows (Doerhoiser Conference Center) was at 52%, which was considered state of the art, Kanipe explained there were a group of designers, mechanical system 3 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! Minutes November 7, 2006 DRAFT and building envelope specialists and detailers and material suppliers that were able to do this. Kanipe stated that he would love to be part of that level of achievement. Kanipe said it will be more common to have a commitment to accomplish that energy efficiency. Clauson said that the other part of the Planning Commission's concern was it measurable. Kanipe responded that energy can be measured but what it discounts is occupant behavior, which was a matter of education, Garrow stated the parking increased to 47 spaces, most underground and staff supported the new parking scheme, The applicant still will provide cash-in-lieu for the pedestrian amenity and was permitted in the code. Garrow noted the recessed portion has been brought up and staff supported the change but staff also felt that it was struggling for an architectural identity and would like to see a better transition between the more modem building on the comer and the more traditional buildings on Hyman. Staff also wanted the building broken up into the 30 and 60 foot module characteristic in that zone district. Stan Clauson said there was an addendum submitted on November 2nd with significant changes in response to Planning & Zoning, Clauson stated there were approximately 47 parking spaces, the current wall and structure has been moved and the square footage remains the same because of the ramping required for the parking from the alley. Clauson explained that the 30 and 60 foot modules were repeated throughout the building format. Andy Weisnowski utilized a model and drawings for the articulation of the building. Weisnowski said that the corner was more unique and addressed the residential neighborhood. John Rowland asked what the dark material in the back was going to be. Weisnowski replied it would be a darker metal material and the whole upper level would be darker so the eye perceived it as a recessive nature, Steve Skadron asked if the spaces on the first level were retail spaces with storefront windows. Weisnowski replied that was exactly what it was. Rowland asked if the windows were double hung on the bank, Weisnowski replied that would become a question of the energy efficiency of the systems that were used. Clauson said that since this met the code and was not a PUD it would not be seen by P&Z again, Clauson said there would be planters and ash trees with pavers on the sidewalks; the outdoor dining area was covered by a roof, which would be a more flexible, useful and functional for the restaurant. Weisnowski said the covering done in a more permanent way and would be better than a more contrived way, Skadron asked if the space was conditioned for a restaurant. Kruger replied that restaurants attract people and the code used to say locally serving restaurants but it was not enforceable. Allgaier said that it was also un-interpretable. Skadron asked the 4 Aspen Plannin!!: & Zonin!!: Commission Meetin!!: Minutes November 7, 2006 DRAFT uses allowed. Garrow replied that it was in Exhibit C and read the allowed uses. Clauson said that a change in use would be required; there were 6 retail locations and the Weinerstube would be the ih commercial location, Skadron asked if that meant 6 doors, Clauson replied they were showing 6 entries and the Weinerstube. Weisnowski said that the Weinerstube was best known for the breakfasts and this was a better side for the dining and outdoor dining, Skadron asked the current building's open space component. Clauson replied zero, Skadron asked how the parking would operate; was it paid parking; was it dedicated to the store operators and residents, Clauson replied that the code does not address any specific requirements for how the parking operates. Kruger said the 47 parking spots were off the street and underground, Skadron said if they would be used, Kruger stated they would be used; the spaces would be a benefit to the tenants and the amentias such as parking would attract tenants, Skadron asked why staff was not satisfied with the 30 and 60 foot modules. Garrow replied even though there was a portion of the building that responded to the next building and the side was 90 feet without any fenestration that would show a 60 and a 30 and did not feel that the transition was enough. Weisnowski said there were materials, height variations, the fenestration, windows and detailing were in this design to create the differentiations in the sections. Weisnowski said they went to great extents to create a building that had more bite sized pieces that were more consistent with the historic nature of town and this block alone had architecture that varied drastically in terms of styles. Clauson said this building meets all the stated commercial design standards in the land use code, Garrow said that staff felt this was an improvement from the previous design; they were happy with the store fronts brought out. Garrow said this was a 180 foot long lot and with the exception of a portion of the Weinerstube at the very front was all one height and staff felt this detracted from the more traditional 30 and 60 foot modules. Skadron asked what was the proposed area for the Weinerstube spot and what was the current Weinerstube. Weisnowski replied 3200 square feet give or take for the proposed and the current was about 3500 square feet. John Rowland asked if staff agreed that all the commercial design standards had been met. Garrow replied that was correct. Kruger said that the requirements for an exceptional project were for all projects and said that she did not know how the exceptional project came about. Kruger asked how the garage circulation went. Weisnowski utilized a map to show the one way alley from Spring Street with a ramping system going down to the garage 5 Aspen Plannin!!: & Zonin!!: Commission Meetin!!: Minutes November 7. 2006 DRAFT and loop around and go down another level or come back up on the other ramp; there were two ramps (like a scissor) in opposite directions. Kruger asked what the problem was with the ramps previously. Weisnowski said the code no longer allows 16% and will only allow 12%; so the ramp was fairly deep and it was safe with the alley. Public Comments: Kevin Wilson, current owner of the Weinerstube, asked where the Weinerstube would be located in the new building and the number of square feet. Clauson pointed out the location on the model. Weisnowski replied that there were about 3200 square feet. Rowland said that this proposed building was good and the energy code compliance was fantastic, Rowland said that he did not have a problem with the 30 and 60 foot modules. Kruger appreciated the applicant adding parking and bringing the retail up to the sidewalk and the restaurant being covered. Kruger said the affordable housing and parking did make it an exceptional project along with the green building. Skadron suggested a comment for the parking allocated to one space per unit for affordable housing units, available for tenants of the building and not condominiumized and not sold. Clauson stated they would accept that condition of approval. Skadron said the review criteria for an exceptional project "i" promoted sustainability and he realized that the commission cannot dictate what goes into the retail spots. Allgaier said the hard zoning would continue to apply to the commercial and office uses of the Cl Zone. Allgaier noted the project exceeded the affordable housing, which keeps people and brings people downtown. Allgaier said that the mixed use was a step in gaining social economic sustainability downtown. MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve Resolution #28, Series of2006 as amended with. conditions, commercial design review, growth management exemption for a new mixed use development, growth management for free-market residential units within a mixed use project, growth management review for the development of affordable housing; and recommending City Council approve a subdivision and multi-year growth management construction of a mixed use building with 18,000 square feet of commercial/office space, six free-market 6 Aspen Plannin!!: & Zonin!!: Commission Meetin!!: Minutes November 7. 2006 DRAFT residential units and twelve affordable housing units. Second by John Rowland. Roll call vote: Rowland, yes; Skadron, yes; Kruger, yes. APPROVED 3-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:05 pm. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 7 Exhibb +\ MEMORANDUM To: Development Review Committee From: Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev. Engineer Date: June 7, 2006 Re: 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision The Development Review Committee has reviewed the 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision for GM and Commercial Design Reviews at their June 7, 2006 meeting and has compiled the following comments: Attendees; Alex Evonitz, Com. Dev, Eng.;Steve Hunter, Engineering; Denis Murray, City Building Dept.; James Lindt, Planner Community Development; Brian Flynn, Parks; Tom Bracewell, ACSD; Blake Fitch, Parking; Cindy Christensen, Housing; Phil Overeynder, Public Works; Stan Clauson, Applicant; Kim Weil. Poss Arch. Building Department - Denis Murray; . Access Infrastructure Permit would be a way to start the project. . Pedestrian protection will be necessary as the work gets underway for the sidewalk. . No use of basement storage by anyone not directly associated with the building. . Doors and Windows all need to be ANCI accessible, Type B access. . Stabilization will be required as well as everything required for the Construction Management Plan (CMP). Fire Protection District - No Attendance Engineering Department - Steve Hunter; . The normal CMP, Soils Report and Drainage Reports are required. . Replacement of the sidewalk C&G need to be part of this project. . If snow melting sidewalks are installed the adjacent C&G need to be heated also so the runoff can go the COA existing collection System. Housing Office - Cindy Christensen; . A change of the unit mix should be considered for the affordable units rather than all 2-Bdrm. . Two different association will be necessary 1 for free market units and 1 for affordable units, . Anticipate going for Board review on June 21. Zoning Officer -Todd Grange; Page 2 of 7 June 7, 2006 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision for GM and Commercial Design Reviews . Parks fees will need to be determined and paid. . A lighting plan will need part of the permit application package. . Are the pedestrian amenities requirement being met at the 10%. Environmental Health - No attendance . AIR QUALITY: "It is the purpose of [the air quality section of the Municipal , Code 13.08] to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity possible by requiring the use of all available practical methods and techniques to control. prevent and reduce air pollution throughouf the city..."The Land Use Regulations [Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code) seek to "lessen congestion" and "avoid transportation demands that cannot be met" as well as to "provide clean air by protecting the natural air sheds and reducing pollutants". . The land use code states that the Growth manaaement criteria, residential: applications need to be consistent with Aspen Area Community Plan provision, Reducing dependency on the automobile is vital for the long- term livability and health of the Aspen area. The AACP envisions a time in the not-too-distant future when the automobile is not the dominant means of moving people in and around the community. The Aspen Area Community Plan seeks a balanced, integrated transportation system for residents, visitors and commuters that reduce traffic congestion and air pollution. Subdivision applications need to provide information on projected traffic generation and air pollution. . Using standard Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Rates, this development will generate 449 additional trips per day, and 63 pound of PM-10 per day. Thus this development will have a pernicious (negative) effect on the air quality if sicmificant mitiaation measures are not implemented, . To ensure that the development does not have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City of Aspen, the Environmental Health Department recommends that the following PM-l 0 mitigation measures be implemented: 1. Pay the City of Aspen's Air Quality Impact Fee (if in place by building permit submittal). Other recommended measures include: 2. Provide free bus pass for employees, 3. Active participation in the City's Transportation Options Program (TOP) by businesses and the Homeowner's Association, and 4. Providing covered and secure bike storage. The City of Aspen Environmental Health Department has reviewed the land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments and reminders: . FIREPLACE/WOODSTOVE PERMITS: The applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Building Department before the building permit will be issued. In the City of Aspen, buildings may have two gas log fireplaces or two certified woodstoves (or 1 of each) and Page 3 of 7 June 7, 2006 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision for GM and Commercial Design Reviews unlimited numbers of decorative gas fireplace appliances per building. New homes may NOT have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel. . FUGITIVE DUST: Any development must implement adequate dust control measures. . A fugitive dust control plan is required as part of the applicants erosion control plan. A fugitive dust control plan may include, but is not limited to fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance, A fugifive dust control plan must be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Air Quality Control Division if this project will last greater than 6 months. . ASBESTOS: Prior to remodel, expansion or demolition of any public or commercial building, including removal of drywall, carpet, tile, etc" the state must be notified and a person licensed by the state to do asbestos inspections must do an inspection. The Building Department cannot sign any building permits until they get this report. If there is no asbestos. the demolition can proceed. If asbestos is present, a licensed asbestos removal contractor must remove it. . TRASH STORAGE AREA: The applicant should make sure that the trash storage area has adequate wildlife protection. We recommend recvclina containers be present wherever trash compactors or dumpsters are located due to the Citv of Aspen's new Waste Reduction Ordinance, Chapter 12.06. . A total of at least 20-27* square feet of the utility/trash service area is recommended for recycling facilities. One 90-gallon toter = 2"x2.5" [5sq. ft.). Need one for each: co-mingled, office paper, newspaper = 15sq. ft. Cardboard - At minimum could use a toter = 5sq. ft and at most need a cardboard dumpster = 12sq.ft (3"x4"). Facility can have required space reduced if facility uses a cardboard shelf = Osq.ft The applicant is advised that with the new Waste Reduction Ordinance recycling services will be included with any trash hauling service contracted during construction, It is important that the applicant plan for adequate spoce for recycling during the construction of the project. Recycling services will include the following recyclable material: Cardboard. Co-mingled (plastic bottles, aluminum, steel cans and glass bottles), Newspaper and Office Paper. . NOISE ABATEMENT: Section 18-04-01 'The city council finds and declares that noise is a significant source of environmental pollution that represents a present and increasing threat to the public peace and to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen and to its visitors. Noise has an adverse effect on the psychological and physiological well being of persons, thus constituting a present danger to the economic and aesthetic well-being of the community, " Page 4 of 7 June 7, 2006 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision for GM and Commercial Design Reviews . During construction, noise cannot exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 am and 7 pm, Monday thru Saturday. Construction is not allowed on Sundays, . It is very likely that noise generated during the construction phase of this project will have some negative impact on the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this and take measures to minimize the predicted high noise levels. A construction noise suppression plan must be submitted to the City of Aspen Environmental Health Department if the construction of this project will create noise greater than 80 decibels. . FOOD SERVICE FACILITIES: Section 10-401 of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Sanitation of Food Service Establishments in the State of Colorado requires a review of plans and specifications by this Department. The Department shall be consulted before preparation of plans and specifications. The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District must be contacted for their recommendation on the proper size of the grease trap. Restaurant grills are regulated by the City of Aspen ara t.he applicant should contact this Department to be it is in compliance with City code. . The applicant should be aware that approval of both plans and specifications is required before the building permit is approved. A minimum of two weeks is necessary for the Environmental Health Department to review and approve plans. Also, final approval from this Department is necessary before opening for business and prior to issuance of a Colorado Food Service License. Planning - James Lindt; . Massing of the structure as presented area a concern. A meeting is requested to discuss option for the structure. . A 3-d model will help P&Z understand the scale and massing of the project. . Buy downs for of her units is suggested verses a cash in lieu for other affordable units. Parks - Brion Flynn; . Tree Removal: An approved tree permit is required for any future tree removals. An approved tree permit requires a proposed landscape plan identifying trees for removal and means and schedule for mitigation. Please contact the City Forester for more information 920-5120. The tree permit must be approved prior to an approved demo permit. . Tree Protection: A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site. 6 formal plan indicatina the location of the tree protection will be reauired for the blda permit set. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of Page 5 of 7 June 7, 2006 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision for GM and Commercial Design Reviews construction backfill, storage of equipment. foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree remaining on site. This fence must be inspected by the city forester or his/her designee [920-5120) before any construction activities are to commence. . Landscapina and Sidewalk landscaped area: Landscaping in the public right of way will be subject to landscaping in the ROW requirements. The Landscapina plan needs to be redesianed and a new plan presented to the Parks Department for approval prior to P & Z. . The street tree planting shall be evenly spaced a minimum of 15 to 20 foot off center. . Use the existing tree locations to determine appropriate spacing along East Hyman and S Spring. The planting should be spaced evenly from the Western property line around the corner ending at the alley property line. . ROW requirements require adequate irrigation pressure and coverage. . Improvements to the soil profiles of the ROW [amendina the current soils to improve air, water filtration and increase lonaevitv of the new plantinas). . Tree trenches will need to be utilized for the street tree planting. Water/Electric - Phil Overeynder; . A transformer location needs to be included for the new construction. . Separate meters are required for each unit in the building. This should be accomplished using a single building penetration then a split of services. . All existing services need to abandoned. Community Development Engineer - Alex Evonitz: . Fees will be required for a storm drainage connection to the City system. . Grading for the new FF needs to address the fact the current building is below the alley level on the south side. . The normal requirements need to be addressed at the time of permit submittal. Special emphasis should be directed to the Construction Management plan because of the close quarters on the lot. Material staging, parking and material handling are major concerns. A tower crane should be considered for material handling on site to minimize traffic disruptions. . Permits for ROW permits will be required for any work within the COA ROW. Parking - Rich Ryan and Brian Fitch . Construction parking will need to be addressed. . No further comment at this time. Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Torn Bracewell . Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. . ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections [roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. Page 6 of 7 June 7, 2006 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision for GM and Commercial Design Reviews . On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. . Oil and Grease interceptors (NOT traps) are required for all food processing establishment. Locations of food processing shall be identified prior to building permit. . Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance establishments. . Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. . Elevator shafts drains must flow thru o/s interceptor . Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line according to specific ACSD requirements. . Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. . One tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is servl:'d by a single service line. . Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district. . All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Peg in our office can develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to the district. . Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the improvements needed. . Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that would be overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve capacity in the area of concern [only for the material cost difference for larger line). . Where main sanitary sewer lines are required to serve this new development or the existing publicly owned sewer system requires modification or adjustment, a line extension request and .collection system agreement are required. Both are ACSD Board of Director's action items. . Applicant will be required to deposil funds with the district for construction costs. engineering fees, construction observation fees, and fees to clean and televise the new main sewer line extension into the project. . The Applicant will have to pay 40% of the estimated tap fees for the anticipated building stubouts prior to building permit. . The glycol heating and snow melt system must be designed to prohibit and discharge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage areas must have approved containment facilities. Page 7 of 7 June 7, 2006 307 S. Spring Street Subdivision for GM and Commercial Design Reviews . The applicant will be required to fund the main line replacement of approximately 300 feet of the existing sanitary sewer system in the alley from Spring St. to Hunter St. . Soil Nails are not allowed in the public ROW above ASCD main sewer lines and within 3 feet vertically below an ACSD main sewer line. . Applicant's civil engineer will be required to submit existing and proposed flow calculations. . Owners will receive credit for prior tap fees, but only in the on the books amount at the time of payment. MEMORANDUM To: James Lindt, Community Development Department From: J annette Murison, City Environmental Health Department Date: June 9, 2006 Re: 307 South Spring Street Subdivision, Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Parcel ill #2737-182-25-004 ~. The City of Aspen Environmental Health Department has reviewed the land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments. , AIR QUALITY: "It is the purpose of [the air quality section of the Municipal Code 13.08] to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity possible by requiring the use of all available practical methods and techniques to control, prevent and reduce air pollution throughout the city..,"The Land Use Regulations (Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code) seek to "lessen congestion" and "avoid transportation demands that cannot be met" as well as to "provide clean air by protecting the natural air sheds and reducing pollutants". The land use code states that the Growth management criteria. residential: applications need to be consistent with Aspen Area Community Plan provision, Reducing dependency on the automobile is vital for the long-term livability and health of the Aspen area, The AACP envisions a time in the not-too-distant future when the automobile is not the dominant means of moving people in and around the community. The Aspen Area Community Plan seeks a balanced, integrated transportation system for residents, visitors and commuters that reduce traffic congestion and air pollution. Subdivision applications need to provide information on projected traffic generation and air pollution. Using standard Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Rates, this development will generate 449 additional trips per day, and 63 pound of PM-l 0 per day. Thus this development will have a pernicious (negative) effect on the air quality if si!mificant mitigation measures are not implemented. To ensure that the development does not have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City of Aspen, the Environmental Health Department recommends that the . following PM-l 0 mitigation measures be implemented: 1. Pay the City of Aspen's Air Quality Impact Fee (if in place by building permit submittal). Other recommended measures include: 2. Provide free bus pass for employees, 3. Active participation in the City's Transportation Options Program (TOP) by businesses and the Homeowner's Association, and 4. Providing covered and secure bike storage. The City of Aspen Environmental Health Department has reviewed the land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments and reminders: FIREPLACE/WOODSTOVE PERMITS: The applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Building Department before the building permit will be issued. In the City of Aspen, buildings may have two gas log fireplaces or two certified woodstoves (or 1 of each) and unlimited numbers of decorative gas fireplace appliances per building. New homes may NOT have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel. FUGITIVE DUST: Any development must implement adequate dust control measures. A fugitive dust control plan is required as part of the applicants erosion control plan. A fugitive dust control plan may include, but is not limited to fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. A fugitive dust control plan must be submitted to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Air Quality Control Division if this project will last greater than 6 months. ASBESTOS: Prior to remodel, expansion or demolition of any public or commercial building, including removal of drywall, carpet, tile, etc., the state must be notified and a person licensed by the state to do asbestos inspections must do an inspection. The Building Department cannot sign any building permits until they get this report. If there is no asbestos, the demolition can proceed. If asbestos is present, a licensed asbestos removal contractor must remove it. TRASH STORAGE AREA: The applicant should make sure that the trash storage area has adequate wildlife protection. We recommend recvcling containers be present wherever trash compactors or dumpsters are located due to the City of Aspen's new Waste Reduction Ordinance, Chapter 12.06. A total of at least 20-27* square feet of the utility/trash service area is recommended for recycling facilities. One 90-gallon toter = 2"x2.5" (5sq, ft.). Need one for each: co-mingled, office paper, newspaper = l5sq. ft. Cardboard - At minimum could use a toter = 5sq. ft and at most need a cardboard dumpster = l2sq.ft (3"x4"). Facility can have required space reduced if facility uses a cardboard shelf = Osq.ft The applicant is advised that with the new Waste Reduction Ordinance recycling services will be included with any trash hauling service contracted during construction. It is MEMORANDUM TO: James Lindt, Community Development FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing DATE: August 22, 2006 RE: 307 SOUTH SPRING STREET /625 EAST HYMAN A VENUE (REVISED) ParcelID No. 2373-182-25-004/2373-182-25-003 ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval to replace an existing commercial space with a mixed-use project to include retail space, restaurant space, office space, deed-restricted units and a free-market residential unit. BACKGROUND: The redevelopment will replace an existing commercial space, containing the Wienerstube Restaurant, and an empty lot. Currently, the parcel is 18,000 square feet and is improved with a commercial building approximately 6,222 square feet of floor area of which 627 square feet is storage and 5,595 is net leasable area. The project also includes the gravel parking lot approximately 6,000 square feet. The ground floor is to include retail space. The employee housing is approximately 13,960 square feet of floor area and is a mix of 12 two-bedroom units (950 square feet net leasable per unit) of which 50% are to be Category Three and 50% Category Four, The third (top) floor is to consist of a free-market residential unit totaling 10,805 square feet and contain four 2,000 square foot units and two studio units, for a total of six units. The basement is to be used for storage, mechanical and laundry facilities for the employee housing. No parking spaces are required for the deed-restricted and/or free-market units in the C-I zone district and none is being provided. MITIGA TION REOUIREMENTS: Under Section 26.470.040(C)(6), affordable housing must equal to 30% of the additional free- market floor area that is provided in a manner acceptable to APCHA. The free-market residential floor area (limited to the third floor of the building) is 10,805 square feet - 30% of 10,805 square feet is 3,241.50 square feet. The deed-restricted affordable housing floor area is 13,960 square, far exceeding the 30% requirement. Under Section 26.470.050(A), 60% of the employees generated by the additional commercial space needs to be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash-in-lieu. The current Weinerstube Restaurant and Ajax Bike and Sport businesses employ 23 employees over 5,595 net leasable square feet (5,595 + 1,000 sq. ft. = 5.6 X 4.1 FTE's = 23 employees), The total amount of retail net leasable square feet has been reduced to 16,125. Minus the existing 5,595 square feet, 10,530 retail square feet generates an additional 43.173 employees (10,530 + 1,000 = 10.53 X 4.1 1 FTE's = 43.173 FTE's). At 60%, 25.9 employees is the mitigation requirement. On site employee mitigation is proposed in the form of 12 two-bedroom units (24 bedrooms). A two-bedroom unit mitigates at 2.25 employees; therefore, 12 X 2.25 = 27 employees; therefore, the 12 two-bedroom units satisfY the mitigation requirement. The deed-restricted housing is proposed as follows: . 6 Two-bedroom units, Category 3, at 950 square feet each . 6 Two-bedroom units, Category 4, at 950 square feet each The proposed units are being developed as part of the mixed-use development and are specified as "for sale" units that are to be sold through the lottery process. Two homeowners' associations would need to be established - one for the free-market component and one for the affordable housing component. RECOMMENDA nON: The Housing Board reviewed the application at their regular meeting on June 21, 2006 and staff reviewed the changes requested by the applicant. Housing recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. The 12 two-bedroom units satisfY the mitigation requirement. 2. It is suggested that two homeowners' associations shall be established. Since the project is a mixed free-marketldeed-restricted project, the assessments shall be based on the differential between the price values of the free-market component compared to the deed- restricted component. This language shall be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the project. No changes to this restriction would be allowed without APCHA's approval. 3. Should the units be deed-restricted as rental units, the following conditions shall apply: a. The units have the ability to become ownership units at such time the owners would request this change and/or at such time the APCHA deems the units out of compliance over a period of more than one year. At such time, the units will be listed for sale with the Housing Office as specified in the deed restriction at the Category 3 maximum sales price based on the Guidelines in effect at the time of final plat approval for all units and all units shall be sold through the lottery system as specified in the Guidelines as they are being provided for mitigation purposes. b. Rental of the units shall be open to all qualified employees of Aspen and Pitkin County and shall not be tied to employment for the free-market component. c. The governing documents shall be drafted to reflect the potential for the rental units to become ownership units; i.e., the Protective Covenants, By-Laws, Articles of 2 Incorporation, etc. Since the project is a mixed free-market/deed-restricted project, the assessments shall be determined as stated in #2 above, based on the price values of the free-market component compared to the deed-restricted component. This language shal! be required in the approval and in the Covenants associated with the project. No changes to this restriction would be allowed without APCHA's approval. d. APCHA or the applicant shal! structure a deed restriction for the units such that an undivided 1/1 Oth of I percent of the property is deed restricted in perpetuity to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority; or until such time the units become ownership units; or the applicant may propose any other means that the Housing Authority determines acceptable. 4. The deed-restriction shall be recorded at the time of recordation of the Condo Plat and prior to Certificate of Occupancy. 3 / ~<~:tmibit I. ,. -"'.~ ~ Resource " Engineering Group, Inc. efficiency' sustainability. simplicity Doerr-Hosier Center HV AC System Design Elements The HV AC system will use roughly 50% less energy than ifthe building had been built following typical Aspen/Pitkin Code requirements- and these are some of the strictest in the country. A few of the exceptional items included in the center's HV AC system are listed below: . GSHP: Ground source heat pumps (GSHPs) provide very efficient heating and cooling. Essentially the system works by moving heat to or from the outdoor pond as needed. This is the same technology used in your refrigerator and a typical window mounted air conditioner. This equipment is just bigger, of much higher quality, and able to operate in forward or reverse (produce cooling or heating);. . Heating efficiency: The heating efficiency of this system is approximately 400+%. In other words for every unit of energy we put in to pump the heat 'uphill' from the very large, relatively cool pond to the small hotter internal water loop, we get 4 units of heat out . Cooling efficiency: The cooling efficiency is measured with a unit know as the EER (energy " efficiency rating). A typical air conditioner has an EER of 12. This system has an EER of around 20. Also, whenever the temperature outside is less than 6SO F, the units will simply cool the building with 100% fresh air from outside. . Indoor air quality: The indoor air quality inside this building is assured by carbon dioxide monitoring. As more people enter a space, they breathe out more CO2 and the ventilation system increases the supply of fresh air to flush odors and pollutants from the building. Quiet operation: The system has been designed and built to strict acoustical criteria to operate very quietly and not interrupt speakers and musical guests. . High efficiency boiler: The GSHP system provides the majority of the hot water heating- even for the kitchen. To assure the almost limitless high temperature water needed to run a kitchen a ;'ery efficient (96%) condensing boiler is used for booster heating. This boiler will also provide additional heat to the space heating system on the coldest 10 to 20 days of the year. The boiler was added to control system costs. To be able to use only GSHP heating year round, the pool would need to be twice as large. . Air handler quality: To meet the acoustical and efficiency requirements of this system, the highest quality air handlers have been used. The fan motors and blades are the highest efficiency available. To prevent heat and sound transfer, the cabinet construction and insulation is some of the best available. . Bigger ducts and pipes equal smaller motors: Bigger pipes and ducts mean less friction, which results in reduced energy use. This simple design principle was used thrO!lghout this system to increase efficiency. , Please feel free to contact us at Resource Engineering Group with further questions. Sincerely, 'I ;1 ;j ~/." i~yq lliutJ' Ii 1/ t August Hasz, PE P.O. Box 3725' Crested Butte CO 81224 USA. tel (970) 349-1216 fax (970) 349-1218 . email houghton@reginc.com . web www.reginc.com VII. b ALPERSTEIN & COVELL, PC A I TOR "N E ". S .A. T l A V,. DONALD '\e, AIPERSTEIN CYN1HIAf COVEll ANDREA L.. BENSON 1600 BROADWAY, SUIH:: 2350 DENYER.. COIOR<\OO 80202.4921 dwa@alpenteincoveU..com cfc@alpe.stelncovell.com alb@alpersteincovellcom ell BF:RT Y. MARCHAND. JR. orcounstl TELEPHONE (303) 894-8191 r AX (303) 861-0420 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Phil Overeynder and Cynthia Covell RE: Golf Course Properties: Amendment to Water Service Agreement and Raw Water Agr'eement DATE: DecembeT 4, 2006 Backgr'ound The City is paTty to a 1996 Water Service Agreement which authorizes water service to the Galf Course Properties Lot Split These plOperties are located at 39590 State Highway 82 (Lat I) and 39600 State Highway 82 (Lat 2) The GalfCourse Properties are lacated acrosS the highway from the golf course In the mid-1990s, they were awned by John and Cindy Galardi (Lot I) and Gerd ZelleT (Lat 2) Presently, Alstan Gardner and Barbara Lee own Lot 1, and Archer and Sandra Bishap awn Lat 2 These lats aTe lacated 'Outside afthe city limits Under the OIiginaJ water service agreement, the City agreed ta provide treated watel service ta the lots in an amaunt not to exceed 8 ECUs, with a maximum offaUI' acre-feet per year OutdaOl irrigation with City tleated water was limited ta 2000 square feet per 1at The water service agreement alsa states that the City wauld provide raw water selvice pursuant to a separate I3W watel agreement, in an amaunt reasonably lequired for autdaor inigatian, from an existing well an the propelty The raw water agr'eement was never executed, and the existing well could nat be lehabilitated The property owners, having installed expensive landscaping while trying to lehabilitate the well, asked far and received City permission ta inigate with beated water an a tempOlary basis They also filed a water caurt applicatian far water rights 1'01 a pand and a shared inigation system For a cansiderable time, the City and the propelty owners were unable to resalve then differences concerning their respective rights and obligatians under the Water Service Agreement, and what SOlt of I3W water agreement shauld be develaped Last spring, City Cauncil authOlized a 1 declaratory judgment lawsuit to determine the parties' rights and liabilities under the Water Service Agreement. This led to negotiations with the plOperty owners, and a settlement which included the parties' agreement to the following: 1 No treated water use outdoors as of April I, 2006. 2. Compliance with the 1996 Water Service Agreement requirement that property owners quitclaim all right, title and interest in and to the Holden Ditch. 3 Conveyance to the City of the water rights the property owners have applied for in the water comt 4. No outdoor use of treated municipal water plOvided by the City, and limitation of the City's total annual water delivery obligation to 3.25 acre-feet (rather than 4.0 acre-feet as provided in the original Water Service Agreement) 5 A Raw Water Agreement that plOvides the following: a The City will be the sole plOvider ohaw and treated water to the Golf Comse Properties, Lots 1 and 2 b Raw water will be provided via a lease to the property owners of the water rights to be decreed in their water comt application. c Existing ponds and existing irrigated landscaping (2.75 acres), as shown on a map attached to the Raw Water Agreement, may be irrigated using untreated water from the wells. There will be no expansion of irrigation d. The landscaping that is presently being installed on the Highway 82 side of the berm on these plOpertics will use low-water-consumption native vegetation, which must be established by September 30,2007, and not require irrigation thereafter. e The property owners will pay the City's annual raw water delivery charges, and costs associated with wells, and 1he augmentation supplies for the wells. f lhe City will fOlgive revenues foregone as a result of assessing tap fees that did not take into consideration the amount oftreated water inigation that actually occurred prior to April I, 2006. g Cmtailment provisions will require the property owners not to use the wells when and to the extent the City imposes restlictions on raw water' deliveries in accordance 2 with raw water cmtailment policies, which policies shall be no more restrictive on the Golf COUlse Properties Lots I and 2 than City cmtai1ment ordinances applicable to outdoor treated water uses within the City. The Water Service Agreement and the Raw Water Agreement may be terminated by the City for default or violation by the property owners, following applOpriate notice and determination of default or violation and a right to cure.. Upon termination for any reason, including default or violation, the water rights decreed would be reconveyed to the property owners, and they would be disconnected entirely from the City water system. An Amended Water Service Agreement and a Raw Water Agreement including these provisioni has been executed by the property owners. They have also executed a deed conveying their interest (if any) in the Holden Ditch and a deed conveying their irrigation system water rights to the City Recommendation We re~ommend that Council approve the Amendment to Water Service Agreement and the Raw Water Agreement in the forms attached to the proposed ordinance These agreements will eliminate outdoor water use with treated water, provide greater certainty about raw water use and landscaping on these properties, and give the City the option to terminate the agreements entirely (and require disconnection from the City's treated water system) if the agreements are violated This settlement thus will provide the City with greater control over water use at these properties, prevent fmther expansion of high water use landscaping 3 ORDINANCE NO. Go Series of 2006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 16, 1996 WITH GERD M. ZELLER AND JOHN GALARDI AND CINDY GALARDI FOR PROVISION OF TREATED WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS TO PROPERTIES KNOWN AS THE GOLF COURSE PROPERTIES (39590 STATE HIGHWAY 82, AND 39600 STATE HIGHWAY 82), AND APPROVING A RAW WATER AGREEMENT FOR THE SAME PROPERTIES. WHEREAS, City Council approved ordinance No. 24, Series of 1996, which authorizes a Water Service Agreement whereby City treated water service was extended extraterritorially to the Golf Course Properties (39590 State Highway 82 and 39600 State Highway 82), subject to the terms and conditions of said Water Service Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Water Service Agreement was recorded with the Pitkin County Recorder on September 4, 1997, at Reception No. 408086; and WHEREAS, the Water Service Agreement authorizes provision of treated City water to the Golf Course Properties for lawful in-building uses, fire protection, swimming pools, and irrigation of up to 2,000 square foot on each lot of the Golf Course Properties; and WHEREAS, the Water Service Agreement contemplated execution of a Raw Water Agreement, which was never completed; and WHEREAS, disputes and differences arose between the City and the original owners of the Golf Course Properties regarding the parties' respective rights and obligations pursuant to the Water Service Agreement; and WHEREAS, the current owners of the Golf Course Properties, Archer Bishop and Sandra Bishop and Alston Gardner and Barbara Lee, have agreed to amend the Water Service Agreement to limit their use of City treated water to indoor uses and minor outdoor uses only, with no irrigation; and WHEREAS, the current owners of the Golf Course Properties have also agreed to enter into a Raw Water Agreement whereby they will convey certain water rights to the City in return for the City's agreement to provide untreated water for irrigation and aesthetic uses on the Golf Course Properties as described in said Raw Water Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City Council has had an opportunity to review with staff the proposed amendment to the Water Service Agreement and the Raw Water Agreement, and to obtain such further information as it deems necessary to evaluate the amendment and the Raw Water Agreement, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT Section I. The City Council of the City of Aspen hereby determines that the proposed Amendment to Water Service Agreement, which authorizes the City to provide treated water to the Golf Course Properties (Lot I and Lot 2, Golf Course Lot Split, Pitkin County, Colorado) for indoor and minor outdoor uses, is in the best interest of the City and substantially complies with the City of Aspen water policy for extraterritorial water services, as set forth in Resolution No. 5, Series of 1993, as amended, and therefore agrees to amend the Water Service Agreement, on the terms and conditions set forth in the Amendment to Water Service Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Aspen hereby determines that the proposed Raw Water Agreement attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference is also in the best interest of the City, and the City Council therefore agrees to enter into said Raw Water Agreement. Section 3. This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4. A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the day of , 2006, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _ day of ,2006. Mayor Attest: City Clerk FINALLY ADOPTED, PASSED AND APPROVED THIS ,2007. DAY OF Mayor Attest: City Clerk F: \Client F iles\Aspen\GolfCourse\ordinance. wpd Fmal103106 AMENDMENT TO WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT This Amendment is made to that certain Water Service Agreement dated September 16, 1996 and recorded September 4,1997 with the Pitkin County Recorder at Reception No 408086 ("Water Service Agreement"), among the City of Aspen, Colorado ("City"), Gerd M Zeller and John Galardi and Cindy Galatdi ("Original Applicants") regarding water service to the Original Applicants' leal property descIibed as Lot I and Lot 2, GolfCoUlse Properties Lot Split, according to the recorded Plats thereofin Plat Book 18 at Page 26, Plat Book 18 at Page 74, and Plat Book 19 at Page 98, Pitkin County, Colorado, and ref OIled to in this Agreement as the "Subject Propel ty" Recitals WHEREAS, the Subject Property is now owned by Sandra and Archer Bishop, Jr (Lot 2), and J. Alston Gatdller and Batbara Lee (Lot I), who are successors in interest to the Original Applicants, and refeHed to herein as "Applicants;" and WHEREAS, the water system infrastructure that was to be constructed as described in the Water Service Agr"eement has been constructed, and the City presently supplies tr"eated water service to the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, due to the passage oftime, changed circumstances, and the need to clarify certain provisions of the Water Service Agreement, the patties have determined that the Water Service Agreement should be amended, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: I References to "Applicants" in the Water Service Agreement shall herein be deemed references to the Applicants herein identified, and their respective heirs, successors and assigns All other terms in the Water Service Agreement that are defined terms shall have the same meaning in this Amendment, unless a different meaning is specifically stated" 2 The second sentence of Patagraph I of the Water Service Agreement is amended to read as follows: Pursuant to this Agreement, the City shall provide treated water service to the Project and the Subject PlOperty in an amount not to exceed eight (8) ECUs, provided, however, that the maximum volume of water" the City shall be requited to plOvide to the PlOject and the Subject PlOperty pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed 3.25 acre-feet per year Final 103106 3 Paragraph 7 of the Water Service Agreement is deleted in its entirety, and replaced with the following Paragraph 7: 7. Conveyance of Water Rights, Permits and Structures.. Applicants shall diligently pursue a final decree in Case No 2002CW42, presently pending in the Water Comt, Water Division No 5, and upon eutry ofa final decree, shall convey to the City, the foIl owing water lights and weIl permits, by quitclaim deed, free and clear ofliens and encumbrances, for no additional consideration The water rights described in (1) - (6) below are herein refened to as the "Water Rights" and are specifically identified as foIlows: (I) 575 acre-feetlyeal of fully consumable water attributable to the Stapleton Brothets Ditch, decleed October 16, 1933 in CA 3000, Gatfield County District Coutt, with an apPlOpIiation date of June 30, 1904, with consumptive use quantified in Case No 99CW306, Water COutt, Water Division No.5, on Janumy 31, 2005 (2) .1 cfs of Stapleton BlOthels Ditch Enlatgernent and Water Right, Priority No 777, decreed November 5,1971 in CA 5884, Gatfield County District Court, with an appropIiation date of September 22, 1960 (3) Rights available to Applicants pursuant to Water Allotment Contract No. 456 with Basalt Consetvancy District dated ApIi112, 2005, as amended October 11, 2005, which authOlizes allotment of water in accordance with said contr.act in the amount of 64 acre- feet per year (4) Bishop WeIl No I, located in the SEI/4, NEl/4, Section II, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P.M., at a point approximately 2040 feet from the NOIth section line, and 1240 feet from the East section line of said Section II, in Pitkin County, permit no 64155-F (5) Gardnel/Lee WeIl No I, located in the SEI/4, NEI/4, Section II, Township 10 South, Range 85 West ofthe 6th P.M, at a point apPlOxirnately 2175 feet born the North section line, and 1625 feet bom the East section line of said Section II, in Pitkin County, permit no (,yqgs.. t= 2 Final 103106 (6) Bishop Pond, located in the SWI/4, NE1/4, Section II, Township 10 South, Range 85 West ofthe 6'" PM, at a point approximately 20475 feet fiom the Notth section line, and 1483 5 feet from the East section line of said Section 1[, in Pitkin County, with a capacity of 6 acre-foot Conveyance ofthe above Water Rights shall be a prerequisite to continued provision of treated watel service by the City pmsuant to the Water Service Agreement and this Amendment after thirty days from entry ofa final declee in Case No 2002CW42 In addition, upon execution ofthis Agreement, Applicants shall convey to the City by quitclaim deed all of their right, title and interesr in and to the Holden Ditch, and all water lights decreed thereto, and shall not oppose any water court plOceedings brought to change or defend the Holden Ditch water rights The City agrees that it will not undertake any water comt proceedings to change the Water Rights desclibed in subsections (I) - (6) above Following conveyance to the City, and so long as the City owns the Water Rights, the City shall be the applicant in all water court proceedings to maintain diligence or to make absolute the Water Rights, and Applicants shall assist the City in such proceedings by timely providing information necessary to maintain diligence and/ot to make the Water Rights absolute Applicants shall not oppose any such applications for finding of reasonable diligence or to make the Watel Rights absolute, although they may file statements of opposition in order to be infotmed of the course of the proceedings. Should Applicants file statements of opposition for such purposes, they will promptly thereafter stipulate to entry of a decree upon the pending application confirming diligence or making the water lights absolute 4 The second paragraph of Paragraph 13 is deleted, and is replaced with the following: The tleated water delivered by the City pursuant to this Agreement may be used fOI all lawful in-building municipal purposes As of April I, 2006, no treated watel will be used for any outdool purposes except the filling of swimming pools and fire protection purposes All treated water use will be consistent with the City's Water Policy Resolution No 5, as amended, series of 1993, and water conservation ordinances Notwithstanding the foregoing, treated water selvice will be pi ovided to the Subject Property only so long as all required backflow prevention devices ale properly installed, tested and maintained, no unplOtected cross-connections, structural 01 sanitary hazards exist, and so long as the City's treated water is used 3 Final lO 31 06 for putposes authorized by this Agreement Applicants' water systems (f01 both treated and raw water) will be available for inspection to authorized City representatives as plOvided in the Aspen Municipal Code to detennine whether cross-cormections 01 other structural or sanitaty hazards exist and to confirm that treated municipal watel is being used as auth01ized by this Agreement, and is not being used fOl OUtdOO1 inigation or aesthetic pmposes Upon reasonable request by the City, Applicants shall provide samples of their municipal water and their iuigation water to allow the City to confirm the source of water being used at a particulat location, and to verify the absence of clOss-connection. Treated water service may be suspended if a required backflow prevention device does not w01k, is removed or is bypassed, or if an unprotected cross-connection exists on the Subject Property Service will not be restored until such conditions 01 defects are couected at Applicants' expense, 5 Patagraph 14 is deleted and replaced with the following: The City will be the sole provider of treated and untreated water service to the Subject Propetty, and shall provide untreated water service pursuant to the Raw Water Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A 6 Patagr aph 23 is deleted and replaced with the following new patagraph 23: 23 Enforcement bv the City The paIties to this Agreement recognize and agree that the City has the right to enforce its rules, polices, regulations, ordinances and the terms of this Agreement by suspension of the supply of water provided hereurrder, provided, however., that Applicants will be given notice of any such violation and a right to cure as provided in the Code or by Aspen Water Department Standards in effect at the time the notice is given, but in no event shall the cure period be less than seven days. In addition, in the event of a final court determination that the Customers (or any of them) have breached the Raw Watel Agreement, the City may also suspend the supply of water provided hereunder, after providing seven days notice of suspension for such violation and without an additional cure period Suspension of service may he made pUlsuant to this paragraph whethel or not the Raw Water Agreement itself is tcrminated. In addition, in the event that Applicants (01 any of them) or any user who has purchased 01 leased a portion of the Subject Property violates provisions of the City's Code, rules, polices, standatds, regulations, ordinances applicable to municipal water customers, or the terms ofthis 4 F mal 103106 Agreement, the City shall have all remedies available to it at law ot in equity, ot as provided in the Code or in this Agreement, including but not limited to the light to place a lien against the Subject Property, the right to foreclose such lien, and the right to specific performance ofthis Agreemerlt. Without limiting the foregoing rights and remedies, Applicants agree that the City may also enfotce such violations by injunction, the patties agreeing that the damages to the City liotn such violations are ineparable, and there is nO adequate remedy at law fOl such violations The City shall be free from any liability arising out of the exercise of its rights under this paragraph. 7 Paragraph 24 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following new paragr.aph 24: 24 I ennination This Agreement shall continue until telminated It may be terminated (I) by mutual agreement of all parties, (2) together with termination of the Raw Water Agr.eement, at the written request of Applicants, as provided below, (3) upon a final comt determiuation that Applicants have breached this Agreement; or (4) upon a final court determination that Applicants have breached the Raw Water Agreement. (I) Termination bv Mutual Agreement: This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written agreement of all patties upon terms and conditions acceptable to all patties (2) Termination at Aoolicants' Election. If Applicants wish to terminate this Water Service Agreement and the Raw Water Agreement (both of which must be terminated iftermination is elected pmsuant to this paragraph 24(2)), they shall provide written notice oftermination, signed by all Applicants or their succesSotS in interest, to the City at least 30 days prior to termination Upon expiration of said 30-daynotice period, Applicants shall, at Applicants' expense, promptly take all actions required by the City to disconnect tlle Subject Property liom the City treated water distribution system. Upon such disconnection, the City shall reconvey the Applicants' Water Rights described in paragraph 3 above (the restated Paragraph 7 of the Water Service Agreement), but not including the Holden Ditch, to Applicants by quitclaim deed, without intervening impairment, loss or encumbmnce caused by the City, at no charge, and the City shall have no ftuther obligation to provide raw ot treated water service to the Subject Property Applicants shall be responsible for all costs and fees for 5 Final 103106 disconnection, and all watet charges owing as of the date of disconnection (3) 1 erl1lination as a Result of Breach Upon a final COllrt determination that Applicants (or any of them) have breached the Raw Wate! Agleement, OI upon a final court deteullination that Applicants (01 any of them) have breached this Agreement, the City may terminate this Agreement by giving notice oftermination, and no furthel right to cUle must be plOvided, Unless tile Applicants and the City otherwise agree, following the City's notice of tetmination, Applicants shall permanently disconnect fiorn the City's treated water system, upon the earliest of (a) entry ofa decree ofthe Water Court, Water Division No 5, authorizing in-house uses of water from Applicants' wells or other wells; (b) approval of a substitute water supply plan that allows in-house uses of water from Applicants' wells or other wells; (c) Applicants' connection to the treated water system of another water provider; or (d) one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of Notice of 1 ennination Upon telmination, unless a mutual agreement for termination provides otherwise, the City shall reconvey the Applicants' Water Rights described in paragraph 3 above (the restated Patagraph 7 of the Water Service Agreement), but not including the Holden Ditch, to Applicants by quitclaim deed, without intervening impairment, loss or encumbrance caused by the City, at no chatge, and the City shall have no further obligation to provide raw or treated water service to the Subject Property. Applicants shall be responsible for all costs and fees for disconnection, and all water charges owing as ofthe date of termination. 8 Paragraph 29 is revised to include the following addresses for purposes of notice, and to delete the names and addr'esses of the Original Applicants 6 Final 103106 Atcher Bishop II and Sandra Bishop 39600 Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 and PO Box 11 ]46 Knoxville, TN 37939 with copy to Patrick, Millel & Kropf, PC Attn: Paul L Noto, Esq 730 E Durant A venue, Suite 200 Aspen, CO 81611 J Alston Gardner and Barbata Lee 39590 Highway 82 Aspen, C081611 and 3155 Roswell Road, Suite 330 Atlanta, GA 30305 with copy to Patrick, Miller & Kropf, P C Attn: Paul L Noto, Esq. 730 E Durant Avenue, Suite 200 Aspen, CO 81611 9. The Water Service Agreement, as amended herein, remains in full force and effect IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto set their hands on the date and yeat above first written Attest: ?liS Archer Bishop,.Ir as wn joint tenancy of Lot 2, Gol Properties Lot lit 1 er as QWneI in . int tenancy of Lot I, Golf Course CITY OF ASPEN By: ~~/.~~ Sandra Bishop as owner in joint tenancy of Lot 2 Golf Course Properties L tSplit 7 Final 103106 Properties Lot Split STATEOF -riON,JF/,,,,",, ) ) ) COUNTY OF 1-4-1"1 Lot Split SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 13-1;; dayof tJrNE>-'&~ 2006 by Archer Bishop h and Sandra Bishop, who personally appemed before me WITNESS my hand and official seal My commission expires: -;Z.-vc...~ ;j,).o 0 j( STATE OF fnlO-VCl-do COUNTYOF~ ) ) ) WITNESS my hand and official seal ~ tlJ,1..010 N~j~~ 8 4-- Final 103106 cny OF ASPEN RAW W A lER AGREEMENl This Raw Water Agreement is entered into this day of , 2006, by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado ("City"), a home rule nllmicipality with its principal address at I 30 South Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 and Sandm and Archer Bishop, Jr, and J. Alston Gatdner and Barbara Lee (SandIa Bishop, Archer Bishop, Jr, J. Alston Gardner and Barbara Lee ale herein refened to as "Customers ") WHEREAS, the City cunently owns, operates and maintains in accordance with tile laws of the State ofColOJaclo and the Chalter, Code, policies, and OJdinances of tile City of Aspen, ColOJado, the City of Aspen water system, which includes, among other things, watel'lights, decrees, structures and facilities permitting delivery ofraw waterto vSJious locations within and without the City limits; and WHEREAS, Customers own certain land outside the City limits, described as Lot I and Lot 2, Golf Course Properties Lot Split, accOJding to the recOJded Plats thereofin Plat Book 18 at Page 26, Plat Book 18 at Page 74, and Plat Book 19 at Page 98, Pitkin County, ColOJado, andrefelIed to in this Agreement as the "Subject PlOperty;" and WHEREAS, in Case No. 2002CW42, Water Court, Water Division No.5, Customers at.e seeking adjudication of changes of water rights, underground water rights, a storage right, and approval of a plan fOJ augmentation (including water rights and contract rights to provide augmentation supplies), aU of which are refelled to in this Agreement as the "Customer Watel Rights;" and WHEREAS, Customer.s receive municipal water service from the City pursuant to an extratenitOlial water service agreement dated September 16, 1996, and recorded September 4, 1997, with the Pitkin County Recorder at Reception No 408086, and amended ,2006; and recorded (the "Water Service Agreement"), and have agr.eed to convey the Customer Water Rights to the City; and WHEREAS, Customers wish to convey to the City and lease back the Customer Water Rights pursuant to this Raw Water Agreement fOJ ilIigation and aesthetic uses on the Subject Property, as provided in this Agr.eement; and WHEREAS, this Raw Water Agr.eement is entered into in conformity with and subject to the laws ofthe State of Colorado and the Charter, Code, policies, OJclinances, rules and regulation of the City; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: Final 103106 1 Conveyance of Water Rights Customers agree that upon entry of a final decree of the Customer Water Rights in Case No 2002CW42, they will convey the Customer Water Rights to the City by quitc laim deed, fiee and clear of liens and encumbrances, for no additional consider ation. The Customer Water Rights are specifically identified as follows: a 5.75 acre.feet/year of fully consumable water attributable to tile Stapleton Brothers Ditch, decreed October 16, 1933 in CA 3000, Garfield County District Court, with an appropriation date of June 30, ] 904, with consumptive use quantified in Case No 99CW306, WaterCoUlt, Water Division No 5, on January 31,2005. b. 1 cfs of Stapleton Brothers Ditch Enlargement and Water Right, Priority No. 777, decreed November 5, 1971 in CA 5884, Garfield County District COUlt, with an appropriation date of September 22, 1960 c. Water rights available to Customers pursuant to Water Allotment Contract No 456 with Basalt Consetvancy District dated April 12, 2005, as amended October 11, 2005, which authorizes allotment of water in accordance with said contract in the amount of 6 4 acre-feet per year, d. Bishop Well No. I, located in the SEl/4, NE 1/4, Section 11, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th P M., at a point approximately 2040 feet nom the North section line, and 1240 feet from the East section line of said Section II, in Pitkin County, permit no. 64155-F. e Gardner/Lee Well No 1, located in the SE1/4, NEI/4, Section 11, Township 10 South, Range 85 West ofthe 6" PM., at a point approximately 2 I 75 feet nom the North section line, and 1625 feet from the East section line of said Section 11, in Pitkin County, permit no b4C\'il5-F f Bishop Pond, located in the SWI/4, NE 1/4, Section II, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6'" PM, at a point applOximately2047. 5 feetfiom the NOIth section line, and 1483.5 feet nom the East section line of said Section II, in Pitkin County, with a capacity of6 acre-foot Following conveyance to the City, and so long as the City owns the Customer Water Rights, the City shall be the applicant in all water court proceedings to maintain diligence or to make absolute the Customer. Watm Rights, and Customers shall assist the City in such proceedings by timely plOviding information necessary to maintain diligence and/or to make the Customer Water Rights absolute Customers shall not oppose any such applications for fmding of reasonable diligence OJ to make absolute the Customer Water Rights, although they may file statements of opposition in order to be informed of the COluse of tile proceedings Should Customers file statements of opposition for such purposes, they will promptly thereafter stipulate to entry of a decree upon the pending application confirming diligence or making the water rights absolute 2 Final 103106 2 Provision of Raw Water. The City will be the sole provider of raw water to the Subject Propelty No additional supplies will be developed, purchased or appropriated for or used on tile Subject Property without the prior agr.eement of all parties, and amendment of this Raw Water Agleement. Upon conveyance to tile City of the Customer Water Rights, the City will lease, subject to the provisions this Raw Water Agreement, water plOduced by the Customer Water Rights to Customers for raw water illigation and aestlletic purposes on tile Subject Property Said water shall be provided for use in accordance with the decree entered in Case No. 2002CW42 and all requirements of state water administration officials, provided, however, that the City shall not be required to provide water hereunder at such times as, and to the extent that, (1) state water administration officials determine that the water rights decreed in Case No 2002CW42 are out of priority and cannot be augmented in accordance with the augmentation plan, or (2) the City imposes restrictions on raw water deliveries in accordance with raw water curtailment policies, which policies shall be no more restrictive on deliveries herelmder to the Subject Property thatl City cUltailment ordinances or policies applicable to outdoor treated water uses within the City. Should raw water deliveries need to be cUltailed, either because of state administrative orders, or because the City has imposed restrictions on raw water deliveries as described in the foregoing sentence, Customers agree to limit or curtail well withdrawals as required, and to limit or curtail diversions to storage, until Customers are notified that such raw water may again be used The provisions ofthis paragraph shall not preclude the City from suspending raw watet deliveries as provided in paragraphs 9 and 14 3 Use of Raw Water on Subiect Propertv. All raw water use on the Subject Property shall be in accordance with the decree entered in Case No. 2002CW42, and as futther set forth herein The Customers may use the raw water leased to them pUIsuantto this Raw Water Agr eement for inigation of the existing currently-inigated landscaping as shown on Exhibit A, which depicts the currently-inigated ateas, the ponds, water featmes, the ateas not cUIrently inigated, and an area on Lot 2 where native vegetation is being installed (identified on Exhibit A as "T emporaty htigation") 1he atea identified on Exhibit A as "1 empOlatY hrigation" may be inigated until September 30, 2007, and shall not thereafter be inigated. The City shall conduct an onsite inspection after September 30, 2007, to confirm that all temporaty inigation systems have been disconnected and removed 1 he raw water herein provided may be used in accordance with the decree entered in Case No 2002CW42 to fill the Bishop Pond for inigation control, and for aesthetic, piscatorial, fire protection and lecreation uses as provided in said decree Other than the temporary inigation in the area shown on Exhibit A, there will be no expansion of inigation to areas not illigated as of April 1, 2006, and not shown as "currently irrigated landscaping" on Exhibit A, and there will be no additional water features. There will be no cross-connections of the raw water irrigation system to the City's treated water system Customers will be responsible for the proper installation, maintenance and testing of required backflow plevention devices, and for assuring that unprotected cross-connections, structural or sanitary hazards exist 3 Fina/103106 Customers' water systems (fen both treated and JaW water) will be available for inspection as provided in the Aspen Municipal Code, to authorized City representatives to determine whether cross-connections or other stlUctural or sanitmy hazards exist, to confirm that no treated municipal water is being used for outdoOl illigation or aesthetic plllposes, to confirm that the irrigated landscaping is not expanded fi"om tile areas autllOrized fOl illigation as shown on Exhibit A, and to confirm compliance with curtailment requirements. Upon reasonable request by the City, Applicants shall provide samples oftheinmmicipal water and their illigation water to allow the City to confirm the source of water being used at a particular location, and to verify the absence of cross- connection. 4. Structures and Facilities. Customers shall be and remain the owners oflhe wells, the Bishop pond stlUcture, and all other stlUctules and facilities necessmy to utilize the Customer Water Rights, and shall be responsible for all operation, maintenance, repair and replacement of such structllles and facilities, and for payment of all amounts due to Pitkin County for the 575 acre-feet of fully-consumable water described in patagraph ] (a) above, all amounts due to the Walter Paepke Life InsUlance Trust and Cato]e S. Seelen for the 1 cts <if the Stapleton Brothers Ditch Enlatgement and Water Right described in paragraph I (b) above, for all assessments and other amounts required to be paid to the Basalt Water Conservancy District pUlsuant to the Water Allotment Contract described in paragraph ] (c) above, and all amounts required to be paid for well permits and substitute water supplyp1ans to enable use of the Customer. Water Rights. Customers shall be solely responsible for the cost of constructing, cleaning, operating, maintaining, repairing andreplacing the wells, Bishop pond, and all inigation lines, sprinklers, and other structmes and facilities which enable use of the raw water on the Su~ject Property 5 Term. This Agreement shall continue until terminatcd as provided in patagraph 14 below 6. Payment Customers shall pay an annual chatge for the delivery ofraw water, based on the City's raw water delivery rates in effect at the time the water is deliver.ed The chmge shall be billed to Customers by .!tme 30 of each year in advance of the upcoming inigation season. The chatge shall be a flat fee based on the square footage or inigated acreage.. Payment shall be made to the City within 60 days of the billing date. Customers shall not be chatged any additional lease payments "7 Service Subiect to the City Chatter, Codes. Rules. Regulations and Policies All water service provided hereunder shall be subject to all applicable provisions of the Charter of the City of Aspen and the Aspen Municipal Code, as well as all applicable standards, rules, policies OJ regulations of the City now in effect or as may be hereafter adopted, including but not limited to those provisions ofthe Code applicable to City residents as set forth in Chapter 8 40 and Chapter 25, prOVIded, however that no such ordinances, IUles, policies OJ regulations shall be applied so as to impose mOle restrictive curtailment obligations on Customers 01 their successors than are plOvided for in paragraphs 2, 9 and 14 of this Raw Water Agreement 4 Fll1al103J06 8 No Right to Reuse or Successively Use Water Except as helein provided, Customers shall have no right to reuse or make a succession of uses of the water provided pursuant to this Raw Water Agreement Customers agree that they do not, by this Raw Water Agreement, acquire any interest in water rights owned or controlled by the City, and that any claims they may have Witll respect to the delivery of water hereunder are strictly contractual rights as plOvided in this Raw Water Agreement 9 Suspension of Water Deliver y The City shall not be liable for failure to deliver watm by reason of any unanticipated failure ofthe wells or other delivety infrastructme, or if water cannot be lawfi.llly delivered in accordance with the decree in Case No 2002CW42. As stated in paragraph 2 above, the City may also impose restrictions on raw water deliveries pmsuant to tllis Raw Water Agr.eement, in accordance with raw water curtailment policies, which policies shall be no more restrictive on deliveries hereunder to the Subject Property than City cmtaihnent ordinances or policies applicable to outdoOl treated water uses within the City. The City may also suspend raw water deliveries pursuant to this Raw Water Agr.eement following notice of defimlt and failure to cllte as provided in paragraph 14 below. 10 Indemnification As partial consideration for this Agr.eement, Customers agr.ee to indemnify the City and hold it, its officials, agents and employees, harmless from any and all losses, injuries 01 claims of any kind whatsoever, including all costs of defense and attorneys fees, that may arise from Customers' use of the raw water leased hereunder, 01 Customels' operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation or replacement of stlUctures 01 facilities belonging to or controlled by Customers 01 their agents, employees, or contractors, on or off of the Subject Propmty.. At no time shall anything contained within this Raw Water Agreement be considered or interpreted to waive or diminish, in whole or in part, the rights 01 limitations bestowed upon the City by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, CRS 924-10-101, et seq, as amended, or any other law, nor shall the indemnification obligation hereunder cover claims or losses 01 damages for which the City would not be liable, should this indemnification provision not have been in existence II . Water Quality Customers acknowledge thatthe raw water that is subject to this Raw Water Agreement is untreated water, and that the City makes no guatantees OJ representations concerning the quality ofthe water provided, or its fitness fOl the pmposes for which it is used, or for any particular pmpose 12 Disconnection of Irrigation Svstem horn Treated Water System; Cross-Connection Prevention The irrigatiou system on the Subject Property has been disconnected from the City's treated water distribution system From and after Apri!l, 2006, no treated water has been or will be used for inigation or other outdoOl uses on the Subject Propetty except as herein specifically plOvided. The inigation system has been connected to the Bishop Well No I, the Gatdner/Lee Well No. I, and/or the Bishop Pond. Customers will be lesponsible for assuring that there ate no cross connections to the City water system at any time The City shall have the right to make reasonable 5 FinallOH06 requests fO! assUl ance that no cross-connection exists, and such assurances shall be provided at Customers' cost The City will not seek to recover flOm Customers any revenues foregone as a result of past treated water irrigation ofthe Subject PlOperty that exceeded the amount authOlized in the OIiginal Watel Service Agreement priO! to its amendment. 13 Obligations Consistent with Law The patties agree, intend and understand that the obligations imposed by this Raw Water Agreement are only such as are consistent Witl, the state and federal law The pm ties further agree that if any provision ofthis Raw Water Agreement becomes, in its performance, inconsistent with state O! federal law 01 is declared invalid, the par ties shall either terminate this Raw Water Agreement and the Water Service Agreement or in good faith negotiate to modify the Raw Water Agreement so as to make it consistent with the state 01 federal law, as the case may be. 14 Default. If either the City or Customers defimlt in the perfOlmance of their obligations hereunder, the non-defimltingpm ty or patties shall have available all remedies at law or equity, including the right to specific perfOlmance The following provisions shall apply: a. Default bv Customers. (I) Non-Pa~ If Customers, or any of them, fail to make any payment hereunder when due, the City shall give notice of non- payment Customer s shall have fifteen (15) days fiom the date of notice withiu which to make payment. Thereafter, the City may suspend water deliveries hereunder until payment of all outstanding balances (including any applicable interest and late fee) has been received, and the City may, but need not, exercise any other rights available to it pursuant to the Code, or at law or equity, or pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to the right to place a lien on the Subject PlOperty, the right to foreclose such lien, andlor the right to bring an action for damages for breach of this Agreement (2) Other Breaches If the Customers, or any of them, fail to comply with any other obligation pursuant to this Agreement, the City shall give notice ofdefimlt Such default must be cured within 45 days of the date of notice of default, provrded, however, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within the initial 45-day period, an additional period, not to exceed 45 days shall be allowed for cure of the default If.a defimlt as to which notice is giveu is not cured within the applicable period for cure, the City may suspend water deliveries 6 FlnallO 3J 06 hereunder lmtil the default is cured, and the City may, but need not, exercise any other rights available to it pursuant to the Code, or at law or equity, or pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to the right to bring an action for specific performance of this Agree- ment and/or an action for damages for breach of this Agreement (3) Effect of Court Finding of Breach. Ifa final court determination is made that Customers or any of them have breached this Raw Water Agreement, such breach will also be a breach of the Water Service Agreement, and the City shall have the remedies available to it for breach of the Water Service Agreement, including suspension of lteated water service and termination ofthe Water Service Agreement as therein provided In addition, upon a final court determination that Customers or any of them have breached this Raw Wate!' Agreement, the City may terminate this Agreement as provided in paragraph 15(c}. b. Defaultbv City. If the City fails to comply with any obligation pursuant to this Agr.eement, the Customers shall give notice of default Such default must be CllIed within 45 days of the date of notice of default, provided, however, if such default cannot reasonably be cUled within the initial 45-day period, an additional period, not to exceed 45 days shall be allowed for cure of the default If a default as to which notice is given is not cured within the applicable period for cure, the Customers may, but need not, exercise any other rights available to them at law or equity, including but not limited to the right to bring an action for specific performance of this Agreement or an action for damages for breach of this Agreement 15. Termination This Raw Water Agreement shall continue until terminated It may be terminated in the following manner: a Termination bv Agreement This Raw Water Agreement may be terminated by mutual written agreement of all parties upon terms and conditions acceptable to all parties. b I ermination at Customers' Election. If Customers wish to terminate this Raw Water Agreement and the Water Service Agreement (both of which must be terminated if termination is elected pursuant to this patagraph 15 b), they shall provide written notice of termination, signed by all Customers Or their successors in interest, to the City at least 30 days prior to termination. Upon expiration of said 30-day notice period, Customers shall, at Customers' expense, promptly take all actions requiled by the City to disconnect the Subject PlOperty from the City treated water distribution system Upon such disconnection, the City shall reconvey the 7 Final 1 031 06 Customer Water Rights (but not the Holden Ditch) to Customers by quitclaim deed, at no charge, and the City shall have no furthel obligation to provide raw or treated water service to the Subject Property Customers shall be responsible for all costs and fees associated with such disconnection and all watel charges owing as of the date of telmination. c Termination as a Result of Customers' Default If the City obtains a final court determination that Customers 01 any of them have breached any provision of tlris Raw Water Agreemcnt, rhe City may give Notice ofTennination, and this Agreement shall terminate seven days flom the date of such notice. d Termination Upon Termination of Water Selvice Agreement This Raw Water Agreement shall terminate automatically upon termination of the Water Service Agreement without the need fOl any Notice of T elmination by the City. e Termination as a Result of City's Default If the Customers obtain a final court detennination that the City has breached any provision of this Raw Water Agreement, the Customers may give Notice of Termination, and this Raw Water Agreement shall terminate seven days from the date of such notice f Reconvevance upon Termination Upon termination, the City shall reconvey the Customer Water Rights (but not the Holden Ditch) to Customers by quitclaim deed, at no charge, without intervening impairment, loss or encumbrance caused by the City, and the City shall have no nllther obligation to provide raw water service to the Subject Property Customers shall be responsible for all raw water chatges owing as of the date of disconnection. ] 6 No Waiver 01 Rights 01 Remedies. Failure of a patty hereto to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall not be deemed a waiver of any such right or remedy and shall not affect the right of such party to exercise at some future time said right 01 remedy 01 any other right 01 remedy it may have hereunder. 17 Notice. All notices required to be given hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be deemed given upon personal delivery orupon deposit in the United States mail, certified mail, retUln receipt requested, postage prepaid, properly addressed to the party to whom directed at its address shown below or at such other address as may be given by notice pursuant to this patagraph: City of Aspen Water DirectOl, City of Aspen 130 South Galena Str.eet Aspen, CO 81611 8 Final 103106 with copy to City Att0111ey City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Customel s: Archer Bishop Jr and Sandra Bishop PO BoxllJ46 Knoxville, TN 37939 J Alston Gatdner and Barbara Lee 3155 Roswell Road, Suite 330 Atlanta, GA 30305 and and 39600 Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 39590 State Highway 82 Aspen, CO 81611 wi th copy to with copy to Patrick, Miller & Kropf, PC Attn: Paul L Noto, Esq. 730 E Durant Avenue, Suite 200 Aspen, CO 81611 Patrick, Miller & Kropf, P C Attn: Paul L Noto, Esq 730 E. Durant Avenue, Suite 200 Aspen, CO 81611 18 F Olce Maieure No patty shall be held liablefOl failure to perform herellllder. due to wars, strikes, acts of God, natural disasters, or other similat occurrences outside the control of such party 19 Assignment This Agreement may not be assigned without the written consent of the other party her eto, which consent shall not beurueasonablywithheld Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, the rights and obligations of Customers hereunder will be deemed assigned and transferred to Customers' successors-In-interest to the Subject Property 20 Entire Agreement This Raw Water Agreement together with the Water Service Agreement constitutes the total integrated agreement among the patties regarding the subject matter hereof, and supersedes and controls all other prior and contempor aneous written and oral agreements and representations of the patties. 9 Final 103106 21 Authority of Signatories By signing this Raw Water Agreement, the parties acknowledge and represent to one another that all procedures necessary to validly contract and execute this Agr.eement have been performed and that the persons signing for each palty have been duly authorized to do so 22 hrterPIetation of Agreement Neither the titles to this Raw Water Agreement and its paragraphs, nO! the recitals appearing priO! to paragraph I of this Raw Water Agreement shall be used to alter the meaning ofthis Raw Water Agreement, and in the event of a conflict, the terms and conditions of the numbcred par agraphs shall govern 23 Binding Agreement: Recording: Covenant. This Raw Water Agleement is binding upon the parties hereto, tlleir successors and assigns. This Raw Water Agreement shall be promptly recorded by the City, and shall constitute a covenant mnning with the Subject Property 24 Litigation In the event either party is requir ed to take legal action to enforce its rights under this Raw Water Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney fees and costs, including expert witness fees The parties agree that the forum for any such litigation shall be the Pitkin County District Court or County Court. 25 Counterpatts. This Agreement may be sigrled using counterpart signature pages, with the same force and effect as if all parties signed on the same signature page. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the patties hereto set their hands on the date and year above first written Attcst: CITY OF ASPEN By: CZ2:E~S Archet Bishop, Ir as owner joint tenancy of Lot 2, Golf Co rse Properties Lot Split ~~/. ~-4c?p Sandra Bishop as owner in joint tenancy of Lot 2, Golf Com se Properties Lot Split 10 Fl11a1103106 - J ston Gardn III oint tenancy of Lot I, Golf Course t I, Golf Course Properties PlOperties Lot Split STATEOF -(f",..;"-'f~6i: ) ) COUNTY OF l-<:No>< ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to befor e me this / ~ day of i-J"'6t--ff!,./L , 2006 by AIcher Bishop Jr and Sandra Bishop, who personally appeared before me. WITNESS my hand and official seaL My commission expires: y1~j~< /1 <t,).o C i ,-","L otaty Public STATEOF~ ) ) COUNTY OF ~ ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this InW dayof l\'nlf'k'm~,2006 by J Alston Gatdner and Batbata Lee, who personally appeated before mjj 2l.t>,'lOfO NO~~~~~ 11 fs:1 r~ ~ ::i' to I I _~. J ~il " . i'i lXa MEMORANDUM FROM: Mayor Klanderud and City Council Chris Bendon, Community Development Directo~ Joyce A. Allga~~uty Director TO: TURU: DATE: December 11, 2006 RE: Temporary Use Permit for Sleigh Rides on the City of Aspen Golf Course SUMMARY: Sandra Dieterich and Aspen Carriage and Sleigh, applicants, are requesting a Temporary Use Permit to allow a commercial sleigh ride operation on the City of Aspen Golf course from December 12 to March 31, 2006. The applicant is working with the Park's Department to make sure the Nordic trails will not be negatively impacted by the operation. A Temporary Use Permit was approved for a different operator in 2002 and by Aspen Carriage and Sleigh in both 2005 and 2006 for sleigh rides on the golf course for the winter season. There were no complaints by neighbors or other trail users with regards to that operation. Staffrecommends approval of the sleigh ride operation with conditions. Staff also recommends that a Temporary Use for future winter seasons be allowed to be approved administratively unless determined by the Community Development Director, for reasons having to do with negative impacts or complaints, that the use should be reviewed by the City Council. ApPLICANT: Sandra Dieterich and Aspen Carriage and Sleigh LOCATION: 39551 Highway 82, Lot 1, Golf Course Subdivision ZONING: Park Planned Unit Development (P PUD) and Park Golf Course Support Planned Unit Development (P GCS PUD) CODE CRITERIA FOR TEMPORARY USE: Section 26.450.050 allows City Council to grant a temporary use of up to one hundred eighty (180) days. As provided for in that subsection, all proposed extensions of a temporary use shall be evaluated under the same criteria as set forth in Sections 26.450.030 and 26.450.040. CODE CRITERIA: The following criteria must be considered for the review of the sleigh ride operation: A. The location, size, design, operating characteristics, and visual impacts of the proposed use. Staff Finding: The sleigh ride operation will originate from the first tee on the Aspen Municipal Golf Course, to the northwest of the pro shop. The sleigh rides will operate daily from 4pm to 8pm. The sleigh itself is staged at the entrance area of the golf course (now Nordic) club house, sitting off to the west side of where the golf carts are stored in the summer. The use does not conflict with the Nordic operations in that the sleigh will use Bernese Boulevard that follows along the perimeter of the golf course and does not intersect with the ski trail. B. The compatibility of the proposed temporary use with the character, density and use structures and uses in the immediate vicinity. Staff Finding: The sleigh ride operation is not expected to create any character or density problems for the area. Actually, one could argue that the sleigh ride scene is one that aesthetically adds to scenic beauty and setting of the area. Housing units are far enough away and the sleigh rides are sporadic enough that the use does not conflict with residential uses in the vicinity. C. The impacts of the proposed use on pedestrian and vehicular traffic and traffic patterns, municipal services, noise levels, and neighborhood character. Staff Finding: The sleigh ride operation will not impact traffic patterns as it is being run on the golf course, there shall not be any increase in noise levels and the City of Aspen is supporting this application and operation. Parking at the golf course is ample for the sleigh ride operation and Nordic trails operation. D. The duration ofthe proposed temporary use and whether a temporary use has previously been approved for the structure, parcel, property or location as proposed in the application. Staff Finding: The applicant is requesting approval by the City Council for the duration of the winter. The Temporary Use Permit has been allowed in previous years and due to the seasonal nature of this use comes back for approval year after year. Staff recommends that the use be allowed seasonally in future years through an administrative approval and with concurrence by the Parks Department unless determined that impacts are such that the City Council should conduct a public hearing on the request. E. The purposes and intent of the zone district in which the temporary use is proposed. Staff Finding: 2 The Park (P) zone district allows for recreational uses, such as this. F. The relation of the temporary use to conditions and character changes which may have occurred in the area and zone district in which the use is proposed. Staff Finding: There are no changes in the surrounding land uses that would prohibit this operation. G. How the proposed temporary use will enhance or diminish the general public health, safety, or welfare. Staff Finding: The temporary use will not impact the public health, safety or welfare. The horses are equipped with "manure collection devices" that keep the trail clean and odors down. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval ofa commercial sleigh ride operation on the City of Aspen Golf Course with the following conditions: I. The temporary use is valid from December 12, 2006 to March 31, 2007. 2. The applicant shall seek and receive any necessary approvals for signs relating to the operation from the City Zoning Officer. 3. The horses and sleigh shall be limited to the Bernese Boulevard Trail at the City of Aspen gol f course. The horse shall wear a diaper to prevent waste on the trail and the sleigh shall pull a drag to re-groom the course. 4. In future years, this seasonal use for sleigh rides on the City of Aspen Golf Course as proposed herein, may be approved by the Community Development Director with the approval of the Parks Department, with conditions as deemed appropriate, unless determined by the Community Development Director that for reasons of impacts or changed conditions that a public hearing and review should be conducted before the City Council. 5. All material representations made in the application and in the hearing by the applicant and the applicant's representative shall be considered conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: 3 RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the request for a Temporary Use Permit to Aspen Carriage and Sleigh for the purpose of operating a commercial sleigh ride operation at the City of Aspen Golf Course from December 12, 2006 to March 31, 2007 with conditions as noted in Resolution No. leI, Series of2006" Attachments: Exhibit A-Application 4 RESOLUTION NO. \0 \ (Series of 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, GRANTING A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE OPERATION OF COMMERCIAL SLEIGH RIDES ON THE CITY OF ASPEN GOLF COURSE, GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION, LOT I, ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID 2735-111-09001 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.450 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicants, Sandra Dieterich and Aspen Carriage and Sleigh has submitted an application for a Temporary Use Permit to allow the operation of commercial sleigh rides on the City of Aspen Golf Course, Golf Course Subdivision, Lot I; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests this use from December 12, 2006 to March 31, 2007; and has the approval of the Parks and Recreation Department; and, WHEREAS, Community Development Department reviewed the temporary use application and recommends that the City Council approve the temporary use permit with conditions; and, WHEREAS, City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on December II, 2006, and found that the proposed temporary use is not inconsistent with the character and existing land uses of the surrounding parcels and neighborhood and that granting the temporary use permit will not adversely impact the neighborhood; and, WHEREAS, City Council found that granting the temporary use permit will further the public interest and welfare by maintaining a valuable wintertime recreational activity in the Aspen area which is also consistent with the uses permitted in the underlying zone district. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section I In accordance with Section 26.450.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, does hereby grant Sandra Dieterich and Aspen Carriage and Sleigh, a Temporary Use Permit to operate a commercial sleigh ride operation on the City of Aspen Golf Course with the following conditions: 1. The temporary use is valid from December 12, 2006 to March 31, 2007. Resotution No. _, Series of2006 Page 2 2. The applicant shall seek and receive any necessary approvals for signs relating to the operation from the City Zoning Officer. 3. The horses and sleigh shall be limited to the Bernese Boulevard Trail at the City of Aspen golf course. The horse shall wear a diaper to prevent waste on the trail and the sleigh shall pull a drag to re-groom the course. 4. In future years, this seasonal use for sleigh rides on the City of Aspen Golf Course as proposed herein, may be approved by the Community Development Director with the approval of the Parks Department, with conditions as deemed appropriate, unless determined by the Community Development Director that for reasons of impacts or changed conditions that a public hearing and review should be conducted before the City Council. 5. All material representations made in the application and in the hearing by the applicant and the applicant's representative shall be considered conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions. APPROVED, December 11, 2006, at a public hearing before the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor John Worcester, City Attorney ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk "I I "",nmen I "--.....KI..U u.oJ'- ....r r ....."""'. .".. APPUCANT: Parcel ID # Name: Location: REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: 5u(\ck<A R ~ 'llO- l:t61;5- PRoJECT: 1"_ Address . Phone #: TYPE OF APPUCA nON: (please checIc all that apply): 0 Conditional Use 0 Conceptual Pun 0 Conceptual Historic Devt. 0 Special Review 0 Final Pun (& Pun Amendment) 0 Final Historic Development 0 Design Review Appeal 0 Conceptual SPA 0 Minor Historic Devl 0 GMQS Allobnent 0 Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) 0 Historic Demolition 0 GMQS Exemption 0 Subdivision 0 Historic Designation 0 ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream 0 Subdivision Exemption (includes 0 Small Lodge Conversion! Mmgin, Hallam Lake Bluff; condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane 0 Lot Split ~ Temporary Use 0 Other: 0 Lot Line Adiustment 0 T Amendment ,b Ie.. . 0 eN' 1 v W\ Oe.C&v"I bt.r-- + h V' 0 'h ~ Cl nJ.,.. S {(.ht--- ~ lA'"tA- ~ bv-., r IN /!/"vv I D /A..f 'j-ut Y'5, r ~ (_of.. ........-- .~) Have you atmebed the followiDg! o Pre-Application ConfeR:nce Summmy o Attacbment#l, Signed Fee Agreement o Response to Attacbment #3, Dimensiona1 Requirements Form o Response to Attacbment #4, Submitlal Requirements.. Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans tIIat are Is.... tIou 85" I II" mast be lOIded aDd . ftoppy disk with an electronic copy of aU writteII len (Microsoft Word Format) mast be snbmitted as part of the application. FE&<; DUE: $ _lei) llb [!iJ Memorandum The City orAsnen City AlIOrnev's Ollice TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: John P. Worcester DATE: December 5, 2006 RE: Ordinance No. 48 Series 2006 - Fee Increases, Second Reading Attached for your consideration and review is a proposed ordinance that, if approved, would increase the fees charged for certain services provided by City Departments. Appended hereto please find individual memoranda from the Department Heads proposing fee increases for 2007. The Finance Department has provided a spreadsheet depicting the 2006 current fee, 2007 proposed fee, and percentage increase if applicable. The Fee Ordinance maintains the City's policy ofrequiring consumers and users of its programs and services to pay fees that are deemed fair and appropriate for the costs of providing such programs and services. REQUESTED ACTION: Motion to approve Ordinance No.~, Series of2006. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ORDINANCE NO.Lt~ Series of 2006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF TIlE CITY OF ASPEN TO INCREASE CERTAIN MUNICIPAL FEES WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a policy of requiring consumers and users of the miscellaneous City of Aspen programs and services to pay fees that fairly approximate the costs of providing such programs and services; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that certain fees currently in effect do not raise revenues sufficient to pay for the attendant costs of providing said programs and services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section I. That Section 2.12.010 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth Aspen Municipal Golf Course user fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12.010 Aspen Municipal Golf Course. Season Pass Rates $900.00 through April I $1,000.00 after April I 20 punch pass $450.00 through April I $500.00 after April I Jr. Pass Rates $115.00 Green Fee Rates $95.00 6:30 - I :00 PM $75.00 1:00 - 3:00 PM $45.00 3:30 - close G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc Senior Green Fee Rates $45.00 for 18 holes $22.50 for 9 holes Jr. Green Fee $45.00 for 18 holes $22.50 for 9 holes Section 2. That Section 2.12.014 of the Municipal Code ofthe City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth Aspen Recreation Department FUN pass fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12.014 Recreation Department Fun Pass The Recreation Department shall issue Fun Passes that provides access to the holder of such a pass to the following facilities and activities: use of the James E. Moore Pool, public or open skating at the Lewis Ice Arena or Aspen Ice Garden, use of the climbing wall at the Red Brick Recreation Center, fitness classes held at the Red Brick Recreation Center, aquatic fitness classes at the Aspen Recreation Center, tennis court rental and usage at the Aspen Tennis Center. Usage, participation and access to the above activities may be limited to certain times and dates as indicated on the pass. DAILY ADMISSION Y outh-RFV Local Youth-Guest Adult-RFV Local Adult-Guest Senior Twilight Guest 10 visit Card 7.00 14.00 9.00 16.00 7.00 5.00 110.00 FUN Passes 20 Visit Youth - Resident 20 Visit Youth - Valley 20 Visit Adult - Resident 20 Visit Adult - Valley 97.00 112.00 146.00 164.00 I Month Youth - Resident I Month Youth - Valley 37.00 48.00 G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 2 I Month Adult - Resident I Month Adult - Valley I Month Family - Resident I Month Family - Valley 69.00 75.00 137.00 164.00 6 Month Youth - Resident 6 Month Youth - Valley 6 Month Adult - Resident 6 Month Adult - Valley 6 Month Family - Resident 6 Month Family - Valley 192.00 228.00 243.00 295.00 530.00 616.00 I Year Youth - Resident 354.00 I Year Youth-Valley 408.00 I Year Adult - Resident 437.00 I Year Adult - Valley 525.00 I Year Family - Resident 954.00 I Year Family - Valley 1098.00 Each additional family member above 4 I Month 6 Month I Year 15.00 50.00 100.00 Section 3. That Section 2.12.015 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth Aspen Recreation Center fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12.015 Aspen Recreation Center Meeting Room rental Nonprofit Use For profit use 54.00 64.00 Exclusive Use of Facility Nonprofit use Corporate use Negotiable Negotiable Section 4. G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 3 That Section 2.12.020 ofthe Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth certain user fees for the Aspen Ice Garden and Lewis Ice Arena, is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2.12.020 Aspen Ice Garden and Lewis Ice Arena ICE RENTAL & USAGE RATES Entire Facility Rental Aspen Ice Garden (AIG) Negotiable Lewis Ice Arena (LIA) Negotiable General Rental & camps AIG 213.00 LIA 223.00 Adult Non-Profit Prime Ice AIG 177.00 LIA 197.00 Adult Non-Profit Non-Prime Ice AIG 167.00 LIA 187.00 Youth Non-Profit Prime Ice AIG 172.00 LIA 187.00 Youth Non-Profit Non-Prime Ice AIG 157.00 LIA 172.00 Skate Sharpening 5.00 Pick Up Hockey 13.00 10 Punch Card pick up hockey 11 0.00 Free Style Sessions 9.00 Free Style 20 Punch Pass 140.00 Skating Classes 11.00 LOCKER RENTAL Monthly 25.00 G:~ohn\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 4 Weekly Camps 15.00 Section 5. That Section 2.12.030 ofthe Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth leisure and recreation user fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12.030 James E. Moore Pool Youth Swimming Lessons Pass Holder Non Pass Holder 52.00 68.00 Private Swim Lessons Pass Holder Non Pass Holder 26.00 31.00 Lifeguard Skills Challenge Lifeguard Training 99.00 205.00 CPR Skills Challenge CPR Skills Training 26.00 52.00 I sI Aide Skills Challenge I sr Aide Training 26.00 47.00 Kayak Roll Sessions Water Polo Drop Ins Masters Swim Drop In 5.00 plus admission 3.00 plus admission 3.00 plus admission Rentals Entire Aquatic Facility for Profit Entire Aquatic Facility Non-Profit-Adult Entire Aquatic Facility Non-Profit- Youth Single Pool Rate For Profit Single Pool Rate Non-Profit Single Lane Rental in Lap Pool Non-Profit Single Lane Rental Lap Pool- For Profit 208.00 167.00 146.00 78.00 68.00 14.00 16.00 Section 6. G:~ohn\word\memos\fees07 .secondreading.doc 5 That Section 2.12.040 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth leisure and recreation user fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12.040 Miscellaneous leisure and recreation fees GYMNASTICS Beginner Beginner 2 days/week Intermediate Intermediate 2 days/week Beginner Boys Begirmer Boys 2 days/week Intermediate Boys Intermediate Boys 2 days/week Advanced Boys Super Tots (4-5 yrs) Hot Shots Level 4 Level 5 & 6 - 3 days/week Level 5 & 6 - 4 days/week Level 5 & 6 - 5 days/week Levels 7, 8, 9, 10 Big Air (Teens & Adults) Parent/Tot (1.5-3 yrs) Tots (3-5 yrs) Gymfants (10 mo - 2 yrs) SOFTBALL/BASEBALL Youth Baseball Tee-Ball Girls Fastpitch Softball DAY CAMP Day Camp I time activity fee Guest Fee TENNIS Monday/WedlFriday (6 hours) Tuesday/Thursday (4 hours) Team (60 hours) Tennis Clinics Tennis Court Rental Fees SAILING G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 60.00 104.00 81.00 125.00 52.00 83.00 81.00 125.00 125.00 47.00 133.00 155.00 175.00 185.00 195.00 225.00 62.00 47.00 47.00 31.00 102.00 57.00 102.00 29.00/day 29.00/day 40.00/day 72.00 52.00 364.00 14.00 8.00 6 Sailing CLIMBING WALL Beginner Rock Rats Boulder Rats Intermediate/Advanced Climbing Beg. Ages 10+ 54.00 Jr. Rats 364.00 67.00 67.00 77.00 27.00 YOUTH INTRAMURALS (50 MINUTES for 5 WEEKS) Kickball I "/2nd Grade 42.00 Kickball 3'd/4'h Grade 42.00 Floor Hockey I "/2nd Grade Floor Hockey 3'd/ 4rh Grade Basketball I sl / 2nd Grade Basketball 3'd / 4lh Grade Gym Olympics YOUTH SOCCER Kindergarten (2 hours/week @ 5 weeks) 6 to 9 years (3 hours/week @ 6 weeks) YOUTH BASKETBALL (Grades I though 8) (2 hours/week @ 7 weeks) Track 15 & Under ADULT PROGRAMS Mens Softball Co-Ed Softball Adult Flag Football Mens Basketball Mens Soccer Womens Soccer Drop In Basketball Drop In Volleyball Trapeze (I day/week) Gym Rentallhour Section 7. G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 31.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 7 43.00 82.00 62.00 44.00 858.00 721. 00 312.00 676.00 936.00 535.00 5.00 5.00 62.00 54.00 That Section 2.12.045 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth Wheeler Opera House fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12.045 Wheeler Opera House RENTAL RATES Regular Performance Rate (also for rehearsal dates) $250.00 Not for Profit $450.00 for profits all days of week 40% add'l per added performance, same day Three day maximum in-season, four off-season Private Dates Individuals Only $750 per day or per event; no break for multiple usage days Private Dates Individuals Only - Christmas / New Years week $750 per day or per event, plus $1000 payment to Wheeler endowment Private Event Rates - Corporate / Business dates only $1,150 per day or per performance Theatre Rental Rates - Corporate / Business, Christmas / New Year's week $1,150 per day or per performance plus $1000 payment to Wheeler endowment Theatre Rental Rates (Private movie screenings only) $750 all inclusive (under 200 attendees) $750 plus expenses (over 200) 40% add'l per added screening, same day Box Office Royalty / Percentage Structure (all ticketed events) Straight 5% of box office; no cap Credit Card billback charges At actual cost for all types Ticket sellers At actual hourly cost plus 115 employer taxes; all hours other than regular hours of operation Ticket printing $0.05 per ticket for Not for Profits; $0.85 For Profits; sold and comps equal G :~ohn\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 8 Theatre Technician Chatges (all events) At cost plus II % employer taxes for Not For Profits At cost plus 20% for For Profits Chatge for ProCoMgrs flexible Custodial Charges $50 per day Not For Profit rate $70 per day For Profit Option to increase fee if deemed necessary and/or appropriate Front of House Manager Charge Waived for all regular usage purposes Matketing and Advertising (Print Only) No chatge for web listing and pickup materials; all other advertising is the responsibility of the renter Deposits Assess deposits only for first-time or fair risk renters Section 8. That Section 2.12.050 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth certain user fees for the Aspen Police Department, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.12.050 Aspen Police Department Fees LAW ENFORCEMENT RECORDS Accident Reports, per Report 6.00 Case reports per seatch 6.00 Plus per copied page 1.00 Arrest history and background checks, per seatch 6.00 Microfilm search per page 10.00 Plus per copied page 2.00 Photograph copies Per 8" x 10" 15.00 Communications logging, seatch per hour 25.00 Per Audio CD 15.00 Case Report/Accident Photos, per photo CD 15.00 ASPEN POLICE DEPARTMENT Alarm user permit fee First false alarm per year 100.00 104.00 G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 9 Second false alarm per year Third and fourth false alarm per year All bank alarms Late fees Central alarm license fee Vehicle inspection Certified VIN inspection Off-duty security, per officer, per hour Notary fees, per acknowledgement 208.00 312.00 332.00 11.50 293.00 17.00 20.00 83.00 2.00 DOG V ACCINA nON AND LICENSE FEES: Annual dog tag fees Transfer fee Replacement tag Section 9. 15.00 15.00 3.50 That Section 2.12.051 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth certain user fees for the Engineering, is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2.12.051 Engineering Department Fees 330.00 330.00 Encroachment License application and processing fee Vacation application and processing fee Right-of-way permit application and processing fee (waived for sidewalk replacement work) 330.00 Temporary occupation of ROW under encroachments by commercial operations, including contractors and vendors $2.50 per sq. ft/month Permanent Encroachment Fee $1,000.00 per permit Map and plan printing Technical standards specifications and details Section 10. G:\john\word\memos\fees07,secondreading.doc $4.00 per copy $50.00 per set 10 That Section 2.12.052 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth certain user fees for the Environmental Health Department, is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2.12.052 Environmental Health Department Fees I Special event plan review fee I Special event inspection fee I Noise variance fee I Swimming pool plan review fee I Site Inspection for Restaurants Food safety training urant Plan Review Fee Food Service License (depending on size of restaurant) (set by state statute) 44.00 44.00 44.00 74.00 77.00 77.00 355.00 $154- $343 Section II. That Section 2.12.053 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth certain user fees for the Information Systems Department, is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2.12.053 Information Systems Preprinted Standard Maps Large Format (larger than II" x 17") Small Format (II" x 17" or smaller) Custom Mapping Services Mailing Lists Plus $1.03/per sheet of labels Digital Data Services $25.75 $5.15 $128.75/hour $103.00/per search $128.75 minimum charge Section 12. G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 11 That Section 2.12.100 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth certain user fees for the City Community Development Department, is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2.12.100 International Building and Residential Code permit fees G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 12 (a) International Building and Residential Code Permit fees Total Valuation Fee $1.00 to $51.50 $2,000.00 $2,001.00 to $101.75 for the first $2,000.00 plus $16.25 for each additional $25,000.00 $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $475.50 for the first $25,000.00 plus $11.75 for each additional $50,000.00 $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $769.25 for the first $50,000.00 plus $8.10 for each additional $100,000.00 $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $1174.25 for the first $100,000.00 plus $6.50 for each additional $500,000.00 $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 $500,001.00 to $3774.25 for the first $500,000.00 plus $5.80 for each additional $1,000,000.00 $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001 and up $6,668.45for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $5.40 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof Other Inspections and Fees: 1. Inspections outside of normal hours mlmmum $250.00 or a per hour charge of $125.00 (minimum charge - two hours) 2. Reinspection fees $75.00 3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated $125.00 4. Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions $75.00 per hour to plans Plan Check Fees 1. Plan check fees are based on the building permit fee and equal 65% of the total building permit fee. Energy Code fees G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 13 I. Energy code review fees are based on the building permit fee and equal 10% of the total building permit fee, with a minimum charge of $25.00. Fire Sprinkler Fees I. Fire sprinkler fees are based on the valuation of the fire sprinkler system and calculated according to the Building Permit Fee schedule. The total Fire Sprinkler Permit fee is the total of the permit and the plan check fees. Excavation/Foundation Fees 1. The Excavation!Foundation permit fee is 35% ofthe building permit fee. Contractor Licensing Fees I. BEST test fee: The BEST test fee is based on the number of questions and level of the exam, starting in 2006. Unlimited BEST test (125 questions 8 hour time limit) $125.00 Commercial BEST test (100 questions 6 hour time limit) $100.00 Light Commercial BEST test (75 questions, 5 hour time limit) $75.00 Homebuilder BEST test (60 questions, 4 hour time limit) $60.00 Renewal test fees: Unlimited, Comm, Lt Comm and Homebuilder $50.00 (Test shall be 25 questions long with a 2 hour time limit) Specialty BEST tests (50 questions, 3 time limit) $50.00 Renewal test fees: Specialty BEST tests (25 question, 2 time limit) $35.00 2. Contractor License Fees Initial I-year Renewal 3-year Renewal General Contractor (unlimited) $265.00 $200.00 $400.00 G:\john\word\rnemos\fees07.secondreading.doc 14 General Contractor (commercial) $265.00 $200.00 General Contractor (light comm.) $265.00 $200.00 Note: Fee for initial year fee plus two renewal years: General Contractor (homebuilder) $100.00 $65.00 Note: Fee for initial year fee plus two renewal years: Specialty (subcontractors) Alteration and Maintenance $100.00 $65.00 Mechanical $100.00 $65.00 Roofing $100.00 $65.00 Historic Preservation $100.00 $65.00 Concrete $100.00 $65.00 Gas Appliance Installers $100.00 $65.00 Solid Fuel Appliance Installers $100.00 $65.00 Fire Alarm Installation $100.00 $65.00 Note: Fee for initial year fee plus two renewal years: Fire Suppression Installation $100.00 Temporary Contractor (6 months) $100.00 $65.00 NA Contractor Red Tag fee for work without a permit: $400.00 $400.00 $465.00 $130.00 $165.00 $130.00 $130.00 $130.00 $130.00 $130.00 $130.00 $130.00 $130.00 $165.00 NA NA NA NA First time - double permit fee Second time - four times permit fee Third time - license is subject to suspension or revocation plus eight times the permit fee Plumbing and Electrical Contractors are licensed by the State, therefore they only register with us and do not pay a fee. International Mechanical Code Permit Fees (b) Mechanical Permit Fees Permit Issuance and Heaters I. For the issuance of each mechanical permit 2. For issuing each supplemental permit for which the original has not expired, been canceled or finaled G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 15 $28.50 8.75 Unit Fee Schedule (Note: the following does not include permit-issuing fee) I. Furnaces For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type $17.75 furnace or burner, including ducts and vents attached to such appliance up to and including 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type $22.00 furnace or burner, including ducts and vents attached to such appliance over 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) For the installation or relocation of each floor furnace, including vent $17.75 For the installation or relocation of each suspended heater, recessed $17.75 wall heater or floor-mounted unit heater 2. Appliance Vents For the installation, relocation or replacement of each appliance vent $8.75 installed and not included in an appliance permit 3. Repairs and Additions For the repair of, alteration of, or addition to each heating appliance, $16.50 refrigeration unit, cooling unit, absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls regulated by the Mechanical Code 4. Boilers, Compressors and Absorption Systems For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor to and $17.75 including 3 horsepower (10.6 kW), or each absorption system to and including 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over $32.50 3 horsepower (10.6 kW) to and including 15 horsepower (52.7 kW), or each absorption system over 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) to and including 500,000 Btu/h (293.1 kW) For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over $45.00 15 horsepower (52.7 kW) to and including 30 horsepower (105.5 kW), or each absorption system over 500,000 Btu/h (146.6 kW) to and including 1,000,000 Btu/h (293.1 kW) For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over $66.75 30 horsepower (105.5 kW) to and including 50 horsepower (176 kW), or each absorption system over 1,00,000 Btu/h (293.1 kW) to and including 1,750,000 Btu/h (512.9 kW) For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over $111.50 50 horsepower (176 kW) or each absorption system over 1,750,000 Btu/h (512.9 kW) 5. Air Handlers $12.75 For each air-handling unit to and including 10,000 cubic feet per minute (cfm) (4719 Lis), including ducts attached thereto G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 16 Note: This fee does not apply to an air-handling unit which is a portion of a factory-assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler or absorption unit for which a permit is required elsewhere in the Mechanical Code. For each air-handling unit over 10,000 cfm (4719 Lis) $21.75 6. Evaporative Coolers For each evaporative cooler other than portable type 7. Ventilation and Exhaust For each ventilation fan connected to a single duct For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system authorized by a permit F or the installation of each hood which is served by the mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood $12.75 $8.75 $12.75 $12.75 8. Miscellaneous For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by the Mechanical $12.75 Code but not classed in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed in the table. Other Inspections and Fees: I. Inspections outside of normal business hours, per hour (minimum charge - two hours) 2. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 305.8, per Inspection 3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated, per hour (minimum charge one hour) 4. Additional plan review required by charges, additions or revisions to plans for which an initial review has been completed International Plumbing Code Permit Fees (c) Plumbing Permit Fees Permit Issuance I. For the issuance of each plumbing permit 2. For issuing each supplemental permit for which the original has not expires, been canceled or finaled G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 17 $125.00 $250.00 $75.00 $125.00 $75.00plans or $28.50 $8.75 Unit Fee Schedule (Note: The following do not include permit-issuing fee) 1. Fixtures and Vents For each plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap (including water, drainage piping and backflow protection thereof) For repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each fixture 2. Sewers, Disposal Systems and Interceptors For each building sewer and each trailer park sewer For each cesspool For each private sewage disposal system For each industrial waste pretreatment interceptor, including its trap and vent, excepting kitchen-type grease interceptors functioning as traps Rainwater systems-per drain (inside buildings) 3. Water Piping and Water Heaters For installation, alteration, or repair of water piping or water- treating equipment, or both, each For each water heater including vent 4. Gas Piping Systems For each gas piping system of one to five outlets For each additional outlet over five, each 5. Lawn Sprinklers, Vacuum Breakers and Backflow Protection Devices For each lawn sprinkler system on anyone meter, including backflow protection devices thereof For atmospheric-type vacuum breakers or backflow protection devices not included in Item I: I to 5 devices Over 5 devices, each For each backflow-protection device other than atmospheric-type vacuum breakers: 2 inches (50.88 mm) and smaller Over 2 inches (50.8 mm) 6. Swimming Pools For each swimming pool or spa: Public pool Public spa Private pool Private spa 7. Miscellaneous For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by the Plumbing Code but not classed in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed in this code Other Inspections and Fees: G :~ohn\word\memos\fees07 ,secondreading.doc 18 $11.75 $5.75 $30.00 $44.75 $89.75 $23.75 $11.75 $5.75 $14.75 $7.50 $1.50 $17.75 $14.75 $2.75 $15.00 $30.00 $110.00 $75.00 $75.00 $36.50 $11. 75 I. Inspections outside of normal business hours, 2 hour minimum 2. Inspections outside of normal business hours, per hour 3. Reinspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 305.8 per inspection 4. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated, per hour 5. Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to plans or to plans for which an initial review has been completed- (minimum charge-one half hour) $250.00 $125.00 $75.00 $125.00 $75.00 (d) International Fuel Gas Code Note: Fees as applicable from the International Plumbing and/or International Mechanical Code Permit Fee schedules. (e) National Electric Code Permit Fees Note: Electric_Permit Fees are established by c.R.S. 1973, Section 12-23-117 and are subject to change by the State Electric Board. The most current schedule is published by the State Electric Board and modified as allowed. Section 13. That Section 26.04.060 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section sets forth Land Use Application Fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 26.04.060 Land use application fees. (a) The categories of review processes and base fees for the processing ofland use applications shall be as follows: Amendments to the existing fee ordinance are indicated in Bold and Italicized text. Category Hours Base Fee 2. All Minor Applications 6 $2,700.00 1,350.00 I. All Major Applications 12 G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 19 3. Staff Approvals 4. Flat Fee 3.0 695.00 546.00 5. Referral Fees--Environmental Health, Housing, Engineering, Parks Community Development collects some fees for Land Use Application review as established by other City Departments. As determined by each department, fees are as follows: Engineering Minor Review Fee $196.00 Engineering Major Review Fee $376.00 Environmental Health Major Review Fee $376.00 Housing Minor Review Fee $196.00 Housing Major Review Fee $376.00 Parks Minor Review Fee $196.00 Parks Major Review Fee $376.00 6. Development Order Recordation Fee $40.00 7. Appeals Base Fee $675.00 Appeals of adverse board decisions. Additional time over 3 hours will be billed at the rate of $225.00 per hour. If an applicant's appeal is approved land use appeal fees will be refunded. (b) The Community Development Department staff shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the processing of each land use application and additional billings shall be made commensurate with the additional costs incurred by the city when the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time than is covered by the base fee. In the event the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes less time than provided for in subsection (a), the department may refund the unused portion of the base fee unless the staff planner determines significant staff time was used. (c) The following guidelines shall be used for the administration of the fee structure set forth above: I. Fees charged for the processing of applications which fall into more than one category shall be cumulative; while the fees charged for the processing of applications within the same category shall not be cumulative. In the event that G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 20 the fees, which result from accumulation, are found by the Community Development Department to be excessive in relation to the number of hours it is anticipated to require to process the application, the Community Development Department may waive the accumulation requirement. As with other Land Use Application, refunds are allowed only when staff has not done significant review. 2. Additional billings shall be based solely on processing time spent by members of the Community Development Department or its designee in the processing of an application. 3. Additional billings shall be computed at the rate of two hundred and twenty five dollars ($225.00) per hour of additional Community Development Department staff time required. Refunds of unused hours shall be made at the rate of two hundred and twenty dollars ($225.00) per hour of time. 4. The Community Development Director shall establish appropriate guidelines for the collection of additional billings as required. 5. This fee structure shall be reviewed annually as part of the City of Aspen's budget hearing process and should any adjustments be necessary, they shall be changed to become effective on January I. 6. The Community Development Department shall identify, prior to or at the time of submission of a land use application, whether an application is to be referred to the Engineering, Housing, or Environmental Health Departments. The Community Development Department shall also identify whether an application constitutes a minor or a major referral, based on the number of hours that will be required to review the application, and charge the applicant for each referral accordingly. Additional billings and refunds shall not apply to the computation of referral fees. 7. Land use review fees may be waived or reduced in the discretion of the Community Development Director for projects serving a public purpose, proposed by a non-profit organization, or in which the fee may be excessive for the work proposed. Section 14. That Section 26.04.070 of the Municipal Code ofthe City of Aspen, Colorado, which section establishes historic preservation application fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 26.04.070 Historic preservation application fees. G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 21 The types of applications and fees for the processing of historic preservation and applications shall be as follows (Historic preservation review fees may be waived or r.educed in the discretion of the Community Development Director for projects serving a public purpose, proposed by a non-profit organization, or in which the fee may be excessive for the work proposed). All fees are deposit fees. I. Designation $0.00 Example: Listing of any property on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. 2. Exempt Development $0.00 Example: Interior remodeling, paint color selection, exterior repainting or replastering similar to the existing finish or routine maintenance such as caulking, replacement of fasteners, repair of window glazing or other such minimally intrusive work. 3. Certificate of No Negative Effect $225.00 Work that qualifies includes replacement or repair of architectural features which creates no change to the exterior physical appearance of the building or structure; replacement or repair of architectural features that restores the building or structure to its historic appearance; installation of awnings, canopies or similar attachments provided no significant feature is damaged, removed or obscured by the installation; fencing; mechanical equipment or accessory features that have no impact on the character- defining features of the building or structure; signs which have no effect on the character- defining features of the historic property; alterations to non-contributing buildings within historic districts; and alteration to no more than two elements of non-primary fayades of a designated building. 4. Minor Development- Certificate of Appropriateness $675.00 Base Fee Work that qualifies includes the expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor area ofthe structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less; alterations to a building fayade, windows, doors, roof planes or material, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the work does not qualify for a Certificate of No Negative Effect; erection or installation in combination or in multiples of awning, canopies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and other attachments to designated properties such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a Certificate of No Negative Effect; alterations that are made to non-historic portions of a designated historic property that do not qualify for a Certificate of No Negative Effect; the erection of street furniture, signs, public art and other visible improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a Certificate of No Negative Effect. Additional time spent will be charged at the hourly rate of $225.00 G:\iohn\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 22 a. Significant Development (Under 1,000 sq. ft.)- Certificate of Appropriateness $1,350.00, 6 hours of staff time 5. Significant Development (Over 1,000 sq. ft.)- Certificate of Appropriateness $2,700.00,12 hours of staff time Work that qualifies includes the construction of a new structure within a historic district; alterations to more than three elements of a building fa9ade including it~ windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall material, dormers, porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim; the expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than two hundred and fifty square feet; any new development that has not been determined to be Minor Development. 6. Demolitions and Off-Site Relocations Only Full demolition and complete relocations off-site. $2,700.00 7. Insubstantial Amendment to an approved Certificate of Appropriateness: $0 8. Substantial Amendment to an approved Certificate of Appropriateness: $675.00 9. Appeals Base Fee $675.00 Appeals of any decision ofthe Historic Preservation Commission. Additional time over 3 hours will be billed at the hourly rate of$225.00. If an applicant's appeal is approved, land use appeal fees will be refunded. The examples listed for different types of applications are intended solely as a guide and are not binding upon the Community Development Department in assessing the proper fee for processing any particular historic preservation or landmark designation application. Section 15. That Section 26.104.072 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, which section establishes zoning fees, is hereby amended to read as follows: 26.104.072 Zoning Fees. Zoning shall be charged the following fees for the services listed: 1. Building plan checks by zoning (a $105.00 minimum deposit, or 80% ofa significant total, shall be collected at building permit application submittal): A. RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL AND PUBLIC USES WITHIN THE PUBLIC ZONE DISTRICT G:~ohn\word\memos\fees07 .secondreading.doc 23 1. Bear Proof Trash Container (Zoning & Building) $55.00 2. Manufactured Housing without basement $115.00 3. Manufactured Housing with basement $115.00 4. New Work and Major Repair!Remodeling Change Orders Up To 500 s.f. $115.00 Flat Fee 501 - 3,500 s.f. $115 plus $.20 per s.f. over 500 s.f. 3,501 - 10,000 s.f. $715.00 plus $.35 per s.f. over 3,500 s.f. 10,000 + s.f. $2990 plus $.38 per s.f. over 10,000 s.f. 5. Minor Repair !Remodel and Change Orders: $115.00 For Zoning reviews that do not add square footage but are not minor reviews, the charge will be hourly. The rate will be a $225.00 per hour with a minimum charge of one hour. (Note: Minor applications request no changes to floor area, use, height and lor footprint. Those applications which are not Minor are consider Major.) B. NON-RESIDENTIAL 1. Bear Proof Trash Containers (Zoning and Building) $55.00 2. New Work, Major Repair!Remodeling and Change Orders Up To 500 s.f. $115.00 Flat Fee 501 - 5,000 s.f. $115.00 plus $.35 per s.f. over 500 s.f. 5,001 - 10,000 s.f $1,690 plus $.67 per s.f. over 5,000 s.f. 10,001 + s.f $5040 plus $.77 per s.f. over 10,000 s.f. 3. Minor Remodel!Repair/Change Orders. $115.00 (Note: Minor applications request no changes to floor area, use, height and lor footprint. Those applications which are not Minor are consider Major.) C. ZONING ENFORCEMENT FEES I. Projects constructed without permits, fees are doubled as a penalty. 2. PENALTY PROVISION A penalty fee for enforcement actions requiring a land use approval $690.00 3. Sign permits: Processing and code compliance for all sign permits 4. Fence permits: $75.00 $75.00 5. Board of Adjustment fees: $258.00 Processing and application fee for all Board of Adjustment appeals G:\john\word\memos\fees07,secondreading.doc 24 6. Special Event Signage Plan Review $65.00 Processing and application fee for all signage associated with Special Events that are not required to be reviewed by Special Events Committee. 7. Banner Installation Fee $55.00 Single $110.00 Double This fee is collected by the City Manager's office. D. Zoning review fees may be waived or reduced in the discretion ofthe Community Development Director for projects serving a public purpose, proposed by a non-profit organization, or in which the fee may be excessive for the work proposed. A public heating on the ordinance shall be held on the _ day of the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. , 2006, in INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _ day of ,2006. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of ,2006. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk G:\john\word\memos\fees07.secondreading.doc 25 L Police Department +__ S;cti~nill~050Ia\: -----+--- .-.. AccidentR~J!Q~--,-~e~ searc~_--+__-~- ~-~~ ~~Pl~c!Jlage . '___$J.OO Case reports and coroner reports, I per search Per copied page Arrest history and background ~F!lr_se~!ch Certification/notarization ~~TQJiII!l_Searc.h________ Per copied p~_ge_ Photograph copies, per 4x5 Per5x7 Per8x10______ __ Cl:lIT1IT!l,l':l~~tions logging Per audio CD Case ReportlA~i<!ent~!1_otos Fee Title 2006 9m:!n!. __ Fe!__ $6.00 _$1.00 2007 ProDosed __ ~ee ~ - Attachment B ~~~e~~ ~___ Chanae Justification -- ---- $6.00 0.0% N~ _~_~A $6.00 $1.90 i i J_____ AnnuaIAlarmPerm_it~e~s___________I__ _ $100:~O False~~r_r:!:I_~ine~______~___ __ __ $100.00 Fals~~~!:!1_Fines (2n~One) $~?~.OO False Alarm Fines (3rd+) $300.00 False Alarm Fine~ (Banks) ___ ~ ~teF~_e:>. _1__$_~~.50 Central Alann licens~_~~~_ ___ ____1 $_279.00 Vehicle Inspection Fee $17.00 Certified VIN Inspection $20.00 Off Duty Security per Officer per hou $80.00 !'lotary F~~~, ~~r Acknowledgement 1 $2.00 Towing Fees (incl. processing)' I $100.00 -- ----- 1 Towing Fees (to impound): I $120.00 Annual Dog Tags __ _~_I_ ____$14.50 --- Transfer Fee $14.50 --- ----- .!3:~lacemen~"!:~__ -l $3.00 i __I___~___ _~_t1QQ 0.0% ___ $5.00 ___ NA NA $10.00 _~ ___ o.q% $2.00 $4!".QQ _O}?% _ l~,.Q.Q ____ __ ~A NA _____ ____ _ ~_19_,90 NA NA ______ _$15.00 $15._00 ~Th ____ $25.09 $25.00 0.0% ___$5.0Q _ $15.00 _200,0% N $15.00 NA ____ _ _ ________ Section 2.12.050 (bl_: Environmental Health .uu Section 2.12.052: Siiedai-or Temporary'Event Food Plan Review ~6ial or Tflmporar)i-Event Food Inspection Fe_~____ Construction Noise Variance SwimmingP-ool Plan Review or inspection Fee _~~staura"!t Site In~eC!i_C?n fee F~ Safety:r:raining Restaurant Plan Review Food Service license $100.00 $104.00 $208.00 __ $312.00 __ $332.00 $11.50 $293.00 $17.00 $20.00 $83.00 __~o ____ $2.00 0.0% NA NA $15.00 $15.00 --~ 2006 - Current Fee Discontinue __ 0.0% ___9.,Q% __ -- NA -- n_ - NA NA Search per hour _ _ Change ~_~cassette t~.Qe NA 0.0% In~ationary Increase First false alarm fine Second false alann fine Third_~nd up false alarms False alarm for banks In_~~i~,,!ary Increase Inflationary Increase _!nflationary Increase Fee set by the State ?~5::010rado Inflationary_l~crease Fee set by the State of Colorado Transferre9 to Parking Transferred ~o Parki_~g ___ __ _lnfl:8~ionary rncrea_~e I_~~ationary Increase .-- 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 3.8% 0.0% 5,_~'JIo __ O.~o/~ _ 0.0% uN' NA 3.4% 3.4% 16.7% ~ ~ I 2007 Percent ProDosed __ Fee Chanae $44.00______ 4.8% Justification $42.00 _ + $42.00 __+__ $42.00 I __ $7~:~ $74.00 $74.00 _:'!:~~- ___~ 0.0% $77.00 __ 4.1% $77.00 4.1% $44.00 $44.00 tnflation_ary Increase 4.8% Inflationarynl_n_crease Inflationary Increase Hourly rate - Infl.ati~nary increase _ ,;_ Hourly rate. Infla!~onClry'!,,!!?~ase Hourly rate. Inflationary increase Fee isset by state statute and cannot be raised. This fee does not come close to covering our costs. Fee IS set by state 'staiiite-and cannot be raisedThis fee does not cover our costs. Fee varies by size of restaurant. $355.00 vanes from $t54 to $344 $355.00 0,0% varies-from $154 to $343 Page 1 of9 Recreation Section 2.12.014 2006 Current ~Fee Dailv ~dmissicm: 1= $700 Youth - Resident --- Youth-Guest __ $1300 Adult - Resident $9 00 - -- Adult - Guest $15 00 Senior $7.00 -- ___ Twilight $5.00 Monthlv Pass Youth Resident _Youth~_ Adult Resident ~u1t VaJ~ey Fal!lily Reside.ot Family-'yalley Each Additional 20 Visit Card Youth Resident _ J'~~~_ Yall~y Adult Resident Aj_~~~~Y_ Guest 6 Month Pass Youth Resident Yo~t~ Vall~y Adult Resident -- Adult ~~~~y_ FamilLResident Family Vallex. Each Additional Annual Pass Youth Resident Y~uth Valle~ Adult Resident Adult V~!~_ ~~'!l!IL~esident F~rnily Valle~ Each Additional _-1- $3600 $46.00 $66.00 $72.00 j $132.00 _ $158.00 $15.00 I ----=1 $93.00 $108.00 $140.00 $158.00 $232.00 $185.00 -+-- $219.00 ~!234.00 $284.00 $510.00 $592.00 ;-----SSO.oo ---L~- j~o.oo $392.00 $420.00 $505.00 $917.00 $1,056.00 >~oo.oo 2007 Percent PrODosed F~ Ch~nae $7.00 $14.00 $9.00 $16.00 $7.00 $5,00 AttachmentS Justification 0.0% 7.7"/0 0.0% 6.7% 0,0% 0.0% $37.00 2.8% _.--- $48.00 4.3% $69.00 4.5% $75.00 4.2% $137.00 3.8% _.- $164.00 3.8% $15.00 0.0% $97.00 $112.00 $146.00 $164.00 N $192.00 $228.00 $243.00 $295.00 $530.00 $616.00 $50.00 $354.00 $408.00 $437.00 $525.00 $954.00 $1,09~:00 - $100.00 4.3% 3.7% 4.3% 3.8% NA Discontinued 3.8% 4.1% 3.8% 3.9% 3,9% 4.1% 0.0% 4.1% 4.1% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 0.0% Page 2 of9 ARC 2006 2007 AttachmentB Percent Section 2.12.015 ARC Meeting ROC)ffi R_en~__ Non.Profit -- Corporate Current PrODosed !:~~ Fee Chanae ------ $52.00 $54.00 3.8% $62.00 $64.00 3.2% I -l Section 2.12.030 Youth Swim lessons: Pass holder ------ Non Pass holder __b~:oo , $62.00 Lifeg_~ard Sk~II_~hall~~~___ Life~uard-.I~~~ing ____ _~,=-R S~ills Challenge _C~'3. Training Fi~st Aid Skil~~hallenge Firs~Aid Traini_"!;!. ~yak Ro~l~es~ions Water P~lo Drop in __ Masters Swim Drop In: $95.00 $195.00 ------- $45.00 _____n $67.00 ----=-1 . :::~~ I Rentals: I Entire Aquatic Facility for ~rofit -L_~i~ble ___Entire Aquatic Facilitt_Non~!~~ __ $160.00 Entire Aquatic Facility Non Profil-i $140.00 S:ingl~POOI '3:ate F_or P~oli!_____ ---'r $75.00 Single Pool_~~~~~qn Profit __ I $65.00 _ ~ingl~ Lan~_I3_ental in Lap Pool- $13.00 Single Lane Rental in Lap Pool- -$15.00 mi~.6 ! Current Fee $52.00 $68.00 $99.00 $205.00 $26.00 $52.00 $26.00 $47.00 $5.00 $3.00 $3.00 $5.00 $3.00 $3.00 -13.3% 9.7% 4.2% 5.1% -42.2% -22.4% -25.7% -- -- 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% N 4.4% ------ 4.3% 4.0% 4.6% 7.7% 6.7% 2007 Percent ProDosed Fee _ Chance Section 2.12.040 Adult f!ograms _ ____ __Adult Baske:t!J_<:,I!-Q'?p in _ ___ Adult Volll:lY~~~~l?_~?P in Mens Rec Basketball -- -j------ ! $5.00 $5.00 $650.00 $900. o~ $515.q~ $825_00 $693.00 $300.00 Mens Soccer Adult Soccer I Adult SoftbaU:~~n.s_ Lea~ A~ult Softball-Coed League Adult Fla_g_Foolball Youlh~rogra_'!ls Youth Baseball T-Ball Gir1sSoftball Day Camp _ One Time Activity Fee Guest Fee I 1 $98.00 $55.00 $98.00 $28.00 $28.00 $30.00 .+- . I $350.00 Sailin~ Tennis Lessons MlWfF $69.00 Tennis Lessons TufTh $50.00 - Tennis Team __----t-~_50.00 ~~..!:Iis Clinics ! $13.00 Tennis Court Rental Fees $7.50 $208.00 $167.00 $146.00 $78.00 $68.00 -------- $14.00 $16.00 $5.00 ----- $5.00 $676.00 ------- ~6'_pO __~3~.00 $858.00 ------ $721.00 $312.00 $102.00 $57.00 $102_00 ------ $29.00 $29.00 $40.00 0.0% 0.0% 4.0% 4.0% 3.9% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.1% 3.6% 4.1% 3.6% ---- 3.6% $364.00 4.0% 33.3% $72.00 $52.00 $364.00 $14.00 $8.00 4.3% 4.0% 4.0% 7.7% 6.7% Page 3 of9 Justification Per Hour Per Hour In addition to Admission In addition to Admission In addition to Admission Per Hour Per Hour Per Hour ------ Per Hour Per Hour ------- Per Hour Per-Hour Justification 6 hours - Inflationary Increase . ~ hours .ln~~_tionary_lncrease 6O~ours - Inflatio~ary ~ncrease Attachment B ! ----- -~ ----- Youth Track $42.00 $44.00 4.8% 2 ho~_r:sJ@7 wks - Inflationary Increase -------------------- ------ 2006 2007 Percent ------------ ------ I Current ProDosed Section 2.12.040 __~e~ Fee ChanQe Justification ------- -------- ---- - - ---- --------- Youth Intramu~ls _ ______ ISO m!Il:..@ Swks) .Inflationaryl!l~re?ose __KickbaI11st12nd Grade - $40.00 $42.00 S.O% - ----- Kickball 3rd/4th Grade $40.00 $42.00 S.O% Floor Hocke 1st/2nd Grade $30.00 $31.00 3.3o/? -- Floor Ho~key3rd/4.~~ Gra~e $30.00 $31.00 3.3% ----- ~- -- S:;Yfn_QIY!flRic;s - $~Q .c~Q_ _ $31.00 3.3% ..--- Youth Soccer $79.00 $82.00 3_8% 6-9 vrs (3 hrsJwk @6weeks)- Inflationary Increase ---- Y OulhSocce_r~_Kin~e!9.3r:te_n ---- __~_"LO'Q ----- _~_43..:.QO 4.f!"(o (2 hrsJwk@5wks)- Inflationary Increase ------ Youth Basketball ~__ _ _ __'!~~Q9 _ ____~~_2-'-()Q ... 5.1% Grades 1.8 (2 hrs/wk@ 7wks)__lrl_fl~tiQ_rl_~.!Y Increase Gymfants .... ------$30.00 -- ------ - ------------- --------- -------- $31.00 3.3% ParentITot $45.00 $47.00 4.4% ---- ________n__ ----------- ~y0~_astics-Be~~~f!r_1_~y!~_~ $58.00 $60.00 3.4% ------ ---- $104.00 ------ ~- --------------------- ------ Gymnastics.Beginner 2daysfwk ! $100.00 4.0% ~.. Gy_mnatics-Inl. 1day/wk ~78:qO $81.00 ~ ... 3.8% - --------- ---------- ------------ Gymnastics-Int 2dayslwk $120.00 $125.00 4.2% - ---- -- -~ Gymnastic_s- Beginner Boys $50.00 $52.00 4.0% 2x1wk -,---~~.:QQ $83.00 3.8% -- ------------------ -- __ Gymnatics.lnt.Boys $78.00 $81.00 3.8% _~ymnastic~~~_Boy~~~_~y~k j $120.00 _$~_~S:OO . 4.2% ------- ---------- ----------- Gymnastics-Advanced Boys $120.00 $125.00 4.2% --------- -- ,"') I $45.00 $47.00 4.4% -- ~------- ~ . .- Gymnastics - Ho~ ~_hots $128.00 $133.00 3.9% ---------- - _ _ <3X~nastics - Level 4 $150.00 ~ $155.00 3.3% ! ------- ~y~!'Ia~t!cs.Level 5&6 3xfwk $170.00 $175.00 2.9% I ---- _~ymnastics-Level 5&6 5xfwk $180,00 $185.00 2.8% -------- Gymnastics-Level S&6 4xfwk $190,00 $195.00 2.6% ; ------ Gymnastics-Levels 7,8,9,10 $220.00 $225.00 2.3% Big ~iE(r:~_~rl_~_~_~~l!I_~L___ $60.00 $62.00 ----- 3.3% ---- m ---------- ----- - C_limb_irl_9""Y'!IL____ -~-- ~ - - ---- ------ ------ ---- ~67.00 ----- --- ---- --------- Beg Rock Rats $64.00 4.7% Boulder Rats ~ , $64.00 ~- $67.00 4.7% Int/Adv Climbing ---i74'-00 -- $77.00 4.1% --- - __ _B~gAg~s__lO+ - -$52~OO $_54.00 3.8% ------ -------- -------- JrRats $26.00 $27.o.Q ~,~,,!o -~ ---- ----- ----- ---- ----- -- ---- ------ ----- ----- Trapeze $60.00 $62.00 3.3% Gymnasium Rental-1 hour $52.00 $54.00 3.8% Page 4 of9 Section 2.12.020 2006 Current ~ Attachment B 2007 Percent PrODosed Fee Chanae Rent Entire Facility ~s?~~-'-~e Garden ___ ______--1 Lewis Ice Arena General Rental and Camps AIG L1A Adult Non-ProFrt Prime AIG L1A Adult Non-ProFrt Non-Prime ---------- AIG L1A Youth Non-ProFrt Prime AIG L1A Youth Non Profit Non-Prime AIG L1A Skate Sharpening Pick-up Hockey, One time Pick.:-~_~~~~~y-,- !~~~ch Free ~ty~__~~~~s Free Style 20 Punch Pass Skating Classes Locker Rental One Year Seasonal Monthly Weekly . Negotiated Negotiated Negotiated $205.00 $215.00 $170.00 ------ $190.00 f ~~---t -- ---;~~~:~~ , -=r-:~:~~~ $150.00 $165.00 $5.00 $12.00 $100.00 ~___ __-.!~OO __ $140.00 $11.00 Negotiated Negotiated Negotiated $2f3.00 $223.00 $177.00 $197.00 $167.00 $187.00 NI NI N/A 3.9% 3.7% 4.1% 3.7% 4.4% 3.9% $172.00 4.2% $187.00 3.9% $157.00 $172.00 $5.00 $13.00 $110.00 . $9.00 $140.00 $11.00 4.7% 4.2% 0.0% 8.3% 10.0% 0.0% --------- ---- 0.0% 0.0% $150.00 N NA $85.00 N NA $25.00 $25.00 0.0% $15.00 $15.00 0.0% Page 5 of9 Justification Per Hour of Ice Time Per Hour of Ice Time Per Hour of Ice Time Per Hour of Ice time ------ --------- --------------- Per Hour of Ice time Per Hour of Ice time -------- --- Per Hour of Ice time Per Hour of Ice time Per Hour of Ice time Per Hour of Ice time Per Hour of Ice time Onetime 10 Punch Pass One time Fee Good for 20 Sessions Per Class Discontinued Discontinued 2006 ~ II Current Fee 1 ~e~!OnS_~~_tside n~~~I~ours $250.00 Reinspection Fees $65.00 Inspection for which no Fee - - ---- ~~~~!Iy Ind!ca~~_________.___l $125.00 Additional Plan Review Required by I C_~a~__________ f __$65.00 EnergyCodeFe~__ ________ __~25EE Building MeChanica.1 Permit Fee, All Types (AMC 12.12.]OO(b) ___ Section 2.12.100 Building Plan Check Fees 8"uilding City Plumbing'Permits. AJr-r------ Types ' 2007 ProDosed Fee $250.00 $75.00 $125.00 $75.00 $25.00 2006 2007 Current ProDosed 1_ __E~~___ ___~~ ___ J ~~_~!3.04.060 Land Use Apelication Fees 1, All Major ~PI?~C~!il:l~~ 2. All Minor Applications I 3. Staff Approvals 0f1at Fee _ 5. Referral Fees E~g:~~o~ ~~~e~ Eng. Major Rev. Env. Health Maj Review _~9using Minor Review Housing MClj~r Review Parks Minor Review ------------- ~~~_~_ajor Review AttachmentS Percent Chanae 0,0% 15.4% Justification ___ _ ~?L~..':Cl~!_!~~E~c:tj~~_ Per H?u~ Charge 0.0% Per Hour Charge ~ ~ 15.4% 0.0% Per Hour Charge No Change 0.0% All Types, increase an Average of 4% per Fee Type from 2006 R~es No change; permit fees changed but the percentage for plan check remains 0.0% the same 0.0% All Types, increase an Average of 4% per Fee Type from 2006 Rates -~~-~~~~~--- ---------- Chana. Justification .. -~ ----- $2,700,00 $2,820.00 4.4% ------ $1,350.00 $1,410.00 4.4% --- - - $675.00 $705.00 ____~y/o ______n___ - - ------- $546.00 $560.00 2.6% -- $196.00 $376.00 $376.00 $196.00 $376.00 $196__~~ , $376.00 ____n_ ~n----- ___ 6 Development Order Recordation it Fe. 7 Appeals-of Adverse Decislonreq Board Review t!:!?urly Rat~ - _ -t 8. land Use Code Interpretations 9. Appeals of Land Use Code-- - --~- !~!erprelations ____ Hourly_R~te __~~0.001__ _ $204.00 $391_00 _________nm_ $391.00 $204.00 $391.00 $204.00 $391.00 $40.00 4.1% 4.0% 4.0% 4.1:'0 4.0% 4.1% 4.0% ~ ~---~ ~ ~ - ~ o.~% $675.001_ ___..!705.00 __n 4.4% $225.00 $235.00 4.4% NA $50.00 N Fees - _m_ _____n__ _______ _____ 1. Designation 2. Exempt Development 3. Certificate of No Negative Effect: , 4. Minor Dev. Certificate-of Appropriateness -- -a. Significant Development <1ksq Ft 5. Significant Development >1k I sq Ft 6. Demo & Offsite RelocatIOns Only: _ ~____~,700:~ ___$_~,~_2~~~ 7.lnsub. Amend to Approvedn i Cert. of Approp. : $0.00 $0.00 B.-S"LiElsfAmeno tifApprove<f-----'--- ------ - --- Cert. of Approp.: $675.00 $705.00 Sect!on 26.04.070 $0.00 $0.00 $225.00 $675.00 NA NA $705.00 ---- $235.00 $235.00 $705,00 $1,3~~1--_$1,410.00 ___~,_?~~._O~I___ $2,820.00 ~-- NA ~==N' $0.00 $0.00 N/A N/A 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% 4.4% -- N/, 4.4% Page 6 of 9 AttachmentB 2006 2007 Percent ----- --------- Current ProDosed Section 26.04.060 Fee Fee Chanae Justification --- ---------- 9. Appeals or Call up of Any HPC Decision: $675.00 $705.00 4.4% - ~r1y Rat~_ ____ $225.00 $235.00 4.4% - .. ----- ----------- ----- ---- Section 26.104.072 ; - -- ----- . ------------ Zonina Fees: ----------- ---- ---- _n_ A'-Resid.fAgl PufiUSes w/in-Public ;------ Zone: ___mn___ ------- ----- ------- - - ---- ,. Bear Proof Trash Container $55E~ -- $55.00 0.0% . 2. Manuf. Hsg w/o Bas_~!!1e~ I $115.00 ~~20.~0 4.3% -- 3. Manuf Hsg w/Basement $115.00 $120.00 4.3% 4. New Work & Major ----- Repair.lRemCl~~I: I $115.00 $120.00 4.3% ----- .. -------- >500 sq ft $115.00 $120.00 4.3% Plus .21 per sq ft over 500 , $715.00 $750.00 >3500 4.9% Plus .36 per sq ft over 3500 >10,000 sq ft. $2,990.00 $3,025.00 1.2% Plus .~~ p_e~~quarE.:~c:l~_ -- ---- ---- ---- . B. Non-Residential: ---------------------~= --- $55.00 0.0% ..J.~ Bear Pro~r:~~~_s_h Container . $55.00 ... ------- 2. New Work & Major Repair.fR~~de~ $115.00 $120.00 4.3% ----- -- ----- -~~~~~-- $115.00 $120,00 4.3% _____________'=Ius .36 per ~~er 5~0__ ---,- ------------ ----------- --------- ----- -- ----------- >5,000sq ft $1,690.00 $1,740.00 3.~~~ Plus .70 persq_ft. - - ---- >10k ______.1_ $5,040.00 $5,240.00 4.0% Plus .75 per sq ft over 10,000 3. Min or Repair/Remodel and ----- ------ , ~Q!"~~~-- , $115.00 $120.00 4.3% q.._?o_"-i~!::l_~n~orcemenl Fees i Penalty Provision $690.00 $705.00 2.2% - ---- -------- 3. Sign Permits $75.00 $75.00 0.0% _n 4. - Fence Permits --------- ----- ---------------- ---- ------ $75.00 $75.00 0.0% -- ---- ----------- ----- ----- 5. Board of Adjustment fees $258.00 $265.00 2.7% 6. SpeCial EVEmf Signage Plan Review $65.00 $75.00 15.4% ------------------------ __...2~..!anne~~!'!stallation Fe~___L___J~~.~_ $55.00 0.0% ---------- ------ ---- - ---- ! $110.00 $110.00 0.0% GOLF 2006 2007 Percent -------- Current ProDosed Section 2.12.010 Fee Fee____ Chanae Justification -- -- ---------------- ------------ Golf Season Pass I i - --$800.00 . NfA . - ---- -------- -- $900.00 - -- Through April 1 ----- $870.00 $1,000.00 NfA After April 1 ------- __ ____ - _n_ 20 Punch Pass NfA ----- -------- ---------- - - -------- ---------- -- ---------- --- -------------- ----- -- $350.00 $450,00 NfA Through April 1 ---- $385.00 $500.00 NfA --~-~~~~~~------ -- ---------- -- ---- -- ---------- - ------------ ---- -- - ---- ----- - --------- - -----,-------- --- ---- - - ------ - - Jr. Golf Pass i $100.00 $115.00 O:O~/o , ----- ---------- ---- . 18 Hole Greens Fees I $95.00 0.0% (6:~am-1~00pm) ---- I $75.00 0.0% (1:00pm-3:30pm) $45.00 0.0% i~:30pm-close) -- --- - ..... ------ - .-..- - -- ----- - .. Senior Greens Fees $45.00 18 Holes -------- ---- ----- ..... --- -------------- ... $22.50 . 9 Holes ---- Page 70f9 Attachment B Junior Greens Fees .. $45.00 18 Holes u_~ ____ ------ $22.50 9 Holes ----------- wneeler ODera House I -- i ....2lllllL ?nn7 Percent --Fee Title Fee Fee Chanae Justification. REGULAR PERFORMANCE RATE (ALSO FOR REHEARSAL DA!~_~L - ---- - Not for profit ----- Sliding Scale $250,00 Three day max in-season, four off-season. 40% add'] per added For profit . Sliding Scale $450.00 -~ ------- ------ performance on same day -~-- ~ Private Dates -Individuals u ----~ $750.00 Per Day -- u_ ----- -- --- ~-~ Private Dates - Individuals Xmas/New Years Wk NA $750.00 Per Day/Event Plus $1,000 Contribution to Wheeler Endowment ------- -- --- --~ Private ~_vents - Corporate Sliding Scale $1,150,00 - --- ------------------------- ---- Private Events - Corporate Xmas/New Years Wk Slid~ng Sca~ ----~-~~~ ~E~.Y!~~~~! Plus $1,000 Contribution t~ Wheeler Endowment ------ ; -- ----------- ----- _____m____ --------------------- ------- Theatre Rental. Private Movie uj Screenings Under 200 Attendees NA $750_00 All inclusive ---------- ---- - ------------- ------------------- Over 200 Attendees NA $750.00 P]~s_ _~~p~nses. 40% add'l per added performance on same day -------- -- I ... - i - -- -- .. ---- - Page8of9 ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ wo. ~;j' o~~ ,.~ ~~;: ~~~ o~~ ~~;j w~. ~cii: ~ . w o o ~ o . ~ ~ ~ < ~ ~ . z o ~ ~ . ~ o ~ ~'" i~ ~ [vi ii~ ft:el i~~ .. = e ~ES .... ~H ;~.!!! .~~ iil ~ ! i~j ~ili ~;Ji w 0' wO !Ql) ~~ ,~ o c ,2 ~Z . . ,. = ~ ~~- .5 :.:S; n, 'Qil~ !:.:ge ;,;-.J!l ~"lij fr'iii8.E ~";oi;' ~d~: 11 ~ ~~~. :;:t~.,.~ w I;~ w~ ou w~ " a~ o .~ ~. 0" si s; . ' "" .e ~~ .0 .- 0' ~i "0 ~l!! ~~ w- ~o ~~ wg ~" ~~ 15~ ., 'w w, a, '0 5. ~g @~ ," . :i .i g LIL :: ~ c: III ~ ~~.~ ~i ...at: "'... .ij i .i i I g ~ I g . 'Ii ::I. iii:;..! .i;~~ .l:~~ ilZ il ..<' ..< ~ 'i~ 8 ':i~ g .~ ~ tl .~ ~ 1$ Q. . II Q.. li .!!.2 e .!! 2 E "".- ,,11'- f;!! et~ .!!!:e ~ .!! 1: t! ~ ll! t: II e -' . ~ ~ I . is- "0 0& ~. o. !.~ o,g. :e"3 ., . ~ . i ~ o . ~ o. wO ~~ < w~ ~o ~~ ~. . I ~ . .. Z -~ i 0 ;i "[ !~ &~- o. o. ,2 .~ . I I z o . ~ o . ~ > ~ . . ~ x ~ o. wO ~~ < w~ ~o ~2 fE~ c J ~ i ~ii ..llii ! J!'~ O' .- ..(.~ 'E ie; .2~ ~.- op ~~! , . , g ~~ i8!, ='50 m.. ! ! ~ & ~ . ~ ~ ~- ;;; . , . o c o 1 " . ~ .. c. ~i ~ . o o w g 00 wO ~w i2~ I;~ ~~ ~2 0:\5 au . ~ ~ i1i ..11 ~Ei e"1: t5 ~ ~& N 'Iii ,E ::: ~ ~ ~.!!! c: i'; !: ~.. ~..! ii. l.i ! ~ i~ . I o ! . lii~ e; ~~ &0 !.i . [ !~ & - ~~ ;;;.. . il ~ . . ~ = ~ ~ . o , ~ > . w . ~ o. wo ~o ~~ ~1i5 I;~ ~~ w~ .0 ~~ ,0 ~u ~ ~ ~ t ! ~ .~ ~ ~ . ~ I .!!Iiaj!. fH, nq ~ri . ~ Iii ~ '::: .. u ~ Ii! ~ ~;; i I t: Iii e ~ f j I I ~, I ~ ~ '!; 'r.' '!j ~ I ~ , , . j i . = :;':":'f 8~ "j;; .n -g,,;;"'C z.:l:~ ~C:"i ..~'- ~..! ~i~ ~~. t;t;~ . il ~ . , ~ = o . ~ . o ~ . O. ww ~w ~. ~~ g5 wO .~ ww .~ ~~ z' ~" J I i ~ ~\ I ~ I ~ l . ~ . . ~ ~" .. . . .~ ~'I~ ttt ,.. tT.~ 11 g 11 0. :,;:; C E :i; i !h DOE ... !J &.5 ::Jg'_5 a . , ! g ~ ~ ~ . . o . . . . ~ . , i . , ~~ ~~ .Q,g .h w , ~ t; ~ . ~ o w ~ . w u . w !!:ii;" ~I; ~w ~~ 00 .w ~t it5 O~ X" o~ m" ! J .0 c- .;;u = ~ -g ,5 . . o~ H ~~ . 0 cO J. = E ~ . ;i~ ,0- I!j ;; ~~ I!, ~I~ Coo . i . , ~ . i " I , < . . ~ 5 -' . o o w ~ ~ u ~ u ~ . o . ~ ~ o w . u i , o i . o c . I h .88. . , ~ ~ 5~ y'i ~~ ... ;.1 glii , ~ tg H -& ~o ... , , . , . 0 ~< ~ , .2~ ~. . c 82 ~~ i~ <0 . , " U 0 .< << , . ~ ~ . . ~ . ~ o . o . ~ ~ w o t ~ u " H ~~ - . ~.2 ~. . I H. .o~ Iii"'! .$g .~. !ilil h~ l~l li'Oi:J, !~! :li.e uh :5~:i . ~ .~ iil . . ~ j ~~ o. ~8. .- ~o t~ d 0" U& w o , ~ u a o " w o . . . e~ 2 ! '1" c'~ ~. ~~ - . o~ ~ 8 .< <! . 2~j .5-2 ! ~..:g ~~ Iii '68.8- B . . ';!ij <,- ;;. ! , c 0 a', ~~ ..I" ...-a. a, ~8 ~i !~ Qj ...- ~a o. ~.E ~ 8 , . . .~ 0. . , ~8 i~ -il ~~ e"! 8; o . ~ ~ a t ~ o ~ ~ I ~!i 1 ~~i ~ .. I! .. ~ B"' I'. di ..~ !l i8.~ Ilil I Hi 1": 'I' I ~ slii.! ".' }l'i::f e.2 ,~ . ~ ~ I ;f.1iiD. ;:8lii .2 ~_ ~ :&~ ~ ~a ~ ';j ~ ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ It ! ~ . i I I ~ I . .a .<:5:!l!: l:!.E ~8i ~~~ o~ 0. ,~. o.! Igti S.< e-1i ~ QfiB u . . o w o . ~ . < B . , u_ ~~ ~~ ~~ i=~ i~ !! :~ ! 0 2- .u . ~ .8 .5 ~~ .8 8a ~t H ~. . ...~ :~~ g..... <'. .~I [ ~.2li 2 H !. !~ ~i H .~ e& &! u. E := !: <'. . ~ ' .-t:: \5 e La ir~ ~~i ~"c =.5!1! 0: . h ~E.! ~ I.~ "'~e ""18: ,-. ah .1" z c , . ~s i &c. 5:~~ .oc i ~ ~ . = , .. t . . l ~ ~ o ~ g . a ....1&. fr:l! ~ ! P _ E .~ .2~ i' , ~ ~~ ! c ~ ~ 1! o w o . ~ u ~ ~ ~ u w o . ~ o . w ~ ~ w o ~ ~ ~ I; o . . :l:: .s l!:!-S.. He . ! I hi H~ :;-S0l iO: ...~i!! ":3 ~ I-- I ~i -a e.i' - ~, 1!5 ~H ~: i . !r~~ ~ .. l:l ! -~ .. .l! ;; .. h 0.:3 :sJ 'I' ~~ 'ii.!! '"'0 l~ . " . .~ ~~ H ~'i . 8 .~ I. lii.i .~ ~ H ~. o. .. I ~ II I i II ~ t. ~~ ., I ~ j~ !~ -, ~~ ly ~[ = 0 ~i- .. m: .,.; 11 I I I I ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 8.! .. o . S :~ .. ~. , I I ~ . ~ ~ o ~ . , . o ~ ~ f~ ~ ~ t ~ I " ~ I o ~ . o a ~ AttachmentS Enaineerina Percent ---.---- ---- ---- Section 2.12.051 ~ae Justification --.------- ---.- --..- --.------------ -------- ----------.------- (3roupOlle. Permit Fee - Encroachment License ~PRlication and proce~I!9_~_e__ i- ~330.oo $1,000_00 3.1% Vacation application and ~3i_~il1.9.f~_~_________.______ $330.00 __ $330.00 __;LLO& Right-of-way permit application and processing fee (waived for _~J<!e"'":~I_kJeplacement) $~}O_._oo -- __$}lQQc! -- ____~:10& Group Two - Riaht of Wav rental fee - --- ------ --.---.-- Temporary occupation of ROW n ---- under encroachments by commercial operations. per square foot --..- $1.30 $2.50 4.0% Group Three - Prints and - Publication Fee -- ----.--- -Mao andpjan-n;:i-nii~g $0.50 $0.50 0.0% PI!l~_ ~1.00__ope@.(~~ fee__ -- Technical Standards, specifications and detailed $50.00 $50.00 N/A Information Systems Sec. 2.12.053 . -------- p.r:~.fIrinted Standard M3:I?L_ ---------- ---....-- -- ---.-----.----.-- Large Format (larger than 11" x 17 N/A $25.75 NI Small Format (11" x 17" or smaller) N/A - i5_15 -- NI -- ---.- - -- -.-.----------------- --------- - nun Custom_M~pping SlilrviCes- . -. . , N/A $12875 NI _t:l_o!-!~y .. MailinCl Lists ----- N/A $103.00 - nN" u_ -- _~_~~~~!l.rch _.El!l.!~l&~r sheet of labels 0; ital Data Services NJA -l12S}O NI Minimum Charge Page 9 of9 \~c MEMORANDUM 2 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM Paul Menter, Finance Director Don Pergande, Budget Manager December 5th, 2006 Second reading: Adoption of Budget Supplemental - Ordinance NO.n (Series 2006); this item will be discussed on Monday, December 11th, 2006 DATE: RE: SUMMARY: Staff is requesting an amendment to the City's 2006 budget that increases the city-wide total expenditure appropriation from $137.2 million to 143.4 million, (See Attachment A). Net of inter fund transfers, budget authority increases from $116.2 million to $118.3 million. Interfund transfers are required reallocations of City resources between funds. Interfund transfers are not expenditures, and should therefore not be included in an analysis of the true cost of City operations. Transfers do, however, require appropriation authority from Council. Attachment C provides a detailed listing of budgeted 2006 interfund transfers. The majority of the supplemental requests are technical adjustments that involve interfund transfers. The total amount of interfund transfers that are requested in the 4th supplemental of 2006 is $4,091,465. The exhibit below outlines the supplemental request's impact on the City's overall appropriation authority. The referenced attachments provide itemized listings of requested supplemental budget authority. CITY OF ASPEN - 2006 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET Description Amount Reference 2006 Adopted Budget: $137,224,699 See Attachment A Total New Requests: $6,231,797 See Attachment B Totallnterfund Transfers that See Attachment B are reflected in new requests: $4091 465 TOTAL ORDINANCE: $143,456,495 See Attachment A Less lnterfund Transfers: ($25.113.126) See Attachment C NET APPROPRIATIONS: $118,343,369 See Attachment A Cash exists in the form of unreserved fund balance or current year revenues to fund all requested appropriations. These requests are described individually below: . Attachment B: "New Requests" of $6,231 ,797 are split between requests for interfund transfers of $4,091,465 and $2,140,332 of formal appropriation, in total change of authority, for issues/projects previously reviewed by Council during this fiscal year. . Attachment C: This attachment details all budgeted interfund transfers of the City for 2006 including this supplemental, which requests approval of $4,091 ,465 in interfund transfers (also detailed as part of Attachment A). Pending approval of this supplemental ordinance appropriated interfund transfers total $25,113,126. New Requests: In the General Fund, new requests to be reviewed by City Council, total $1,924,334. $1,419,710 of these new requests is an interfund transfer from the General Fund to the Asset Management fund. These requests are made up of the following: Risk Management, $8000: $8,000 are for one time requests. $3,500 is for the purchase of employee safety equipment. This request will be offset by CIRSA reimbursements. $4,500 is for a technical adjustment to the payroll budget. This is a one time appropriation request from General fund cash reserves. Community Development, $256,000: $256,000 in one time requests for an expanded scope for the lodging consultant, a new land use planner, and an urban design consultant per Council's request. This is in addition to the $138,800.00 that has been allocated for the moratorium budget already in 2006 in the 3rd supplemental request of 2006 (see attached memo). This is a one time appropriation request from General fund cash reserves. Police Department, $26,725: These are onetime requests. $22,336 for appropriation of the reimbursement from Forstmann Little to cover the overtime incurred by the police department for the visit from the Iraqi President and $4,389 for appropriation of vehicle accident reimbursements. The appropriations requests will be 100% offset by revenue reimbursements. Recreation Department, $93,265: The following are all one time requests: $25,089 for additional staffing needs to keep up with the demand for popular recreation classes. $10,000 insurance deductible incurred due to a flood, 8,000 in appropriations for insurance expenses, $3,000 for unexpected unemployment charges, $6,576 for utilities correction from the Red Brick Center of Arts, $600 for increase gymnastics instruction. All of these appropriations that staff is requesting are onetime appropriations and will be 100% off set by additional revenues generated by the Recreation department. $40,000 is a one time technical adjustment to the Recreation payroll. This request will be funded from the General Fund Cash Reserves. Aspen Recreation Center, $76,044: The following are all one time requests: $6,000 for shed roof concrete work for the creation of footers and drainage improvements under the emergency exit shed roof and $25,144 for staff expenses to meet the increased demand for the ARC facilities. These staff requests will be 100% offset by additional revenues generated from the Recreation department (Recreation, ARC, and AIG). $44,900 is a one time technical adjustment for the pool, administration, and the Lewis Ice Arena payroll budget. This request will be funded from the General Fund Cash Reserves. Aspen Ice Garden, $44,600: The following are all one time requests: $35,000 for additional overtime and temporary staffing costs needed to keep up with the demand for services at the Aspen Ice Garden, $8,600 in appropriations for insurance expenses, and $1,000 for hockey sleds and equipment due to increased activity. All of these onetime appropriation staff requests will be 100% offset by revenue generated by the Recreations department (Recreation, ARC, and AIG). The net effect will be the subsidy level for this department will remain inline with the beginning year approved subsidy level. Interfund Transfer, $1,419,710: $1,419,710 is a technical adjustment to transfer funds to the Asset Management fund to fund the Jenny Adair project and the ARC energy efficiency project previously reviewed and approved by Council. The ARC energy efficiency project has a rate of return of 14.8% per year. This equates into a 7 year return on investment. This is a one time appropriation requests from General fund cash reserves. Parks and Open Space Fund, $1,872,255: This request is made up of two interfund transfers: $197,552 is a onetime water reclamation transfer to the Golf fund and $1,674,703 is a technical adjustment to the transfer from Parks Operations fund to the Parks Capital Project fund, this transfer will fund all of the Council approved capital projects in 2006. Wheeler Opera House Fund, $680,000: This is a technical adjustment. $680,000 is an interfund loan from the Wheeler to the Amp fund to be paid back over the next ten years at an approximately 6% interest. This interfund loan is to fund the Redbrick remodel. The Wheeler fund has sufficient cash reserves to fund this request. Lodging Tax Fund, $150,000: This supplemental request is a technical adjustment. The forecasted amount of the Lodging tax has increased for 2006 year end. 100% of this tax is distributed on a yearly basis. This appropriation request will allow the additional anticipated revenue to be fully distributed to ACRA and the City of Aspen's transit system. Housing Development Fund, $56,500: This is a technical adjustment. This is an interfund transfer to Marolt housing fund. This appropriation request is needed for Marolt to maintain the 115% lease coverage ratio. The Housing Development fund has sufficient cash reserves to fund this request. Early Childhood Initiative - A VCF ($10,000): This supplemental request is for a technical adjustment due to a change of staff composition. Payroll will be ($10,000) lower than budgeted at the beginning of 2006. Water Utility Fund, $221,000: These are all onetime requests. $68,000 is for the Pump Station energy efficiency project, this request will be 100% reimbursed by funds from CORE in 2007. $108,000 to be used for Integra Engineering proposal for high priority pump efficiency projects, as well as a number of lower priority items. (See attached memo) $45,000 is a one time water reclamation project interfund transfer to the Golf fund. The Water fund has sufficient cash reserves to fund these requests. Electric Fund $8,000: This is a onetime water reclamation project interfund transfer to the Golf fund. The Electric fund has sufficient cash reserves to fund this request. Housing Authority Fund $18, 750: $18,750 is a one time request for a technical adjustment to the payroll budget for the Housing Authority Fund. The Housing Authority fund has sufficient cash reserves to fund this request. Asset Management Fund, $1,310,948: $933,000 is for the formal appropriations of the ARC Efficiency Project, $30,000 is a request for additional appropriations needed to complete the Redbrick remodel, and $207,948 is formally appropriating all of the 2006 funds needed for the Jenny Adair project. These requests are funded from the General fund cash reserves in form of an interfund transfer from the General fund to the Asset management fund. There are sufficient funds available in the General fund to fund these requests. $140,000 is a technical adjustment for the final appropriations of the New Animal Shelter; this was funded from reimbursements received from the Animal Shelter Board. Please feel free to contact either Don Pergande or Paul Menter with questions regarding any of the appropriation requests included in this ordinance. ORDINANCE NO.'-ti-- (Series of 2006) AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE TN THE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND EXPENDITURES OF 1,310,948, AN INCREASE IN THE GENERAL FUND OF $1,924,344, AN INCREASE IN THE PARKS FUND OF $1,872,255, AN INCREASE IN THE WHEELER FUND OF $680,000, AN INCREASE IN THE LODGING TAX FUND OF $150,000, AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND OF $56,500, A DECREASE IN THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION INTIATIVE FUND OF ($10,000), AN INCREASE IN THE WATER FUND OF $221,000, AN INCREASE IN THE ELECTRIC FUND OF $8,000, AND AN INCREASE IN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND OF $18,750. WHEREAS, by virtue of Section 9.12 of the Home Rule Charter, the City Council may make supplemental appropriations; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has certified that the City has unappropriated current year revenues and/or unappropriated prior year fund balance available for appropriations in the following fund: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS FUND, WHEELER FUND, LODGING TAX FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, EARLY CHILDHOOD INITIATIVE FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, AND HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND. WHEREAS, the City Council is advised that certain expenditures, revenue and transfers must be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 Upon the City Manager's certification that there are current year revenues and/or prior year fund balances available for appropriation in the: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND, PARKS FUND, WHEELER FUND, LODGING TAX FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, EARLY CHILDHOOD INITIATIVE FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, AND HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND: the City Council hereby makes supplemental appropriations as itemized in the Attachment A. Section 2 If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any re.ason invalid or unconstitutional by any court or competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND POSTED ON FIRST READING on the 2006. ORDERED PUBLISHED AND/OR day of ATTEST: Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY ADOPTED AFTER PUBLIC HEARING on the _ day of ,2006. ATTEST: Helen Kalin K1anderud, Mayor Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to Form: John Worcestor, City Attorney A Total City of Aspen 2006 Appropriations by Fund - Appendix A . ! Fund # ,QQO- 001 -~ 100 120 130 140 150 ~1 152 --- 250 340 Fund Name General Government Funds Asset Management Plan General Fund Subtotal General Gov't Funds: Soecial Revenue Funds -- mended 2006 2006 Amended Expenditure Supplemental # Expenditure Budget 4 Budget $6,162,138 ___$1,310,948 $23 352 639 ~29,514,777 ---- Parks and Open Space Wheeler Opera House Lodging~tax Fund Parking Improvement Fund Housing Develo~ment Early Childhood Educ. Initiative- AVCF ... . _1--__ $229,222 Kids First! Yellow Brick $1.546124 Subtotal, Speciat Rev. Funds: $60,905,668 Debt service-Funds - Debt Service Fund Subtotal, Debt Se~rViceFunds: Parks Capital Improvement Fund $11,762,168 - $4,256,161 - $995,087 $2,052,570 $4Q,064,3:36 $3853247 $3,853,247 $10,708,637 Enterprise Funds -- ~1_ Water Utility _ ~..~ Electric Utility 441 Stormwater . 444 Ruedi Hydroelectric Facility 450 Transportation Fund . 471 Municipai Golf Course ~ ~__ Truscott Housing ... .._____ 492 Marolt Housing_ - --Cgubtotal, Enterprise Funds: 501 ~ 622 f--- Health Ins. Internal Service Fund TrusfS; Agency Funds 620 Housing Authority .622 Smuggler MOuntain Fund Subtotal, Trust & Agency Funds: $10,307,500 _ $7,1~8,348 ~ $12,908 - $293,610 ---SS,202,371 $1,149,059 $2,079,445 $1.168298 $28,341,539 $2,875,000 ~ ---- $944,870 $80 960 $1,025,830 ----- --~-- $137,224,699 Less Interfund Transfers 'EQUALS NET ALL FUNDS APPROPRIA nONS: $1 .924344 $7,473,086 $25276.983 $3,235,292 _.532,750,069 $1,872,255 $680,660 $150,000 $0 $56,500 -$10,000 .~ ~ $2,748,755 - $221,000 _ $8,000 . $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ~ $229,000 ~ $0 $13,634,423 _$4,936,161 $1,145,087 $2,052,570 -$4~120,8:36 $219,222 $1.546124 -$63,654,423 .- $3 853 247 $3,853,247 $0 $10,708,637 $fO,528,500 $7,1~~ $12,908 $293,610 $6,202,371 $1, 149,05~ $2,679,445 $1 168298 $28,570,539 $0 $2,875,000 $18,750 $963,620 ~ ~ _ $86960 $1,044,580 $6,231,797 $143,456,495 $18,750 $21,021,661 $4,091,465 $25,11~ -f-- $116,203,038 $2,140,332 $118,343,369 001.13: Community Devel ! "This is additional budget appropriations for the expenses-Moratorium-~to~--.. . 001.13.13316.82999 mee~c;~uncil directives _ .____... I $256,000 Subtotal, Com Dav Departmentl 001.31: Police DepartmenL_______ ..._ 001.31.31200.80040 -Forstmann Little reimbursement for overtime forthelraqi President visit J ______.1.1.7,036 . OOf31":3130CCa0040' Forstmann Littlerelmburseme-rif for overtime-forthe-iraqi President visit I $5,300 - ----------------- 'Vehicle accident reimbursement M expenses reimbursed - this formally 1'-- ------$4,389_.._ . approp.ria~es the fu_n~~ _ ___ __ _ _ __ _ Subtotal, Police Departmenr; I I I OQ1 }L~1 OOO.80QIt~~ffset by re,,_E!~_L!~~__~~~~_ra~ed in 2006 and wi.ll ~~ affect.the. ~ubsidy lev~!__l Insurance expenses - will be offset by revenues generated in 2006 and will ;1 001.71.71000.82400 not affect the subsidy level_____ .. i Insurance deductible incurred due to flood - will be offset by revenues 001.71.71000.82400 igenerated in 2006 and will not affect the subsidy level $10,000 001.71 :71620.82999Itncrea_!;ed demand for Gynastles - instructor expense offset by reven~~d-- -~~600 001.71.71000.80012ITechnical adjustment lor payroll ' $40,000 IDue to increased class en-rollment, additional staff was needed - wil-I be 001.71.71000.8003010ffset by revenues generated in 2006"nd will not affect the subsidy level $25,089 Subtotal, Recreation: !ReqUest fo-rshed roof concrete work -~-wflfbe offset by revenues generated 001.72.72100.839001 in 2006 and will not affect the subsidy level 001.7i72600.80012! Technical adjustment for payroll - pool and admin operations------ - ----- -- -- - - !Technical adjLi-stment for payroll- Lewis Ice Arena for coverage of facilities 001.72.72700.80012 and programs -- -- ---rO-me-Elt the increase in demand for the ARC facilities: additional staff was needed - will be offset by revenues generated in 2006 and will not affect ...1 001.72.72600.80012 the subsidy level __ __~25, 144 Subtotal, ARC, I City of Aspen Supplemental Budget New Func~ing ~equests Deoartment N~!, Reauest DescriDtion 001.10: Risk Management_ Employee Saftey. Yak Tracs - Funds are reimbursed by CIRSA Technicafadjustme_~_t for payroTI------- 001.71: Recreation - -Red Brick Center of Arts-utilities billing correction - will be offSett)y--- 001.71.71000:8~_?22 revenues generated~!1 2006 and will not affect the subsidy level ----Recreation has received-lJnexpected unemployment ch-arges - wilnJe 001,72: ARC 001.74: Aspen Ice Garden Additional operations has increased labor expenses - will be offset by 001.74.74000.80030 revenues generated in 2006 and will not affect the subsidy level :!nsuranceexpense - wiilbe offset by revenues generated in--2<f6ifand-will 001.74.74000.82400,n~laffe.ct the subsidy level . ..__ ___ . . I Hockey sleds and equipment due to increased in activity - will be offset by 001.74.74000.83999! revenue!!J~enerated i~ 2006 and will not affect the subsidy level I Subtotal, Aspen Ice Garden. 001.95 Interfund Transfers , -~ransfer to the AMP - funding the Jenny Adair Tabor pro]ect"ancfihe ARC __001.95.00000.95000 . efficiency project Subtotal, Transfers SUBTOTAL, GENERAL FUND: 100: Parks and Open Spa~~_f_':!':I_~_ 100.95.82067.95471--0ne time water reclamation tranSfer-to the-GolfF-und" ~Increase in the Transfer to the Parks Capital Fund to fund ali oftile--Capital 100.95.00000.95340 projects appropriated in the 340 lund Subtotal, Parks Fund: 120: Wheeler Opera House Fund _ _ _m_ . ... 120.95.00000.95000 Redbrick remodel- interfund loan to AMP Subtotal, Wheeler Opera House: 130: Lodging Tax Fund: To appropriate all of the 2006 Lodging Tax for distribution to ACRA and 130.00.19010.62000 the City 01 As en Transit System - Technical adjustment Att B. New Requests Attachment B , 1-- _ Amount i Subtotal bv Oeot. I I , I $3,5Qa..:........ _~500. $8,000 $256,000 $26,725 $6,576 $3,000 . $8,0(lo...L...._ $93,265 $6,000 $36,000 . $8,900 _ $76,044 $35,000 $8,600 . $1.0(l()___ -- $44,600 $1,419,710 $1,419,710 $1,924,344 $197.552 $1,674,703, . 1 $1,872,255 $680,000 , $680,000 $75,000 i Page 1 City of Aspen -- Attachment B ----- Supplemental Bud.!t~. i -~ ------ I New Funding Requests ----- -- -- -- - ---- ___m New Reauest Descriotion --- - - Department ---- ---------- Amount Subtotal bv Deot. iTa appropriate all of the 2006 Lodging Tax for distribution to ACRA and 130.00.19020.82025 :the City of Aspen Transit System - Technical adjustment i $75,000 -------- - --- i --------- Subtotal, Lodgin!iTax Fund: $150,000 ~~O: Housing Development ------ - ___on Subsidy Transfer to the Marolt Fund 492 - to maintain a 115% lease , -- 150.95.00000.9_5~~~ r~overage ratio Subtotal, Housing Development Fund:: $56,50~_ , $56,500 151: Earl}'.c:hildhood Initiative - AVCFk_~~_ i ____ 151.24.2430080012, Ch~,,~inStaffing i ($10,000) ---..- ------ , Subtotal, Housing Development Fund: ($10,000) 421: Water Utility , 421.94.4470f._?_6000 : Pump Station ene_~gy_~tficient project - r~imbursed by core fur:;~s~_~~_f_007 $66,000 !October 30th, 2006 - Council approved the submittal of a fall supplemental I request in the amount of $108,000 to be used for Integra Engineering I proposal of $218,000 for high priority pump efficiency projects, as well as a: $106.000 : ---- 421.94.44701.86000~~umb~E..E!~ower priority items _________ ! ------ 421.95.00000.95340; One time water reclamation transfer to the Golf Fund , $45,000 . I --------- Subtot.i"CWater Utility:1 - $221,000 431: Electric Fund -~ ------------ 431.95.00000.95340_ One time water reclamation transfer to the Golf Fund $8,000 ---- Subtotal, Parking I Transportation - u ~ $8,000 620: HC?using Administration ------ .- 620.83.xxxXX.80012 :Technical adjustment for payroll bud~iefauth6rity $16,75<L_~ --r---- Sli"btotil, Housing Administration; $18,750 , i ------ ------------ ----- --- 000: Asset ManagemEt_nt Capital ----- -------~--- i -~- 000..91.8200_1_:86010 _ Final appropriations for the _C?~~~~u_tof the New Animal Shelter ProjeC! - - $140,000 ---- - ~- 000.91.)()()()()(.66000 AR_C_lOl1ergyefficiency project $933,00~ i Redbrick remodel - revised estimate needs additional $30,000 in $30,000 1.-- ~- ~~- 000.71.8~9~5:86000! appropri~~~~~!..:..E~~_asset manC!.ge_ment - - 000.90.82067~86000 : Appraprialing funds far the Jenny Adair project in 200~ ~ __ $207,948 ------ Subtotal, Asset Management Capital Furid: $1,310,948 Total New Requests ,All Funds: $6,231,797 $6,231,797 Att B. New Requests Page 2 CITY OF ASPEN Transfer From Fund Transfer To Fund i ! I -j -- ~~~unt Of;:~~~~lpuTDose of Interfund Transfer Attachment C 2006 Interfund Transfer 000: As.set .Milnagement --- ,.. -IWii'eelerOpera House -- __ _ ____________~K!d_s_First Fund ___. ___ Debt Service-Fund. reductiOn --- -- -.---- --- --'-~Debt Service Fund ----~--~--_.....__.- I Subtotal, Transfers From Asset Managem 001: General Fund I ____om I Parks and Ooen 5 ace Fund: ___ ___~~__~___ l:l_o..!!lSl~fiLDevelopment Fund AMP Fund AMP Fund ____ __ _______ ;Park.ing and Tra."sportations.Fund - ~ Parking and Transportations Furid- AMP Fund ------ -- ___~___~!v'IP Fund AMP Fund ___ ___ __ ___L~~ortation Fund Subtotal, Transfers from General Fund: 100: Parks and Open Space Fund .--------- $186,468 Transfer to Wheeler Opera House $181,690 Transfer to Repay Streets LO~~~_. _'__==- __ -$1,203 Correcting RevRef1.!':l~_i!:'R ~~nds Transfer $455395 !Transfer to Deb~ Service Fun~__ $822,350 i L $81,960 IAnnual Partial Subsidy of Food Tax Refund $1,126,848 iTransfer .-Zupa",,"CisProperty Re-purchase $45,000 iAspen Square and Curb cirii:l'G-ijtte-r--projects - $31,000!Third Floor Remodel- remaining contract $-fO,OOO;-Correcting Transfer to match Resolution $15,000 ,Intercept Service to encourage bus usage _~~9-,-000: First Step of the ARC Master Plan $10,000 IS Backup Switch Purchase $1,419,710 Jenny Adiar and ARCeffi6ency projects $_140 oo_q-9J~~~tions Subsidy - $2,899,518 ______.!'~~~~I)~_9~~~ace Caoital Fund One time Water Reclaim transfer to Golf Parks Capita(FacffitJes spAc Debt Service Fund ---- Transfer to fund budgeted 340 Capital $3,714,067'improvemen~E~j~~:.._____ ._^' ______ $197,552! Water Reclaim _ProL~--=---~_Il_S~!_ to G.C?I!_ ____ $250,000ISPARC Inter Fund Loan Interest _ _________ $893,873; Parks 2005 Open Space Bonds i. _u U $856, ~8~_C!.~_~~~_,!I()_~,.20q~_.~~L~~Tax ~ven~E'!~~~ 12005 Parks and Open Space Revenue Bonds - $954,506irefunding 1999 bonds $1,722,201 i Pay off the 2002 ARC Interfund Loan __n ---$462,0001 Payoff the 2002 ARC Interfund Loan $649,619!PaYOffthe-2cio2"ARC Interfund Loan__ ! Overhead Payment. General Government _ _ ___ $633944: Support of fl!~~Qperati~~_____ I Debt Service Fund r D~bt serv~:-Fund -------- IWheeler Opera House : : Housj~g P~Y~!QP~E'!D_LE!!!1d ! -W~d<~ Fl;!cilitiesFund 363_ ___--+ I 1 iGeneral Fund 1 i Subtotal, Transfers from Parks and Open I !space Fund: ! 120: Wheeler Opera House Fund _u____ U___ I IGeneral Fund I $10,333,9501 i Overhead Payment - General Government $226,1481 Support of Fund Operations ~_ ilnterfund transfer to cash flow the Redbrick $680 000 I Remodel in 2006 $906,148 ! I $100,0001 Operations Subsidy '12004 Certificate'of Participation (Refunded, Originally issued in 1989 to construct Rio ____ n~_?_9~~488fG_~_n~l3!_Pl:!rking g_arage _ _ ____ _ ___ ___ $76,795Ioverhead, Transportation Administ_~.!!o.rln Overhead Payment. General Government __Q.E!Qerol Fund ___________________~1_~~J~9-~l!~~__~_E~~__Qpera!!o_ns__m__ Subtotal, Parkinn Garane Fund: $996473f 871,282.5 150: Housing Development Fund 1 450 Transportation Fund $2,000,0001 Burlingame mitigation Truscott I ~ental HoLJsing Fun_d _ _-=:- $1,091,192ITruscott I, 2001 Housing Bonds Subsidy ----- - - I Lanscaping improvements. transfer Parks _ _ .Tr:u!,i9Q'tt_1?nds~ing Improvements _ $50,000 Capital Fund ----- --[MarOlfRa.nch Seasonil-j.:iousing~Subsidy for $95,000:Budgeted Capital Improvements IAPCHA Housing Office, Operations Subsidy ---- $170,255- (50% of total Subsidy, split with Pitkin County I Upgrade Burlingame car share vehicle to hybrid $45,000,vehicle loverhead Payment - General Government $469208 Support of Fund Operations $3 920 6551 1 _ $1_0_.900fT~l;!n_SfeLto Kids_First - for expenses $10000 AMP Fund Subtotal, Wheeier Opera House: 1_40: P!,,_rkin_g ~i~r~_g~J:~~~ ______________:J:ransportation Fun~ :Oebt Service Fund ---- -Transportation Fund -- __~rJI~!~ Ranch Season~I_H()_L1s!.Q_gFund I Housing Office Operations Fund I ----- : Parking I Transpo!~!ation _ Fl!r'l(j , IGeneral Fund . - !Subtotal, Housina Develoament Fund: 151: Early Childhood Educ.lnitiative. AVCF I Kids Firsf Fund I Day_Care (Kids First !Yellow Brick) Fund --- !General Fund 3,26119200 -~ !GeneraJ Fund -T----- : , ___--L_ I _L I , , $30,000 I Transfer - New Property Manager Position loverhead Payment - General Government $59850 Support of Fund Operations $89 850 . CITY OF ASPEN Attachment C 2006 Interfund Transfer . ----- ----- ------------------------ -- Transfer From Fund Transfer To Fund Amount of Transfer j P~JrDO_~~_ C?f-'nt~rf~nd Transfer Parks and Open Space Capital Fund ! IGeneral Fund -- - iOverheadPayment. General Government $29 367! Support of Fund Operations Water Utility Fund I r- 1----- I I Return on Investment Payment, General Fund I I Sale of Land to Water Utility for Operations General Fund $1,000,0001 Facilities ---- Genera! Fund -$92,-56~~gIObal warming-EH ------ ---- --- Parks Capital Fund $770,000 Water Reclaim P..!l?j~~ -- Parks and Open Space Fund - $150,000 I Water usage Conservation Programs -- One time Water Reclaim transfer to Golf $45,000 IWater Reclaim Project - transfer to Golf ---...-.-.----.-. Overhead Payment - General Government -. : General Fund - -- _____n___ _ _$614 189_. S~pport of Fun~_ qperatiC?_ns !Subtotal, Water Utility Fund:: $2671,756 2,057,567.00 ~i(U~!i!i!Y Fund IGeneral Fund - __m.__ -- m_______.._ - $364,000 Franchise Fee Transfer to General Fund I . Overhead Payment - Generai Government iGeneral Fund -.- ---.- __n $296,536, Support of Fund Operations ------ : Parks Capitai Fund $130,000 Water Reclaim Project T-....- .-- - - 0 I ;urchase of Hydroelectric power from-CitY~---- - I Reud[ Hydro_~i~ct~ic ~ll~~ - ___n______ $406,000,owned Generating F~_cillty____ - General Fund $92,56711/3 Global W<:'f!!ling-EH - ------One time Water Reclaim transfer to Golf ---- ~8'_~OJlNater. Reclaim. Project. transfer to Golf _ 'N<:lt~~ Utility Fund I $148309. Electric Utility portion of Utility Billing Services I ' n.____. _ Subtotal, Electric Utility Fund: I $1445412' 1,031,412.00 I!~~~i Hyd!oelectric Fund ! I... .. . ..------------ L_ I i Overhead Payment. General Government General Fund ____ n__________.J.!Q.!760 ~Support of Fu~~gperations ------------ --.- I T_~~sportatlon Fund I -i Overhead Payment. General Government ----------- General Fund $351,266 : Support of Fund Operations :Contribution for Mall Rubey Park Mall --- - Parks and Open Space Fund $318,054 ,Maint~~~ce -- Subtotal TransDortation Fund $669,320 ~C?urse Fu~~__ ---- - -Overtu3'acf Payment - General Government General Fund -- $115,721 Support of Fund Operations ~~a~~cS_and Open Space Fund $10000. Grounds Mainten.!l_n~ serVIcei 'Subtotal Golf Course Fund: $125721 ' Truscott Rental Housing Fund I - -:bverhead P-ayment - General Governnlent - i -- iGeneral Fund $3S,OS4~ Support of Fund Oper<!~_(:lnS ----.- --------- I Overhead Payment - Housing Operatrons---- - . . ~OUs.iQ.g_.9flerations Fund $48849' Support of Fund Operations iSUbtotal Truscott Houslna Fund: ! I $83,903 I ~I!.R~n_~tl S_~a~()':Ia:I-!'i-C?!J~I!!9n~'!!!..--- I ------l OverheadPiyment"- Gen-eralGovernment 'General Fund ! $16,7161 Support of Fund Operations --- -.---- . r Overhead Payment - Housing Operations - ~ Hq~s.i_ng_ ()perations Fund ! F~,6~gLSupporto.f_ Fund Operation_s__ ~Subtotal, Marolt Ranch Fund: , $413661 ~i_ng 9!f!c~ Operat~ons Fund ___________~---------- _ _mmL __ __u . iOverhead Paymenf~-General Government iGeneral Fund: $49 880 1 Suooort of Fund Ooerations Smuggler Housing Fund - I--n-----.- I Overhead Payment - General Government 'General Fund n____._ $3,382!Support of Fund Operations Housing Operations Fund $3315 :Housing Overhead- --- Subtotal, Smuggler Fund - 16,697 ----- I-c-c--- -.. .. . -~.- $25,113,126! . 2005 TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS .~~,_."~~~~--'" l)td MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner ~ Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development ~ PUD Amendment: Hotel Jerome, 330 East Main Street Public Hearing, Continued from November 27th, Ordinance No. 42, Series of 2006 TO: FROM: THROUGH: RE: DATE: December 11, 2006 ApPLICANT: Hotel Jerome Inc. REPRESENTATIVE: Vann Associates LLC LOCATION: 330 East Main Street. CURRENT ZONING: Commercial Core SUMMARY: Based on discussion at the public hearing before City Council on November 27'\ 2006, the applicant has agreed to withdraw the request for a fourth floor penthouse addition on the west side of the Annex building. The applicant continues to request that the City Council approve a PUD Amendment that would allow for 2,644 square feet of additional commercial space, largely for spa services in the basement; and that would eliminate a previous PUD requirement that 27 parking spaces be set aside for hotel employees. This packet includes a re-draft of Ordinance No. 42 that reflects the withdrawal of the request for a fourth floor addition, and resulting minor changes to the required housing mitigation. The applicant has informed City staff that Hotel Jerome representatives are prepared to address several issues at the December Ilrh public hearing, which were broached at the November 27'h public hearing. These issues include the treatment of historic interior elements; the landscape plan for the Courtyard; and the applicant's proposal to remove a requirement that set aside parking spaces for employees. 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 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 commercial space and reduction of employee parking requested in this application. 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, J.B. 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 torn 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 of the 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 26.415.070(D)I(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). PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW: GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVtEW: 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. 2 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 Resolution No. 29, which approved a Growth Management Review and Commercial Design Review, and recommended that Council approve a PUD Amendment. These approvals encompassed the fourth floor addition, including three lodge suites. Growth Management Review Because the applicant has withdrawn the fourth floor addition, including the three lodge suites, the employee generation calculation has changed. The generation of employees is now based solely on the additional 2,644 square feet of commercial space in the basement. Pursuant to Section 26.470.050(A)I, this commercial use would generate eight (8) employees, and would require the mitigation of 1.2 employees. 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. Because this is a Historic Landmark, the first four employees generated in this proposal are not required to be mitigated, and the next four employees are mitigated at 30%. This calculation requires the applicant to mitigate for 1.2 employees. The interior renovation and reconfiguration of the Cortina Lodge will accommodate one (I) additional employee, and the additional .2 employee can be mitigated via a payment of cash-in-lieu. All units at the Cortina will be Category I. Considering that the P&Z and the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority had agreed with the previous proposal to house one (I) employee at the Cortina and make a payment of cash-in-lieu for one (I) employee, based on the application that encompassed the fourth floor addition, the Community Development Director is prepared to issue an Insubstantial Amendment to require the applicant to accommodate one (I) employee at the Cortina Lodge and pay cash-in-lieu for .2 employees under the amended development proposal, pursuant to Section 26.470.080(A)I-3. 3 KEy ISSUES: The following table reflects the withdrawal of the fourth floor addition. The number of lodge units has been reduced from 96 to 94; the total square footage of the building has been reduced from 122,592 s.f. to 115,860 s.f.; and the height allowance has been reduced from 54 feet to "per existing conditions." 4 The applicant's withdrawal ofthe fourth floor addition leaves two changes to the existing PUD approval: 1) An increase in commercial floor area of 2,644 square feet; and 2) Eliminating the requirement that 27 parking spaces be set aside for employee use. Regarding the proposed increase in commercial floor area, staff believes the addition of spa services in the basement of the hotel is a consistent use for a hotel of this type. 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. In addition, the applicant has stated that the Jerome Hotel has a progressive policy toward employee transportation support, and plans to outline that policy at the December II public hearing. Applications for a PUD Amendment are typically a trade-off: The applicant may seek to exceed the dimensional requirements ofthe zone district, while offering public benefits in exchange. In this case, the applicant no longer seeks to exceed the dimensional requirements of the zone district, but is seeking to amend the existing PUD approval. 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. 5 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. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 42, Series of2006, with conditions, finding that it meets or exceeds the applicable standards of review." ATTACHMENTS: As provided previously. 6 ORDINANCE NO. 42 (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. Parcel ID: 273707321001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Hotel Jerome Inc., represented by Varm 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 Commission 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, I WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 27, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and continued the public hearing until December II, 2006; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on December II, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and approved Ordinance No. 42, 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 standatds 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 welfate. 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: 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 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 Section 3: Dimensional Annrovals 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. NlA: No Dwelling Units 94 todge unirs Per Finat PUD Plan Per Final PUD Plan Per Final PUD ptan Per Finat PUD Plan Per Final PUD Plan Per existing conditions N/A: One structure Per existing conditions Per existing Conditions TOTAL: 115,860 sq. ft. Commercial: 15,985 sq. ft. Hotel Units: 58,502 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 ofthe 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. 3 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 alternative 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: Utilitv and Service Conditions of Aooroval 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. 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 4 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 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. I. 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. 5 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 shall be deed restricted to APCHA's Category I income and occupancy guidelines. A certificate of occupancy shall 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 one (I) employee through housing at the Cortina Lodge, and shall mitigate the remaining .2 employee via a cash-in- lieu payment. 4. The applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the Aspen/Pitkin 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. The applicant shall provide a legal instrument permanently ensuring the affordability of the units in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney. The City shall accept a nominal property interest (1110 of I percent undivided interest) or other reasonable means or assurance. If this standard cannot be met, the units shall be transferred as "for sale" units pursuant to the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. 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. 6 Section 12: 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 13: 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 14: 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 15: 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 16: 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 11th day of December, 2006. Approved as to form: City Attorney 7 juud ld//f New Condition The applicant is required to submit a written inventory of all original features existing within those interior areas of the Hotel Jerome that are customarily open to the public, or where the public is typically invited. This inventory must be accompanied by current photographs, and copies of any photographs of the interior of the Hotel Jerome available from the Aspen Historical Society archives. The Historic Preservation Officer will verify the completeness of the inventory. Any overlooked elements that can be documented as original will be added to the list. Said inventory shall identifY proposed treatment of the items that are on the inventory. The inventory shall be reviewed by the City's Historic Preservation Officer. To the extent that there is a disagreement to the proposed treatment, the applicant may appeal to the City Manager. The City Manager's decision in the matter shall be subject to an appeal to the City Council as a de novo review. Once the proposed treatment is agreed to by the City and the applicant, no changes shall be allowed without the consent of the City's Historic Preservation Officer, subject to the appeal provisions set forth above. JPW- saved: 12111/2006-196-G:\john\word\ords\Jerome condition.doc Helen Klanderud }JCJFJ (~//f From: Sent: To: Subject: carlie siemel (carliesiemel@hotmail.comj Friday, December 08, 2006 3:46 PM Helen Klanderud; Torre; Rachel Richards forward; Jack Johnson; J.E. DeVilbiss; J.E. DeVilbiss forward Thank you for Nov. 27, 2006 Council Meeting Dear Mayor Klanderud, Councilman DeVilbiss, Councilman Johnson, Councilwoman Richards, and Councilman Torre: Thank you for your diligent work at the November 27th public hearings and for listening to the presentations regarding Stage 3 and the Hotel Jerome. We agree with City Council's disapproval of adding additional height to the Hotel Jerome. By not granting this variance, you are helping to preserve the unique qualities and architectural character of this important area of the city. Respectfully, Carlton R. Seimel, Representative Aspen Citizens for Sensitive Development Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN Radio powered by Pandora http://radio.msn.com/?icid~T002MSNOJA07001 1 StirlWg Homes f! j\J-f'.A'V}V ldlll REAL ESTATE SALES I RENTALS I PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 600 East Main Street! Suite 102 1 Aspen, Colorado 81611 970.925.57571888.648.13681 FAX 970.925.1405 www.stirlinghomesinc.com To: Mayor and City Council From: Bill Stirling Homes Inc. Ref: Hotel Jerome: "If the applicant is willing, City should support their effort." Date: December 6,2006 I was serving the citizens of Aspen as Mayor, when the Council negotiated with Dick Butera and Jim McMannus's proposal to restore and expand the Jerome Hotel in the mid 80's. Dick and Jim were great stewards of the Hotel and agreed to throw aside all the other previously approved, yet woefully inadequate, expansion designs and start anew. Though there had been work done here and there over the earlier part of the 20th C, this was the first major renovation of the Hotel since Herbert Bayer, the reknnowned Bauhaus designer and artist, oversaw an upgrade to the Hotel in the late 1940' s. Dick Butera was the point person of the partnership, and the most controversial part of the application was the annex, where the world famous Jerome pool had been. Keeping that annex at the same height as the original Hotel was key to the approval. It was Dick's idea to build the marvelous ballroom in which literally every Aspenite and Aspen visitor has been in for one event or another over the years. I want to commend you on your decision not to allow the Hotel Jerome's new owners to build the three lodge suites atop the existing Hotel. The village scale of our town has been one of the most important features of our charming mining town over the centuries. In my view the four most important components in making Aspen so attractive over all these years are: I. The Aspen Idea-mind, body and spirit 2. The growth management plan, which manages the pace and size of growth 3. Historic preservation of the wonderful Victorian architecture and 4. Maintaining our manageable size. In my view all the other aspects of the Jerome proposal are worthy of being endorsed by the Council. Eliminating the 27 garage spaces designated for employee use makes all the sense in the world, as they were rarely used by workers in any case. Adding those spaces to make a total of 47 for guest use is completely defensible. Some parking will be available nearby at the Cortina. Putting a modest spa facility in the lower level of the hotel is also a very good addition to the amenities of the Hotel. I like preserving the Cortina, one of the classic 1950's motor lodges, as the key site for affordable housing, just one block away. The paramount feature of their application is the overall restoration of the inside and outside of the Hotel. The Hotel has become such a focus for the community and our visitors, and has been intensely used in the past three decades and is now in dire need of being overhauled again. The Hotel is now owned by a family from Oklahoma. They own, understand and have been stewards for other great historic properties and really seem to grasp the importance of bringing the Hotel from top to bottom into the 21 st C. The thoroughness of their proposals to accomplish this renovation are laudable, and these improvements are essential to the integrity of the Hotel and key to the Hotel maintaining its competitive edge. By City resolutions we have always left the interior changes and restoration decisions of the Victorians up to the owner. The most important facet of any restoration is to preserve the classic look on the exterior. So windows and all other exterior features must reflect the historic traditions. For the most part I think it is important to be consistent with that policy. However, there are important components in the public areas of the Hotel (lobbies, stair cases, JBar, and other public spaces) that might require some consultation with the Historic Preservation Officer and the Historic Preservation Commission. It appears that the applicant will be willing to cooperate with the City on these issues. The owners have to have a certain leeway in determining what happens inside the Hotel rooms. The remainder of all the mechanical and technical upgrades is what will make the Hotel a great destination resort attraction into the foreseeable future.. If you will continue to keep the height as it is, and the applicant is willing to accept that decision and move forward and stay on schedule, then I would urge you to support all of the other aspects of their effort to protect their asset and bring it back to all its 19th C. grandeur, but with all the modem underpinnings necessary to make it last another Century and continue to serve their guests. Sincerely, A1B'II.'I' 1 hrmg n r U-..M-a:"" L2./ II HOTEL JEROME PARKING 12/11/06 1. 1983 Gilmore PUD Approval · 60 off-site parking spaces of which approximately 35 were to be allocated to Hotel employees. · Agreed to participate fmancially with the City in the construction of a munici- pal parking garage on the Rio Grande property in which the 60 spaces would be located. 2. 1986 Butera PUD Amendment Approval · 1986 Amended and Restated PUD Agreement required 51 on-site parking spaces. 3. 1990 Butera Supplemental PUD Amendment Approval · Approved a variety of minor changes to the 1986 approval. · Required 27 of 51 spaces be reserved for employees. Eight employee spaces at the Cortina Lodge. · Employee parking condition recommended by P&Z to help alleviate lack of public parking in immediate site area. 4. Existing Hotel Parking · 38 parking spaces. 13 spaces converted to other uses over time (e.g., office, workshop, storage). 5. Required Parking Pursuant to Land Use Regulations · 14,891 sq. ft. net leasable at 1 space/l,OOO sq. ft. = 15 spaces. · No parking required for hotel units in Commercial Core zone district. · No parking required for hotel employees not housed on-site in any zone district. 6. Proposed Hotel Parking · 47 parking spaces. 9 former spaces will be reclaimed in connection with renovation. · Additional parking was originally proposed under courtyard but was abandoned to protect existing Spruce trees. 7. Existing Hotel Employee Parking Program . Hotel provides bus passes to all full-time employees at a cost of approximately $4,000.00 per month. . Approximately 12 to 15 management/priority employees are provided with parking spaces in the garage, space permitting. . Parking is generally available for these key employees year round Sunday through Thursday. A sign is posted to indicate if parking is available on a given day. If no space is available, these employees are reimbursed for up to 8 days per month in the Rio Grande garage. . Parking program is discussed with each new hire during orientation, and all employees are encouraged to ride the bus, carpool, walk or bike. . The Hotel sponsors various programs to encourage riding the bus, carpooling, walking and bike riding. · In summer, the "Make A Difference On Your Way To Work" pro- gram. $850.00 mountain bike given away plus an additional $1,000.00 in prizes to other participants. Over 60 percent of employees partici- pated in 2006. · In winter, the "Hotel Jerome Green Program". Weekly prizes at City Market, Target and Wall-Mart for participants. $500.00 end of season prize. · 87 percent of Hotel's employees either walk to work, utilize bus passes, park in the Hotel's garage and/or the Rio Grande garage, carpool or bike to work. 8. New Parking Policy · To address a concern raised by the neighbors, the Hotel has implemented a new policy that limits employee on-street parking to Bleeker Street between Monarch and Mill Street while working. There is a carpool signed area in this location. · Employees will be notified of the new on-street parking policy with their paychecks and a permanent sign will be posted at the Hotel's employee en- trance detailing the parking policy. Failure to comply will result in disciplin- ary action up to and including potential termination. c.. e o :::::::tl::;::R 000 o N c.. ~ CO () -/ Q) .....0 > 0..... . C (") OT"" . ~ '- o ~ o ..... c:: o ...... t;:: Q) C Q) (() tl:: 0) ~ o 00 c CO c.. ~ ~ a.. e a.. ~ 00 00 0 00 a.. :::l 00- :::l_(() CO 0 (() 3: cd a.. 0 - c.. Q) Q) Q) ~ 00 ~ > > > ~8~o~~ ~.DD.III .- ..... n:s 1:: o Q. tJ) c:: n:s '- l- I t: n:s ..... en CD E o '- CD I - CD ..... o ::I: 00 00 CO;::R 11.0 (j) C/)-.;:t :::l (() 00 :::l (() 00 0 cdoo~ ~cor--.. _I1.N CO S ...... t;:: Q) ~ a5 Q)(();::R > 0)0 'C C CO O~ ~ CO 00 00 CO a.. OO;::R :::l 0 (()T"" - Q) > 'C o MEMORANDUM lYe TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner Chris Bendon, Community Development Director~ The Hearthstone House, 134 East Hyman Avenue, Landmark Oesignation- Second Reading, Ordinance # 44 of 2006, THRU: RE: DATE: December II, 2006 On behalf of the owners of Hearthstone House, Stan Clauson requests to continue Second Reading of Ordinance #44, landmark designation of 134 East Hyman Avenue, to February 26,2007 for the purpose of compiling more information on the building's current condition. The City filed this application for designation without owner consent; therefore, Staff supports continuing the application to a date amenable to the property owner. A letter requesting continuation and extending the six month stay on demolition of properties under consideration for designation is attached as Exhibit A. 4 December 2006 STAN ClAUSON ASSOCIATES, INC Planning. Urban Design Landscape Architecture Transportation Studies Project Management Ms. Sara Adams Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen, CO 81611 200 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE: 970.925.2323 FAX: 970.920.1628 E-MAIL: info@scaplanning.com WEB: www.scaplanningcom Re: Hearthstone House historic designation process, 134 East Hyman Avenue Waiver of Rights and Request for Continuance Dear Sara: On behalf of the owners of the Hearthstone House, I am writing to express their agreement to waive their right to compliance with Section 26.415.030. C.l, regarding notification of property owners, and to extend the six month demolition stay until such time as City Council has approved or rejected an ordinance designating the Hearthstone House as an historic resource. This agreement is conditioned upon the continuation of City Council hearings on this matter until February 2007, specifically a second reading of the proposed ordinance shall be scheduled no earlier than 26 February 2007. This additional time will allow the owners to prepare appropriate information on the current condition of the Hearthstone House as a lodging property and to plan to attend the hearing. If said continuance is not granted, then the owners would require full compliance with all notification provisions of the Land Use Code. As stated in previous testimony before the Historic Preservation Commission, the owners have determined that the lodge in its present form is not economically viable and would like to pursue a redevelopment of the site. Unfortunately, the structural and design aspects of the existing building do not permit a remodeling or reconstruction that would retain existing features of the building, such as might be required if the building were designated. We provided an analysis of the Hearthstone House building by Lisa Purdy, a qualified historic preservation consultant. Although, the Historic Preservation Commission did not agree, Ms. Purdy's findings support the contention that this building is not a worthy candidate for historic designation. While the existing building may be regarded affectionately for various reasons, we do not believe that this structure offers public benefits consistent with the City of Aspen Land Use Code so as to warrant listing on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. Rather, more significant benefits could be derived from a redevelopment of the site, consistent with the Code, to ensure the economic viability of its role as a lodging facility. PLANNING AND DESIGN SOLUTIONS FOR COMMUNITiES AND PRiVATE SECTOR CUENTS Ms. Sara Adams 4 December 2006 Page Two We look forward to presenting additional testimony at the City Council public hearing and to your confirmation that a hearing date will be scheduled at the end of February 2007. Very truly yours, Stan au n, AICP, ASLA STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, INC. '~-f MEMORANDUM Mayor Klanderud and City Council Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner GG= Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development QJNWl TO: FROM: THROUGH: RE: Civic Master Plan Adoption, 2nd Reading of Ordinance No, 46, Series of 2006, Public Hearing. DATE: December 11,2006 ApPLICANT: City of Aspen REPRESENTATIVE: Community Development Department CURRENT ZONING: Various SUMMARY: The purpose of the Civic Master Plan is to provide guidance for the future use of publicly-owned properties in the Civic Core, located between Aspen Mountain and the Roaring Fork River. The Civic Master Plan process was initiated by City Council in June 2000, and was guided by the 25-member Civic Master Plan Advisory Group (CMP AG), staff and a consulting team. The CMPAG used the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan for guidance during deliberations, along with eight (8) Core Principles that reflect the tenets of sound urban design. The CMPAG held numerous work sessions with Council over the years to "check-in" and get direction when needed. The Draft Civic Master Plan contains 67 findings and 49 recommendations regarding 16 different sites in the Civic Core. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve an ordinance adopting the Civic Master Plan as a regulatory document, pursuant to Section 26.208.010(1) City Council powers and duties. Ordinance No. 46 requires future applicants for development on the various sites evaluated in the Civic Master Plan to demonstrate "consistency" with the findings and recommendations in the Plan. If future applicants can not demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations, Ordinance No. 46 requires future applicants to demonstrate consistency with the eight (8) Core Principles contained in the Plan (Exhibit A, Pg. 4); and to demonstrate consistency with the portions of the Aspen Area Community Plan cited in the relevant section of the Civic Master Plan. In the balance of this memo, staff has responded to a request from Mayor and Council at 1st Reading for further information on the role & authority of the AACP, the Civic Master Plan and the 1993 Rio Grande Master Plan. THE ROLE ~ AUTHORITY OF THE ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN: The 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan Update was adopted via Joint Resolution of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission and the Pitkin County Plarming and Zoning Commission on January 2S, 2000; and also adopted via Resolution No. 12, Series of 2000, by the Aspen City Council on February 28,2000. At that time, the City of Aspen Land Use Code allowed for a Comprehensive Plan or a Community Plan to be referenced in the Land Use Code as a regulatory document. The AACP was, and continues to be, referenced in several areas of the Land Use Code as a regulatory document. For example, the Land Use Code requires that a subdivision or a Plarmed Unit Development (PUD) must "be consistent" with the AACP. THE ROLE & AUTHORITY OF SUPPLEMENTAL PLANS OR DOCUMENTS: Until 200S, the Land Use Code did not provide for supplemental plans or documents to be adopted in a regulatory capacity. For that reason, various plans were generated and reviewed but carried no authority, and tended to "sit on the shelf." In 200S, City staff proposed a code amendment, which was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. This code amendment allowed for the adoption of supplemental plans, guidelines or documents that "amend, extend or add" to the AACP; it identified the Planning and Zoning Commission as the final review authority to adopt a "guiding" plan or document, and identified the City Council as the final review authority for the adoption of a "regulatory" plan or document [Section 26.104.030; Section 26.212.010(R); and Section 26.208.010(1)]. THE ROLE & AUTHORITY OF THE CIVIC MASTER PLAN: The Civic Master Plan should be considered an "extension" of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). The Civic Master Plan "carries the subject matter [of the AACP] into greater detail through the development of [the Civic Master Plan]", pursuant to Section 26.1 04.030. Specific portions of the AACP are cited in the Civic Master Plan, and these portions of the AACP were relied upon by the CMP AG to generate specific and detailed findings and recommendations. The adoption of the Civic Master Plan would not change the marmer in which the AACP is currently used in the Land Use Code. If the Civic Master Plan is adopted as a regulatory document, it would require future applicants for development on the various sites evaluated in the Civic Master Plan to demonstrate "consistency" with the findings and recommendations in the Civic Master Plan. However, staff recognizes that the Civic Master Plan can not anticipate all potentially appropriate uses that may be proposed in the future on sites that were evaluated in the Civic Master Plan. At the same time, it has always been the intent of the Civic Master Plan Advisory Group to make the Civic Master Plan a "living" document that can be relied upon in the future to provide guidance for the future development of properties evaluated in the Plan. 2 City staff, the consulting team and the CMPAG believe that the criteria used by the CMPAG in adopting findings and recommendations should still be relied upon in the future to evaluate whether future uses are appropriate on sites identified in the Civic Master Plan. Specifically, those criteria are the eight (8) Core Principles adopted by the CMPAG, and the portions of the Aspen Area Community Plan that are specifically cited in the Civic Master Plan. Therefore, Ordinance No. 46 requires that if future land use applications can not demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations in the Civic Master Plan, future land use applications must demonstrate consistency with the eight (8) Core Principles contained in the Civic Master Plan (Exhibit A, Pg. 4); and must demonstrate consistency with the specific portions of the Aspen Area Community Plan cited in the relevant section of the Civic Master Plan. THE ROLE & AUTHORITY OF THE 1993 RIO GRANDE MASTER PLAN: The 1993 Rio Grande Master Plan was the result of a direction from City Council "to identify appropriate activities and land use patterns for the Rio Grande property," according to "Purpose of the Master Plan," page I (see Exhibit E). The Planning and Zoning Commission adopted the Rio Grande Master Plan (RGMP) via Resolution No. 93-10, which stated that the RGMP "identified general land use goals and recommendations," and "identifies specific areas of the Rio Grande Property with general land use themes" (see Exhibit F). Resolution 93-10 also stated that the maps contained in the RGMP "are intended to be used only as guides." Although the Rio Grande Master Plan itself states that "new development or significant alterations must be consistent with this plan," it is Resolution 93-10 that specifies the authority regarding implementation of the plan. That authority is "general" and "guiding," and not regulatory. Regardless of whether the 1993 Rio Grande Master Plan is guiding or regulatory, a physical master planning exercise such as this is typically relevant for 5-10 years before other factors and changing conditions have an impact on the area under physical planning review. In the case of the Rio Grande Master Plan, many posItive and productive recommendations were implemented, including the basketball court, skateboard park, removal of the access road along the river, implementation of the pedestrian path linking to Patsy Newbury Park, bins for recycling, the riverwalk and kayak course were completed, an alternate location for the snow dump was found and the snowmelter was relocated to the recycling facility. However, one of the driving forces behind the shaping of the 1993 RGMP was the potential for a regional rail terminus - an initiative that was ultimately abandoned. This substantial change in conditions ultimately limited the relevance of the 1993 RGMP 3 The Civic Master Plan encompasses the entire area identified in the RGMP. It was not only appropriate, but necessary, to update planning efforts such as the RGMP, based on changing conditions. For that reason, if the Civic Master Plan is adopted as a regulatory document, it would supercede the RGMP. However, the practical impact is minimal. Map 1 - site A (\\0 G-Rf\tJoe M,A)fER PLAN ICj'i) \-/'. " " " " " " " Trans po rtatio n/Recre ati 0 n , , " , " " " - " .. ",. -~ "- " " " 4 Map 2 - site B l~ lO G~ANOE M-MrE"R PlA-1II I'l'" 3 5 Two of the sites evaluated in the Civic Master Plan - the City-Owned Parking lots north of Rio Grande Park, and Galena Plaza - were encompassed in the 1993 RGMP, but were barely mentioned. The 1993 RGMP makes no specific recommendations for the City- Owned Parking lots or Galena Plaza, and its maps simply show the parking lots and plaza remaining in place. The apparent lack of emphasis on these sites may be due to the fact that both were located directly adjacent to and/or part of the anticipated regional rail terminus. Absent the development of that substantial transit center, it is appropriate and necessary to re-evaluate the future use of these and other nearby properties. Other comparisons and contrasts between the Civic Master Plan and the 1993 RGMP: . The RGMP recommends that if the rail terminus was not built, the playing fields should be retained. The Civic Master Plan retains the playing fields as well, and the Rio Grande Park Master Plan would slightly enlarge the field so it is regulation-size for soccer and football. . The RGMP set a goal to "visually and physically connect the river to the park." The Civic Master Plan and Rio Grande Park Master Plan would help to reach that goal by recreating riparian areas along the river. . The RGMP holds open the possibility of the "future development" of a year-round Theatre in the Park facility at its current location inside the Park. The Civic Master Plan does not allow for this, and identifies the vacant parcel next to the Wheeler Opera House as the appropriate site for an additional performing arts facility, if needed. If the theatre tent is moved, the Civic Master Plan and Rio Grande Park Master Plan would expand the John Denver Sanctuary. RIo GRANDE MASTER PLAN - PLANNING REVIEW HISTORY: The following is a brief summary of the planning review history of the properties reviewed in the 1993 RGMP: ~ 1973: The City used ih Penny transportation funds to purchase a majority of the Rio Grande property. ~ 1975-'78: A Performing Arts Center for the property was studied. ~ 1981: A non-specified 1.5-acre site was set aside for a future Performing Arts Center and the City moved the snow dump from the Sanitation District property to the Rio Grande property. ~ 1982: The City and County exchanged the Aspen One, Oden and stable (Galena Plaza) properties. ~ 1987: The City installed the snow me Iter. ~ 1988: A conceptual SPA master plan was adopted by Council identifying a parking garage, the library, the Spring Street extension, a snowmelt facility and an arts usage area. ~ 1989: A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the parking garage and Pitkin County Library ~ 1990: A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the Youth Center. ~ 1991: Council denied a conceptual SPA approval for the trolley, Theatre in the Park, recycle facility and snowmelt operation and instead directed staff to prepare a master plan for the entire site. 6 FUTURE LAND USE REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR SITES IN THE CIVIC MASTER PLAN: The Civic Master Plan does not provide any legal entitlements for future development at any site contained in the Civic Master Plan. Any potential future land use applications for any of the sites evaluated in the Civic Master Plan must demonstrate "consistency" with the Civic Master Plan, and would be reviewed under applicable sections of the Land Use Code. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REVIEW PROCEDURE: ADOPTION OR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL TO ADOPT PLANS. GUIDELINES OR DOCUMENTS The Plarming and Zoning Commission has the final review authority to adopt any plan, guideline or document by Resolution if that plan, guideline or document is to be used in a guiding capacity, and not a regulatorv capacity. The Plarming and Zoning Commission also has the authority to recommend via resolution that City Council adopt any plan, guideline or document via ordinance if that plan, guideline or document is to be used as a regulatorv plan, pursuant to Section 26.212.010(R). Final Review Authority for rezulatorv plans: City Council. On November 21,2006, the Plarming and Zoning Commission held a public hearing, and voted 5-1 to approve Resolution No. 31, which recommends that City Council adopt the Civic Master Plan via Ordinance as a regulatorv plan, with conditions. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW PROCEDURE: ADOPTION OF PLANS. GUIDELINES OR DOCUMENTS AS REGULA TORY DOCUMENT The City Council has the final review authority to adopt a plan or document via Ordinance if it is to be used as a regulatory document. How the material shall be used in relation to the AACP, land use development and plarming shall be described in the content of the ordinance, pursuant to Section 26.208.0 I 0(1). Final Review Authority for rezulatorv plans: City Council. Reviewing the Draft Civic Master Plan will be an unusual land use planning exercise for the City Council. Rather than looking at specific site plans, the Council will be reviewing a conceptual plan that does not often contain specific "site-plan-style" recommendations. In most cases, the Civic Master Plan contains recommendations that are general in nature, and intended to create the context for appropriate decision-making in the future. Staff intends to make a powerpoint presentation outlining the overall purpose of the Plan as well as its many "moving parts." Staff will ask Council to provide feedback in the marmer that Council members deem appropriate, ranging from conceptual discussions, to questions about specific findings and recommendations, to the format and implementation of the Civic Master Plan. There are several potential outcomes of the Council review process. The Council may find the Civic Master Plan to be adequate on its face, and may adopt it. The Council may want to see changes to the Plan, and could implement those changes in the form of conditions of approval. Or the Council may find numerous fatal flaws and decline to adopt the Civic Master Plan. 7 PUBLIC PROCESS: The Civic Master Plan Advisory Group requested in June 2006 that the entire Civic Master plan be provided to the public for feedback. Rather than provide a "shorthand" version suggested by staff, the CMP AG believed that the entire plan should be distributed for feedback. Thus far, the public feedback process has consisted of the publication of the Draft Civic Master Plan as a 20-page newspaper insert with accompanying article; posting of the Plan on the www.aspenpitkin.com webpage; a listserv notification; legal notice of the public hearing before the P&Z; a separate advertisement of the P&Z public hearing; and legal notice of the December II City Council public hearing. The minutes of the P&Z public hearings are attached as Exhibit B. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 46, Series of 2006, with conditions, finding that it meets or exceeds all applicable standards of review." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Draft Civic Master Plan (provided @ 151 Reading) Exhibit B: P&Z Resolution No. 31 & Minutes Exhibit C: Draft Civic Master Plan Appendix A (provided @ 151 Reading) Exhibit D: Civic Master Plan Phase I Report (provided @ 1 st Reading) Exhibit E: 1993 Rio Grande Master Plan Exhibit F: P&Z Resolution No. 93-10 Exhibit G: Public feedback 8 ORDINANCE NO. 46 (SERIES OF 2006) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE CIVIC MASTER PLAN, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council in June 2000 initiated the Civic Master Plan process to provide guidance for future development in the Civic Core of the City of Aspen, and appointed members to the Civic Master Plan Advisory Group; and, WHEREAS, the Civic Master Plan Advisory Group consists of representatives of various local organizations and agencies that are located in the Civic Core of the City of Aspen, and has held numerous meetings; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the Draft Civic Master Plan, the Community Development Department and the 2S-member Civic Master Plan Advisory Group recommend adoption of the Draft Civic Master Plan in June 2006; and, WHEREAS, a copy of the 20-page Draft Civic Master Plan was inserted in the Aspen Daily News and posted on the City website in August 2006 as part of a public feedback process; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has the responsibility to review comprehensive plans or any supplemental plans, guidelines or documents, pursuant to Section 26.212.010(R); and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 21, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and recommended pursuant to Resolution No. 31, Series of 2006, by a vote ofS-l that City Council adopt the Civic Master Plan with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Draft Civic Master Plan under Section 26.104.030 and Section 26.208.010(1) 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 December 11, 2006, the Aspen City Council reviewed the proposal and approved Ordinance No. 46, Series of 2006, by a _ vote, approving with conditions the Civic Master Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Civic Master Plan meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that the approval of the Civic Master Plan, 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. 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED THAT THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS THE CIVIC MASTER PLAN: Section 1: Adoption ofthe Civic Master Plan Pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 26.208.010(1) City Council powers and duties of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council adopts the Civic Master Plan as a regulatory document. Section 2: Relationship to the Aspen Area Community Plan a) Pursuant to Section 26.104.030, the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan was utilized as a guiding document for the adoption of eight (8) Core Principles contained in the Civic Master Plan, as well as the findings and recommendations contained in the Civic Master Plan. Specific references to portions of the AACP are made in each section of the Civic Master Plan. b) When land use applications are required to demonstrate consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan under Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, land use applications shall also be required to demonstrate consistency with the Civic Master Plan. Section 3: Rel!ulatorv application of the Civic Master Plan a) Pursuant to Section 26.104.030, the Civic Master Plan Mall be considered a regulatory document. Plarming and development initiatives for land use entitlement on the parcels identified in the Civic Master Plan shall demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations in the Civic Master Plan. Plarming and development initiatives for land use entitlement on the parcels identified in the Civic Master Plan unable to demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan must demonstrate that the conceptual plan and/or development proposal is consistent with the eight (8) Core Principles contained in the Civic Master Plan, and the portions of the Aspen Area Community Plan referenced in the Civic Master Plan. b) Upon adoption, the Civic Master Plan shall supercede the City of Aspen Rio Grande Master Plan of 1993. Section 4: Code Amendment Section 26.1 04.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code, which section relates to the "Comprehensive Community Plan and other Plans, Guidelines or Documents," is hereby amended as follows: Civic Master Plan. The Civic Master Plan, adopted per Ordinance No. 46, Series of 2006, shall be considered a regulatory document. Plarming and development initiatives for land use entitlement on the parcels identified in the Civic Master Plan shall demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations in the Civic Master Plan. Plarming and development initiatives for land use entitlement on the parcels identified in the Civic Master Plan unable to demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan must demonstrate that the conceptual plan and/or development proposal is consistent with the eight (8) Core Principles contained in the Civic Master Plan, and the portions of the Aspen Area Community Plan referenced in the Civic Master Plan. 2 Section 5: 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 6: 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 7: A public hearing was opened on the 11th day of December, 2006, at S:OO PM in City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (IS) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 27th day of November, 2006. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by the Aspen City Council this 11tb day of December, 2006. Attest: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin K1anderud, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney 3 r)th~1>;+ B RESOLUTION NO. 31 (SERIES OF 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE CIVIC MASTER PLAN, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council in June 2000 initiated the Civic Master Plan process to provide guidance for future development in the Civic Core of the City of Aspen, and appointed members to the Civic Master Plan Advisory Group; and, WHEREAS, the Civic Master Plan Advisory Group consists of representatives of various local organizations and agencies that are located in the Civic Core of the City of Aspen, and has held numerous meetings; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the Draft Civic Master Plan, the Community Development Department and the 2S-member Civic Master Plan Advisory Group recommended adoption ofthe Draft Civic Master Plan in June 2006; and, WHEREAS, a copy of the 20-page Draft Civic Master Plan was inserted in the Aspen Daily News and posted on the City website in August 2006 as part of a public feedback process; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has the responsibility to review comprehensive plans or any supplemental plans, guidelines or documents, pursuant to Section 26.212.0 I O(R); and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 24, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, and continued the public hearing to November 14, 2006; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 14, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing and continued it until November 21, 2006; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 21, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, and recommended by a vote ofS-l that City Council adopt the Civic Master Plan, with conditions; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE CIVIC MASTER PLAN: Section 1: Adoption ofthe Civic Master Plan Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Section 26.1 04.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the Civic Master Plan as a regulatory document. Section 2: Relationship to the Aspen Area Community Plan a) Pursuant to Section 26.104.030, the Aspen Area Community Plan was utilized as a guiding document for the adoption of eight (8) Core Principles contained in the Civic Master Plan, as well as the findings and recommendations contained in the Civic Master Plan. Specific reference to portions of the AACP are made in each section of the Civic Master Plan. b) When applicants are required to show consistency with the Aspen Area Community Plan under Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, applicants are also required to show consistency with the Civic Master Plan. Section 3: Rel!ulatorv application of the Civic Master Plan a) Pursuant to Section 26.104.030, the Civic Master Plan shall be considered a regulatory document. Planning and development initiatives for land use entitlement on the parcels identified in the Civic Master Plan shall demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations in the Civic Master Plan. Planning and development initiatives for land use entitlement on the parcels identified in the Civic Master Plan unable to demonstrate consistency with the findings and recommendations of the Civic Master Plan must demonstrate that the conceptual plan and/or development proposal is consistent with the eight (8) Core Principles contained in the Civic Master Plan, and the portions of the Aspen Area Community Plan referenced in the Civic Master Plan. b) Upon adoption, the Civic Master Plan shall supercede the City of Aspen Rio Grande Master Plan of 1993. Section 4: Planninl! and Zoninl! Commission conditions of recommendation to City Council During its review and consideration of the Civic Master Plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission included two (2) conditions as part of its recommendation to City Council; these conditions were intended to be added to the Civic Master Plan: a) Like uses should be clustered with like uses whenever possible. b) The enhancement of existing conditions should be permitted. Attest: Jasmine Tygre, Chair Jackie Lothian, Assistant City Clerk FIN ALL Y, adopted, passed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission this 24th day of October, 2006, Approved as to form: City Attorney Aspen Plannine & Zonine Commission Meetine Minutes November 21. 2006 COMMENTS .............................................................................................................2 MINUTES ..................................................................................................................2 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST..............................................2 CIVIC MASTER PLAN ADOPTION .......................................................................2 ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE PUD AMENDMENT ........................................8 1 Aspen Plan nine: & Zonine: Commission Meetine: Minutes November 21, 2006 Jasmine Tygre opened the regular meeting at 4:30 pm in the Sister Cities Meeting Room. Commissioners Brian Speck, Dylan Johns, Ruth Kruger, Steve Skadron (4:35), John Rowland (4:45) and Jasmine Tygre were present. Staff in attendance were Ben Gagnon, Joyce Allgaier and Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Jasmine Tygre asked what was happening with the Caribou Alley Enclosure. Joyce Allgaier responded that it was going before HPC soon. Allgaier said that she would send an email about the application for the Caribou Alley to the commiSSIOners. Allgaier said Community Development would host a luncheon work session regarding the code changes next week. MINUTES MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve the minutes from October 3 and 17, 2006; seconded by Brian Speck. Dylan Johns abstained. Approved 5-0. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (10/24/06,11/14/06): CIVIC MASTER PLAN ADOPTION Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing. Notice had been provided in October. Ben Gagnon stated that he walked through a slide show at the October 24th public hearing showing the different sections. Gagnon said Appendix A provided additional background of the sites, some historical information and the Rio Grande Master Plan. Gagnon said there was discussion at the previous meeting for the lack of planning for some of the areas. Gagnon asked P&Z to adopt a condition that would add historical information to the main document. Gagnon said the 1993 master plan looked at Rio Grande Park as well as some of the areas to the south coming up to Galena Plaza and over toward the Obermeyer area; there were a number of recommendations carried out with a basketball and skate park as well as getting rid of vehicle access at the east end ofthe park and establishing pedestrian paths. Gagnon said the west end of the park contained the field, the parking area south of Rio Grande Place and encompassing part of Galena Plaza next to the library, all were purchased with ih penny transportation funds in 1973. Gagnon said there was planning going on at the City and County levels regarding a regional rail 2 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! Minutes November 21. 2006 system coming from the Denver & Rio Grande alignment. Gagnon stated the 1993 plan continued to make the assumption that rail system would become a reality and the west end of Rio Grande Park including the field was anticipated to be part rail terminus area and in the mid 1990s that regional rail system fell apart and was ultimately abandoned however the land in that area including the parking lots and part of Galena Plaza was purchased with 7th penny funds if that land was used for anything other than transportation it would go to a city vote to change the use of the land from transportation to some other use. Gagnon said specifically there was discussion about the parking lots between Rio Grande field, Community Banks and the ACRA Offices, which was a six year process in terms of how they came up with those recommendations on the parking lots. The Rio Grande Master Plan cited those parking lots to remain as parking lots with the possibility of potential uses for the parking lot were neighborhood commercial retail (targeted to neighborhoods). The potential upper floor uses being affordable housing and another potential use for the area was an Arts or Cultural Facility, which was a complicated proposal. Gagnon said there were lots of revisiting of the issues over the years and over the last year the advisory group drafted and re-drafted all the findings and recommendations; the group literally used the thumbs up or thumbs down or if they wanted to talk about the subject some more then they would put their thumb sideways. Gagnon said they did not stop until all the thumbs were up; there were a lot of issues and that was why it took so long to draft the 50 findings and 65 recommendations. Gagnon said that Galena Plaza has a zag through it noting there was a triangle portion of it purchased with 7th penny funds and the balance of the property was part of a 1982 City County land trade; there used to be stables on that property. In 1989 and 1990 the Council approved a Specially Planned Area (SPA) for the library and parking garage and the plaza on the top, which was approved for a people place with landscaping and not considered for parking. It was important that this area not become a dead space. The advisory group found that it was a dead space; people were not using it and one of the findings for the Civic Master Plan was to provide a public meeting hall on the north end of that property. Another potential for Galena Plaza was a visitor center with a very nice view. Gagnon said that when you are looking at so many uses and so many areas it can free up some space in other areas. Jasmine Tygre asked about the 6th penny funds for open space. Gagnon replied the 6th penny funds apply to the area right by the river and the Rio Grande Park Master Plan was to recreate the riparian area; one of the main goals was to clean storm 3 Aspen Plannine: & Zonine: Commission Meetine: Minutes November 21. 2006 water; today the storm water runs into the river and one of the goals of the Civic Master Plan was to create clean water with a series of2 or 3 vaults that would literally take storm water bring it through a treatment underground and make little creeks and small ponds. Gagnon said there were no buildings in the riparian area and the 6th penny was to restore that area. Public Comments: 1. Kent Reed said that he founded Theatre Aspen in 1983 and last summer he initiated an outdoor Shakespearean Theatre in the Galena Plaza space. Reed said the space created a natural amphitheatre and with imagination the space could be utilized. Reed said that he did not know that Galena Place was available for smaller groups and under utilized; they could use the space for rehearsals, small one act plays and dances. 2. Junee Kirk said that she was very much interested in the former Youth Center Space, which was part of this master plan. Kirk said that she wanted to bring community dance to that area along with many other groups like performing arts, religious meetings and it was only in the last couple of weeks that they were made aware of this space. Kirk noted there was a tremendous amount of demand and interest in that beautiful area, which was a commons area that serves not only dance groups but civic government needs. Kirk said that the commission should not vote on this master plan and many citizens should be involved for greater input and should not be used for public offices. Kirk said in the new Civic Master Plan did not give consideration to scale, being smaller buildings so that views and open space can be appreciated. 3. LJ Erspamer asked how much weight could be supported on the parking garage, a one-story building and did you know there was water underneath the parking garage. Gagnon replied that he knew about the water and a one-story building was what it could support. Erspamer asked if the surface parking spaces would be lost. Gagnon replied the future use of this plan would have to show consistency with the plan; the advisory group acknowledged the need for short term parking in that surface parking area. 4. Jackie Kasabach stated that she was a member of the master plan group. Kasabach said the Galena Plaza may be made slightly smaller but it would not go away; the objective would be to create a more lively interactive space. Kasabach said that she enjoyed what Kent did this summer and felt that was what Galena Plaza was supposed to be. Kasabach said that the library had the right to extend so many feet and has nothing to do with this master plan. Kasabach said the Rio Grande room was beautiful but the acoustics were not good. 4 Aspen Plannin!!: & Zonin!!: Commission Meetin!!: Minutes November 21. 2006 5. Dennis Tuma said that he became aware ofthe Rio Grande meeting space when he set up a weekend workshop for the Friends of Tibet, which could be transformed into a wonderful space. Tuma said that he was begging for space to enrich the community. Tuma suggested moving office space down valley. 6. Sue Smeadstead said that she was involved with the Youth Center and funds that came from the City and County; the Youth Center raised dollars and Prince Bandar gave $500,000. to the board president and in 2003 the Youth Center was included in new Aspen Recreation Center. Smeadstead said at that time they traded the old Youth Center Building to the City for the 1.4 million dollar investment in the Aspen Recreation Center, so they own their space at the ARC. Smeadstead said the meeting space at the old Youth Center (the top floor) was rented as meeting space to many different groups since 1990. 7. Toni Kronberg said there was an easy solution to getting this plan passed, which would be to add multiple uses with the existing uses. Kronberg said that she was most interested in the Library Park Plaza, the 3 asphalt parking lots and the current recycle center at Rio Grande Park. Kronberg distributed a black and white photo taken from Smuggler of the area for an overview of Rio Grande Park. 8. Bill Lipsey spoke as a citizen and a member of the advisory group. Lipsey said that he didn't think that there were any private properties governed by this document; he didn't think that a group would come in with private property expecting entitlements because it was public properties. Lipsey said that during the course of looking at the Civic Master Plan the Obermeyer Place was discussed and certain guidelines (a public process called a COWOP) were applied to a private entity. Obermeyer retained SCI, built walkways and the result came out extremely well representing revitalization. Lipsey said there were so many built in checks and balances between this document and anything that has ever been done; it has to go to City Council and the document remains a recommendation. Jasmine Tygre spoke as a member ofP&Z on the original plan and the reason she voiced concern for the importance of the ih penny tax in acquiring these funds. Tygre said the ih penny was for transportation related purposes and not specifically a train but transit related purposes. Tygre thanked Ben for the information and the public who have brought forth past information. Tygre said that part of her concern was that it was putting the cart before the horse; until you get permission from the voters to change the use of the ih penny sales tax to something else a lot of this was premature. Gagnon responded to the discussion of spaces to use for the arts and the advisory group felt strongly about it; there was talk of the shared meeting space and there 5 ~ r Aspen Planninl! & Zoninl! Commission Meetinl! Minutes November 21. 2006 were a number of sites that could happen. There was a strong commitment to retaining a space for a meeting hall in that area. John Rowland said there were good thoughts and the imagination was a good point. Rowland said that the Civic Master Plan was just a tool for imagination. Dylan Johns asked the ramification of voting on this plan as far as implementing these policies and shaping the course of history. Gagnon said the immediate effect was making a recommendation to Council; Council does the final adoption via ordinance. Gagnon said the way it was a regulatory document was that it would be referenced in the Code as the Aspen Area Community Plan was referenced. Johns said there was a tremendous amount of work done to get to this point and he did not feel that there wasn't time for additional input. Johns said there could be an enhancement to what businesses were on site; there were needs throughout the community for spaces. Johns said that the old Youth Center may need some renovation because it was not a perfect space but it did not mean that it was to be turned into cubicles either. Johns would like to see that incorporated into the document. Gagnon responded that the group said that a newer renovated old Youth Center Building could be a welcoming and interactive destination that capitalizes on the vistas, creates vitality and could include mixed uses and or a range of civic and or cultural uses. Steve Skadron agreed with John's and Dylan's comments. Skadron asked if Junee's concerns were addressed. Gagnon replied the plan allowed for lots of different scenarios; the conditions could remain the same at the former Youth Center for the next 20 years and until someone comes forward with an idea for the building. Gagnon said there was a strong input from the advisory group for public meeting space with the different scenarios. Gagnon said there were no entitlements in the Master Plan so that any building that goes up on any public lands would go through numerous hoops. Gagnon said that nobody wants to hear about building a government building but the City of Aspen was an activist government and does a lot; the Aspen Area Community Plan has 47 goals, 40 policies and 99 action items. Gagnon said the standards were high and that was great because it makes everyone go higher and try harder but in order to satisfy that demand you need people and space for professionals to interact with one another and not in little rabbit hutches. Joyce Allgaier stated this wasn't a development plan because it doesn't entitle anyone; the tools that would be guiding recommendations would be this document, a PUD, a SPA or other land uses. Skadron complimented the team that put this plan together with the years of work. Skadron said the plan was insightful, comprehensive and something that he could support; it had enough flexibility to allow for imagination. 6 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! Minutes November 21. 2006 Ruth Kruger said this was very well thought out and was loosely written in so far that it was a guiding document; it doesn't say exactly what needs to go where but it was something to refer to when you look at all of these spaces to make sure that the whole space was put together well containing all of the elements that need to be in those areas. Brian Speck said that he was in agreement in the sense oflooking at a lot of structures and civic space that was created in the past that may need to be modified. Speck said he looked at this as an overview of civi~ needs of the community. Jasmine Tygre said that she saw this as an enabling of development document as it was written. Tygre said the existing uses addition would be helpful because if a particular use was a considered use in an area regardless of who the applicant was might be perceived as an entitlement because it was in the plan. Tygre said that she did not want to sound disrespectful to the work done by the committee but she said that she has been through this before. Tygre said that the Youth Center Building was a classic example of building in front of that staircase, part of the plan was a continuous vista from Rio Grande Park to Aspen Mountain; the plan was not to use the Rio Grande building for governmental offices and look what occupies the building. Tygre said that history does repeat itself so she will vote against this proposal. Johns wanted to add the enhancement of the existing uses and recognizing there could be some changes to the way those things were laid out but still have them function as they do now. Johns expressed the desire of dropping the office component down to the lowest priority for this site. Johns said the preferred site for offices would be the Zupancis property or an adjacency to an existing office use versus the old Youth Center that had potential for public and arts uses. Gagnon said this was reflected in the findings and recommendations on the site. Johns said that his goal was to make it more specific in clustering uses. MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to approve Resolution #31, series 2006 recommending that City Council adopt the Civic Master Plan with conditions including a statement to the effect that like uses should be attempted to cluster around themselves when possible and that existing uses be allowed and allowed to be enhanced if desired. Seconded by Ruth Kruger. Roll call vote: Rowland, yes; Skadron, yes; Speck, yes; Kruger, yes; Johns, yes; Tygre, no. APPROVED 5-1. Discussion: Tygre requested the resolution be emailed to the commissioners with the addition of the language added. Allgaier suggested the resolution would be 7 Aspen Plan nine: & Zonine: Commission Meetine: Minutes November 21. 2006 carried forward to City Council and that Ben should explain that those were P&Z recommendations to be added to the document. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE PUD AMENDMENT Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing for the Aspen Highlands Village PUD Amendment. Glen Horn planner for the applicant said they would like to start all at the same time and at another time. Jessica Garrow stated the proof of public notice had been provided. MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue the Aspen Highlands Village PUD Amendment to December 5th; seconded by Dylan Johns. All in favor, Approved. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 pm. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 8 ",,' C1..-ki bit E ,. CITY OF.ASPEN RIO GRANDE MASTER PLAN 1993 '. Prepared by: Aspen/pitkin P1anning Office Technica1 assistance provided by: Rick McGill 1# CREDITS The Planning Department would like to thank those individuals who donated their valuable time to this plan: Kirk Baker, Rebecca Baker, Sally Barnett, Fritz Benedict, Alan Bloomquist, Tom Bracewell, Jon Busch,Chris Churchill, Hal Clark, Ed Cross, Patrick Duffield, Jim Duke, Suzanne Farver, Andy Freeman, Chris Hall, Roger Hunt, Julia Marshall, Carol Lowenstern, Lance Luckett, Ramona Markalunas, Bruce Matherly, Jack Reid, George Robinson, and Chuck Roth. TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page Purpose of the Master Plan Location Map Process Summarized History Assumptions Site A * Existing Condi~ions * Goals * Map * Recommended Land Uses/Activities * Recommended Action Plan summary site B * Map * Existing Conditions * Goals * Recommended Land Uses/Activities * Recommended Action Plan summary Rio Grande Land Use Hap Appendix A - Potential Development Scenarios Appendix B - History of Parcel 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 13 14 1.4 14 18 20 PURPOSE OF THE MASTER PLAN The Aspen City Council directed staff to create a master plan to guide'future development of the remaining "undeveloped" portion of the Rio Grande property. Council's intent for a new plan was to identify appropriate activities and land use patterns for the Rio Grande property. Council emphasized that all public interests should be considered in this. new planning effort. The Rio Grande master plan was developed as a tool to guide future development on the site. Following it's adoption, new development or significant alterations must be consistent with this plan and shall be reviewed pursuant to the Specially Planned Area development review process. The Rio Grande property is zoned Public with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay. Thepurpose of a SPA overlay is to provide design flexibility for land which requires innovative considerations and allow for the development of mixed land uses. The document provides a land use map that is a general outline for proposed uses. Three land use plans/maps for the entire study area, depicting how the uses may be integrated, are also provided in Appendix A. The three maps are intended to serve as guides for specific development scenarios but were not adopted as part of this plan. Timing and particular needs of future programs will dictate which of the three scenarios, or an alternative, is best to use. Specific development details accompany the maps in Appendix A. In addition to characterizing the Rio Grande parcel as two separate but interactive pieces, this document summarizes the history of the entire parcel, outlines existing conditions, identifies goals for each piece, proposes land uses/activities, and makes recommendations for future use. The Rio Grande master plan applies to the property bordered by Rio Grande Drive on the south, the Roaring Fork River on the north, Mill Street on the west, and the Eagles Club/Patsy Newbury Park on the east. The parking garage and Chamber offices, library and Youth Center parcels are also zoned Public with a SPA overlay and could be considered as accessory or support facilities for future development in the master plan area. For example, the office space in the parking garage could be used as ticket or luggage facilities when valley-wide rail locates on the playing field. Similarly, the publically owned property surrounding the Bass/Obermeyer building on Rio Grande Drive could be used to support other development in the master plan area. 1 ~~. .~ Ct<e'O'o. 't ... ., /olOl"'.tr_..........,U... ....- 00\ _. C-.t_..... ....I.-t.__.....,...... ptOQ"'I..lncMl.i......... Aspen ___Rio Grande SPA Master Plan Sit -1....~ -eJ] MOllJ]ta..i1'1 PROCESS Staff formed the Rio Grande Group (a citizens review group) and began the planning process in November of 1991. The following groups participated in the planning process: the Alternative Edge, Art.Park, Aspen Art Museum, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Aspen Theatre in the Park, Aspen Trolley Group, Aspen Youth Center, City of Aspen Parks and Public Works Departments, Gentlemen of Aspen R.F.C., Pitkin County Parks Association, Pitkin County Public Resources, Roaring Fork Railroad Association, and Trout Unlimited. The charge to the Group was to work with staff to develop the master plan. The Group was expected to identify critical features of the property that should be enhanced and/or preserved, resolve land use issues pertaining to the site and make recommendations regarding appropriate land use development. . The Planning-and Zoning Commission believed that the master plan should be flexible and not exclude future possibi Ii ties. The Commission' did not want to plan the site and wanted to avoid review of specific building locations and building sizes. However the Rio Grande Group did give careful consideration to potential site 2 development. The Group concluded this level of review was necessary to ensure that future uses were not only appropriate but were compatible with each other. With development information provided by organizations, such as rail and trolley advocates who hope to utilize the property in the future, the Group was able to consider several land use scenarios. A phased build out of the property and two full build out programs identified the range of possibilities for the property. In order to preserve the Group's work, three different approaches to development are presented on the maps in Appendix A. Again these maps are to be used as guides and were not adopted as the land use maps for this master plan. Although the Group considered facility needs for specific projects, it was not their purpose to make recommendations on community-wide issues such as the valley-wide rail or a cross-town trolley system. There are other decision-making arenas that will decide the fate of those projects. The Rio Grande Group met approximately ~6 times over an eight month period. One of the first tasks of the Rio Grande Group was to review existing and proposed land uses for this vital piece of communi ty property. Ini tial meetings were devoted to a presentation and discussion of particular land uses on each section of property. The property was divided into two manageable for which primary land use goals and development were made: discussion sites recommendations for Site A: the area between the river and bike path next to the snow melter (page 6); and site B: the recycle site (Old Impound lot) and the playing field (page ~3). IDSTORY This is a brief summary of the planning review history of the property_ For a more thorough history refer to Appendix B. In ~967, the Denver Rio Grande Western Railroad began discussions with the city and county regarding redevelopment of their property and right-of-way. Since those initial discussions there have been many plans regarding this 18 acre parcel: * 1973 - The city used 7th penny transportation funds to purchase a majority of the Rio Grande property. \ 3 * 1975 1978 * 1981 * 1982 - * 1987 - * 1988 - * 1989 - * 1990 - * 1991 - ( ASSUMPTIONS A Performing Arts Center for the property was studied. A non-specified 1. 5 acre site was set aside for a future Performing Arts/Conference Center and the City moved the snow dump from the Sanitation District property to the Rio Grande property. The City and County exchanged the Aspen One, Oden and stable properties. The city installed the snow melter. A conceptual SPA master plan was adopted by Council identifying a parking garage, the library, the Spring Street extension, a snow melt facility and an arts usage area. A final SPA plan was the parking garage library. approved by Council for and the Pitkin County A final SPA plan was approved by Council for the Youth Center. Council denied conceptual SPA approval for the trolley, Theatre in the Park, recycle facility and snow melt operation and instead directed staff to prepare a master plan for the entire site. . The Group identified several assumptions with regard to the . property. From the basis of these assumptions the Group began their review of existing land uses and proposed land uses. 1. Rather than completely replan the parcel, the Group began their review of the property from the perspective of existing uses and past p.lans. 2. The Group considered why and how the different pieces of property were purchased. Some of site A and all of Site B were purchased with transportation funds and most of the river frontage was purchased with open space funds. 3. The extensive work on the whitewater course and initial regrading of site A, has required adjustments to the traditional ~ethod of dumping snow on Site A, In 1991, the city Council \ 4 directed the Public Works Department to find an alternative to dumping snow on the parcel. In response, the Department is attempting to purchase land adjacent to the County Maintenance Facility for snow storage. The site will not be ready for approximately two years so the snow melter is still needed for that period. The Group is confident that the operation of the snow melter, if adjusted, can continue in the near future. 4. The Group realized that there were other decision making processes which could affect development of the two sites. The Group knew that a valley-wide rail system terminating on the Rio Grande, ultimately a tri-county decision, could use a significant portion of the property. The possibility of the Trolley System affecting the property is also beyond the Group's control and is now in the hands of the Transportation Implementation Committee. However, the Group reviewed the two proposed land uses and made specific recommendations if, the train and trolley were developed on the property. 5. Specially Planned Area review will be required for site specific development. Depending upon how the land was originally purchased, future permanent development may require voter approval which is also out of the Group's purview. Using the considerations mentioned above the Group reviewed the potential land uses of each site. SITE A I. Existinq Conditions site A is generally described as the land between the bike path or row of large cottonwoods that edge the playing field, and the river. However, it also encompasses the existing snow me Iter and the drainage pond closest to Mill street. Please refer to Map 1. The property is 2.213 acres. Site A consists of the snow sedimentation pond necessary for the site has also been used as a or dumping into the snow melter. For seven years, the Aspen Theatre in the Park has set up its theatre tent on this site for live performances between June and September. For the summer of 1992, the theatre received a temporary use permit to set up a larger tent with increased back stage capacity. melter, and sand filter and this operation. Traditionally, "snow dump" for melting on site The Art Park group has been very active and generous in its efforts 5 to reverse a trend of neglect towards this portion of the Rio Grande property. The group has rejuvenated the westerly portion of site A near the Ron Karagian bridge and the berm adjacent to ~he theatre tent. The Art Park has evolved into a beautiful garden showcasing local artist's work. The Art Park and Theatre groups have been the catalyst for the City to reconsider their stewardship of this community property. They first rallied the community to enhance the riverbank emphasizing the river and park interaction. As a result, City Council allocated approximately $60,000 to excavate the high water channel, adjacent to the main river channel, for a whitewater course. As part of the development of the course, the City created a pedestrian path along the river and revegetated the river bank and slope of the property down to the whitewater course. The walking path is intended to enhance the river experience and meander along the river's edge changing elevation as it follows the white water course. The path will not be paved because the existing paved bike path at the edge of the park is intended for multi-use. Finally, site A is an important pedestrian connection between downtown, the Art Museum, Herron Park and the dense Hunter Creek neighborhood. The Karagian bridge became a strong link to the Museum with the Art Park revitalization. II. Goals G The basis of the goals identified for this Site are the funding sources for the initial purchase and the unique characteristics of the Site. The majority of the site is comprised of the Aspen One Property (acquired with Sixth Penny Open Space Funds in 1978) and the parcel the City traded with Pitkin County in 1982. A smaller piece of the parcel was purchased with 7th Penny Transportation Funds. The parcel contains prime public river frontage and was identified as a key piece in the 1973 Roaring Fork Greenway Plan. The Greenway Plan promotes preservation of indigenous spec.ies and maintenance of the riparian environment along the Roaring Fork River and its tributaries. The Greenway Plan also supports an extensive trail system throughout the "Greenway" for "maximum possible recreational and educational potential." The site is also an important hub in the bikeway/pedestrian trail system and is consistent with future plans to extend the pedestrian and bike paths upriver. From this point, one can go up or down river, into downtown, to the Art Museum, or over to the post office-retail center on pedestrian/bike paths. 6 Map 1 - S' J.te A \-/\ , , Transp . ortatlon/R ecreation , , , , , , . "- . .' ',", .", " - , , 7 The following Goals were established for redevelopment of Site A: a. Develop a passive park offering a quiet open space for the community. b. Visually and physically connect the river with the park. c. Support the Art Theme connecting various art oriented elements such as the art park, Theatre in the Park and Aspen Art Museum. . d. Discourage permanent development except for structures which support the Art Theme or enhance the edge of the river as a people place. e. Discourage ~mployee housing as an inappropriate use for this site. f. Provide a venue for local artists in support of the Art Theme. g. Limit vehicular delivery/service and theatre. access except for theatre parking for the disabled at the h. Coordinate park activities with the Art Museum. i. Maintain pedestrian/bike paths throughout the site. III. Recommended Land Uses/Activities for Site A This site is divided into several elements for discussion purposes: 1. Site Enhancement The whitewater course is almost completed. The river bank has been regraded and recontoured to create more of a visual and physical connection to the river's edge. The banks of the channel have been revegetated and stabilized. A river walk has been established at a lower elevation from the park with the intent of being more remote from activities of the City and more restive for the pedestrian. A small bowl-shaped sitting area has been carved into the bank above the river walk to afford viewing of the new whitewater course. The sitting area remains unfinished. More dirt should be removed from that area to sculpt the curve of the bowl 8 and reduce the steepness "of slope so people can sit comfortably. However, further regrading of the rest of the site is unnecessary because it will eliminate the flat surface and inhibit park use. Irrigation should be considered along the slope for growth and as well as water features. Some revegetation and channel work have yet to be finalized, including the land surrounding the pond near Mill Street. "Native wildflower mix and irrigation ditches will be integrated into the landscape. Other footpaths may be needed in' the future and should be considered as park use evolves. Revegetation of the park shall include the theatre tent. The landscaping should help screen the tent I s stored trusses, storage shed and wood floor in the off season. It is important to note that the regradinq and recontouring of the site does not impact the temporary use of the snowmelter or sedimentation pond. It does, however, require an alternative site for the dumping of snow. The City has begun to accommodate snow dumping in other locations and is attempting to purchase another site for dumping snow. The Group has concluded that snow melt activity is inappropriate in the long-term view of the park. The snow dump should be relocated immediately and the snow melter relocated from Site A as soon as feasible. An alternative location may be considered on the recycle site integrated with an expanded recycle facility, Trolley Barn, and/or another transportation or essential community service land use. As long as the existing sand filter remains integral to the operation of the snow melter it will remain on Site A. However, it should be reshaped into a water feature for the summer. The edges of the sedimentation pond will be reworked to give a more landscaped finish. Without compromising it I S function, the inside and outside of the pond should be sloped to provide a more gentle finish and reduce the water depth. 2. Art Park Theme A strong Art Theme should be promoted as an important use for the Rio Grande parcel. The Art Theme is already supported by a variety of existing uses: the Theatre in the Park, on-site sculpture and flower gardens introduced by the Art Park group and direct access to the Art 9 Museum. Continued support for the Art Park group's efforts will provide local artists a venue for their work. Art will be iocated in the park on a revolving basis and maximum flexibility can be achieved by variety of spaces. This is important to accommodate different works. The Art Park group also proposes to continue to maintain the flower gardens, sponsor and encourage outdoor sculpture, and expand irrigation and lighting systems. To ensure maintenance and management of program responsibilities the Art Park group must work with the City to define policies or agree on a contract. Aspen Theatre in the Park is a key component of the Art Theme. The theatre recently installed a new wood floor with an improved drainage system. The company also received a temporary use permit to put up a larger tent. This permit will be reviewed on an annual basis unless the company receives SPA approval. Aspen Theatre in the Park runs from June through August performing four nights a week. CurrentlY, the theatre is required to take down the tent at the end of the season. Support beams, the wood floor and some equipment will be stored on-site. The storage shed will also provide locked storage during the summer. At this point, Aspen Theatre in the Park is not considering a year round facility. If the need for a year round facility is supported by the community, then future development at this site should be reviewed at that time. Review should consider the proposed improvements, infrastructure needs, and impacts on the passive park use. The theatre has considered on-site housing for personnel. The Rio Grande Group does not support housing for theatre personnel finding the use inappropriate on this site. Housing would conflict with the "passive park" use identified for the site. In addition, housing in the park sets a bad precedent for other City and County parks. 3. Level of Activity other land uses pertaining to food or commercial uses have been 'discussed for this area. The anticipated argument for locating these uses on the river's edge is the creation of more activity along the river within the urban setting of the City. Food booths along the paths could encourage a festive gathering place in the park. 10 However, careful evaluation must be given to future vending along the river. The character of the Rio Grande parcel, although not void of structured acti vi ty or development i.e. the Theatre in the Park, should focus primarily on the river. The visual and physical connection to the river is the fundamental goal for land use on this site. The Art Theme and other improvements are to support and compliment the river as the primary amenity. Any commercial venture must not detract from that goal. Thus, small vending booths or food stands cannot block visual access to the river. Physical access to and through the parcel or use of the footpath or kayak course cannot be diminished by vending operations. Potential impacts generated by these types of uses: vehicle related deliveries, trash, fumes, noise, power lines, must also be contained and kept at a minimum at best. Given the above constraints, the Art Museum appears to be a more suitable location for these types of proposed uses. In addition, the Museum side receives more sun than the Rio Grande side, a retail venture is more consistent with the commercial orientation of the Art Museum, and the Museum has the water and sewer services for food oriented activities. 4. Access to the Site There is. a service drive that currently accesses the site (Art Park Way). The road will be eliminated and merged with the existing pedestrian/bike path forming a 12-14 foot wide concrete pedestrain/bike path. The path may be used by theatre service/delivery and park maintenance vehicles onlY. The access may also be used by the disabled when attending the theatre. Two handicapped parking spaces, that will double as delivery space, will be provided at the tent. To alleviate the impact of only one access point to the park and to encourage less traffic on the access road, another point of access for pedestrians has been identified. Between the Eagles Club and the recycle site access will be upgraded, to include a sidewalk and gutter. A pull-out area will be provided at that portion of Rio Grande Drive for drop-off. IV. Recommended Action Plan Summarv for site A To achieve the goals and proposed land uses for this site, the Rio Grande Group recommends the following actions for Site A: 11 1. The regraded site should be revegetated and ditches should be added throughout the park area adding water features and park irrigation. 2. Pedestrian paths may be developed in the future if warranted. 3. Pond and irrigation ditch leakage should be corrected. 4. The snow me Iter should be relocated out of Site A within two years from the purchase of an alternative snow dump site. 5. The sand filter should be reshaped for use as a summer water feature and more efficient operati'on unless the eventual relocation of the snow melter no longer requires the filter in which case it should be eliminated. 6. The pond closest to the snow melter (sedimentation pond) should be recontoured to compliment the surrounding park landscape and revamped to improve its function as a settling pond for the snow melter. 7. A small turn around for service/delivery combined with two disabled parking spaces should be designed next to the theatre tent at the end of new pedestrian/bike path. 8. The small bowl-shaped seating area should be finished. 9. Access will be upgraded at the path between the Eagles Club and the recycle site. Drop-off will be provided for access to Patsy Newbury park and Rio Grande. 10. A 20 foot transition zone has been delineated on the site maps. This is the boundary between Site A and Site B. The zone lends protection for Site A from encroachments and inappropriate uses from Site B yet provides site development flexibility for Site A and B taking into account vegetation and topography. SITE B Site B encompasses the existing recycle site on the eastern portion of the parcel, publically owned land on the corner of Bleeker and Spring streets, the access road down to Site A, the small triangle of open space between the access road .and bike/pedestrian path, and the playing field. This piece of the master plan is bordered by "Rio Grande Drive, Mill Street, and a row of Cottonwoods and a pedestrian/bike path to the north (please see Map 2). 12 2 - site B Map ~" - 13 I. Existina Conditions The community's recycling drop-off center has temporarily occupied the eastern portion of Site B for several years. The facility accepts the widest variety of materials, and because of its central location, is one of the most accessible drop points within Pitkin County. The materials accepted at the site are: aluminum, tin, glass, plastic, newsprint, cardboard, low grade paper, high grade paper, green bar computer paper, and used dry cell batteries. There is a 20 yard roll-off dumpster for glass, a 100 yard trailer for cardboard, twenty-five 90 gallon containers for aluminum, tin, plastic, and all grades of paper, and a small container for batteries. An employee of Pitkin County Public Resources monitors collection of materials at the site. Recently, the berms surrounding this area have been increased in order to shield the recycle activity from view, to prevent blowing trash and to reduce haul costs during the construction of the white water course. The access road (Art Park Way) used for the snow me Iter and the theatre is approximately 40 feet wide. The playing field, which occupies the majority of this parcel, was established as a temporary use until such time that the field is converted for transportation uses. Other than the goal posts, and temporary recycle containers the parcel is void of any structural development. II. Goals Because the site was purchased with 7th Penny Transportation funds the basis of future development goals is transportation oriented. The parcel is also across the street from an assortment of land uses including the Bass/Obermeyer building, which is zoned Service/commercial/Industrial (SCI). Because of the close proximity to the SCI zone district and to downtown, a variety of land uses, including essential community services, are considered appropriate for this site. The Rio Grande Group has identified the following Goals for the redevelopment of site B: a. Locate essential community services in the eastern portion of Site B. b. Ensure that existing and future uses on the eastern portion of Site B are compatible with surrounding land uses because of this area's location and visibility. c. Satisfy transportation related needs first when considering the use of Site B. 14 d. Retain and optimize park(recreational uses in this area and replace the active park and playfield only with a regional rail facility. e. Preserve view planes to the river and Independence Pass with low-profile development. III. Recommended Land Uses/Activities for Parcel B This parcel can be divided into several different elements for discussion purposes: 1. Recycle site The recycling center is in critical need of an enclosed space for collection of material. Blowing trash has been a problem and inclement weather reduces the site to mud. Pitkin County Public Resources propose to construct a facility that is partially below grade and will make collection, bailing, and hauling of material more efficient. Enclosed bins and bailing will eliminate unsightly conditions and blowing trash. Enlarged collection areas and more storage for material will reduce the number of trips made to haul the material off-site. Efficient drop-off will encourage residents to continue to use the site. The upgrade of the recycle facility should consider relocation possibilities to City land across the street on the corner of Spring and East Bleeker Streets. 2. Trolley Barn The Trolley Group proposes to develop a trolley rail system. The system includes a car barn facility, tracks and poles, and several trolley cars. Review for this plan only considered operation and routing that would occur on the Rio Grande parcel. Depending upon the location of the barn it can be incorporated with the proposed expansion and enclosure of the recycle facility or integrated with a future rail terminal on the playing field. The structure is proposed to be one story in height. This is consistent with the recommendation for low- profile development on the parcel to avoid blocking views of the river or Independence Pass. The building could also be designed to enable affordable 15 housing on a second level. The Trolley Group cannot fund the cost of the housing but is willing to make the structure available for future housing development. Although the Group believes that housing associated with the theatre was an inappropriate land use, housing on top of the trolley barn may be more suitable if developed on the eastern portion of the site. The site's proximity to the street, S/C/I zone district and location on the edge of the park lend a more urban feel for a multi-use development. Impacts to the river and Independence Pass view planes would have to be considered. 3. Access Road The access road to the snow melter and theatre (Art Park Way) is 40 feet wide. Vehicular access into the park should be eliminated. A new pedestrian/bike path should replace the existing pedestrian/bike path and access road. It should be 12-14 feet wide and could be located either next to the playing field or recycle site. If the path were located next to the playing field the eastern portion of the site could be unified creating more land area for proposed uses. The new path is intended for pedestrian and bikes but the width can accommodate theatre service/delivery and park maintenance vehicles. Two accessible parking spaces will also be provided for the disabled attending a production at the tent. 4. New Walking Trail A new walking trail has been roughed-in above the snow melter. The trail is approximately halfway up the berm surrounding the recycling lot. The trail should be graded and improved as a walking path connecting to Patsy Newbury Park. The trail should not encroach into the recycle site. 5. Snow Melter The snow melter will be removed from Site A. recycle site should be considered as a alternative for the snow melter. Integration transportation/ essential community services considered. The current relocation with other should be 6. Additional Activities In the event either the Trolley Barn, recycling center or the snow melter are not built on the eastern portion of the site, other essential community oriented services may be located on site. However, a SPA review would be 16 required. Because transportation funds were used to purchase this piece of property, transportation related services should be given priority. Publically owned land adjacent to the Obermeyer building may also be considered for the location of essential community oriented services. 7 . Active Park Although the eventual development of a valley-wide rail system will use a majority of site B for a rail terminal, it may be years before a rail system is implemented in the Roaring Fork Valley. Therefore, the Group identified interim uses which are considered appropriate for site B. Increased recreational activities should be installed on site B. A full-court basketball court and half-pipe skateboard ramp: can fit on site B. The rugby field (390' x 225') should be squared off to enhance the playing area. Park and recreational uses should exist on this site onlY to be replaced by a regional rail facility. 8. Rail The vall~y-wide Rail Task Force has been actively pursuing a valley-wide rail that will terminate at site B. This master plan did not address the rail question in detail because decision-making will involve a broader forum. Initially commuter rail would not require the loss of the playing field. Recreational activity can still be accommodated if the commuter and trolley tracks are installed at the northern edge of the playing field. A ticket kiosk, located next to the new pedestrian/bike path, could service both the trolley and commuter rail passengers. If rail develops from commuter to regional rail service, . the rail terminal may be developed at the far end of the field thus preserving some open space for park purposes. The trolley barn could also be incorporated into the rail terminal to preserve space. However, the majority of the playing field will be lost when the rail becomes fully developed. A terminal, passenger platforms, and possibly three sets of tracks would be necessary for regional. rail. The existing transportation center, under 17 the parking garage, could be used for ticketing, baggage, and passenger services. The trolley tracks on the north side of the field will remain and a trolley stop will be tied into the rail terminal. IV. Recommended Action Plan Summarv for site B To achieve the goals and proposed land uses for this site, the Rio Grande Group recommends the following actions for Site B: 1. The City of Aspen should .decide whether a City-wide trolley system is appropriate in Aspen. If the Trolley is approved as proposed, the eastern portion of site B is the recommended site for the Trolley barn. However, the barn may be integrated with a regional rail facility when developed. 2. A height limit of one story should accompany any development on Site B unless housing is approved for the Trolley barn on the eastern portion of the site. 3. Development on the eastern portion of site B should be screened from the playing field and site A. 4. The slope and berms on the eastern portion of site B should be revegetated to blend into the park on the rest of Site B and Site A. 5. Any development on the eastern portion of site B should not intrude into the Independence Pass view plane. 6. The city and County should review the recommendations of the Roaring Fork Forum study relating to a regional-wide recycling program and other remedies that are being considered for the County recycling program. If the recycling operation is considered necessary at this location then the recycling site should be covered or contained. A facility up to a maximum of 5,200 square feet is recommended in order to integrate with other uses. The recycling facility should be incorporated into the Trolley barn structure and/or snow melt facility, and should front the street for easy public access. 7. The access road (Art Park Way) and the existing pedestrian/bike path should be eliminated. A new pedestrian/bike path should be created connecting Rio Grande Drive to Site A. It should be 12-14 feet wide and able to accommodate theatre service/delivery and park maintenance vehicles only. The new path may also be used by the disabled to. park at the theatre during a 18 performance. 8. The walking path should be improved at the higher elevation along the slope that forms the edge of the recycle site. 9. The City should work with the Youth Center to develop more recreational activities on site B. 10. The city should consider extending activities onto Patsy Newbury Park. recreational 11. The temporary active park maintained on site B only to rail facility. and playfield should. be be replaced by a regional 12. If a transportation use is developed on the playing field, then an equivalent parcel, in the City, should replace the playing field. 13. A rail terminal and accessory facilities, if developed on the Rio Grande property, should be developed only on site B. 14. Development of rail facilities should not block-off access, both visually and physically, to site 'A. 15. The Youth Center and the city should build a full~court basketball court in the open space between the recycle facility and the playing field. 16. The Youth Center and the City should install a half-pipe skateboard ramp in the open space between the recycle facility and the playing field. 17. The City should realign the playing field. 18. The City should continue negotiations with the property owners of the Bass/Obermyer building to settle the use of the publically owned property that is adjacent to the . building and being used by customers and tenants of that building. 19 - ~ [Q]o""~ rJ'\ ~-:. ~6" ,I 012 - ~- a-r)- t: ~ C ~ "b~. _::s == ~ ctI 0 ::-1.Il;:'~ S3 ..~'t:: t:.... C)- O :::.... 5' fi~~'~ ~ ~::.". ~ 0' ~ o.g lZl::: Q ",,::!~ l} n- to, c., Q'" ;;" Cot ~ iii' ~ $t !.. ~ ~ ,,' .. .... l1l ~ l:l J I . i . s ~::= cnO ;;jG'l ::JJ::JJ -c~ .-2 ~ ~ 0 . 2 m ~ APPENDIX A POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS. *These maps are provided as future land use guides. They were not adopted as part of' the conceptual SPA Rio Grande master plan. .\ t. V '" (ri ri)~ f C) ~ If Ii t i j i.li it 0 \) ~ . . . ~ r:, ~~~ l~ln t ~ ~ .0 '\ll ~, ~ Ir ; f i c:: ~ gl 1,lj!Hi ;;:: ~ ~'" i I I' . 'll ~ 'l:l'" .t q t . d I j i S 0 "< i lIT E .. .." · I . . ~ -" .. . :S::Il t: ~. ==-s. I . J i l fr!! ..... So ,., I:: ~- ~ s. .... f i It 110 I~ cnO .. .. ,." .... ., "- ~ I { · f -lc:;) ~ ,., 'l:l f I H .0 I. m:Il ~. .. ~ ~ .. go l j . :Il~ - t: f i' i .... "z " .. .. l . l ;j ""'0 " - ;;- ~ ~. .. ~m .. 0 g ~ " " r- Z 0;- r- " " ,." ~ "<; ",0 ~ " ~ ~ IOillJI~ "" ~ ~ ~n So . ~ s.~ ~ I:: 5- Qj S- Q '"'\ Ql ~ ~ ~ ~ ., ~ C' g OJ :: Qi" ~ !. ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ !:. .. .. i " .. ~ ~ t:l H iU II f II" i i i i lr f dOl t:liH! HE!' Jtlfl jill ldP: In: (tIll q I l i ': S:IJ : )>- 10 ~ 0 _ m Cl 8 :IJ:IJ "J> r--2 )>0 2m (f =- - <'l::' (/) c ~ <J ~ C r." ~i; i; ~.... ::;, ,,~ a :1>;::: n ::::: E: ~ N ~o ~ .... ;j ~ .... '" "<; ,0- ,.r- Ei ~~ ~ f . . . . . .. CI) ;oc:.f.:J.' tb ~ ::, ~ ~ ,.. ~ iq Hj ~ 0 ,00: l~! i! J . 1<::,,"1 ""! ~ . t i - r;, I ~ r t l t I ' , 0 ~ I ~ ~ .. 'l:l" ill. .liB ~:Il .. ,,0 ,... 22 I , e: ". -" UH i: ~- S- o' ".- l t , H 0 { (/'lO c::- , ,. e: S. / ;::: ". ;;- .... Hi I -Ie;) .. tr! / l If 1 :;;: " ., ~ ~ '- m:Il " W & :Il~ " S1 I 1 " c:' .. HI .... "tl:2 - " g- o S. e: t:l ""'0 " . ;;- .. I I l . ~ , i ~m " - ~ , :2 - S' 0;' ,... ~ " ~ .. .. ;:J .. 0 Ef i .... .... " ,,.,, .. -<: These specific development details were used to ensure that the proposed land uses could be accommodated on the property. Theatre Tent The tent is approximately 60 feet seats approximately 100 patrons. 12.9'. x 80 feet and 26 feet high and The storage shed is 12.9 I X Recvcle Facilitv The proposed facility is approximately 5,200 square feet. option eliminates several bins and moves part of the floor below grade for increased efficiency. This plan Customer access to the recycle site should be directly off. of Rio Grand Drive. Haulers should access off of snow dump road on the west side of the site. If the trolley barn is located on the site the cuts into the embankment, necessary for trolley access to the trolley barn, can also provide truck access to the recycle facility. Trollev Barn According to the plans, a trolley will leave the barn, cross the pedestrian/bike trail and Rio Grande Drive and travel in between the Youth Center and Jail to Main and Galena Streets.' The Trolley Group proposes to run track along the north side of the ball field providing stops at the Art Park then Mill Street. The Trolley would continue across Mill Street and utilize Puppy Smith right- of-way ~or a stop at the post office. The Group proposes to develop a car barn approximately 7,000 square feet which includes 1,000 square feet for accessory office, storage, and related uses. The barn will house the trolleys and provide a garage for light maintenance. The second floor of the building could accommodate 5,700 square feet of affordable housing. Basketball Court and Skateboard Half Pipe A 52' x 90' basketball court can be located in the open space between the playing field and current recycle site. A 42' x 24' skateboard ramp can also fit in this space next to the basketball court", Location of these activities in this area requires trolley access to the barn to be moved down to the 20 foot buffer separating Site A from' Site B or eventual relocation to the field if the barn is integrated with the rail terminal. APPENDIX B In 1973, the majority of the Rio Grande parcel (Parcels B & C and some of Parcel A) was purchased from Jim Trueman with 7th penny money thus preserving the land for future ~ransportation needs and limiting commercial development on the parcel. Between 1975 - 1978, city files indicate that planning sessions were held between the Council, Planning and Zoning commission, and the Planning Department to determine the most appropriate use of the Rio Grande parcel. A 1978 memo from the Planning Department outlines the evolution of the Performing Arts Center concept for .the Rio Grande. The memo concludes with a Wheeler Task Force determination that the Wheeler "appears. to offer the best solution to t~e requirement for establishing a performing arts facility in Aspen..." but maintain "the option to expand the perfo'rming art facilities to the Rio Grande when demands for a larger space become an obvious and economically viable need." In 1977, a Rio Grande SPA Plan was filed with an interim SPA plan schematically identifying land uses on the entire property. ,However, a conceptual plan expires if a final plan is not adopted. Council Resolution (80-6) in 1980 established a task force to review and make recommendations for the Rio Grande property. Subsequently, a 1981 Council Resolution (81-20) recognized the need for, a year round Performing Arts Center and the task force 'recommended that a non-specified one and one-half acre site be set aside for a future Performing Arts/Conference Center. An employment agreement with Benedict-Mularz was initiated in order for the architects to prepare a site plan for the Rio Grande. In 1982, the City and County entered into a land exchange agreement. The exchange included the stable property west of the Courthouse, the Aspen One Property (a piece adjacent to the river) and the aden Property (site of the new library). city Council granted conceptual SPA approval in 1986 for the Roaring Fork Railroad Proposal which included a terminal building, passenger platform, baggage handling, parking and trackage on the Rio Grande site. However, a conceptual SPA approval expires within two years if a final plan is not adopted. In 1988, a second conceptual SPA plan was approved. This plan was more site specific and the plan consisted of a parking facility, library, new access road connecting Mill and Spring Streets, and paving of the remaining surface parking on the southern portion of the Rio Grande. A snow melt facility and area for "Arts Usage" ~as also included in the plan. The center of the site remained 1 unprogrammed with the playing field undisturbed. A trail system and shuttle corridor extended through the site. The 1988 conceptual plan had many recommendations regarding the entire site. Galena Street should be a pedestrian corridor to the Rio Grande parcel. A shuttle should travel north on Galena' and on the east side of the parking facility to decrease traffic congestion on Mill. A snow melt machine was proposed to help the snow dump operation but relocation was encouraged. However, the snow dump area should be reserved for "Arts Usage". And, if the Library had not been developed on it's new site, the Arts Groups would retain the right to use the site instead of the snow dump area. The 1988 conceptual SPA plan was amended to locate the snow me Iter on the Rio Grande property and the Land Exchange Agreement was amended to facilitate the library and parking garage development. A Final SPA plan was approved in 1989 for the library and parking garage and final SPA approval was granted for the Youth Center in 1990. In 1991, the Planning and Zoping Commission recommended to Council conceptual SPA approval for the Art Park/Theatre and Trolley Car Barn, but denied the continued use of the Rio Grande for the snow dump and melter operation. Council did not approved conceptual SPA approval and directed staff to prepare a new conceptual SPA plan. 2 e-~~;b;1 F ...." RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ADOPTING THE RIO GRANDE MASTER PLAN "- Resolution No. 93-~ WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and zoning commission (hereinafter "Commission") have the responsibility and the authority to adopt comprehensive plans for Aspen; and WHEREAS, the commission and City council directed staff to prepare a Master Plan for the publically owned Rio Grande property, with attention focused primarily on the area between Rio Grande Drive and the Roaring Fork River; and WHEREAS, staff, together with community members and representatives of community organizations forming the Rio Grande Group, identified general land use goals and recommendations for future development of the property; and WHEREAS, a land use map has been created that ident~fies specific areas of the Rio Grande property with general land use themes, which map shall be adopted with the Master Plan and incorporated therein; and /' WHEREAS, three other land use maps have been prepared and included in Appendix A of the Master Plan to ensure that development of specific uses can be accommodated on the property, however, these maps are intended to be used only as guides; and '- WHEREAS, the Commission has formally reviewed the Master Plan at regularly scheduled meeting April 20, 1993; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed Public Hearing was held by the Commission on June 8, 1993 to consider the Master Plan for the Rio Grande property. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED by the Commission that it does hereby adopt the Rio Grande Master Plan. APPROVED by the Commission at their regular meeting on J"une 8, 1993. ATTEST: .ty Clerk ASPEN PLANNING AND Zidir:Z- Bruce Kerr, Chairman Date signed ~~~fj? ! I /,r,....... - I e-)C ~:" 1- Z r;. Comment from: Jason Stoller, Crystal Lake Road: 925-3308 Transcribed from a conversation with Ben Gagnon: Would like to see a major enlargement of the pedestrian malls: Main/MonarchlDurantlSpring. He has seen large pedestrian-only areas in various European countries, and believes it would be a major tourist attraction and make for a nicer downtown. Would like to see light rail and an intercept garage structure at the airport. Parking underground at Wagner would be OK if it helped the success of the pedestrian mall. Would also like to see cafes along the river in the vicinity of the Art Museum. Would also prefer commercial uses downtown rather than affordable housing. . ~ . ~ . ,'.1 \, i.' .. i.~ . Pl'. " 'tl"t :,(g.... I \0 ,0/' ;.% .=... ~.) N ;:1~ ~ I"~ ~~ .~~- I ...."000 0'- t!;.,~.~U r)IU~ g- .;> 0. ..." '" .~< ~.' < ~ J 4 - - ~ I..Sl - :s; ~ ?C ~ ~~ t p.f . a- 'v\ ~ a+g t~- VI - '. ('J i' \" .... '* .... .... .., ... ,I' '-. > -:: ~1 d : ~ L]g~E ,i~1 r"\ ~ i t~ 1 i..t J -5 B ~ e 'C :V\Q . &~~u <I)~~ g -s ~ ..... 0 p., ~ ~ -li +-(! aou.s ~ ~ : 0"'05",0 c: J,... ."."-' W ~~~:~~ 'S';' J...~ t) p.E .5 ~ :0) '" ~l?!~1'ii ..JJq.t v ..c~\)~~~ . !.~ +-':E~1JS" : '7 ::JuT'~g,'g ,C : ..1 : "\ 1::: . ~ ~ "-t 'I~~ii: ~~~~ : CJI ~ .,..., :fj~~-1 :~n :~ t' ) . ~J6 lit ~:: . - bl).A o. .5..:e; 8 ~ '3 e 0 0 0-" .c ~ v ~ ~ .J '" "" .- ~~j" ~-B " .~ u ~ . ; - "- 'g c:: u 0 5 ." 5 ~ 0'" U ~ "'2~ o ~ -" 0 - 0 ..8", -" - .~ u u g; Z " c '" .~ -0 1! Iii :;; z ro ~ "- w u c o () .Y. ~ m 0- Q) ""0 C m ~ (9 o 0:::: ~ ' :-6 .. -'4~ ~~J2j ~....~~ ~~ C~;li;a GJSOt'l e-~..o ~ iP ~ "" .~ ~ "" ..:=-- .8 -g ~ e ;; ~l:;e"ou"" 'J:l\.:) S;: ""0 ~ i; t.l U '" .g ; .... u .!::2 ~V\ 1l J2 ~~ So .~~~..g8 ; ~:c~~~ "" :J t:: ~ ; J:-. ~ ~-ll"'O E~ ...t:! '"' C .... ~\" ~ ::l C'l ~ ~ ""0....... "tI ..c ~ "'d <'l ~"ao~;.~ .2~ 0 ..o~ U u If) ... U l,.:;.... ""0 b.O~ 'i. ..... c U Io.l ""0 tll U 0., ~ ~ c: Ol.l 0.. u :E._ ~ U) l.fl ~ .~ a - ::E c: ""0 ..!:1 :a u ~ u'~ ~ u 5. c: ~ u ~ ~ ~ ""0 .~ < R '0 u .5 ;1 ~ Cf) (]) 00 -0 W C C\l ..0 ... ::J ~ , ~ ""0 :.~ ~ ,g ll~~~v ...._~].Q.s 8~~o.,,~ oou~go.. N..s ~ '" ~ 0 .Sp.,~~..g-€ c .... ""0 v 0 .... ~~c~c:o I.) t.l ~ l:IO..c: .... ~eC)j.~tl "" u 0 ..... ;:;. tJ 8..c :.-, ell ....- Il) o 0 ~ 0.. ll)...c: ~ :t (5 '"2 2 .... c: o'-'=< ell tll B ..se~1:o5" p., '" "'d c::: -0 .:.E :0 ~ 1:: ~ ~ ~ t5~~1~g ~ ll..o-E.-.!j ,.,::; I'll .... V ;:!! ~ U '" ::l F - ... :~ gf ~ ~ ~ -E u:.a"E",~'-;..q lLl'3i_.~"'O ..s..c ClI ~ w I: 1:'0 s1~ lLlu. ~ '" .... ClI - ClI :s:~~t35fi- . , ~ 'o~ a:: .1:-~~ o ~ '2 ~ :E,"Ue~ u ~ 'U '50 ~ .! ~g.,g~ l:""'l 0 ... ~ ..... ..>I'''~-B '" ~ ~ ..... "'0 '2 p.. 0 ClI c:: ::l ~~-fi,: E "'0 c:: ILl U E 1:;.;;i1 b(l 0 0 ~~'"E:cu () 0.."'0 I: 5 o "'0 ~ ClI 0....... " ~ "'i>..c '" ..:.:: ""P~<d: oo21:~... ~ h ;:!.:: ..... ~ "'0 ..... I: 0 ~ ~ ~~ ~1~~ ~ ~ ~ ;;> ;;> :?; ? ~ ] ~ .8 ..s ..: ClI ..... ~ t 5~ECE~~ ~~~ g e-..... -Bee "".2 =e8.gbLl ';::~C)~o...S ~ <::) ~.. I..... "'0 I ~ ~ "'3 ~ 't: >-. - oJ 8" e.1';l~ ~u~t)J:jO ~ClI ,-Bu~"'01: .>p.. ~ .8 "'0 J:j I: ~ ILl -'--"'.....~U)ClI.E""Ij~",o "" e ~ '" '" '<il 0 ; :-::I :3 <.+::. I: u ... e ... ;:! ......, U <"l"'O ILl C) ~ ~>-."'O 'E g,.:g <"l u 1~~1!' soil ..c o~.....<..s........ .8 :t: ~ c:: v ".:Ii "'0 0 'J:l bI:l c:: > u"3 ILl ~;""<ilU8~~~ :::: ..... ~ u ~ c.. u -J::~-o~s::u ..... '" 1:: ~ v .::1 -fi bl) ~ Q) g ~ .- ~ ..c "'0 ........ .5 ~ nn!fl ~ c ... t 5 0 0.. ~.... 0.. <"l t'Ill:E ,w u t'Il U -00"'0 "'of!:3 e-'J:llilA W"'O g,.~"'C..c~]1 ~ ~ t'Il ~ a ... ClI ..... ClI ..... ..... U... ILl '" ~ ....... ... +-'"E'fU..e!:i~ClI..c:U (f)~"E~ ~~,,;.~"E Q)~.a""c:l.tl@'..8 :>?-u"'~ 1:'>"Ebl) > I: ..c: U - ..... ..... I: ClI.....~~ua1~.tl Q) ~ ..~r ~ u "'0 'r:: ClI J:: 1:l ...c: 0..;;> I.l ..a ~ ~ i1 E f-~ ~"oF .5-B 5 ~.5 o , ... ~Oil~~ .g-5' ~S-:;l~.g~ ~ ~-fi t) --B 8."'0 o ~ ~ 1:; E Cl,.g ~ ~ e- '" 'C ILl 1"_ Q.j 'J:l I.l lEal .~ ~ 5 ~ ~5 p; :.a Sl:E ~ o..~ ... :-;:l U 0.. ~ +:J l!:' ..s1l.s~.sI:~V' ~JJs~"o.ga c::~ i3 5 e-~.B .s~:;..:='.g~o Q)'o @1 bl):9~ ClI ao~""e~uu.~ u5~8'3-Bg!.1 W5t~~.8'a~ +-,jgfo..l:.f:!ClI.:.o U) 0.. 0 U 'E ..s "'0 5 C'O"'O~Fo'Eau (]);~~vg~~ ..c s,,:.J!-B u u""~ +-' .. tl u 1! 1 5 ~ "" 5~~1~~~~~.s if) F 0: l? .~ 13 .,s 8 s . , >-"2 ~ d ..c ,_ 0 v 1l e "; ~ ... ClI U ~ ~;StE bl) o '~ g 5 ~ ~ >-. J:j t) ;g "" ~ ~..c ClI ~ en U C j:l.., .s ~ .g ~"'O e:l ClI , ; @" r~ Z "" U bl) ; 0' o c:: ,_ I: Oil 0 l:l ~ ........ "';l ~ 0 o~"E;; ~~ o...:.a "'0 [) I: ..... ~ U"'O ~ ~ ~ ~ '<il ~ .~ 0.. ~ ,S U bl) U ;>O..c:..c~..s t.l ........ ... ..c: >.~ """ 0 ~i3~~ ~'J:l..c ~ ~ c: ..:g -; t.l ... ,~ ~ E ;s ~ , . "" e 0 sOil 5"0 o 00 ~ u -~ 1! u . ~ 1:013 o ~ ] ~ ::;-5 ~ ~ u'" .;:: t.l ~ : ClI_ v u \l "'goD 5"" ~l"" ~ ..... J: :s .s GJ u 1! t.l e ClI F .g c:s ...'..-.. ~ "~! ~ ~ "1 ~ ~ .1 g c.i \--""'lI ou~ 000 ro _ ';;''ii~ - ~ "'- " 0 - ~ 0_ o 0 ~5 L... ~~ .~i::' 0'- Q:~ ~ -0 ~ .~; ~ (t~..J"-' :~~ u 0 ro ~ DOO H ~.:s o u ~.~. ~ " o 0 ffi S ffi .: ~ ~ 0. ro E .w 8~ .: ~ :;;::.0 '5. .8 o " W 0 ~ . 00_ ro_ ~~ ~8 - . ~! o 00 -"" :o~ ro 0 ::: Ql ~ro ro<!> o . "'" -0 00," .- - c . w 0 E 1i o 00 u"" .go :E .~ ....u ::; ~a. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Helen Klanderud and Aspen City Council FROM: John Worcester, City Attorney Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~ Appeal of Land Use Code Interpretation - Failed Motions and Tie Votes Resolution No. 98, Series of 2006. COPY: RE: DATE: December 11, 2006 SUMMARY: One of the jobs assigned to the Community Development Director is to provide interpretations of the text of the City's Land Use Code. This is a formal process in which an applicant requests a written interpretation and, if they don't agree with the interpretation, affords the applicant the right to appeal the decision to the City Council. There are three criteria upon which the City Council has to decide an appeal of a code interpretation. Based solely upon the record established by the original decision, the City Council shall consider whether 1) there was a denial of due process; 2) the administrative body exceeded its jurisdiction; or, 3) the administrative body abused its discretion. The City's code states that the decision or determination made by the administrative office shall not be reversed or modified unless there is a positive finding on one of these criteria. In this case, the interpretation rendered by the Community Development Director addresses whether a tie vote is a failed motion and the meaning of a failed motion. The interpretation is broad, in that it applies to all situations, but it came-up with respect to a specific development application. The Sky Hotel Redevelopment application was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, a motion to approve the project was offered, and the motion received a three-to- three vote. Staff advised the Commission during the meeting that the tie vote constituted a denial and no further action was taken. Since then, attorneys for and against the project have been debating the meaning of this tie vote and staff felt it best to provide a formal interpretation of the Land Use Code with all parties as applicants (which provides all parties with the ability to appeal). Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont and individual owners within these projects, Tom Todd on behalf of the Aspen Alps, and David Myler on behalf of the Sky Hotel were the applicants for the interpretation. Jody Edwards is the appellant. The interpretation finds that all actions of the Planning and Zoning Commission require a majority in favor to be effective, that a tie vote is nothing more than a failed motion, and therefore the Sky Hotel project has the right to continue to be heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The background section of the code interpretation reveals that failed motions and tie votes have been treated in a variety of ways and that planning and legal staff have not provided consistent advise on the matter. Staff believes that the interpretation was rendered appropriately and that the Director's authority was not exceeded and no abuse of discretion occurred. Staff also believes that the code could be clarified to provide better guidance on the meaning of a failed motion. Attached are two Resolutions. One finds that the Director acted correctly and affirms the interpretation. The second finds that the Director exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority and reverses the interpretation. Staff recommends the Council adopt the Resolution affirming the Director's interpretation. ABUSE OF DISCRETION OR EXCEEDING AUTHORITY? The Director's authority to interpret the Land Use Code is established in Chapter 26.210 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. In this case, the Director was asked for and provided an interpretation. The Director analyzed the text of the Land Use Code and made a finding. In doing so, the Director also analyzed the City of Aspen Charter, a document called Rules and Procedures adopted by City Council, Robert's Rules of Order, and the minutes of several land use cases in which a tie vote or a failed motion occurred. The Director believes these sections of the Land Use Code, the additional city documents, Robert's Rules of Order, and the history of similar cases are all pertinent to interpreting the Land Use Code in this case. The Director does not believe that using these documents constituted an abuse of authority or an abuse of discretion. The research on former cases where a tie vote or failed motion occurred revealed an inconsistency in the manner in which City staff advised decision-making boards. This highlighted the need for a formal interpretation. The Director does not consider the interpretation to be a departure from City policy. In fact, the Director considers the interpretation necessary to establish consistency in how boards are advised when such a tie vote or failed motion occurs. The Director considers the interpretation to cure a potential procedural mishap with the Sky Hotel case and allow for due process to be provided to all affected parties in the fairest manner possible. The Director does not consider this to be a retroactive application of a new law. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the Director's interpretation was rendered correctly and that no abuse of authority or exceeding of jurisdiction occurred. Staff recommends City Council uphold the Director's interpretation by adopting the proposed Resolution to affirms the interpretation. 2 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: (all motions must be made in the positive) "I move to approve Resolution No. $, Series of 2006, [affirming or reversing] the Community Development Director's interpretation of the Land Use Code regarding failed motions and tie votes." ATTACHMENTS: Note - Exhibits to this memo have been numbered I, 2, 3, ... Attachments to the numbered exhibits are lettered A, B, C, ... Exhibit 1 - Affidavit of notice Exhibit 2 - October 24,2006, appeal letter from Jody Edwards Exhibit 3 - Supplement to Interpretation dated October 13, 2006, with attachments lettered A through D Exhibit 4 - Interpretation dated October 3,2006, with attachments lettered A through G. 3 RESOLUTION NO. _, (Affirming Interpretation) (SERIES OF 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMING AN INTERPRETATION OF THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING FAILED MOTIONS AND TIE VOTES. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received a request for an interpretation of the City of Aspen Land Use Code regarding failed motions and tie votes from Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont and individual owners within these projects, Tom Todd on behalf of the Aspen Alps, and David Myler on behalf of the Sky Hotel; and, WHEREAS, the Director rendered an interpretation and the Applicant, Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont and individual owners within these projects, believes the Director exceeded his jurisdiction and abused his discretion and sought an appeal based on such grounds; and, WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, may affirm an interpretation of the Land Use Code made by the Community Development Director or reverse or modify the interpretation upon a finding that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and verbal testimony from Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont and individual owners within these projects, Tom Todd on behalf of the Aspen Alps, and David Myler on behalf of the Sky Hotel, and the Community Development Director and has found that the Director provided due process and neither exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council affirms the Community Development Director's Interpretation of the Land Use Code regarding failed motions and tie votes. This Resolution shall not affect any eXlstmg litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. 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 ofthe remaining portions thereof. Resolution No. _, Series of2006. Page I APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on ,2006. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney Resolution No. , Series of 2006. Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. --' (Reversing Interpretation) (SERIES OF 2006) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN APPEAL AND REVERSING AN INTERPRET A TlON OF THE LAND USE CODE REGARDING FAILED MOTIONS AND TIE VOTES. WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received a request for an interpretation of the City of Aspen Land Use Code regarding failed motions and tie votes from Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont and individual owners within these projects, Tom Todd on behalf of the Aspen Alps, and David Myler on behalf of the Sky Hotel; and, WHEREAS, the Director rendered an interpretation and the Applicant, Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont and individual owners within these projects, believes the Director exceeded his jurisdiction and abused his discretion and sought an appeal based on such grounds; and, WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 26.316, may affirm an interpretation of the Land Use Code made by the Community Development Director or reverse or modify the interpretation upon a finding that there was a denial of due process, exceeding of jurisdiction, or abuse of authority in rendering the interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has taken and considered written and verbal testimony from Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont and individual owners within these projects, Torn Todd on behalf of the Aspen Alps, and David Myler on behalf of the Sky Hotel, and the Community Development Director and has found that the Director either exceeded his jurisdiction or abused his authority in rendering the interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the appeal of the Community Development Director's Interpretation of the Land Use Code regarding failed motions and tie votes and reverses the decision as follows: Section 1: A failed motion to approve an application before the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Board of Adjustment shall be considered an action to deny the application. A tie vote shall be considered a failed motion. Section 2: This Resolution shall not affect any eXlstmg litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances Resolution No. _, Series of 2006. Page I repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on ,2006. ATTEST: Helen Kalin K1anderud, Mayor Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney Resolution No. _, Series of 2006. Page 2 ~: .' G.",bil: 1 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE MlBltE33 OF PROPER 'IT: ~U~ ~~~ . SCHEDULED PUBLIC ~ARING DATE: "" o.j{/{'f\ 'Ge.,vr I'?J . Aspen, CO . 200 lo STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I,~r(a 6tx-t7J.A...J (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner.. .~ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (IS) days prior to the"public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto." _ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Co=unity Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of > 200_> to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. _ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Co=unity Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of . property owners shall be those on the current tax records ofPitldn County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental ~gencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) . . ~[.: Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to. or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addiesses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, tIie proposed zoning map shall be available for public inSpection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (I5) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ( 1ftu~YJ?tMn V ,vgnature , The foreg%nfi,"~ffidavit of Notic.e" was aCknow. ledged beforeme thisJ-~y of ~ ,2oolz, by ---.:J'f<'t71 ca 6U'V'VYOVIl PUBUC NOTICE RE' APPEAL OF A LAND USE CODE INTERPR,ETA- Tl(JN REGARDING FAlLEO MOTIONS AND 'J:lE VOTES BY QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARDS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. . NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday November 13, 2006 at a meeting to begln ~t5:00p.m.beforethe As~n City Council, Cound Chambers, Basement of Aspen City Hall, ]30 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an appeal of a Land Use Code Interpre- tationregard!ngfalledmot~nsandllevoteson motio;}s by quasI-Judicial boards. Thelnterprela. lion states that failed motlons shall not be con. sldered actlon by quasi-judIcial boards and that tlevatesrepresentfailedmotlons. For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the City of Aspen Community Development De- partment, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429- 2765,chriSb@cl.aspen.co.us. s/Helen K1anderud; Mayor CltyofAspenCltyCouncll Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on October --22,2(106.(4149) w1TNESS MY HAND Ai'm OFFICIAL SEAL d?~n~rre~ NotaIy Public AITACHMENTS: COpy OF THEPUBLICAnON PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BymuIL . AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESSOFPROPERTy:~l zJ Cak l\.\~'<€;I~Aspen,co SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Jj~t.tt- ~ . ,2000 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, ~1?ctJ~ (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following marmer: _ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was compo.sed ofIetters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (IS) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of ,200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Gl ~.~ t4.C;III.O\D.1) X Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice e n e ,w IC conTIilils1Iiejnfurr1iation described i Section 6.304. 2) of the Aspen LanJi-UseCOde. At least fi S) days prior to e public hearing, noti~.was-hand delivered oJ-maitecI by first class posta repaid U.S. ~iJ...ltJaIl owners ofp~erlywlthin three hundre<!J eet of the ropert ~ect to the develgpmem application. The n~d addresses erty owners sh@..be1li~se on the current tax ords of Pitkin nty as they appeared no re than sixty (60) days p' 0 the date oft lic hea~'zr- opy e owners and government agencies so n . ea is attached1lereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (IS) days ,dO' '" >h, ",bl" h=lig"" ,",h CJN~WtL Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this~tlay of d:7ttJPet-- ,2006., by L-tJf,1S 'R1=rJ~~j WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: rJrh::r/ 2(')(){ ~M/ , tary Puo)' ATTACHMENTS: COpy OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL PUBLIC NOTICE RE: APPEAL OF A LAND USE CODE INTERPRETATION REGARDING FAILED MOTIONS AND TIE VOTES BY QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARDS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday November 13, 2006, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, Basement of Aspen City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an appeal of a Land Use Code Interpretation regarding failed motions and tie votes on motions by quasi-judicial boards. The interpretation states that failed motions shall not be considered action by quasi-judicial boards and that tie votes represent failed motions. For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2765, chrisb@ci.aspen.co.us. Sf Helen K1anderud. Mavor City of Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on October 29,2006 City of Aspen Account David, lody, and Tom: Community Development is recommending this item be opened on the 13th and continued to the November 27th City Council meeting. A~tkA b; ~ -r.~ ~S -101 04 M\~ eJ. -#rU>3 ~w 'VVo\1 ~~wJiJ-l,a ~ ~ ~~~ ~ RJW^ ~ l)virA ~lw' 2M MJ,lt.uJ. Ne.- 'IHo1 1#~\b Co 1110Z, '?} 1#A 1~u\ {[fJJ 6. ~(1'1 * ~ co Vy"A KLEIN. COTE & EDWARDS, LLC ~~rb; r:: 2 ArrORNEYSATLAW HERBERT S. KLEIN LANCE R. cort. pc. JOSEPH E. row ARDS, DI, PC EBEN P. CLARK MADHU B. K1US~AMURTJ MATIHEW M. WWRY hsk@kIlCIaw.Dct lrc@kcelaw.lJCt jee@kcelaw.net cpc@kcclaw.nct mbk@kcelaw.nc:t mml@kcelllw.net 201 NORTHMlLLSTItEET,sTE. 203 ASPEN,COWRAOO8]61\ TELEPHONE: (970) 925.8700 FACSIMILE; (970) 925.3977 "&ltolClmiltedinC.Hfomia October 24, 2006 Chris Bendon City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Sl., 3'd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Notice of Appeal concerning Determinations related to Application for Redevelopment of the Sky Hotel dated October 13, 2006. Dear Chris: This letter constitutes a Notice of Appeal pursuant to Section 26.316.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and by the agreement of the City of Aspen Community Development Department and the concerned parties. This office represents Chateau Chaumont Homeowners Association, Chateau Dumont Homeowners Association and Todd Vieregg and Fred Beihl as individual owners within those two Associations. Generally, our clients appeal the code interpretation of the Director of the Community Development Department in determining that: (I) a tie vote on a motion for a resolution of the City of Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission is not a denial and results in an application pending indefinitely; (2) independent of the foregoing, the Resolution of the Planning & Zoning Commission denying the application did not constitute a denial of that application: (3) the actions of Applicant and the Planning & Zoning Commission following the Resolution by the Commission did not waive or preclude any continuing process on the first application or any revised application; and (4) the Director's interpretation, and departure from prior City policy applies retroactively to this application and the Resolution. These determinations are arbitrary and capricious, not supported by any evidence, and contrary to the policies, regulations and law relating to these maLleP.i. Tht: lh::tt:lIuinations constitute an abuse of discretion and are in excess of the authority of the Director, the Community Development Department and the City of Aspen in these circumstances. We intend to present a more comprehensive analysis of the legal principles, facts and circumstances controlling this appeal at the required hearing before the City Council. If there is anything in addition to this Notice that is required in order to pursue this Appeal of the determinations of the Director or if you need additional information from me, Chris Bendon City of Aspen Community Development Department October 24, 2006 Page 2 please do not hesitate to contact me. Appellants reserve the right to present additional arguments, evidence and authority at the hearing on this appeal. It is my understanding that the City will be responsible for publishing notice of the hearing date for this Appeal. Thank you. Sincerely, KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC cc: Todd Vierreg Fred Beihl N:\Chateaux\Notice of appeal 10.24-06 epc,doc -- CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LAND USE CODE INTERPRETATION a,hi J7u.. 3 JURISDICTION: City of Aspen APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: Section 26.212.050 Section 26.216.050 Section 26.220,050 Section 26.304.060.D Section 26.304.060C.6 EFFECTIVE DATE: October 13, 2006 APPROVED BY: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director WRITTEN BY: Date: Chris Bendon, ~'?r~ommunity Development Director City Attorney COPIES TO: SUMMARY: This Land Use Code interpretation shall supplement the interpretation issued on October 3,2006, on this topic and based on supplemental information provided by Jody Edwards in his October 10, 2006, letter and by David Myler in his October 13,2006, email. Both of these items are attached. With respect to the "meaning of all actions" section of the Edwards letter, the possibility of a tie vote does not necessarily lead to an "absurd result" or "indefinite deadlock." It merely means that the motion failed and that no action resulted. The Land Use Code mandates that boards "approve, approve with conditions, or deny" applications. (See Exhibit C as an example.) The Code also states that the boards can only take action through a concurring vote of a simple majority. With respect to the City's "historical treatment," the October 3rd interpretation cites varying ways in which the City has treated failed motions and the lack of consistency really highlights the need for a formal code interpretation. The McQuillan citation in Mr. Edwards' letter does not appear to be definitive on the subject as it unfortunately leaves out the next sentence which reads: "However, other jurisdictions have decided that, in the event of a tie vote, there has be a 'failure to act' which, ifno further action is taken, may result in a mandatory approval for the application." (See Exhibit D.) ,.-, With respect to the "applicability of interpretation" section of the Edwards letter, the Community Development Department does not consider Mr. Myler's appeal to be - "'- deficient. The appeal, and follow-up correspondence, did lead to the Community Development Director realizing the need to provide a formal interpretation of the Land Use Code in order to resolve the uncertainty of the meaning of a failed motion. Processing of the appeal itself was postponed in deference to the discussion of whether or not the failed motion was an "action." Upon resolution of the meaning of a failed motion, Mr. Myler's appeal will be processed accordingly. The interpretation, in part, recognizes a mistake in the processing of the Sky Hotel application largely based on bad advice given to the Planning and Zoning Commission by the City's legal counsel and aims to correct the situation. The Community Development Department does not consider it a retroactive application of a new law. The interpretation issued October 3, 2006, shall be effective with no modifications. APPEAL OF DECISION Any person with a right to appeal an adverse decision or determination shall initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Director. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this Title to appeal any decision or determination. EXHIBITS A. October 10, 2006, letter from Jody Edwards B. October 13, 2006, email from David Myler C. Land Use Code section 26.412.040.0 - example of requirement to act on an application D. McQuillan, Municipal Corporations, Section 25.269 - - t2K4ib,'b, .4 I KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC I ArrORNEYSAT LAW IlEKHEKT S. KLI:lN LM,CE R. curE. pc. JOSEPII E. LDWARDS, Ill. PC UIEN I' _ CLARK MADlillll. KKISUNAMUKTl hsk(rjkcclaw.nel Irc(l~hclawl1et Je~({lkcclaw.llel epc@kcclaw,ncl Illbk'fil.kcelaw_lIt;:t lOI NOKTJ I MILL STREET. SIF. 2U~ ASI't:N,COUlRAD() 81(,11 TI.::I.EPHONE: ('J70) 9~~.H1(}() FACSIMILE: (1)7fl) 9:>5_.1'1"n October 10. 2006 " a:,., adlll:lIeJ i"Callf<lTn;o Chris Bcndon City of Aspcn Community Developmcnt Ikpanmcnt 130 South Galcna Street Aspen. CO 81611 Rc: Land Usc Code Interpretation - Tic Votes and Sky Ilotel Dcar Chris: ---""/ lhank you for the opponunity to comment on your draft Code Interpretation. Our ollicc reprcsents the Chateau Chaumont and Chateau Dumont Owners' Associations and various imliviuual owners or units within those buildings. Those buildings arc adjacent the Sky Hotel. The Interpretation spccilically rererences anu was raised in the context or the tie vote of the Planning anu Zoning Commission at a special meeting hcld on January 3]. 2006. with regard to the application Iiled by the Sky Hotel. Your Interpretation raises two issues on which I would like to comment: (1) the meaning or the phrase "all actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority" contained in * 26.212.050 ofthc Code; and (2) the current status of the application tiled by the Sky Hotel. Wc respectfully uisagree with the draft Intcrpretation for the reasons set ronh below. Meaninl! of "All Actions". As you very clearly state in your intcrpretation. the City Stall and the various City bOal'us and commissions have historically considered that 3 tie vole un a motion to approve is a failed motion and a failed motion to approve is a denial - without the neccssity of a follow up motion to deny. This was also clearly statcd in John Worcester's lettcr to David Myler dateu April 12, 2006. wherein John wrote. "Simply stated. absent a majority vote. an application is denied for failing to obtain the requisite votes for approval." In other \\lords, the City has historically interpreted that the words "all actions shall require the concurring vote or a simple majority" actually mcan "all actions for approval shall require the concurring votc of a simple majority:' Only an approval is an "action" which requires a majority vote. In the case of a denial. no "action" occurs - a dcvelopmcnt permit is denied and thc existing status or the propeny in question remains unchanged. There are good reasons for this. ,,",-~ Chris Bendon October 10, 2006 Page 2 ""'0 Presumably, if a motion to approvc failed by a tie vote. a follow up motion to deny would also fail by a tie vote and thc application would be left sitting in limbo or dcadlocked- potentially, for an indefinite period. This is a trustrating and absurd result which could not have been intended when S 26.212.050 was originally written. The applicant carries the burden to establish that it meets the standards of review in the Code. An applicant is seeking an approval to change the status quo with development of a IICW structure. If the applicant cannot convince a majority that its proposal meets the standards of revicw. then it has not carried the burden, it does not receive a development pennit and nothing changes, A lack of approval is appropriately a denial of the application to obtain a new development permit. This appears to bc consistcnt with a majority of the states which have addressed the issue. "Where the buard hears the applicant as an original preceding, a tie vote is a denial of the application since a tie vote of the members means that the applicant did not carry the burden of proof and persuasion." McQuillin, Municipal ('orporations, Vol. 8A, Section 25.269 (3'd Ed.). """",,,", Principals of statutory interpretation apply to intcrpretation of municipal ordinances. United Airlines v. City and County o{Denver, 975 P.2d 1139, 1142 (Colo. App. 1998). Any construction of a statutc which lcads to an absurd result will not be followed. Dye Construction Co, v, Dolan. 589 P.2d 497. (Colo. App. 1978). In interpreting a statute, the primary goal is to give effect to the legislative intent - that is, the intent of the Council when it adopted the ordinance in question. See, People v. Davis, 794 P.2d 159 (Colo. 1990). To properly assess the lcgislative intcnt, one must give effect to all provisions of the code. Adams County School ni"/ricl v Dickey. 79 t P2d 688 (ColD, t9QO), Applying these principals in thc instant case, it appears that staffs historical interpretation of S 26.212,050 makes the most sense because it avoids the absurd rcsult of a deadlock and potentially indefinite delay and it provides "prompt" results as required by Section 26.304.060.1), quoted in your Interpretation. In his letter of April 27, 2006, David Myler argued that "any malter can be continued to a meeting at which an odd number of commissioners are present." Mr. Myler also suggests that if necessary the Council could appoint a spccial commission member in the event of a deadlock. In the context of a tie vote where one or more members or alternates of a buard or commission has a contlict of interest, it would be necessary to walt until a mecting at which one of the voting members was ill or othcrwisc unablc to attend and then take another vote. This hardly seems to be a prompt or lair way It1f a governmental entity to conduct its affairs. The historical intcrpretation of the City Code by the city staff and various city boards and commissions is well within the latitude afforded a city for interpretation or its own codes, provides for prompt decision making and avoids the circumstance of a potential deadlock. It is not good government to continue motions until one or the voting members is unavailable to attend a future meeting or until the Council appoints a special commission member. ,-""'" '~,., -~ Chris Hendon October 10. 2006 Page 3 '- Applicability of Interpretation to Sky Hotel In the Interpretation, you concluded that the Sky Hotel application is "considered pending" until the Planning and Zoning Commission "takes action" on the application, and, presumably. no action has been taken because of the tie vote. I think this is incorrect. In fact, the Planning and Zoning Commission took formal action by virtue of Resolution No. 36, Scrics of2005. This Resolution was signed by the Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Assistant City Attorney. The signed Resolution is cntircly consistent with the City's thcn-existing interpretation of the Code. The Resolution very specifically provides that the Planning and Zoning Commission "hereby denies" all of the land use requests over which it had final authority and specifically recommended that the City Council dcny the subdivision request for the Sky Hotel. That is a final written Resolution and it is still in effect. In order for a Resolution to be reconsidered it must be reconsidered no latcr than the same day or the next day on which a regular meeting of the commission is held. See, Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised, Sec. 37, (1 O'h Ed). Resolution No. 36 was not reconsidered at the meeting on January 31. 2006, or at the next regularly scheduled meeting. That Resolution is final and is no longer subject to reconsideration. ~"'~" A stafl'interpretation issued more than eight months after-the-fact does not nullify or render moot a valid Resolution. If that was the case, thc new Interpretation would render moot every past Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the HPC, the Board of Adjustment or the City COlIncil which w~s hasecl on l'I cienial resulting from a tie vott' Are all of those applications still pcnding as well? A fundamcntal tenant of constitutional law is that new laws (or new interpretations of old laws) are not applied retroactively. While it is not contained in the draft Interpretation. in a prior memorandum to the Planning & Zoning Commission, you indicated that the Sky Hotel application was kept "live" (with regard to the existing moratorium) by virtue of the Notice of Appeal filed by David Myler on February 10,2006. In the second sentence of the Notice of Appeal, Mr. Myler specifically states: "By operation of Section 26.212.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the tie vote of the motion to approve Resolution No.9 (sic), Series of2005, constitutes a denial of the applications described in that Resolution for which the Planning and Zoning Commission has final dccision make authority subject to appeal." Clearly by virtue of the second sentence ofthc Notice of Appeal, the "no action" argument was waived with regard to the Sky Hotel appeal. As provided in Section 26.316.030.A, all appeals must be filed within fourteen days of the date of decision. On April 10, 2006, well morc than 14 days after January 31, 2006. Mr. Myler states that "upon retlectlOn and turther analys's" he dId not believe that a tIe was a demal. In the April 10,2006. letter Mr. Myler pointed out that a tic did not constitute an "action" by the Planning and Zoning Commission and therefore could not be a denial. Failure to provide notice within the fourtcen days after a meeting constitutes a waiver of any rights to appeal a decision. While Mr. Myler presented an interesting argument based on a new interpretation of the City Code. that April 10, -- '- ,- Chris Bendon October 10, 2006 Page 4 - 2006, lettcr was simply too late and any rights to make that argument were waived on February 10.2006. further, pursuant to Section 26.316,030.C, any appeal is to be considered within thirty days within the filing of the Notice of Appeal or is soon thereafter as is practi~al. This appeal has been silting donnant since February 10. 2006. Failure to prosecute the appeal must be l;ull:sit.kreu a Wi1iVC:I uf any rights which may have existed under that appeal. This is particularly critical in the current circumstances where the city has, in thc interim, enacted an emergency moratorium wherein the City Council specifically detennined that it is necessary "to declare an emergency for thc preservation of public property, health. pcacc and safety." In thc face ofa dcclaration of an emergency and the imposition of the moratorium on the acceptance, processing and approval ofland use applications, it is patcntly unfair and inappropriate for an applicant to file an appeal (which, absent the "no action" argument, is probably without merit) and thereby keep an application "live" without prosecuting the appeal in a timely manner. There exists a valid Resolution denying the Sky Hotel application. That resolution constitutes an action validly takcn by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The waiver of the "a tie vote is no action" argument in the February 10,2006 Notice of Appeal and combined with the lack of reconsideration of that Resolution at the next regular meeting constitutes a jurisdictional prohibition against further consideration of the Sky Hotel application by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, & F.OW!Q;~' ~. Edwards, III .. / NIChllh:llux\ll3cndon ltT,doc ,""- ........ Message Page 1 of2 c_ ~1IjJ,jj; ~ - Chris Bendon - From: David Myler [dmyler@mylerlawpc.com] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:53 AM To: Chris Bendon Cc: Joseph E. Edwards 111; Tom Todd; John Worcester Subject: Tie Vote Interpretation Chris: I am writing on behalf of Aspen Club Properties, LLC in response to Jody Edwards' letter of October 10, 2006, in the above-referenced matter. Please consider the following: 1. This letter will confirm that Aspen Club Properties, LLC believes that your interpretation of Section 26-212-050 regarding the effect of a tie vote is correct and supported by sound analysis. 2. In the last paragraph on page 1 of Jody's letter, he states that "In the case of denial, no 'action' occurs." (a sort of no action denial). However, in the last paragraph on page 4 of his letter, Jody states that Planning Commission Resolution No. 36-05 denying the Sky Hotel application "constitutes an action." We agree with you that a denial constitutes action. that such action can only be approved by a majority vote, and that Resolution No. 36-05 is void and thus ineffective since it was not approved by a majority vote as required by Section 26-212-050. 3. If a denial is not an action, as Jody suggests, it would not be possible to appeal under the Code or seek judicial review under Rule 106 C.R.C.P. An applicant for development approval is entitled to an action; a decision from which there are remedies. There are no remedies associated with inaction. 4. The general rule in McQuillin cited by Jody do not apply where the Code specifically provides for a contrary result. 5. Your interpretation does not change a law retroactively. It corrects a mistake. The correction of a mistake, whether by interpretation, appeal or court order, always occurs after the fact and thus can only be applied retroactively. 6. An incorrect interpretation of the Code of uncertain origin and with no record of ratification by the City Council is not evidence of legistlative intent. On the other hand, your interpretation supports an intent by Council to provide that actions can only be taken by a majority vote which is consistent with the plain language of Section 26-212-05. 7. An impasse, if one occurs, and despite the ways and means of avoiding it, is not an absurd result. It is a potential consequence of any group decision-making process where voting is involved. Rather, the absurdity results from the automatic conversion of a motion for approval, complete with supporting findings, into a denial with no findings at all; or, worse yet, a no action denial which leaves the victim with no remedies at all. 8. Prosecution of our appeal has not been abandoned. It has simply been delayed by mutual agree of the applicant and staff in order to address and resolve the tie vote issue. That resolution will either eliminate the need for an appeal or confirm that there is, iffact, an appealable action. David J. Myler ,""'- The Myler Law Firm, P.c. "'- 211 Midland Avenue, Suite 201 10/13/2006 Message Page 2 of2 Basalt, CO 81621 "- Phone: (970) 927-0456 Fax: (970) 927-0374 dmyleJ~mylerlllwps:.(;om *********************************************************************** CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE, This message is intended only fOf the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is attorney work-product, privileged. confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. lfthe reader of this message in not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. !fyou have received this communication in error, please notifY us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us al the above address via e-mail or the United States Parcel Service. The typewritten signature included with this e-mail is not an electronic signature within the meaning of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act or any other law of similar import, including, without limitation, the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act as it may be enacted by any state of the District of Columbia. ~- - 10/13/2006 '"- '."." ~ '- 1 6#klitf c ... .. If the land use application is subject to review by the Historic Preservation Commission and the application has been approved for a combined review process, pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B - Combined Reviews, the Historic Preservation Commission shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the land use application for Commercial Design Review, pursuant to Section 26.412.0S0, Review Criteria. . ( 26.412.030 Applicability. This section applies to all commercial, lodging, and mixed-used development with a commercial component, within the City of Aspen requiring a building permit. Applications for commercial development may be exempted from the provisions of this section by the Community Development Director if the development is: 1. An addition or remodel of an existing structure that either does not change the exterior of the building or, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, changes the exterior in such a minimal manner as to not justify this review. 2. A remodel of a structure where proposed alterations affect aspects of the exterior of the _ building not addressed by the Commercial Design Standards of Section 26.412.060. 3. A development activity not subject to any other reviews requiring approval by either the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission. 26.412.040 Procedure A. Pre-Application. Pursuant to Section 26.304.020, Pre-Application Conference, Applicants are encouraged to meet with a City Planner of the Community Development Department to clarify the requirements of this section and to determine if a project may be exempted from the provisions of this section. This step is not mandatory. c) \J>, B. Application. A development application for Commercial Design Review shall include the requisite information and materials, pursuant to Section 26.304.030. In addition, the application shall include scaled floor plans and elevations for the proposed development. The Community Development Director, at hislher own discretion, may require additional submission materials according to the complexity of the development proposal. The application shall be submitted to the Community Development Department along with any requisite review fees. C. Community Development Director Review. The Community Development Director shall review the proposed development in accordance with Section 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, and in relation to Section 26.412.0S0, Review Criteria, and Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards. D. Planning and Zoning Commission Review. Applications for Commercial Design Review shall be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission along with a recommendation by the Community Development Director. If the application is subject to review by the Historic Preservation Commission and has been approved for a combined review process, pursuant to Section 26.304.060.B - Combined City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. ....___"- Ann. Tlo___'" L Reviews, the application shall be forwarded to the Historic Preservation Commission along with a recommendation from the Community Development Director. The Plarming and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, shall review the proposed development, at a public hearing in accordance with 'Section 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, and approve, approve with conditions, _ or denv the application based on the criteria of Section 26.412.0S0, Review Criteria, and Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards. Public notice for the public hearing shall be provided by publication, posting, and mailing. (See Section 26.304.060(E)(3)(a), (b), and (c).) E. Notice to City Council and Call-Up 1. Notice to Citv Council. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Commercial Design Review, City Council shall be promptly notified of the action to allow the City Council an opportunity to avail itself of the Call-Up procedure set forth below. Notification shall consist of a description in written and graphic form of the project with a copy of the approving document. Also see appeal procedures, Section 26.412.090. /'...." 2. Call-Up. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with conditions a development application for Commercial Design Review, the City Council may order call-up of the action within thirty (30) days of the decision, action or determination. Consequently no associated permits can be issued during the thirty (30) day call-up period. If City Council does not call-up the action within the call-up period, the resolution shall be the final decision on the matter. - 3. Citv Council action on call uP. The City Council shall consider the application on the record established before the PI arming and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable. The City Council shall affirm the decision of the Commission unless there is a finding that there was a denial of due process, or the Commission exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. The City Council shall take such action asis deemed necessary to remedy said situation, including, but not limited to: a. Reversing the decision. b. Altering the conditions of approval. c. Remanding the application to the Commission for rehearing. 26.412.050 Review Criteria. An application for Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: 1. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a more-appealing pattern - of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the ....... purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 400, Page 17 c::-'/Cltih,t D . ~ 25.269 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS tantamount to a veto power in two members of the board. 10 Where }he board hears the applicant as an .original proceeding, a tie-vote is a denial of the application since a tie-vote of the members means that the applicant did not carry the burdens of proof and persuasion. 11 If' the governing body fails to vote to reverse, remand or affirm by an enhanced majority, then it has failed to render a decision within the specified period and it constitutes a decision affirming the action of the board. 12 However, other iurisdictions have decided that, in the event of a tie-vote, there has been a "failure to act" which, if no further action is taken. mav result in a mandatory approval for the application. 13 The absence of a member of a zoning board from some or all of the public hearings upon a particular matter will not of necessity invali- R.I. Schofield v. Zoning Bd. of Review of City of Cranston, 99 R.I. 204, 206 A.2d 524 (1965). 10 Md. Where disapproval of an application to a board of zoning appeals for a variance rests upon a mere failure to obtain the concurring vote offour out of five members, the action cannot properly be described as that of a fact-finding body; in such circumstances it would be more accurate to say that approval of the variance is prevented by the exercise of a veto power. Mayor and Council of City of Baltimore v. Biermann, 187 Md. 514, 50 A.2d 804 (1947). 11 Md. Lohrmann v. Arundel Corp., 65 Md. App. 309, 500 A.2d 344 (1985). N.J. Committee for a Rickel Alternative v. City of Linden, 214 N.J. Super. 631, 520 A.2d 823 (App. Div. 1987),judgment afi'd, 111 N.J. 192, 543 A.2d 943 (1988) (de novo hearing). A review of a decision of a board of adjustment approving the granting of s zoning variance that results in a deadlock can be viewed as a de novo review. so that the failure to convince a majority of reviewers of the entitlement to a variance results in a reversal of the board's grant of the variance. Committee for a Rickel Alternative v. City of Linden, 111 N.J. 192, 543 A.2d 943 (1988). N.Y. Tall Trees Const. Corp. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town ofHunt- ington, 97 N.Y.2d 86, 735 N.Y.S.2d 873, 761 N.E.2d 565 (2001). Pa. Danwell Corp. v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Plymouth Tp., 115 Pa. Commw. 174,540 A.2d 588 (1988); Giant Food Stores, Inc. v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Whitehall Tp., 93 Pa. Commw. 437, 501 A.2d 353 (1985). 12 N.J. Preakness Hill, Inc. v. Township Council of Wayne Tp., 221 N.J. Super. 175,534 A.2d 58 (App. Div. 1987), judgment rev'd on other grounds, 113 N.J. 370, 550 A.2d 475 (1988) and (overruling recognized by, Harry Grant Center Corp. v. Mayor and Council of Borough of Fort Lee, 235 N.J. Super. 491, 563 A.2d 449 (App. Div. 1989)). (interpreting statute). 13 Ind. City of Evansville v. Fehrenbacher, 517 NE2d 115 (Ind App 1987). Page 434 ZONING date th the me facts ;1 anothel was ma refrain access t Howeve member the evid earlier h Where member 14 Mas. board mer allowed a hearings, , the hearini Zoning Adj N.Y. Tl Wash. App.378,5 Wis. Fi meeting of: ber's vote ~ public meet; reI. Cities S 809 (1963). 15 Mass. attended hel exercise infc Boston, 336 ] N.Y. Tau Affirmativl Part of heari decision he n casting vote. 1963). 16N,Y. T, (1957). Wash. Jot ApP.378,541 17M F' e. It. IS C nfl' o lets I ....", CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENl LAND USE CODE INTERPRETATION ~\\?lt-- Lf JURISDICTION: City of Aspen APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: Section 26.212.050 Section 26.216.050 Section 26.220.050 Section 26.304.060.B Section 26.304.060C.6 EFFECTIVE DATE: October 13,2006 WRITTEN BY: Chris Bendon, f\ III A A 'AA 0 Community Development Director UVWVl ~VLU Chris Bendon, Date: Q,{., 5,'ltJ)~ Community Development Director APPROVED BY: , COPIES TO: City Attorney City Plarming staff City of Aspen Plarming and Zoning Commission City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission City of Aspen Board of Adjustment SUMMARY: This Land Use Code interpretation clarifies the meaning of a failed motion and the meaning of a tie vote. The request was filed by David Myler on behalf of the Sky Hotel, Jody Ed'Yards on behalf of the Chateaus DuMont and Chaumont, and Tom Todd on behalf of the Aspen Alps. Each of these parties shall have the right to appeal this code interpretation, as outlined below. BACKGROUND: The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed a land use application for a project known as the Sky Hotel Redevelopment and considered a motion to approve the project, subject to conditions, on January 31, 2006. The motion to approve failed by a three to three (3-3) vote. City staff advised the Commission that a failed motion constituted a denial. The failed motion was therefore considered a denial and a resolution was prepared by staff and signed by the Chair to reflect a denial. (See Exhibit B - P&Z Resolution.) No other motions were offered. (See Exhibit C - P&Z Minutes.) The attorney for the applicant subsequently filed an appeal claiming that the failed motion did not effect an action by the Commission. As a result of numerous discussions - '- . with the applicant's attorney and the attorney representing a neighboring property, it was determined that a formal interpretation ofthe Land Use Code was necessary. In the past, Community Development staff has routinely advised the Plarming and Zoning Commission, as well as other quasi-judicial boards, to pose motions in the positive (e.g. "I move to approve... "). In that manner, staff has advised, deciphering the meaning of a failed negative motion would be avoided. Following is an example of how staff has advised the Commission to phrase the motion when staff was recommending denial: RECOMMENDED MOTION: "[ move to approve Resolution No. ----' Series of 2004, recommending approval of a code amendment to permit expansion of non-conforming structures. Note: Motions should always be made in the positive and then voted upon. This eliminates the possible confusion of a failed negative motion. Staff has also advised that a failed motion to approve constitutes a denial. In instances where a motion fails and there are no other motions offered, staff has not advised that a follow-up motion is necessary to complete the hearing. In this circumstance, staff has just provided a Resolution of denial for signature. Exhibit D provides an example of this from a Planning and Zoning Commission case called Mountain Discount. However, more-often in practice various motions are "tested," or put forth for a vote, which fail and are followed with slightly modified motions until a majority position can 5e found. This typically occurs when a board is split on a certain point and a majority opinion is not apparent without voting on motions. Exhibits E and F provide examples from both P&Z and HPC of this practice. For tie votes, staff has advised the boards that a tie vote results in a failed motion because a majority in favor was not achieved. With respect to the Sky Hotel case, a motion was offered and the resulting vote was a tie vote - three to three. Staff advised the Commission that 1) a tie vote was not a majority and resulted in the motion failing; and, 2) a failed motion constituted a denial with no follow-up action necessary. No further motions were offered. DISCUSSION Staff has relied on three sections of the Land Use Code, one provision in the City Charter, and one provision of City Council adopted Rules and Procedures to render this interpretation. Following are the sections, emphasis added. - '- A. Section 26.212.0S0, Quorum and Necessary Vote - Planning and Zoning Commission. No meeting of the commission may be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members of the commission being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct ",,.,.~ any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurrinJ? vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes, of the members of the commission then present and voting. "- B. Section 26.216.050, Quorum and Necessary Vote - Board of Adjustment. No meeting of the board shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members of the board being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. The concurring vote of four (4) members of the board then present and voting shall be required to decide any appeal, reverse any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an administrative official charged with the enforcement of the Title or to approve any variance to the terms of these regulations. All other actions shall require the concurrinJ? vote of a simple majority. but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes, of the members of the board then present and voting. C. Section 26.220.050, Quorum and Necessary Vote - Historic Preservation Commission No meeting of the commission shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurrinJ? vote of a simple majority. but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes, of the members of the commission then present and voting. O. Section 26.304.060.B, Actions by Decision Making Bodies All decision-making bodies shall act in accord with the time limits established in this Title. Action shall be taken as promptly as possible in consideration of the interests of the citizens of the City of Aspen. Depending upon which decision-making body has final approval authority over a given development application, a site specific development plan may only be approved by written resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, or by ordinance adopted by the City Council. Any land use approval which places any burden upon or limits the use of private property shall be by ordinance. All resolutions and ordinances granting final approval for a site specific development plan shall: . . . ..,..- E. Section 26.304.060.C.6, Other rules to govern. Other matters pertaining to the public hearing shall be governed by other provisions of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, applicable to the decision-making body conducting the hearing and its '-' - adopted rules of procedure, so long as the same are not in conflict with this Title. The City's decision-making bodies may adopt rules of procedure to limit the number of development applications which may be considered at a hearing. F. City of Aspen Charter- Council Procedure, Section 4.7 - Voting. The vote by "Yes" and "No" shall be taken upon the passage of all ordinances and resolutions, and entered upon the minutes of the council proceedings. Everv ordinance shall reauire the affirmative vote of a maioritv of the entire council for final oassai!e. Resolution and motions shall reauire the affirmative vote of a maioritv of the members oresent. No member of the council shall vote on any question in which he has a substantial personal or financial interest, other than the common public interest, or on any question concerning his own conduct, and in said instances the member shall disclose this interest to the council. On all other questions each member who is present shall vote when his name is called. Any member refusing to vote except when not so required by this paragraph shall be guilty of misconduct in office. - G. City Council Rules and Procedures - Adopted June, 2005. Section XIV, subsection 1- Recording Vote; Tie Votes. The minutes of the Council shall record each individual Councilmember's vote on all ordinances, resolutions and franchises. In the case of a tie vote on any motion. the motion shall be considered lost. H. Robert's Rules of Order (Adopted by reference as part of City Council Rules and Procedures) - Section 43, Bases of Voting Result - Tie Votes and Cases in Which Chair's Vote Affects the Result. On a tie vote, a motion requiring a majority vote for adoption is lost, since a tie is not a majority. . . [full text provided as Exhibit G] Each of these sections requires at least a simple majority for a board to take action. In some instances a quorum in favor is necessary. The Land Use Code does not provide specific direction on a tie vote, but the sections within the Charter and the Rules and Procedures adopted by City Council indicate that a tie vote is not a majority and therefore not an action. From citation D, above, it appears that a land use application remains pending until an action is taken. .- In cases where a motion fails, it appears from the text ofthe Land Use Code that a review of an application cannot be considered complete because no official action has occurred. In fact, this is at least partially standard practice of the City. In cases where a majority is opposed to the motion and no further motions are offered, City staff should not advise the board that the failed motion represents an action because, from the text of the code, no action was in fact taken. In these situations, City staff should advise the board to either consider a motion to deny the project, thereby creating an action, or encourage the '-' '-- applicant to amend the project in such a way as to appease a majority of the board. This may necessitate a continuation. In cases where the board is deadlocked and all attempts to break the deadlock have failed including motions to deny, staff should advise the board to continue the case until the deadlock can be addressed. If the deadlock circumstance exists for a review where the board is a recommending body only (not a final decision), the board may opt to consider a motion of neutrality that states the positions of the board members and explains the deadlock circumstance. INTERPRETATION The Land Use Code requires quasi-judicial boards to "act" upon cases and action, at a minimum, requires a majority in favor of a motion. Failed motions shall not be considered action. A tie vote on a motion shall be considered a failed motion. Land use cases shall remain pending until acted upon. The Sky Hotel Redevelopment application shall be considered pending until the Planning and Zoning Commission takes action on the application. This interpretation was provided on October 3, 2006, and shall become effective on October 13, 2006 - the delay necessary to permit all parties to this interpretation time to submit their arguments and any amendment or supplement to this interpretation to be made by staff. This interpretation of the land use code shall be valid until such time as the code sections specified are amended to implement this clarification or for other purposes. 'j"".,.o APPEAL OF DECISION Any person with a right to appeal an adverse decision or determination shall initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Director. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the Community Development Director and with the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this Title to appeal any decision or determination. EXHIBITS A. September 29, 2006, letter from Dave Myler, with attachments B. P&Z Resolution No. 36, Series of200S C. P&Z Minutes - January 31,2006 (partial) D. P&Z Minutes and Resolution from Mountain Discount case E. P&Z Minutes from 777 Cemetery Lane case (partial) F. HPC Minutes from 100 East Bleeker Street case (partial) G. Selection from Roberts Rules of Order ^~ - DA YID J MYLER' ROBYNJ. MYLERI23 THE MYLER LAW FIRM, P.C. EiiltJ,iJ, A Colorado Professional Corporatiori A ADMITTED IN CO], NY', cr' 211 MIDLAND A VENUE SUITE 201 BASALT. COLORADO 81621 OCT 0 '~ 2006 1 ELbPHUNE (970) 927-0456 FACSIMILE (970)927-0374 EMAILS dmyler@mylerlawpc.com nnyler@mylerlawpc.com cvincent@mylerlawpc.com cwood@mylerlawpc.com .""......, CHER R VINCENT, PARALEGAL CONNIE A WOOD, LEGAL ASSISTANT September 29,2006 Chris Bendon City of Aspen Community Development Director UO S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Via E-mail and U.S. Mail RE: Request for Interpretation per Land Use Code Section 26.306.010 Dear Chris: I am writing on behalf of Aspen Club Lodge Properties, LLC (the "Applicant"). In an effort to bring clarity and certainty to the issues surrounding the tie vote of the Planning and Zoning '>.. Commission on January 31, 2006 relating to the application for approval of the Sky Hotel redevelopment, the Applicant wishes to join in the request for an interpretation of the provisions of Section 26.212-050 of the Aspen Land Use Code submitted by Jody Edwards on behalf of the Chateau Chaumont and Chateau Dumont Homeowners' Associations. Specifically, I am requesting that you review such provisions to determine whether or not a tie vote by the Planning and Zoning Commission on a motion of any nature constitutes an action. I have previously provided opinions to the City Attorney's office that the plain language of that Section precludes any action (approval, denial or otherwise) without the affirmative vote of a simple majority of the Commission Members present. I have attached copies of those opinions and request that you review them in connection with your analysis. The effect of a tie vote is that the motion being voted upon fails (in the terms of Robert' s Rules of Order, it is "lost") and, accordingly, no action has been taken as a result of a tie vote. The matter under consideration is not resolved and may continue to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission until the members adopt a motion to take a specific action by a majority vote. I do not believe that the joint requests for interpretation submitted by me and Jody Edwards are subject to the stay provisions of Section 26.316.030.B. Those provisions are intended to preserve the status quo with regard to an application, and in particular, to prevent an applicant who has obtained an approval from proceeding with development activities, until any appeal is resolved. Such is not the case here. Certainly there is no approval ofthe Sky Hotel application and the status ",""..- THE MYLER LAW FIRM, P.c. '- Chris Bendon September 29, 2006 Page 2 quo will be preserved while we determine, based upon your interpretation, if an appeal is even necessary . Very truly yours, THE MYLER L David J. Myler By. cc: John Worcester (via e-mail) Jody Edwards (via e-mail) Surmy Varm (via e-mail) David Jackson (via e-mail) Cheryl Jones (via e-mail) -"'..... THE MYLER LAW FIRM, P.C. 211 MIDLAND AVENUE SUlTE201 BASALT. COLORADO 81621 TELEPHONE (970) 927.0456 FACSIMILE (970)927..0374 - DAVIDJ. MYLER' ROBYNlMYLERl23 A Colorado Professional Corporation ADMITTED IN co', NY', IT '" EMAILS dmyler@mylerlawpc.com rmyler@mylerlawpc.com cvincent@mylerlawpc.com cwood@mylerlawpc.com CHEa R. VINCENT, PARALEGAL CONNIE A. WOOD, LEGAL ASSISTANT April 10, 2006 VIA EMAIL John Worcester, City Attorney City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Sky Hotel Appeal Dear John: As you know, the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission considered a motion to approve the Sky Hotel Application on January 31, 2006. The vote was 3 for and 3 against. Citing Section 26.212-050, it was the opinion of David Hoefer and Chris Bendon that the tie vote had the effect of a Commission denial of the Application. Based upon that opinion, the Applicant has appealed. Upon reflection and further analysis of Section 26.212-050, I do not believe that the tie vote resulted in a denial. The operative language is as follows: All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority. . . of the members of the Commission then present and voting. In my humble opinion, both approval and denial constitute "actions" and, thus, the affirmative vote of a majority is required for either. A denial is no less an action of the Commission than an approval and Section 26.212-050 clearly requires an affirmative vote on all actions, not just approvals.' Unless there are some other provisions of the Municipal Code governing this matter of which I am not aware and which would produce a different result, a tie vote cannot result in action; to the contrary, it results in no action. If that is the case, the Commission did not deny the Application on January 31,2006, and the Applicant is entitled to revive the review process and request that the Commission take final action to either approve, approve with conditions or deny the Application. <.,,,...,, - lIt should be noted that there was no consideration of a motion to deny the Application. ASPEN AnDRESS: 1 06 SOUTH MILL STREET, SUITE 202 THE MYLER LAW FIRM, P.C. - ,- --. John Worcester April 10, 2006 Page 2 If you concur that no action has been taken, the Applicant will accept that opinion and withdraw its appeal. We will need to advise the Commission, the City Council and other interested parties of this determination and schedule the matter for further consideration by the Commission. I look forward to your response and would welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter with you in more detail. Very truly yours, :ffi~ David J. Myler -- cc: David Hoefer (Via Email) Chris Bendon (Via Email) Sunny Varm (Via Email) David Jackson (Via Email) Cheryl Jones (Via Email) Bill Poss (Via Email) ASPEN AnDRESS: 106 SOUTH MILL STREET, SUire 202 THE MYLER LAW FIRM, P.C. 211 MIDLAND AVENUE SUITE 20 I BASALT. COLORADO 81621 TELEPHONE (970)927-0456 F ACSIMlLE (970)927-0374 DAVIDJMYLER' ROBYN 1. MYLERI21 A Colorado Professional Corporation '""",,..- ADMITrED IN COI, NY', CT' EMAILS dmyler@mylerlawpc.com nnyler@mylerlawpc.com cvincent@mylerlawpc.com cwood@mylerlawpc.com CHER R. VINCENT, PARALEGAL CONNIE A. WOOD, LEGAL ASSISTANT April 14,2006 VIA EMAIL ANDU. S. MAIL John Worcester, City Attorney City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Sky Hotel Appeal Dear John: ""'-'''" Thank you for your prompt reply to may letter of April 10, 2006 in the above-referenced matter. If I understand your conclusion, the Sky Hotel Application was deemed denied simply because it was not approved. And it was not approved simply because the Motion to Approve failed to receive a majority vote. While I agree that no approval was granted, I am unaware of any legal authority that supports the conclusion that a failure to obtain an approval is the equivalent of a denial. As I stated, such a result seems to conflict with Section 26.212-050 of the Code which requires that any and all actions, and certainly a denial must be considered an action, requires a majority vote. Even Robert's Rules of Order (Revised) provides that where the vote on a motion is a tie, the "motion is lost."(see Section 46). There is no other consequence. In addition, an automatic denial simply as a result of a failed motion to approve could leave the City in the position of having to defend a denial of a land use application with no reasons in support of it, which constitutes an abuse of discretion, per se. It would seem to be in the City's best interest (not to mention that of the Applicant and a reviewing Court) to treat a failed motion as no action, leaving the reviewing body free to entertain a different motion. In my experience, it is preferable for municipalities to require that all actions be authorized by a motion to either approve a matter before them, with or without conditions, or to deny the matter with a statement of reasons in support. And in either case, the action requires the affirmative vote of a majority ofthe members present. I don't wish to belabor this point, but I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss these issues and the status of the Sky Hotel Application with you and Chris Bendon at your earliest convenience. The Applicant is giving serious consideration to significant revisions to the project to address a number of concerns that were expressed by Plarming Commission members and the neighbors. Although we are prepared to proceed with an appeal if we are not able to revive the -. - ASPEN AnDRESS: 106 SOUTH MILL STREET. SUITE 202 THE MYLER LAW FIRM, P.C. "- John Worcester April 14, 2006 Page 2 application process based upon an interpretation of the tie vote rules, I am not sure whether we would have the ability to introduce such revisions to the Council in the process of an appeal. Your advice and counsel would be greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, :~ David 1. Myler cc: David Jackson (Via Email) Cheryl Jones (Via Email) Sunny Vann (Via Email) Bill Poss (Via Email) ~"'" ASPEN ADDRESS: 1 06 SOUTH MILL STREET, SUITE 202 '."",,,", Resolution No. 36 (SERIES OF 2005) a,Ol~ . - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DENYING GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM APPROVALS, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL, AND CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL, AND RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL DENY THE SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SKY HOTEL, 709 EAST DURANT A VENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. Parcel ID:2737.182.80001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application (the Sky Hotel Redevelopment project) from Aspen Club Properties, LLC, (Applicant), represented by SUlmy Vann of Vann Associates, requesting approval of ten (10) free- market residential growth management allotments, three (3) affordable housing growth management allotments, Commercial Design Review, Conditional Use approval, Subdivision approval, Condominiumization approval, vacation of a portion of an alleyway, reconsideration of Ordinances Nos. 12, Series of 1961; 2, Series of 1962, and 3, Series of 1962, and vested rights for a period of five (5) years for the redevelopment of the Sky Hotel; and, WHEREAS, the Property is legally described as the Woodstone Inn Condominiums, according to the condominium map thereof filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder March 11, 1983 in plat book 14 at page 45 through 49, inclusive, as reception number 248609, and as further described in the Condominium Declaration for W oodstone Condominiums recorded March 11, 1983, in book 441 and page 814 as reception number 248608; a non-exclusive ingress/egress easement described in an unrecorded easement agreement, notice for which was given by short form easement agreement recorded April 25, 1977 in book 327 at page 777; and, Encroachment License Agreements recorded in book 316 at page 232, book 425 at page 907, book 425 at page 913, book 425 at page 919, and book 498 at page 909. The property is approximately 42,645 square feet and is zoned Lodge. The property is commonly known as the Sky Hotel and is addressed as 709 East Durant Avenue, Aspen, CO. The property owner is Aspen Club Lodge Properties, LLC; 1000 Potomac Street, NW, Suite 150; Washington, DC 2007; represented by Surmy Vann of Vann Associates, LLC; 230 East Hopkins Avenue; Aspen, CO 81611; and, WHEREAS, the site currently contains 90 hotel units, ancillary commercial space, and underground parking in a structure of approximately 44,000 square feet of Floor Area. The Sky Hotel Redevelopment project includes 90 hotel units, 10 free-market residential Ullits, 3 affordable housing units, ancillary commercial space, and underground parking in a structure of approximately 103,200 square feet of Floor Area as defmed by the City of Aspen; and, 'I\..~,.., Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No 36, Series of 2005 Page 1 - ''\<." , WHEREAS, the Community Development Department. received' referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Bcilding Department, Fire, Streets, Housing, Environmental Health, Parks and Water Departments as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, sald referral . agencies and the Aspen Community Development Department reviewed the Sky Hotel Redevelopment project according to the standards of review for each of the requested land use approvals and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.040 of the Land Use Code, Growth Management Review for free-market residential allotments and affordable housing allotments may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.425 of the Land Use Code, Conditional Use Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.412 of the Land Use Code, Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.480 of the Land Use Code, Subdivision Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by tlle City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission Community, Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304 of the Aspen Land Use Code and during a regular meeting on November 15, 2005, continued to November 29,2005, continued to January 17, 2006, and continued to January 31, 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing to consider the project and where the recommendations of the Community Development Director and comments from the public were heard and considered a motion to approve the request for ten (10) free-market residential growth management allotments, three (3) affordable housing growth management allotments, Commercial Design Review, Conditional Use approval, and to recommend to City Council Subdivision approval, with the findings contained in Exhibit A of the November 29, 2005 staff memorandum and the conditions of approval recommended by the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS the motion failed b a three to three 3-3 vote resultin in a denial of free-market residential growth management a otments, denial of affordable housing growth management allotments, denial of Commercial Design Review, and denial of * Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 2 - Conditional Use review, and a recommendation to City Council for denial of the Subdivision review. - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION as follows: Section 1: Denial bv Plannin!! and Zonin!! Commission The Plmming and Zoning Commission hereby denies the land use requests for free- market residential growth management allotments, affordable housing growth management allotments, Commercial Design Review, and Conditional Use approval for the Sky Hotel Redevelopment project. ~ Section 2: Recommendation of Denial bv Plannin!! and Zonin!! Commission The Plmming and Zoning Commission .Eereb~ recommends the City Council deny the Subdivision request for the Sky Hotel Redevelopment project. Section 3: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of mlY action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or aJ11ended as herein provided, and the SaJ11e shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinmlces. Section 4: If mlY section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Commission at its special meeting on January 31, 2006. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: ATTEST: ~ .~""", ( C:\home\Current Planning\CASES\Sky Hotel\Reso-denial.doc - Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 36, Series of 2005 Page 3 II "'.-. ~ibib PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (: ._,-"\ ~ MINUTES OF JANUARY 31. 2006 L 'ftA~ -1 ~ MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to extend the meeting to 7:15pm seconded by Brian. All in Favor, APPROVED. Dave Jackson began to speak about the investment and Jasmine Tygre stated that was not within the purview of this commission. \..,.....- Cheryl Jones, Northwest Capital, spoke of being in the hospitality business for about 20 years and they were looking at this asset and saying where is it positioned in the marketplace today. Cheryl Jones said the dynamics in the world have changed; people want bigger rooms, more spacious rooms; that's the direction that the lodging industry is going, that's the direction that residential is going so in an effort to accommodate that demand and be competitive in the market place and satisfy what people want in Aspen, this is the way that we feel that we could redevelop the property with respect to the residential on top. There was the ability to put it into the rental program when it was not in use so it wasn't as if it's going to go dormant; there would be demand for that. Cheryl said that in the event this doesn't get redeveloped in this fashion it will be very, very difficult to redevelop because it was a dilapidated building; the ceiling heights were very low and it would not be a development worthy of redevelopment. They have put as much lipstick on this property and have reached the limit and done as much as we can with the structure as we can; we are going to be very hard pressed to of how to reposition this asset and meet future demand. MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve Resolution 36, Series of2005 approving with conditions Growth Management Allotments for 10 free-market residences and 3 Affordable Housing Allotments, Commercial Design Review and Conditional Use and recommending City Council approve the Subdivision for the redevelopment of the Sky Hotel and adding the condition that the alley be maintained during construction. Brian Speck seconded. Roll call vote: Ruth :J. Kruger, yes; Mary Liz Wilson, yes; Brian Speck, yes; Steve Skadron. no; Brandon "I Marion, no; Jasmine Tygre, no. DENIED 3-3. Discussion: Ruth said that it has been a benefit to the community to bring in the youth and vitality to the Sky Hotel. Meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. y Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ~ ~ ~i}\bl --- -- 22 Sdtibtl- 0 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - June 07. 2005 Public Comments: Tom McCabe, public, stated that Aspen Repair Service has been in that zone ..... district since 1973. McCabe provided the history ofthat building from when it was built, which included parking below the building from that ramp. McCabe drew this building and the adjacent building; he said most of the parking belongs to the building where his shop is located. McCabe said the city created the zoning but they don't police their own zoning. McCabe said he had a plat of the area. Tygre asked Tom for a copy of the map. McCabe had concerns for the parking because it has always been problematic. McCabe said he wanted to protect the SCI zone, which was meant to protect Mom & Pop businesses that don't have high profit margms. Paul Hoeper said there was only one entrance and exit to his store and they took careful measurement of the parking spaces. Tygre stated that there were criteria in the packet as exhibit A; there was constant pressure on the SCI zone because rnany businesses could not afford to pay the rents charged in other zones. The retailers than can afford to pay more in rents pushes out the ones who can't afford to pay more; the SCI zone was designed to protect businesses that were mixed use businesses but primarily had that repair, full serving quality to them, which has not been easily defined. Skadron complimented the applicant on the audacious venture that was much needed in the community unfortunately he said his decision would be to enforce the code and ultirnately best serve the community. Skadron agreed with staff on this zone district not generating high customer traffic volumes and for this entity to ultimately work it would need high traffic volumes. Rowland shared Steve's comments. Marion applauded the efforts but agreed with Jasmine and Steve. Marion said the parking conundrum that exists also concerned him. Brain Speck dittoed the commissioners concerns and supported staff. Oates added 2 conditions: all access shall be from the east building entrance and the applicant shall provide a parking plan with the addition of at least 4 legal sized and accessible parking spaces on site; the plan shall be based on a current survey. MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve the Conditional Use for Mountain - Discount at 557 North Mill with the addition of conditions 5 and 6; seconded by Brandon Marion. Roll call vote: Speck, no; Rowland, no; Marion, no; Skadron, no; Tygre, no. Denied 5-0. {- ,~- ....... L~ ~ h&,.}.tG" ~ 5 ,~c''''' - ~ ~ 'n , -........s 04-U')CSl 00 0 ~ cs> t9 .... ~C ('t) t;~ .... 01' ,,.. . '" .., 0." .. .. "' '" ",~,.,. .-..,...." RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DENYING THE MTN. DISCOUNT CONDITIONAL USE FOR RETAIL SALES - . OF DISCOUNT ITEMS AT 557 N. MILL STREET PARCEL ID #2737-073-00013 Resolution No. 19, Series of 2005 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Paul Hoeper, owner, for conditional use approval for a conditional use approval for a retail sales establishment with 60% of the floor area dedicated to retail sale and 40% of the floor area dedicated to storage of inventory; and, WHEREAS, the subject parcel is located in the Service/CommerciaVIndustrial Zone District in which the sales and rental of consumer goods such as household appliances, electronic equipment, furniture, clothing or sporting good uses may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.425 of the Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended denial; and, WHEREAS, during a public hearing at a regular meeting on June 7, 2005, the ~ Planning and Zoning Commission denied by a 5 to 0 (5-0) vote the Mtn. Discount Conditional Use for a retail establishment to be located at 557 N. Mill Street, Suite !OI, with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: That the Mtn. Discount Conditional Use for a retail and rental establishment be denied. DENIED by the Commission at its regular meeting on June 7, 2005. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: n~ \ JL City Attorney r- J&6mWz -;#_ Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION F&llItbll- E. Minutes April 2. 2002 ,-- Winchester noted that from the last hearing there was more asphalt and they were trying to create something in the middle to break it up without backing into each other. -r'\ t Jasmine Tygre stated that she was surprised by the plan tonight because last meeting's plan had shown more vegetation, which provided additional screening as approved by the parks department. Tygre said that without the landscape screening, the plan becomes much less attractive and stated that she was disappointed. Weimann said that the city landscape plan was approved. Winchester stated that there were the large trees on the sides that remained. Eric Cohen said that he agreed with the planning staffs comments that the variances were driven by the design of the house, which did not need to be designed that way to begin with and was represented by the architect who said that she figured that was the way that they would do it one way and then come in and ask for the variances later. Cohen said that based on those facts, this was a waste ofthe commission's time. Roger Haneman said that the vegetation was to hide the bad design; so whatever the vegetation was would not change his mind on this. Haneman said if this had come before the coIllIllission in the design phase, he said that he would have voted no because he would have preferred the garage in the rear. "'\ . Tygre reiterated that in order to vote the criteria have to be met; the findings must be made. Kruger said that the project had challenges to include the duplex with the FAR on a site of98 by 153; she said that she didn't think the garages could have been placed in the back. Kruger said that there were large trees on the sides and the landscaped middle. Myrin said that he still felt that it was possible to have the garage doors facing the street that would work if it were all grass out front. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to approve P&Z Resolution #12, series 2002 approving variance from Residential Design Standards to allow two street facing garages that are located forward ofthe duplexes at 775 and 777 Cemetery Lane and allow for double stall garage doors. Ruth Kruger seconded. Roll call vote: Myrin, no; Buettow, no; Cohen, yes; Kruger, yes; Haneman, yes; Erickson, no; Tygre, no. DENIED 4-3. - * o I Erickson said that he felt that the applicant met 2 of the 3 standards and would like to make another motion for the applicant to come back for review of the garage doors. Cohen stated that the no votes were all based upon the same thing, the garage doors. Myrin said that if there were green grass in the front he would have accepted the motion. Erickson said that he did not have the grass concerns but rather the bam door or garage door look on the street that should be minimized for ....... ....... 7 P~ICHEA : 4T 11 S RLODE S RESID IAL DESIGN ANDARD VA CES Jasm' Tygre opened public hearing for ot 11 SilverLod ubdivision. ,- -'v D a Hoefer stated the proof of noti was provided. es Lindt state at "'- Elmore repres ted by Stan Ma . submitted the a ication.The posed 8040 Greenline r ew was to incre the allowable R on site by 31 quare feet; the reque d variances wer om the second mass, buildin . entation and drivewa cut from the res' ntial design st ds. ..'- -r, r-. p -- '........ ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes April 2. 2002 the street, which was not accomplished. Myrin agreed with Ron on the garage doors, but he suggested the grass since there was not another selection for the garage doors tonight, so that there could be a vote tonight. Buettow said Bert's idea of the grass was good and the primary look for the garage doors not looking like garage doors. Tygre said that she might go along with the re-design of the garage doors but since she didn't know if the parks department would provide enough screening from the street for her to support it, but she was willing to look at the garage doors. Erickson suggested the garage doors looked like the side of the garage did when the sides faced the street, so it looks like the side of the house. Winchester said that the side of the house was stone, so the garage doors would never look like the side of the house. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to continue the meeting to April161h ..k for the applicant to come back with new garage doors designs providing '1'" less impacts. Bert Myrin seconded. APPROVED 7-0. that the lot w 3,329 square fi and 3,172 squ feet FAR was allo d by right; the ainance that cre ed the SilverL Subdivision al ed an ease of FAR w' 8040 Greenlin pproval. Lindt d the 317 squ e feet ould not have egative impact the visual app ance from the eet; there was a geolo' report noting impacts from addition of th 17 square feet. d that the appli t proposed the nt fa4;ade of house be 10 ed to the front ed of the building velope, whic ed from street. Staff fel e applicant ma an effort to m the standar ecause the ad constraints . a 20-foot e ment on the operty. Lindt said at the proposed . eway cut wo exce,ed the eet in depth standar om the proP,erty " e. to the, front tback; there as a, .19~% grad on the prope slope and engin ring only alla ed a 15% m mum for a . way, the ore it was neces that the dri way cut be' re than 2-fe depth. 8 . out the letter at he sent to Davi. oefer regarding e avid Hoefer plied that the lette as forwarded to e Mayor City Mana . Myrin sta that communicati from the board on't get across from ffto Counci Jasmine Tygre sa' that whenCoun <" 'and the, Manager r pond to the mmission in gene , then the co . sion could deCide if any a on should b aken. TS er COWOP; the c ept of of amounts asphalt, auto and estrian was on the old Ob eyer ,-- - bers of the public house on the rner of Cemet Lane and Silver Drive with reg the size of e lot, square fi tage above and belo grade and if seth being the to FAR; ,w/ ~"""" DECLARATION None. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (03/19/02 and 04/02/02): 775 and 777 CEMETERY LANE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD ' VARIANCES Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing for 775 and 777 Cemetery Lane Residential Design Standard variances for the garage and garage door placement. - - 1 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes Apri116~ 2002 Fred Jarman said that this was a continued public hearing from April 2nd and '- March 19th. The criteria sheets from Section 26.222.010 of the Land Use Code were distributed. Jarman stated that staff recommended denial on both variances; this was consistent with the last 2 hearings. Jarman noted that Chet Winchester and Joachim Weimann were to come back with more refined garage door elevations as well as landscaping plans. Chet Winchester responded that they didn't have time to get the changes and landscape drawings in before James left. Nick Solis, architect, said that the landscape plan with elevations and screening needs recommended from the parks department. Solis said that he took out some trees with the recommendation from Stephen Ellsperman, Parks Dep<\rtment. Jasmine Tygre stated that sketch #11 April 2002 was the plan to be approved by the Parks Department. Ron Erickson asked about the overlapping on the landscape plan. Solis replied that was what the parks department wanted. Solis said that the elevations for the garage doors showed the paneling and windows to match the rest of the windows and siding on the house. Solis stated that he asked parks about the grass pavers and they said it would be a maintenance nightmare because they would not hold up for the day-to-day use. _. There was no public comment. Bert Myrin asked what would be the height of the trees at the time of installation. The architect replied that the trees height would be from day one installation or 5 to 6 feet. Solis said that the blue shrubs shown would only get to 8 foot so it ' wouldn't detract from the overall Cemetery Lane Plan. David Hoefer asked the timetable for the installation of the hll1dscape completion. Jochiem Weimann replied that the houses should be finished July I st so the landscaping could be complete in another month. Ruth Kruger said that the garage doors blended in nicely and the landscaping was a challenge that was satisfied. Ron Erickson stated that the commission was being fair hearing the case. Kruger stated that the design review standards were too constraining for a lot of this width. Erickson said that the house was designed back from the golf course making it closer to the street; he said that the problems were of design. Myrin said that the parks department did not allow the screening, so he said that he wasn't there yet. Winchester said that they did not want to block the neighbor to the right and that was the reason that the building was moved but then they had the garage doors to fit in without an alley. - ....... 2 "..., ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes Aoril16,2002 MOTION #1: Ruth Kruger moved to approve Resolution #12, series 2002 approving the variances from the residential design standards to allow 2 garages that are located forward on the duplex at 775 and 777 Cemetery Lane to contain garage doors that face the street and allow for double stall garage doors finding that the review standards that yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan and be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints and the landscape plan be completed by August J; 1 st. Ron Erickson seconded. Roll call vote: Erickson, no; Haneman, ~ yes; Myrin, no; Kruger, yes; Tygre, yes, DENIED 3-2. - - ....... Tygre inquired about the color of the siding on the drawings. Weimann responded that it would be more like the garage doors in the illustration dated II April 2002. Myrin asked the color of the concrete. Weimann replied that it would be a sand or buff colored concrete. ,',- MOTION #2: Ron Erickson moved to approve Resolution #12, series 2002 approving the variances from the residential design standards to allow 2 garages that are located forward on the duplex at 775 and 777 Cemetery Lane to' contain garage doors that face the street and allow for double stall garage doors finding that the review standards that yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan and more effectively addressed the issue or problem a given standard or provision responded to with the sketches dated April 11, 2002 and the following condition: 1. Tbe Applicant sball iDstall all of the landscapiDg ,howD OD the proposed laDdscape plaD DO later Ihat Augusll, 2002. 2. The garage doors shall be hI compliance with Ihe plaD marked as Exhibit #I~from the public heariDg. +- Ruth Kruger seconded. Roll call vote: Erickson, yes;:Haneman, yes; Myrin, yes; Kruger, yes; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 5~0. "- moved to a ove the GMC nutes from PPROVED 5- . -- -- 3 - '-- ,..... ....... - - ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Eic;i L~J- MINUTES OF MAY 24, 2006 III,. F Chairp on, Jeffrey Halfe aIled the m mg to order a :00 p.rn. Co ssioners in atten ce: Sarah ughton, Aliso gley, Derek lko, Jason Lasse d Michael ffman. A Guthrie, Hist c Preservation er athy Stricklan , Chief Deputy . Clerk DiscI e - Sarah will re e herself on 4 E. Coop gl.ukQv 100 E. C(:}6IlER-ST. - CONCEPTUAL, DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION AND VARIANCES Mitch Haas, consultant Rally Dupps, architect New elevation - Exhibit I Amy said the project is a Victorian miner's cottage on a corner adjacent to the Yellow Brick building. There is an addition that has no historic significance that will be removed. A garage will also be removed and the building will be picked up and moved forward a couple of feet. It is tight from side to side and some setbacks variances are being requested to allow for a reasonable addition. There has also been some discussion of aFAR bonus. The issue is the connector piece between the new and old construction. The applicant has done some revised drawings that are in the packet but in staffs opinion we aren't quite there yet. The issue is the use of the connector as a deck and the railings and furnishings that corne along with that are somewhat awkward sitting right behind an historic building. Possibly incorporate the deck to the east side of the building which is the non-historic side of the building. There has been a restudy of the west side of the addition. Two options have been presented A or B. As a suggestion rnaybe the connector could be slipped westward to facilitate more outdoor space. Mitch Haas, planner. They altered the deck and it is no longer overhanging over the west side toward Garmisch Street. All the overhangs occur on the east side. We also pulled back the railing of the deck and the connecting I -- ASPEN mSTORlC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 24, 2006 element is much smaller than tJJ.e existing element. The cap has also been taken off the glasos railing. ~ . - Derek asked if a cap is required on the railing. Rally said the railing has to have a ct:rtain compression and thickness. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the rneeting was closed. Rally said he worked on the drawings trying to rnove the deck to the other side but to get the program the deck would push everything out so the house would then be wider than the hist<:ric house. Alison said if this is going to be an exemplary project having the 500 square foot bonus would have to go hand in hand with not having the deck. She understands why the client wants the deck and she has no problern with it. To make it even glassier you could get rid of the corner posts and make it all glass. Alison said if the deck gets approved it is in the right position. </....... Derek said regarding rnassing and scale the restudy is good and the project is in compliance with our guidelines. Regarding the deck from a compliancy standpoint they are keeping it away from the historic resource and they are not attaching to it and the glass is an honest attempt to keep it light. As far as fenestration options B is his preference. ....... Sarah echoed Derek's comments regarding the deck given the constraints to the site. The revised plan of pulling the glass off the historic building is appropriate. The comment made by Alison about eliminating all metal at the corner is a good suggestion. In terms of mass and scale Sarah has a concern with guideline 10.14 about the roof form. Option B, the gable on the vertical element on the west fa9ade having it come so much higher than the north facing ridge is against that guideline which talks about the roof being in character with the historic building. The detailing of the out riggers, the rafters seerns tedious and should be addressed at final. In terms of demolition and on-site relocation and variance, they are all acceptable. - Jason said the only sticky point is the deck. He is in favor of A design simply because that is the only design that is a two-story elernent and ties in - 2 .,- ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 24. 2006 better with the gable end. Jason has no issues with the deck and he couldn't find anything in the guidelines that says you can't have a roof deck on top of the connector lin1e Jason also agreed with Sarah's comment about the verticality of the ridge line piece. - Michael said he is favor of option A for the same reasons stated by Jason. He is concerned about the deck and he is not in favor of the FAR bonus with the roof deck. A flat roof with no deck is a better idea. Jeffrey also agreed with staff's concerns about mass and scale. The deck element is a corner element and the street frontage is prominent. This is a landmark and exernplary project. There is an awful lot of detailing in that link that is starting to become competitive. Guidelines 10.3 and 10.6 deals with designing a building that maintains the character of the historic building. The concern is the west elevation. Jeffrey would prefer A design with a study of the gable roof. Sarah said in terms of the verticality discussed option A would be preferred. -'\lison also said she would prefer A. Amy said with regard to the connector the guideliI1es dont ~p\,;",~ directly to it, but staff's interpretation comes from guideline 10.7 which says a one story connector is preferred. As soon as you do something programmatic on top it isn't a one-story anymore. Mitch said the deck is only 7 feet and not big enough to have a hot tub on it. It is not a place for a grill etc. because all of the living and dinmg area are downstairs. You would have to come through the master bedroom to use the space. As far as patio furniture that can happen on any historic property. There are projects in town that have a one-story connector over a deck and sorne of those projects face the street. We are fine with option A. In terms of massing on the roof we will lower the gable to meet the historic one and not extend above it. _(ally said he will look at the roof overhangs and he appreciated all the comments made by the board. ,"-"'" -- Mitch addressed the FAR bonus. He emphasized all the assets. We are removing an inappropriate addition. We are rernoving a'garage and restoring the entire streetscape. We are removing a non-historic bay window 3 .",,-, ASPEN mSTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 24. 2006 and restoring that as best to the historic condition. Our connecting element is much smaller than the existing one. -- Rally said we are exposing the entire back side of the historic house that was gone. Mitch said on the east side ofthe connector the door was removed. Amy listed the conditions: Conceptual, demolition, on-site relocation, Setback Variances: 9.6 rear yard setback; 2 foot east side yard setback; five foot west side yard setback variance, and a 500 square foot FAR bonus if the board chooses. - - MOTION: Derek moved to approve conceptual development for 100 E. Bleeker St. with documents submitted in plan B with the inclusion of the deck and eliminate any steel connections that are vertical. Approval of the conditions listed above by including the FAR bonus to go into TDR's; motion second by Sarah. Roll call: Jason, no; Derek, yes; Alison, yes; Michael, no; Sarah, no; ~ Jeffrey, no. Motion died 4-2. ~ MOTION: Sarah moved to approve Resolution #13 for 100 E. Bleeker with the following variances as stated by Amy including the 500 square foot bonus for TDR's. Mass conditions: Reduction in height of the gable on the west facing addition to match the north facing gable and no higher than that gable. The inclusion of option A diagram. The inclusion of the roof deck. Elimination of the rafters. No vertical steel connectors in the deck. Motion second by Derek. Roll call: Jason, yes; Derek, yes; Alison, yes; Michael, no; Sarah, yes; Jeffrey, yes. Motion carried 5-1. + ,.,,- - 4 " g43. suIt, bers :lose ,ble. :t as It to ame \dif- may :ltire pro- are atis-- ce it ntire ,ther rlia- )asis ,ling 1t of otiee r" nus\-.. otice"" it is lOO.) ,pie, a a ma- entire whose ucces- and, mem. of the g43. BASES OF VOTING RESULT Plurality Vote A plurality vote is the largest number of votes to be given any candidate or proposition when three or more choices are possiblei the candidate or proposition receiving the largest number of votes has a plurality. A plurality that is not a majority never chooses a proposition or elects anyone to office except by virtue ofa special rule previously adopted. If such a rule is to apply to the election of officers, it should be prescribed in the bylaws. A rule that a plurality shall elect is unlikely to be in the best interests of the aver- age organization. In an international or national society where the election is conducted by mail ballot, a plurality is sometimes allowed to elect officers, with a view to avoiding the delay and extra expense that would result from addi~ tional balloting under these conditions. A better method in such cases is for the bylaws to prescribe some form of preferential voting (see p. 357). Tie Votes and Cases in Which Chair's Vote Affects the Result If the presiding officer is a member of the assemblYI he can vote as any other member when the vote is by ballot. (See alsop. 349.) In all other cases the presiding officer, if a member of the assembly, can (but is not obliged to) vote whenever his vote will affect the result-that iSI he can vote either to break or to cause a tie; or, in a case where a two- thirds vote is requiredl he can vote either to cause or to block the attainment of the necessary two-thirds. Tn par- ticular: -On a tie vote, a motion requiring a majority vote for adoption is lost, since a tie is not a majority. Thus, if there is a tie without the chair's vote, the presiding officer can, if he is a member, vote ifi the affirmativel tl:lereby causing the motion to be adopted; orl if there is one more in the affirmative than in the negative with- out the chairls vote (for example, if there are 72 votes in favor and 71 opposed)1 he can vote in the negative "~. - -- 343 I E;J.ibib, ~ - 344 RUL'ES Of ORDER g44. to create a tie, thus causing the motion to be rejecte~. -Similarly, in the case of a motion requiring a two~thlrds vote if without the chair's vote, the number In the affir:na;ive is one less than twice the number in the negative (for example, if there are S9 in the affirmative and 30 in the negative), the chair, if a member, can vote in the affirmative and thus cause the motion to be adopted; or, if there are exactly two thirds in the affir~- ative without his vote (for example, if there are 60 In the affirmative and 30 in the negative), the chair can vote in the negative, with the result that the motion is L- rej eeted.'" . The chair cannot vote twice, once as a member, the~ agam in his capacity as presiding officer-first to make a tie, and then to cast the deciding vote. In an appeal from the decision of the chair, a tie vote sus- tains the chair's decision, even though his vote cr~ated the tie, on the principle that the decision of the chalr can be reversed only by a majority. g 44. VOTING PROCEDURE Rights and Obligations in Voting VOTING RIGHTS OF A MEMBER IN ARREARS. A member of a society who is in arrears in payment of his dues, b.ut who has not been formally dropped from the membership rolls and is not under a disciplinary .suspension, retains the full rights of a voting member and is legally entitled to vote except as the bylaws may otherwise provide. RIGHT OF ABSTENTION. Although it is the duty of every member who has an opinion on a question to express it by .It should be noted that if, without the chair's vote,.the nun:ber of ~e?~~ tive votes is one more than half the number of affirmahve votes, ~he c au s vote cannot affect the result. Thus, if there are 60 In the afflr.mahve and 3~ in the ne ative without the chair's vote, and he were to vote In the a~rma tive, the ~esulting 61 in the affirmative would still fall short of two thuds of the total vote of 92. 'let) MEMORANDUM RE: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council Bentley Henderson, Asset Manager/Assistant City ~,'F.ag~ Chris Bendon, Community Development Director lj\NWJ Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer/' €3.-- ~ 312 W. Hyman A venue- Contract for Purchase, Resolution # ~ Series of 2006 TO: THRU: FROM: DATE: December II, 2006 SUMMARY: The subject property is a 6,000 square foot lot. It is developed with a Chalet style home that was built in 1954. The attached resolution will, if approved, authorize the City Manager to execute a contract to purchase this property for $3.5 million. This property is available for sale and has recently been the topic of discussion for landmark designation. Staff has performed an analysis of development potential and has identified this as a site which, if purchased by the City, could achieve at least two important goals identified in the Aspen Area Community Plan; Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation. The existing home on the site currently contains two free market units, one on each floor. Each free market unit is entitled to the development of a "carriage house," which is a type of affordable housing subject to specific size and deed restriction requirements. The new carriage houses, in combination with the City's voluntarily deed restriction of the Chalet will result in a total of four small residences for locals. Conceptually, no addition is planned for the Chalet and the new carriage houses will sit behind the house, sensitively placed to preserve the architectural character of the building and existing trees on the site to the greatest extent possible. The proposed development does not require re-zoning and is a "use by right," allowing the project to fit comfortably into the neighborhood. In 2003, the City adopted incentives for carriage houses, including exempting them from FAR to encourage meaningful units such as these to be built and permanently occupied. According to staff analysis, a successful project can be developed on this site and remain below the allowable FAR, again creating sensitivity to the surround context and adjacent property owners. In terms of historic preservation objectives, the house represents a fine example of the Chalet style of architecture that exemplifies the social and architectural history of Aspen as it began developing as a ski resort. Aspen residents of the time appear to have viewed this style as appropriate to our mountain setting and important to the establishment of Aspen as a ski resort that was competitive with its famous European predecessors. Many of the Chalets were constructed by Europeans who rclocated to Aspen after World War II and who's culture has influenced the community ever since. The faJ11ily who built the house at 312 W. Hyman Avenue were drawn to Aspen after reading an article in Time Magazine published a week after Lift I opened in 1947. Already the place had an international buzz. Saving buildings like this one provides a means to convey our hcritage to present and future generations. I The City Attorney has reviewed the attached contract as to form. the City will have up to 30 days to review the purchase and 90 days to close. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council adopt Resolution ~ Series of 2006. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution #le'"l.;-Series of 2006, a contract to purchase 312 W. Hyman Avenue, Lots P And Q, Block 46, City and Townsite of Aspen." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: Exhibit: Resolution #~Series of 2006 A. Potential development "Pro Formas" B. Contract 2 RESOLUTION 102- (Series of 2006) A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF 312 WEST HYMAN A VENUE, LOTS P AND Q, BLOCK 46, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a contract for the purchase of312 W. Hyman Avenue, Lots P & Q, Block 46, City and Townsite of Aspen, a copy of which contract is attached hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1. That the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract between the City of Aspen and Jordan V. Gerberg, a copy of which is armexed hereto and incorporated herein, to purchase the property at 312 W. Hyman Avenue, Lots P&Q, Block 46, City and Townsite of Aspen. Dated: Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor 1, 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 ofthe City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held December II, 2006. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk i ~J'1(lolt- A AH DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY PURCHASE PRICE: $3,500,000 NEW CONSTRUCTION PRICE: 2,485 SQUARE FEET AT $350/SQ,FT. $869,750 REHAB OF CHALET: RESTORATION & CONVERSION OF GARAGES TO LIVING SPACE 1,956 SQ. FT AT $250/SQ, FT. $489,000 TOTAL ACQUISTION & CONSTRUCTION: $4,858,750 TOTAL SALES PRICE: 1 CAT 2,2 BDR. 1 CAT 3, 2 BDR. 1 CAT 4,2 BDR. , CAT 4,3 BDR. $848,000 NET COST: $4,010,750 PER UNIT SUBSIDY (4 UNITS): PER BEDROOM SUBSIDY (9 BEDROOMS): $1,002,688 $445,639 RETENTION OF 1 UNIT AS FREE MARKET TOTAL ACQUISTION & CONSTRUCTION: $4,858,750 TOTAL SALES PRICE: 1 FREE MARKET, 2 BEDROOM@$120o/sa. FT. 1 CAT 3,2 BDR. 1 CAT 4,2 BDR. 1 CAT 4,3 BDR. $1,807,200 NET COST: $3,051,550 PER UNIT SUBSIDY (3 UNITS): PER BEDROOM SUBSIDY (7 BEDROOMS): $1,017,183 $435,936 SALE OF UNUSED FAR AS 4 TOR'S TOTAL ACQUISTION & CONSTRUCTION: $4,858,750 TOTAL SALES PRICE: 1 CAT 2,2 BDR. 1 CAT 3.2 BDR. 1 CAT 4.2 BDR. 1 CAT 4. 3 BDR, $848,000 SUBTOTAL: $4,010,750 SALE OF 4 TOR'S AT $200.000 EACH $800,000 TOTAL NET COST: $3,210,750 PER UNIT SUBSIDY (4 UNITS): PER BEDROOM SUBSIDY (9 BEDROOMS): $802,688 $356,750 SALE OF UNUSED FAR AS 8 TOR'S TOTAL ACQUISTION & CONSTRUCTION: $4,858,750 TOTAL SALES PRICE: 1 CAT 2, 2 BDR. 1 CAT 3.2 BDR. 1 CAT 4,2 BDR. 1 CAT 4,3 BDR. $848,000 SUBTOTAL: $4,010,750 SALE OF 8 TOR'S AT $200,000 EACH $1,600,000 TOTAL NET COST: $2,410,750 PER UNIT SUBSIDY (4 UNITS): PER BEDROOM SUBSIDY (9 BEDROOMS): $602,688 $267,861 Coldwell Banker The Aspen Brokers, Ltd. 720 East Durant Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 . , 'pyJ1tlol t- b I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 The printed portions of this form, except differentiated additions, have been approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission. (CBS 1-7-04) THIS FORM HAS IMPORTANT LEGAL CONSEQUENCES AND THE PARTIES SHOULD CONSULT LEGAL AND TAX OR OTHER COUNSEL BEFORE SIGNING. CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE (RESIDENTIAL) Date: ~r . 2006 Purchase Price: $ 3.500.000.00 17 18 19 20 I. AGREEMENT. Buyer agrees to buy, and the undersigned Seller agrees to sell. the Property dermed below on the terms and conditions set forth in this contract. 2. DEFINED TERMS. a. Buyer. Buyer, City of ~. Colorado will take title to the real property described below as 0 Juiul Te..ou 0 Teo..1s 10 Commuo 0 OOer TBD b. Property. The Property is the following legally described real estate: Lot. PandO, Block 46, City of' bpen 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 in the County of Pitkin , Colorado, commonly known as No. 312 ...'t. sv.an A..-.rme .a.~ co 81611 Street Address City State Zip together with the interests, easements, rights, benefits, improvements and attached tixIlns IlJIIIIIr1erW1I thereto, all inten:st of Sell.". in vacated streets and alleys adjacent thereto, ""cept as herein ""eluded. e. Dates aDd DeadliD... 1_ Nu. Refe...... Eveol Dale or DeadliDe I pa Loan Application Deadline n/a 2 Pb Loan Commitment Deadline n/a 3 pc Buyel's Credit Inforrnatioo Deadline n/a 4 65c Disapnroval of Buyel's Credit Deadline n/a 5 pd Existing Loan Documents Deadline o/a 6 pd Objectioo to Existing Loan Documents Deadline n/a 7 fi Sd Approval of Loan Transfer Deadline n/a 8 ~ 60(4) Appntisal Deadline n/a 9 p. Title Deadline ., cia.,.. a:f'ter .-c 10 pc Survey Deadline 23 day. aft.~ NKC II ~lIc Survey Objection Deadline 30 cIaya after 8C 12 pb Document Requost Deadline ~.t i.. .-de now 13 fi7d(2) & fi Sa Governing Documents Objection Deadline and Title U daY" after HaC Objection Deadline 14 fi 8b Off-Record Matters Deadline 1 c1aY1l after III:C 15 !8b Off-Record Matters Objoctioo Deadline U cIaya after 8C PRB'AREDBY:__GutMr~,.......A.- ~'_ CBS '-7-00, """"""'10 Buy_ Sol RooI __ _>, ~__Comm;oalon _AST"~._. _ 6.16. _R~to; JoneWMoy, ~_n."-'''''''''. Lid. Buyeoj.)_ "'1011 _.)- 16 ~ 8f Ri2h.t Of First Refusal Deadline n/a 17 ~1O Seller's Pronertv Disclosure Deadline "1 days .:fur de 18 ~ lOa . on Obiection v-lJine 30 daya ~te;r ..c 19 pOb Resolution Deadline 33 daya ~t.r ..C 20 ~ 10c Property Insurance Objection Deadline nla 21 ~Il C....iIol Dale go daya dte;r "C 22 116 Possession Dale 90 daya ~te;r ImC 23 ~ 16 Possession Time 5:00 p... HS't 24 ~ 27 A_a.., DeadIiae Dale .... t ~ 3D, 2006 25 127 A__ DeadHaeTiIoIc 4:00 p... .'f n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a nla D/a D/a 29 30 31 d. Atta"_als. The following are a part of this contract: AddeDcl... A 32 33 Note: The following disclosure forms are attached but are Dot a part of this contmcl: x.ad-Baaed Paint Di.cl.o.~ 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 .. Applleabllity ofT_I. A check or similar marl< in a box means that such provision is applicable. The abbreviation "Nt A" means not applicable. The abbreviation "MEC" (mutual execution of this contract) means the latest date upon which both parties have signed this contmcl. 3. INCLUSIONS AND EXCLUSIONS. The Pllrchase Price inc1udes the following items (Inclusions): a. Fhtara. If at!aclIed 10 the Property on the date of this oontracl, lighting, heatiDs, plwnbing, veotilaling, and air conditioning fixtwes, TV antennas, inside telephone wiring and COIIIICCling blocl<sljacks, plants, mirrors, floor coverings. intercom systems, built-in kitchen appliances, sprinkler systems and controls, buih-in VllC\IlIII1 systems (including a.:cessories), gllI1Ige door openers including D/a remote controls; and n/a b. En........ The following attached fixtures .... excluded from this sale: Dla Co Penoul Property. If on the Property whether attached or not on the date of this COIlllact: storm windows, storm doors, window and porch shades, awnings, blinds, SOIeen5, window coveritJs,o. cur1ain rods, drapery rods, firIlp\lg inseo1s, fireplace screens, fireplace grates, heatinjl stoves. storage sheds, and all keys. If cbecIood, the following are included: 0 Water Sefteacn 0 S.elceIFlre Detcdon U SeeDmy SystelllS 0 Satellite Syae.. (including satellite dishes) and n/a II. Trusler of P1:rsoaaJ I'ropcrty. The Pmona! Property 10 be conveyed III Closing shall be conveyed, by Sella. free and clear of all taxes, (except personal proporty taxes for the year of closing), litms and encumbrances, except a/. Conveyance shall be by bill of sale or other applicable legal insIrumenl. e. Parldal aad Storal" FacIIIaIes. The 0 U.. 0.1)' 181 o....nIlip oflhe following parl<ing facilities: ........- ......_....~ to ~ Praa.rtv and the following storage facilities: fto_ ---+_...~ to t:M o-...t:v. f. Water RigJlIs. The following legally described water rights: ..... 6\ 62 63 64 65 Any water rights shall be conveyed by "'a deed or other applicable IcgaI insIrumenl. 4. PURCHASE PRICE AND TERMS. The Purchase Price set forth below shall be payable in U. S. Don... by Buyer as as follows: PREPAREDBY:...G.......Ge....,~ \ltlacl.. CSS '47...04. Confndlolluy.wJSelR...e.w.(R........". Cofotado R...e.... Commiuion R_A$Te~,CI2OO6, _ 6.16, __Rogiollndlo: JaneWMoy. __Tho"'-'Ilnlkefa. lid. _"- ..... 2 of . _.)- 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 Item No. Referuce Item I ~4 Purchase Price 2 Ha Earnest Money 3 ~41>(1 New First Loan n/a 4 41>(2) New Second Loan n/a S ~ 4c Asswnplion Balance n/a 6 ~4d Sell... or Private Financin Dla 7 n/a D/a D/a 8 n/a Dla Dla 9 t4e Cash at Closing 3,150,000.00 to TOTAL S 3,500,000.00 Nok: I f there is 811 inconsistency between the Purchase Price on the first pogo and this f 4, the amount in f .. slIaIl _I. e. Eaneot MOIlC)'. The Eames! Money set foI1h in this scctioa. in the form of..... ...-..... is part paymcnl of the Purc/uISe Price and shall be peyable to and held by s.-- ti H. ~ a_ (Eamesl Money Holder), in its trust account, on behalf of both Seller and Buy.... The Eamesl MOlle)' deposit slIaIl be lcrHIered with this contract unless the parties mutually agree and set foI1h I difforeal deadline in writing for its paymenL The parties authorize delivery of the Earnest MOIley deposit 10 the closing company, if any, at or before CIosiDg. In the evcul Eamesl Money Holder has IgROO 10 have interest on earnest money dqlosits tnmsf........ to a IiIod -'>lisbed fur the purpose of providing Iffonlable housing to Colondo residents, Seller and Buyu aclmow\edge and agree thol any int..-est accruing on the Earnest Money deposited with the Earnest Money Holder in this lI'IInSaGtion shall be tnmsfemd to such fund. b. N_ Lee.. [Omilted - NoI Applicable) c. Aaa_ptioa. (OmiIted - Not Applicable] II. Seller... Private F1uaem. [0miIted - Not Applicable) eo Call al Clos", All amounts paid by Buyer at Closing including Cash at CIosiD& plus Buyer's closing costs, shall be in funds whi<:h comply with III applicable Colorado laws, which include cash, electroniclransf... funds, ccrtiflCld cbcck, saving:s and I.... tcIler's chcd; and cashier's chcd; (Good Funds). S. FINANCING CONDITIONS AND OBLIGATIONS. e. Loea AppIbtioa. [0miIted - Not Applicable) b. Lee. C__lbae.l. [Omilted - Not Applicable} c. C......I.fonaatloa. (Omitted. Not Applicable) d. EmtIat: Lee. Rn1ew. [Omitted - NoI Applicable) 6. APPRAISAL PROVISIONS. e. AppnillalC....itiooo. 181 (1) No Approillal CoIldilio.. This subsectioo a. slIaIl nol apply. []\ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~)\IOOl\ \ It. ~~ ~~\~\Mt.~~='P*Wl>lo\w. 'lM\M..w. \a*\~ (ft~)wn.~~~~~u~S 'QWits..\\~~..U~~'o'r ~~~ ~\kIIM"'~~ ~~'U~~\W6 \W.~ ~.WiItM~~w.nIJMf\~i'ak\a \ 1l~\&\.'OW<!l'6W.~~ hlIW~taM...'4il-l.ll!lt.ilIM~~tie~~I~~\ \\\\\ \\\ \\\\\~\~\~,. 'Ukll hk~lIJc\~"1&!P~\M~\Mk~' J.t..\oIl~\MiIlk~"~'u.~~~""",,~ vWIliM.\lM~~\&'<irlt'\ld'lA\\~"""tie~w.~....'f't\' ""-Io\~w.Il~ OM~\M~lWlI~w.t.MMo'ol~\W\M~~'I.lfIlh&~~mw." u_~lilKIolJI~ ~~~~~ftW~~~'*ll~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ []\ \ \ \ \ \~ \tll\ \ 'It. ~ -u. \\ ',luY\1Oo\~ ~~ \iloWa\i'ak~ ~~~\ It\lo\ ~~ o~~ ~\lIIIl!r~~w.m~\~&\W'oIt.IIW\w.~~~~"~~~ .M15~~~~~~~lb'e~lIWtWoll\Wcli6,"'~~"'\~W.llM~ 1M. ~ YaIIIIo\lllW, ~~'tlI'tlt\lIJc\ ~ll\ldill1liWiM. \~~ ~~ "NW\t>>'P'Wi~ all&~\h~ \~~~\WM 'Gll 'QlIr,~lklih/lldl\m \:WIMolI\WldllMll\~ '>> ~ ~ ,*,,*~le\ WW ~~~~~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 13\ \ \ \ \ \ \~) \M6M ~'UkII'tta\h w.!MlAo~-w.'slolI\c\Wolt'Utw..~'6"\cWlo\oW.If'Gll~ ~'el<Wilk ~~h/I &l~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' 1\all~~~~~'\Idg~le\W6!h\ ~mlIMlll\'UlI~~~"I~~VAlIloIl nloliM 'li'olI\ ~""~'6'~ WlMiM -u.l&lI'tldA W.l'Id.!IlH ~\~'W-W.~\A."I }Il'~ PftEPMED BY: MIlIvo GubHr~...... ...nit..... CBS '-7..... ~Io Iluyond SeI_ ~(_, ~ ReoI e_Commialcn _"'-nI_._, _ .,.. _RogiIIanldIo: JonoWMoy,C___"->_....., Buyeoio) _ _JoI. ~o)_ 107 108 109 110 III 112 113 114 115 116 117 J 18 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 \31 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 ]48 149 150 151 ]52 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 ]61 162 163 164 165 166 ~Xl'i~)~~'Wo\~'c\i\II\11r1de\o'Wo\i\ll.'f~~\ "'9JMaWll\~'e\n\~~~~ ~~~~~k~~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ ~ \ .r~wnWll~ \ \~.J'd~~6o\ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'dIW. 'lIJ'Gls\ll&1dlIk:l. 'slIM '*'liIdolt')IW\~ Ci\~ ~~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 7. EVIDENCl:OFTITLE. .. EvlduccorTide. On or before Title Deadllec U2c),SeUershollcausctobefurnishedtoBuyer,otScller'sexpense, a cum:nt coIIllDilm..tJor owners title insurance policy (rille ~) in ID amount oquaI to the Pun:base Pri<1e. \dr\i'f 'lftj~ "" ~"M. \ \.lI~ ~~ 'dI'tltte\M6WW~'dAW. At Seller's expense, Seller shall cause the title insuranc:e policy to be issued and delivcnd to Buyer as soon as pncticable at or afbs Closing. J'n'litle iosurancc: commitment ~ It\ 181 SIIoD 0 SIlo. Not oommit to delete or insure over the standard exceptions which relate to: (I) parties in possession. (Z) IJJII1:COI'ded easements, (3) survey matterll, (4) lIlY IJJII1:COI'ded mechanic's liens, (5) lP'P period (effective dale of commitmenl to dale deed is recorded), and (6) IIIIpOid taxes, assessments and UIII'fJdeemed ax sales prior to the y.... of Closing. Any additional premium expense to obtain this additional coverage shall be peid by Seller. b. Copios on:ucptloas. On or before Tille Deadu.e (f 2c), Seller, ot SeUen expense, shall furnish to Buyer and ../a ,(I) a copy oflllY p1als, declarations, covClWlts, conditions and restrictions llurdMing the Property, and (2) if. title iosurancc: oommnn-t is required to be lUmished. and if this box is checked 181 Copies "h.y 0tIIer Doco...... (or, if illegible, ......_ies of such documents) listed in the schedule of exceptions (Exceptions). Eveo if !be box is not clIecI<..... Seller shall bav. the obIipIioo to lUmisb lhese docwnents pursuant to this subseclion if requested by Buyer lIlY time on or before 0...-. ......l1rr~- (f 2c). This requimnent shall pertain only to documents as shown of record in the offk:es of the clerlt and recorder. The abslnct or titleiosurancc: commitment, togdher with lIlY copies or summaries of such documents furnished pursuant to this section, constitute th. title documents (rille Docwuents). Co s.n-ey. On or befOl'll s.rrey DeadIlae (f 2c) 181 SeIer 0 a.yer sball causc Buyer and the issuer of the TrtIe ~MIb1o~uw."l\tio~ldt'tltlo\i'f'U~ to....,.;ve. c:um:nt OI-+.......s.rreyPlat 18I1....--tLoaltloaCertifialk 0 D/a {!ho~checlcedisknown..Survey).Anamountnotto""ceed$ 3.000.00 for Survey sbaIJ be paid by o Bayer 181 SeIer. If the cost exceeds !his amount, Buyer sholl pey the excess on or before CIosio& IIII1ess Buyer deliven to SeIJer before Survey is ordcrcd. Buyer's written notice allowing the exception for survey matterll. d. C_.'.terestC_...ity Goverailll Doco_.ts. 181 (I) Not Applicable. This subseetioo d. shall not apply. (]\\\\\\\IM~"~~~~\'lllI~~~'1<\~'fto~~~"~IIlt,..~'ilaWe ....,..-.\.\U~~~~\\t.W.WdlolIk~~~.\~~~=~\W1 ~"~~~~\'aio!.M1~~\aIlt.~""~'6. . W.li"tWD~ ~~~~~"'l~~:~~\J\\"Uo\~ lttWl\t..\Wrltt. ~~&';(u)'dIo~'UWt,\~~~'lIWI Wio~~)w.w~~~~ .~W~'l1l~~~\i ",W&~'dI'ltl&\A~"t..\0W6\~~~"''M'" b'ehMJ.J~"'Wlcl~~ \'lt~ 'OololeW."~I!)t U.L~t"'u u.l.1I~ \U ~\lMlldo\lI\lUt\WrIM\..... """'()6IIW-' ~\lt-lh" 'iIIIan.~m ~\I't"ge1M~~~"""~ 'tfo'.\ ~""IlI\$ldo ~ ~~'tM\Mi5\\t.~~~\ItlI~.......~~\&~.,..M."I.1'1<\ W.~ralI\ts vh5~~~~~~~~'lIll~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (]\\\\\\\~~"~~~~~...~~tt~&t.M~n.w.ws olol~loM ~,,"~~~'Ul~W~ ~Wt~~ u'ploII'tM~W"'o'MW~~~\60~WW6lc\...-~-.w.\t".L~~~\lIa ~"JJ\'lt~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ I. TITLE AND SURVEY REVIEW. L Title ReriN. Buyer shall have the right to inspect the Title Documents. Writtm noticle by Buyer oflllllllel'dlanlilily of title, form or conIeot of Title Commitment or of lIlY other unsatisfactory title condition shown by the TrtIe Ooc:umeots, nolWilbsIanding f 12, shall be signed by or on behalf of Buyer and given to Seller on or before Tide Objediollll'eI.1iH (f 2c), or within five (5) c:aIendlIr days aller n:ceipt by Buyer of any chanfll' to the Tille Documenls or ~ to the Title Commi_ togdher with a copy of the docwnenl adding lIlY new Exception to title. If Seller does not receive Buyer's nolicc by the dale specified above. Buyer acc:epts the condition oftitl. as disclosed by the TrtIe Documonts as satisfactory. b. Matlen .ot S1t0Wll1Iy tile Pablk Records. Seller shall deli_ to Buyer, on or before OIJ.a-ntMattenDeadUae (~ 20) true oopies of alii..... and surveys in Seiler's possession pertaining to the Property and sball di3cIooe to Buy... all easements, lim. (including. without limitation, govenunental improvements approv.... buI not yet insIaIlcd) or other title IDlIlIerlI (includin& without limitation, rights of Iinll refilsal, and options) not shown by the public records of which Seller bas actual knowledge. Buyer shall have the righllo inspect !be Property to determine if lIlY 1hitd party has lIlY righl in the Property PREPARED BY; -..,.0 CkIIleer GM*Iw. ....... -.. g T'r11 CBS1-7-44,~"8urondSoll__(P ". ...)"~_~c.._,' R_ASTe-.._._ ..'.-'R~to:"""Wroq.~_n.__LId. _a)_ "- hit -<a)_ 167 168 169 170 ]71 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 ISO ]81 182 183 184 ]85 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 ]99 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 not shown by the public records (such as an unrecorded easement, lWecorded lease. or boundaIy line discnlpancy). Written ootice of any IUlSIItiBfactOl)l cooditioo disclosed by Seller or revealed by such inspeclioo, notwilbsIanding 1 12, sball be sigood by or on bebalf of Buyer and given to Seller on or bef_ Off-RearcI Malton ~ DeadIae U 2c). If Seller does not receive Buyer's notice by said date, Buyer lICCepIs title subject to IlUch rights, if any, of lbinI parties of which Buyer bas 1CIu8\ knowledge. .. Sarvey Review. Buyer shall have the right to inspect Survey. If writtoo ootice by or 011 bebalf of Buyer of any IIIISlItisflM:tory cooditioD shown by Survey, ootwitbslllnding t 8b or t 12, is ReCived by SeIIcF on or before Soone,otJ ....... 0eIld1lH (I 2c) then IlUch objection shall be deemed an W1S8tisfactory title cooditioo. If Seller does 001 receive Buyer's notice by SoorveyObjecCloa ~Il""e (12c), Buyer accepts Survey IS Sltisfactory. d. S.....I Ta:dlol Diotri<c.. SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICTS MAY BE SUBJECT TO GENERAL OBLIGATION INDEBTEDNESS mAT IS PAID BY REVENUES PRODUCED FROM ANNUAL TAX LEVIES ON TIlE TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHJN SUCH DISTRICTS. PROPERTY OWNERS IN SUCH DISTRICTS MAY BE PLACED AT RISK FOR INCREASED MILL LEVIES AND EXCESSIVE TAX BURDENS TO SUPPORT THE SERVICING OF SUCH DEBT WHERE COlCUMSTANCES ARISE RESULTING IN TIlE INABILITY OF SUCH A DISTRICT TO DISCHARGE SUCH INDl!aSlldlNESS WITHOUT SUCH AN INCREASE IN MILL LEVIES. BUYER SHOULD INVESTIGATE TIlE DEBT FINANCING REQUIREMENTS OF THE AlITHORIZED GENERAL OBLIGATION INDEBTEDNESS OF SUCH DISTRICTS, EXISfING MILL LEVIES OF SUCH DISTRICT SERVICING SUCH INDEBTEDNESS, AND THE POTENTIAL FOR AN INCREASE IN SUCH MILL LEVIES. In the event the Property is located within a special taxing dislrict and Buyer desires to tenniJse Ibis CODIr8ct as a RSUIt, ifwrilleD notice is received by Seller on or before Oft'.Reeord MaUus Ob~ DooMIIiae (I 2<:), Ibis CODIr8ct shaD then tenninate. If Seller does not receive Buyer's notice by such date, Buyer accepts the effect of tho Property's inclusion in such special taxing district and waives tho right to tenniJse. .. Kipt 10 Objed, Can. Buyer's right to object shall include, but DOl be Iimiled to those _ lisled in 1 \2. If Seller receives oolice of unmen:baotability of title or any other uosatisflM:tory title condition or ~ tams as provided in subsections 8 .. b, C and d above, Seller shaD use reasonable effor1s to correct said ilaoa ond bear any ocmiDal ~ to correct the Il8IIIC prior to Closing. If such uosatisfilctory titl. coodilioo is not corrected to Buyer's Il8Iisfaction oa or before Closing, Ibis CODIr8ct shall then tenninate; provided, however, Buyer may, by wrilIeD noIic:e received by Seller oa or before Closing. waive objection to such ilaoa. \\\"\=~l.\llI'~'a'dgb\~IJiWl~~~)~lQtItO~'tl*'1:WlMoll.\ s.ll"~ loWdIW.~~~lIIe\tWdIA WMlWlaal\H ~1~loikM lk.~"''dJIHI''Vf'tW. n,\iWIt. =w.w.\Il~t.\tpl.WA"~E~~~'UIWI~\ft'lM1ikht- cWiMt.llWiI1a\M1vWI ... w..~~'d ~~w..iWI~.......'Nat...~~ ~~~'Gklt) " ~tv.~,<<\ ~~IW.IlilJIlt.IIf,JiWl't\Wt.w.WdIIl\~~w. occumd on or bel_ tho Ript.r FInt Rehsal Deadliae (I 2c), Ibis CODIr8ct shaD terminate. &- TIlle AdvIsory. The Titl. DocumenIs affect tho title, ownenbip and use of tho Property and sbou1d be reviewed carefully. Additioaally, oIher IIlIIllers not reflected in the Title o.x:.m-ts may affect tho title, owncnhip and IIllC of tho Property, including widJout limitation boundaIy lines ODd ~ ...... zoning, ....~dod _ .-... and claims of eucments, leases and oIher unrecorded agreemClllS, and various laws and govemmenlal ~ c:onccming land use, developmeot and euviromnentaIlDIIllers. Th..rrxe _Ie _,. be _.... ocpanlel)' tn. IIIc ~ .Iaati _te, aad tralllfer of IIIc ..rtace ....te ~ aot _riIy 18.,... traasl'er of ttoo .u.cnl ....... nird partIa ..y IloId 18enaw 18 oR, pi, otloer .......... ......... ucl'IY or .._ .. or aader die ... .pI"". ...... ..- -y po ..... rlPla 10 ....r .... _1IIe Prvpert)'. Such _ may be excluded from the title insurance policy. Buyer is advised to timely consult legal counsel with respect to all such _ IS thcR _ strict time limits providrxl in this conIracI (e.g.. Tille <<*j_-'I.... Dadlille [t 2c] ODd Olf-Recerd Matten Objectioa DudliM: [t 2cD. 9. LEAD-BASED PAINT. Uoless""""'Jll, if tho improvements on tho Property include one or more raidcnliaI dwellings for which a building permit was ilsued prior to January I. 1978.. Ibis conIracI shall be void unIcas a complded !.e>>,l'--' Paint Disclosure (saJes) fonn is sigood by Seller and lbe required md estale licensees, which III\lIlI occur prior to tho porties siping Ibis CODIr8ct. 10. PROPERTY DlSCLOSURE,INSPECfION AND INSURABILITY; BUYER DISCLOSURE. On or before SeIeI". Propert)' Dioe....... 0eIld1iloe (12c), Seller agrees to provide Buyer with a SelIer's Property Disclosure funn CXIIIIpIeIed b)' Seller to the besl of Seller'. c;um:n11Clual knowledge. .. f....p IiH Objuliolt 0eIldu.e. Buyer shall have the right to bave ;'OSj.diooa of the physiaoI condition of the Property and Inclusions, at Buy..... expense. If tho physical condition of tho Property or Inclusions is ,_..;.~ in Buyer" subjective disaetioo, Buyer shall, on Dr before la......_ Objedloa DooMIIIae (t 2c): (I) oolity Seller in writing thal this COIJtract is tenninalcd, or (1) provide Seller with a written description of any IID5lIIislilctory pbysical cooditioo which Buyer requires Seller to correct (Notice to Correct). Ifwritteo notice... 001 received by Seller on or before la'~ I ,...... ObjediH 0eIld1ille (I 2c), thopbyBical cooditioD oflhe Property and Inclusions shall be deemed to be satisflM:tory to Buyts. b. R__lioIt DooMIiIIoe. lfa Notice to Correct is received by Seller and if Buyer and Seller baveool qrad in writing to a PAEPAIlED8Y:-..__._........ .. CBS 1.7-04, ece.:tbBuynWRe.fEll*(P.......... oIiII). CoIorwi:) RMI EstaIeCv...'. , I _ASTe-._._ &,'e,__~ _ adlD:.....W.....~_11lo__.W 8uyo<(.) - Pop' all -..)- 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 settlement thereof on or before Raolatioa Deadliae (~ 2c). this contract shall terminate one calendar day following the ~. 0ClIcIu.e (f 2c), unless before such termination Seller """"v.. Buyer's written withdrawal of the Notice to Correct. Co 1.....bilIty. This contract is conditioned upon Buyer's satisfilctiOl1, in Buyer's subjective diBcretiOl1, with the availability, Icrms, conditions and premium for Jlf\lI'OI1Y insunDce. This _ shlIIIlerIIIiDIIe upon Sella's nceipI, 011 or before 1'rop<r1y I......... ObjoctiDa Dadu.e (f 20) of Buy.... written nolic:c that such .......... was _ lIlIIisfattOly to Buyer. If said notice is not timely received, Buyer shall have waived any right to terminate WICIer this provision. d. Da.... Llns .IICI 1.....Ity. Buyer is responsible for JlIIYIlICIIl for .11 ;~ SIIn'C)'S, engineering reports or for any oIhcr worl< performed at Buyer's request and shall pay for any cIamaqje which 0CCUJ'lI to thc Prcpaty and IncJusiolls IS . resuJt of such activities. Buya- shall not permit claims or Ii.... of any kind apiast 1be Prcpaty for .'sp<a"'D, surveys, ensm-;ng reports and for any other worl< performed on the Property at 1Iuye<'. noquesl BIJY'l< ..,...,. to indemnifY, protect and hold Seller hannless from and ogainst any liability, damage, <:os! or cxpa1SC iDcumld by Seller in connection with any such inspectiOl1, claim, or lim. This indemnity includes Seller'. ript to JllOOV,," all costs and ...,--- iDcumld by ScIIe:r to enforce this subsection, including SeDer'. reasooable attorney and legal f..... The provisions of this subscctioa shlIII survive 1be tamination of this __ Co Bayer DiIIdeo.rc. Buyer represents that Buyer 0 Does 18I DoesNot need to sell and close a P'~ to complete this (none....;".,. Note: Any property saIe contingency should appear in AddltlauIProv_ (f 24). f. M....'. ...... If the JlR'llCDCC of a Rlgislered .... offender is . _ of conccm to Buyer, Buyer UIIlIersbaIds thai Buyer must caalllclloca1law oof_ officiala rcganIing ob4aiaing such information. t I. CLOSING. Delivery of deed from Seller to Buyer shall be at closing (Closing). Closing shlIII be 011 the date specified as CIaeIac Date (f 2c) or by mutual aercement at an earlier date. The hour and place of Closing shall be .. desilnaled by ,.....'''''-'1 __IF.. ~ ~ .....1r...... Ltd.. . 12. TRANSFER 01' TITLE. Subject to tender or pIl)'IIlCIll at Closing as required herein and .,.,...,.;......, by Buyer with the other Icrms and provisions hereof, Seller shall execute and deliver a good and sufficionl __1 .arr...br deed to Buyer, at Closing. conveying the Property tn:e and clear of aU taxes except tho general taxes for tho y_ of Closing. Except as provided herein, title shall be conveyed tn:e and clear of a111iem, including any tpnCll1lJllClllalIiem lOr special improvaueats installed .. of the date of Buyer's sipalurc bereoo, wbclber "SOl/sed or not. Title shlIII be conveyed subject to: L those specific ExcopIioos described by reference to recorded documents .. ret1ectcd in tho TJtIc [)nro- sccepIod by Buyer in acconIancc with f Sa (Title Review). ... dislributiOll utility ....-.. (including cable 1V), .. those specificaDy described rights of third parties not shown by tJu: public records of wbicb Buyer has actual koowledge and which ~ ..,.,."...n by Buyer in accordance with t 8b (MatWs not Shown by tho Public Records) """ f Ie (Survey Revn). d. incluaion of the Properly within any special taxing district. Co the benefits and bunIms of any declaration and party wall agreernenIs, if any, and r. other Dl. 13. PAYMENT 01' ENCUMBRANCES. Any encumbrance required to be paid shall be paid at or befon: Closing from the proceeds of this _ion or from any other soun:c. 14. CLOSING COSTS, DOCUMENTS AND SERVICES. Buyer and Seller sball pay, in Good Funds, their respective Closing costs and aU other itans roquinKIlo be paid at CIOlIing. except IS otherwise provided bereio. Buyer and Seller shall lli8n and comp..... all C'...~ or reasooably required documents at or before Closing, F.... for rcaI estate Closing lIllrVices shall be paid at Clooing by 18I o..-.If by Bayer.... o..-llalf by SeIIcr 0 Bayer 0 Se'" 0 OtMr Dla "'~'Illok\lalolddlt. ~ 'dM\ ~ "~,, ...\~MiM" ~ ..'.Lu....~I. H" .~~ ~w..u. lJ\o''''\h)\ O....,~Io"'OlliWlM'Wt\~'WlilNoll'6\M't/IIlsisM-~~'k\~'Il.~~W.~'*H....,~~ A.ssociation Transfer Fee) shall be paid by 0 Bayer 0 Se.... The local transfer lax of 1. 5 % of the Pun:hasc Price shall be paid at Closing by 0 0..uIr by Bayer .... o-Ilalf by Se'" 18I Bayer 0 Seller 0 0tHr Dl. Any saJes and UIIe lax lhat may accrue because of this transaction shall be paid '"""" cIlJe by 18I Bayer 0 SeIer. 15. PRORATIONS. The following shall be proraIed to CIooiIl&Date (f 2c), except.. otherwise provided: L Taxa. Pcnonal property lax.., ifony, and..Bl"'Cf&l rcaI_taxc:s for they.... of Closing, based on l8IJuafortlle CaIellClar Vear I.....lately Pr.. <<.. CIosIIsI U M.... a-t Mill I-r .... Moot a-t ,10.- ,.t 0 0tIler a/. b. Rea... Rents based on 18I Reals A_By a-Ived 0 Ace........ Security deposits held by Sc\Ier shall be cnditcd to Buyer. Seller shall assisn all ...... to Buyer and Buyer shaIIlSSUIIIC such I....... .\ ''c).'\~''\~''''.u.... ~,l'Wow.t./lelg\Ilo\-~~WWMilIWI"""~\~1D\II ~) t.. ~)lWlt.IIlo~~'Q,~IIlo5Wr\M\,(tIlSkJg\'OWl~'dll~~~'llWMtuWl <....~'tW\~1.)'tIoll~...~WW1t.~~~'O\SMS~~w.~ ~~'dM\'<lcWIlo\iWi~~~~~1.)...~~,~~toWdIl'ia.lt'ftM'tWl it\sWIlo:lNIo\lIlW.lIl.t.\Mlt~'~~M.w.~'tio~\llll~\lNolt~~~~...t.. .~W I'll ~MIS) BY: -.0 .....-o.nIMr........ ~.V[..... CBS 1-1~. Corhcl.....snd w__ _AlloI), ~ __C<lmmluion _AST.-. Cl2OIl6. _ 6.16. -. RogioIeoodl<> .....W..... ~ _The~ _, lJd. Buyer(.) - ...."'. SIlIor('I_ 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 pla.~ ~ '<lteWIo1\Dllte\~l~\ilYJll~"~Wo*lIi\iWl'shM~l8e'clllIlgWilM\"l\ \ \ \ ~ \ \ \ \SWIiI\ \ \~'.WIH-'ft ~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ !*'\lI.U.\\\\\ \ \\\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\'*MWl~W\:\\oll\~~"~)ol' .... 'oUl/lL\WIliM\lWo~ ~~~~.t.....~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\,\\\\\\\\\,\\\ ~\~~~~~~~~\\~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\""\\\\\\"""'\"'\"'\'\'\~~~~"'\'\""\'\'\\\ s-.w.lliU~II1"'" ~\l~Vl6~~~~~~\\ .w.\.1o\loll'tO\IW*'tO ~WU~'2\)'~~"" '1:"u~~\\\\\\\\\ ""'\ . ~~'\lIln\c\l\bo'l~w.'.w'-\d,WM.~~~ \~\ ~\~~ ~ XJ~)~~~~"~~'~~~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ~,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\,\\\\,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\,\, Co 0dIer............ Water and sewer chuges; inIen:sI on any continuing loon, lIIIlI nI. t FiIIII Setd I. ..l Unless oIberwise ogrocd in writing, tbcsc pronIions sbaI1 be final. .6. POSSESSION. PoosoosionofthePropertyshallbedeliveredtoBuyeron r,. J' .Dooceand Pm IJ.T'-e (l2c), subject to \he foil_inS ~ or tenancies: - If Seller, after Closins, fails to deliver possession as specified, Seller shall be subject 10 evktion Il'Id nil be IIdditiona1ly IUlbleto \Ju)'!! for Ja~ of$ 25.00 per day from \he P ..... Dooce (f 2c) until ~ is delivered. Buyer 0 Doa I1lI Doa Not rqnseullbal Buyer will occ:upy the Property as Buy.... priJlcip8l raidence. 17. NOT ASSIGNABLE. This COD\I1lCI shall not be assiplble by Buyer wiIbouI Seller's prior wrilIan COIISCIII. Except as so restricted, this conlracl shall inure 10 the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, personal ~ ... 1YlI and IS1lip of the parties. II. INSURANCE; CONDmON OF, DAMAGE TO PRon:RTY AND INCLUSIONS. Except as oIberwise provided in 1IIis conlnICl, the ProperIy,Inclusions or boIb shall be delivered in \he condition existios as of the dale oflbis conlnICl, onlinAy wear and \ear excepted. L c.ully l.......ce. In the event the Property or Inclusions shall be damaged by fire or oIh<< casually prior 10 Closing, in .. II1IOlIIII of not more than .... percent of the total Purchue Price, Seller shalt be MIll!"-' lO .... 1be same before \he CIeoIoIco... (f 2c). In the event sudI cI.Image is _ ropoired within slIid lime or if1be ..... l' exooed sudllIlIIII, Ibis COD\I1lCI may be taminaIed lithe option of Buyer by delivering 10 Seller wrilIan notice of \cnItinaIion. Should Buyer elect 10 corry OUI this COD\I1lCI despite such dlnnaae. Buy... shaD be enOOed 10 . credit. II C1ooma. for all \he insurance pl...-ds resuItin& from such damase \0 the Property Il'Id Inclusions payable 10 Seller but _ the owncn' association, if any, plus the amount of any deductible provided for in sudI insurance policy, such credit not to exooed \he total Pun:Itue Price. ... ""_,., IIIdluIou..d s....1c:d. Should any Inclusion or service (inclulling ~ and ,...."- of \he Property, e.g. healing, plumbing, etc.) fail or be danla8ed betw....\be dale of Ibis coo\taCI and Closing or per -.ioo, wbic:bcver sbaI1 be eer\lor, then Seller shall be liable for the rq>Ilir or rq>Iacemc:nI of sudlInclusion or service with . .... of similar size, age and quality. or an equivalenl credit, but only 10 \he _ that \he ""'int........... or repl,.-t of such Inclusion, service or IixIure is not \be responsibility of the owner.;' llIlSOCiI!ion, if any, less any insurance ....-..10 received by Buyer covering such repeir or replacanenl Seller 8JId Buyer ore aware of the exisImce of JR-OWDed home warranty flI'OIlIams \bat may be purc:hased Il'Id may cover the rq>Ilir or rep'-nall of some Inclusions. Co w..- 1'1........... VerlfteatiOll ofC.....1tloL Buyer, upon reasonable notico, sbaII have the ri&hl1o walk \brousb \he Property prior 10 Closing 10 verify that \he pltysical condition of 1be Property and Inclusions complies with Ibis conlr8Ct. 1'. RECOMMENDATION OF LEGAL AND TAX COUNSEL By siping this .........-ot, Buy..- and Seller .amowledF that \he rapective broker has advised that this documaII has ~ lepI """""'i.....ccs and has ......-....ded \he "'_""'"00 oflille and """a."";"" with IegaJ and tax or other couoseI bef_ signing Ibis conlr8Ct. 10. TIME OF ESSENCE, DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. Time is of the essence hereof. If any -.. or chcc:k n:ceived as Earnest MOMy hereunder or my other paymenl due hereuoder is not paid, honored or U!IIdemI when due. or if any oIhor obliplion hereunder is not performed or waived as herein provided, tbore sbaI1 be \he following remedies: L U a.yer II ill De....1I: ~ (1) Speellk ___ Seller may elect \0 trealthis COD\I1lCI as c=-nceIed, in which case all payments 8JId tbinsa of value received hereunder shall be forfeited Il'Id n:tained on bebaIf of Seller, and Seller may roco_ such cIamap as may be poper, or Seller may elect \0 trealrbis conIract as being in full foroe and effect and Seller sbaIJ have the Jiabt \0 specific fjfo.ma.lCC or """'"r. or boIb. (1) .....lda.... 0."&15- All payments and 1IImgs of value n:celved hereunder shall be forfeited by Buyer and n:tained on behalf of Seller and boIb parties shall thereafter be released from all oldqp..m. hereunder. II is ogrocd that such payments lIIIlIlhinss of mue are LIQUIDATED DAMAGES and (cxcepl as provided in subsection c) .... SELLER'S SOLE AND ONLY REMEDY for Buya's failure 10 parfonn \he obliptions of this COD\I1lCI. SeIIor expressJy waives \he tanedies of specific perf.........x and additional damages. ... If Sdor II ioo DefI.Il: Buy... may elect \0 \reII this COD\I1lCI as canceled, in which ..... all ...,"""lIs and things of value received berewtder shall be retwned and Buyer may recover such """'W" as may be poper, or Buyer may elect 10 treallbis conIrlIcI as beina in full foroe and effect and Buyer sbalI bave \be riabI to specific performance or datnages, or boIb. PREPARED BY: -........ GlInIMr....... --- I 1 C8S \.7-<l4, ~ to e.y...... Roo! __. C<Podo RooI.- Con-mooicn _ASTe-.,_ _ .,1.. _RegioIIndto: JonoWIIoy. ~_Tho__ LId. BuyoI(o} _ ...... en _o}_ 348 .. C_ ...s EIpe...... In the event of any arbitnUion or litigation relating to this contract. the arl>itIalor or court shall 349 award to 1I1e prevailing party aI. reasonable coslS and """"""",, including attorney and Iega1 fees. 350 %1. MEDIATION. If. dispute arises relating 10 this conlract, prior to or after closing, and is DOl resolved, the parties shall 351 first proceed in good faith to submit the _to medioti"". MMUdu.n ia. process in which the J*1ies meet witb an imp8rliaI 352 person who beIps to noooIve the dispute informally and confideotially. Mediators canDOl impose bindio& cIec:isions. The parties 353 to the dispute must agree before any settlement is binding. The parties win jointly appoint an acceptable mediator and will share 354 equally in 1I1e cosI of such modialion. The mediation, unless od1erwise "llI'O"'I. shaJJ terminate in the eveat the entire dispute 355 is not resolved witbin 30 <:aIa>dar days of the daIc written notice requesting mediation ia sail by <<me party to the other III the 356 pmty's last ImowD address. This section shaJJ DOl alter any dale in this COIItJ.a, ...Joss otberwiae asr-l 357 n. EARNEST MONEY DISPUT'E.. In the event of any QOI1trovony rcpnIing the IlarMS Money and dtinp of value 358 (ootWq,."...,m,8 any termination of this cootracl or mullllll wrilleD inalruclions), Earnest Money Holder shaJJ not be required 359 to lake any dOlI. Earnest Money Holder may await any JIR'C""""'s. ... at iIJ opioa and sole discretica. iolerpIead all parties 360 and deposit any money or 1I1ing:1 of value into a court of ccmpelaII jurisdicti"" and shall recover court cools and mISOIIIl>le 361 IIIIomey and legal r-. 362 %3. TERMINATION. In 1I1e event this contrael is terminated, all payments and 1I1ing:1 of value received hereuDcIer shall be 363 returned and the parties shall be ....Ii.....! of.lI obligations bemmder, subject to if lOt!, 21 and 22. 364 U. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS. (The fullowing additional provisions have DOl hem IflIXVwd by the Colorado Rad Eotm 365 Commission.) 366 _ ...a.. ..&...- A at:.t:acbed hlazet:o 367 %5. ENTDlE AGREEMENT, MODIFICATION, SURVIVAL. This 8&l1lOIIlOlIt consIiIutes the ontirc contract between 368 the parties ",Iating to the subject hereof. and any prior ....."'AIleulS pertaining thereto, whctber on! or writIea, have hem maged 369 and intqp'ated into this contract. No subsequent modification of any of the ........ of this coIIIraCt shall be valid. binding upon 370 the parties. or enforceable unless made in writing and signed by 1I1e parties. Atry obligation in this coIIIraCt thai, by Us terms, 371 is intended 10 be performed after tenninaIion or Closing shall survive the same. 372 Z6. NOTICE, DELIVERY AND CHOICE OF LA. W. 373 L n,.... Delivery. Except for the notice requesting medialion desaibed in 1 21, and crxcept as provided in 1 26b 374 below, aI. notices must be in writing. Any notice 10 Buyer shall be effective when received by Buyer or by SelIiD& Brob:nt&e 375 Finn, and any notice 10 Seller shall be effective wben received by Seller or LislinaBrob:nt&e Firm. 376 b. EIedrHlc DeIorery. As an aJtemalive 10 physical delivery, any si&!!!d ~ and wrilIen notice may be delivered 377 in electronic: form by the following indicated methods only: IllI F....iIe IllI E-d 0 NBc. Doco_. with original 378 signaIIRs shaJJ be provided upon ""I"est of any party. 379 .. C_ .n..... This contracI and a\l dispules arisina bereuncIer ahan be governed by and CIlIII1I'ued in accordance 380 witb the laws of the SIIIIc of Cokndo that would be applicable to Cokndo rcsiclenla who sign a coIIIraCt in thia - for property 3. J Ioc:ated in CoIonodo. 382 17. NOfICEOF ACCEl'TANCE,COUNTEIU'ARTS. This proposal shall expire unless ~ in writiIJa, by Buyer and 383 SeI...., as evidolloed by their signatures below. and the offc:ring party receives notice of ~ pmsuant 10 1 16 011 or before 384 "-1*'" DeadIiH Date (I 2c) and Aeeep..... Deadliae T_ (12c). IhccClpled, 1I1is ~ shaJJ become. conlr8Cl 385 between Seller and Buyer. A oopy of this <Io<:w11"nf may be exocutcd by each party, .......Iy, and ,",-each party baa exocutcd 316 . oopy thereof, sucb copies taken togdber shall be deemed to be 8 fWI and c:omplelc contracI between the partie6. 387 388 IlO'fIIJl City cd &.paD, co'~",^ 130 soath Qal._, &apeD, co 81611 DAft 389 INon:: If... .ffer it ...... .....tcred or rejected, do .01... ... .....~I.L Rd'er _. 'ZI) 390 __8Y:......__.___ C8S147~.CorMd:to_lftds.lReMe....~).COknCbRellll&lllleeu....' . . RMlFAl1W~ Q2OO6. V8f1lian 6.18. Softw8reR _' ..cite: ....W..... Cc:*IMIIu...-n.Atpen BtobrI. Ud. ....... _1- JolCdaD V. ~ orr.a.l: ...Ubll_ Jun. 26. 2006 312 _I: .,...., __. CO 81611 /IIlLLJIIt Ilr: JolCdaD V. ~. h-Q.t:.e 39\ 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 40\ 402 403 404 405 406 407 401 409 4\0 411 4\2 413 414 415 416 417 4\8 4\9 420 421 Dll.ft 21. COUNTER; RI:JEC110N. This offer is 0 C........... 0 Rejedlld. I.itia"~ "party (Bayer or SeIIor) ...... aN......... or nj. ,I<<' offer I:ND OF rnNTRArJ' N.: ~ ......_...... aad Eanost Moacy Ileaipt......... slped.. or IIctlore TIlle Deadhe (I Zc). I BltOKEll ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. The lllldersigned BroI<a5 ~ receipt onlle ~ Monoy dqlo&iI specifiod in f 4 and, while not parties to lhe contract, agree to <:ooperate upon request with any """';"m c:onduoIed IIDlIer f 21. The Selling ~ is a 0 "'er's A&at 0 Tn_ Ill. JInIIIer in this ~. The Listing Broker is a IllI Sellcr's Aaut 0 T......dio...BroIIer in this tnlnsadion. BROKEll'SCOMPI:NSATlON DISCLOSURE. Selling ~ Firm.. ~ or """,missiOll is to be paid by 0 LiItiac ........... Fina o Bayer 0 Otkr D/. ITo be ~ by Usti!!g ~) Listing Brok-ee Firm's compenslIIim or commission is to be paid by: IllI SelIor D.,.cr 0 OtHr a/. Selling BroIcera8c Firm's Name: Co1~ BNabar '!'be .a.ap.a azobr., Ltd. 720 ...t _t _. __. co 81611 By: Signature IIarliJo Gub.-r ~J:' Dale ListingBrokerageFirm'sName: ,"_'''-11._'-_''' ~ ~ __'lr__.. Ltd. Dale: Dla tcarao 0abAar ~r Address: 720 ...t Dar&D:t .........u.. :a. Phone No.: ~70-~25-6750 __IIY:....__.__ casl.7-44.CanndlDl!ur..dS,,--(1l '1 oW).~_~eu........., _A$TIl___ 8...._~1D:.....WIlor.~____lId. ~.)- Papt..t ADDENDUM A Addendum to that Residential Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate dated . 2006 (the "Contract"), between City of Aspen ("Buyer"), and Jordan V. GerbergTrust Established JlUle 26, 2006 ("Seller"), for 312 West Hyman Avenue located in Pitkin County, Colorado (the "Property"). This addendum has not been approved by Colorado Real Estate Commission. I. ADDENDUM TO CONTROL. To the extent the provisions contained in the Addendum conflict with provisions contained in the Contract to which the Addendum is attached, the provisions of this Addendum shall control and govern. 2. IRC SECTION 1445. Seller warrants that Seller is not subject to withholding as defmed under Internal Revenue Code Section 1445 and will execute an affidavit prior to closing to this effect. In the event that Seller fails to deliver the affidavit at closing or that Seller delivers such affidavit but Buyer has actual knowledge that such affidavit is false, or receives notice that the affidavit is false from any agent of Seller. Buyer shall be entitled to withhold from the purchase price a sum equal to ten percent (10%) of the total amount which othefwise should have been ......ized by Seller from such sale, which sum will be paid by Buyer to the United States Treaswy pursuant to the requimnents of Section 1445 of the 1ntemaI Revenue Code and the regulations promulgated thereunder. 3. COLORADO STATE INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING. Seller has been advised that under Colorado law (C.R.S. Section 39-22.604.5), in the case of any conveyance of a Colorado real property interest the person or party providing closing and seUlement services may be required to withhold Colorado state income ,tax equal to 2% of the sale price (or the net proceeds resulting from such conveyance, if less) when the transferor is a non-resident of the SIak of Colorado. Seller shall be obligated to either comply with the withholding requirements of C.R.S. Section 39-22-604.5, or provide an affidavit in fonn and content satisfactory to the person or party providing closing and seUlement services which certifies that the Seller is not subject to the withholding requirements. 4. MISCELLANEOUS: a. Time Periods. If any time period referred to in this Contract shall end on a Saturday, SWKIay or legal holiday, such time period shall auiomltically be extended to 5:00 p.m., M.T. on the first regular business day thereafter. b. Further Assurances. Each of the parties agrees to execute, acknowledge and deliver, or cause to be executed, acknowledged and delivered, such further instruments and documents and to do all things and acts as the other party may reasonably require in order to carty out the intentions of this Contract and the transactions contemplated hereby. c. Entire Arzreement. This Contract contains the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior understandings, negotiations and represlllltations writIen or oral, not contained herein. It may not be amended or modified except by an agreement in writing signed by both parties hereto. d. Inteq>retation. No provision of this Contract shall be construed against or interpreted to the disadvantage of any party by reason of such party having, or being deemed to have requested. drafted, required or slnJctored such provision. Page 1 ofS 5. DUE DILIGENCE. The following is a condition to the closing of this Conlract whicb may be waived by Buyer alone. Buyer shall have until 5:00 p.m., M.T., on the Inspection Objection Deadline (the "Due Diligence Period"), within whicb to obtain satisfaction as to any matter concerning the Property, including, but not limited to, the Plans and SpeciflC8tioos, all of the documentation for the homeowners association of wbich the Property will be a part, and the physical inspection thereof and Buyer's intended use thereof. To this end, (a) Seller will cooperate with Buyer in supplying, upon request, any documentation or infonnation Seller can supply at 00 additional cost or expense to Seller; and (b) Buyer, or Buyer's designees, shaIJ be permitted access to the Property, at all reasonable times to conduct such examinations and make such tests as Buyer shall deem appropriate; provided that (i) following aoy such tests or examinations, the Property and all facilities thereon shall be restored to its or their condition as they existed immediately prior to the perfonnance of any such tests of examinations; (ii) Buyer shall indemniry and hold Seller absolutely blameless and harmless from and against any and all loss, injwy, damage to person or property, claim, demand, liability or obIigatioo of whatsoever nature resulting from, occasioned by or arising in coonectioo with the perfonnaoce of any sucb tests or examinations; and (iii) all such examinations or tests shall be 11 Buyer's sole cost and expense, sball be undertaken solely at the behest of Buyer as a contract vendee, and not at the behest of Seller as the owner of the Property and shall not give rise to aoy lien against the Property. If within the Due Diligence Period, Buyer infonns Seller in writing that Buyer no longer wishes to ~ to close this Contract for any noason or for 110 IIllISOIl at all, from then and thereafter, this Contract shall be immediately lern1inated, the parties shall be relieved of any further duties of perfonoance hereunder, and Buyer's earnest -r deposit, together with interest earned thereon, shall be promptly returned to Buyer. If Buyer fails to give any sucb notice, tIdt this condition to closing shall be deemed fully satisfied. 6. SELLER'S WARRANTIES AND REPRESENTATIONS. Seller "'I" sents and warnnts as follows that: a. No H.-nJous Materials. Seller has not p1aced any hazardous materials on the Property and to the best of the Seller's current actua1 knowledge, without any duty of inquiry, the Property has never been used to generate, manufacture, refine, transport, Ileal, store, handle, dispose, transfer, produce, process, or in any __ deal with, baardous materials. For purposes of this Contract, the term "hazardous materials" shall meIlD any gasoline, petrolewn products, explosives, nKlioactive IIIIIerials, hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, hazardous or toxic substances, polychlorinatM biphenyls or related or similar materials, asbestos or any material contaiDiDg ubestos, or any OCher subslP"<X' or material as may be defined as a hazardous or toxic substance by any enviromoentallaw, ordinance, rule or regulatioo of any govCl'DlllCll1la\ authority, including, without Iimitatioo, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (42 V.S.C. Sectioos, 960 I, III m.), the HaDrdoua Materials Tr8DSpOI'tation Act, as amended (49 V.S.C. Sections 1801, ~Bll.), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. Sectioos 1251, !li Bll.) the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Sections 7401, !It ~.), C.R.S. 1973 Section 25-]7-101, g~., as amended and C.R.S. Section 25-15-101, !lt~. b. No H._rcJ Areas. No portion of the Property is located within any flood plain, mud slide, flood hazard, or fiwh area, as designated on any map prepared or issued for such Page 2 of5 purpose by any governmental authorities. c. No Patent or Latent Defects. Seller has no knowledge of any patent or latent defects, soil deficiencies or subsurface anomalies existing on the Property. If Seller has coastrucIIld any improvements on the Property. If Seller has constructed any improvements on the Property, Seller shaD provide Buyer a copy of the soils report aDd repnlSCIIts that any recommendations of the soils engineer regarding locations or conslruction of the fowulation and/or retaining walls have been folJowed. d. No Mechanic or Materialman Liens. No work or Jabor has been I"'.r....med DOl' materials furnished in connection with any improvements to the Property widaiD six IIlOllths of the date hereof or if any such work or labor has been performed or materials lVmisbed, all costs aDd charges for the same have been fully paid aud ~ exisls no .......-;".s or materialmen's liens with respect thereto or the right to claim such mechanic's or materialmen's liens. There shall be no mechanic's or lDId.erial.-l's liens in exislence, or the right to file SllCh liens, at Closing, and Sellers shall deliver to the title insurance company issuing the Title Insurance Commim-t an affidavit, or such oIbcr documcIIts as required by the Title Company, executed by Sellers certifying lIpinst work done or materials furnished to the PI operty which might be grounds for a mechanic's or materialmen's lien under or punuaot to the laws of the Stale of Colorado in form sufficicot to enable the Title Company affirmatively to insure Buyers apiDst 811)' such liens aDd any aDd all odlcr affidavits which the Title Company might reasoNlI>1y require in onIer to insure titlc to Buyers with the deletion of StandanI Printed Exllcptions I through 5, at no cost to Buyers. e. Public Assessments. Any assessments billed either prior to closing or widaiD one hundred aDd twenty (120) days tbcmlfteo- for municipal or governmental improvements constructed or installed prior to closing will be the obligation of the Seller. f. TSD Fees. All utility tap fees have been paid for the Property, aDd that gas, water, sewer, eleclrical, cable television and telcpbooc services will be available to the Property at closing. Buyer shall have no obligation for the payment of any tap fees aDd shall be entitled to reimbunement by Seller for any tap fee oot paid prior to CIosiag. g. Buildillll and Fire Codes. All conslruction OIl the Property has been, IDd will be, performed aDd complcted pursuaDl to a valid building permit and in accordaocc with all applicable building and fire codes. h. No Code Violations. To the best of Seller's ICtuaI knowledge, then: is and will be at the time of closing no condition existing with respect to the consIrUction OIl or occupancy of the Property that violates any local or State code. law or ordinance. i. Merchantabilty. Seller has good and merchantable title to the Property free and clear of all liens aDd encwnbrances (other than those that shall be payable at Closing aDd there exists no restrictions on the right of Seller to transfer and assign the Property and convey good title thcrelo to Buyer. Seller shall continue to be 1awtW1y sei2lCd of the r.~ until the date of closing. j. No Collateral Default. Neither the execution of this Contract nor the consummatioo of the lnInSllCtions provided for herein constitute, or will result in, 811)' "'-:h of 811)' of the tenns, l:OI1ditions, or provisions of, or constitute a deflwlt W1der any indenture, mortgage, Page30fS loan agreement, lien, license, judgment, decree, order, instrument or other verbal or written "l!l""'llIent to which Seller is a party or is subject or to which the Property is subject. k. Authority to Enter Into Contract. If Seller is other than a natural penoon, Seller bas the Icglli power and right to enter into this Conlract and to perform all of its obligations hereunder. The execution of performance of this Contract bas t-n duly aulhori>M by all necessary intcmaIllCtion of Seller and Seller shall, It or prior to Closing. JIIOVide Buyer with evidence of such action in a form satisfactory to Buyer. This Contract is a valid and binding obliglltion of Seller, enforceable against Seller in acc:ordaoce with its terms. I. Underl!J'OUlld Stol1l2e Tanks. No underground storage tanks are located on the Property and any underground storage tanks previously IocaIed 011 the Property during SeIler's ownership were removed in compliance with all of the provisions of the Colorado Uodergrow>d Storage Tank Law, C.R.S. ~ 1-20-501 etlClq. and regulations thereunder. If any underground storage tanks were located on the Property during Seller's ownership and subsequently removed, Seller shall provide to Buyer prior to Seller's ~<>perty Disclosun: Deadline with copies of all records prepared and maintained in accordance with the regulations set forth above, ~.oting compliance with the requimnents for closure and removal of such underground storage tanks. The foregoing statements are true and com:ct as of the date of the COlltrlIct and will be true and correct 011 the Closing Date. Seller shall execute an affidavit as to the tru1b and .ccuracy of these representations and warranties on the date of closing. 7. TJ1l.E COMMITMENT. Seller shall cause the Title Company issuing the commitment to provide, CORCIImlIItIy with the delivery of the titIe insurance IXlIDIIIitmcot, legible oopies of all plats, covenants, easements, reservations, and other documents or instrumen1s listed in the Schedule of Exceplions, together with a cmrent certifialle of 1lIxes due issued by the tR&wRir of the county in which Property is located. Said Commitment shall provide affirmative gap coverage. All refenmees to an "abstract" in the Conlnlct .... heRby de\etcd. 8. EQUIPMENT AND APPLIANCES IN WORKING ORDER. Sellen Igree that all systems, including but not limited to heating. plumbing. electrieal. and all appliances, shall be in good woddng order at the time of closing. The Sellers shall keep and maintain the Property and electrical, plumbing and heating syslems in good condition and shall, at their sole cost and expense, undertake whatever repairs and/or main_ shall be or become necessary prior to Closing to keep them all, and the Property, in good condition. AIry existing warranties shall be assigned to Buyer at Closing. 9. BUYER'S RIGHT OF ENTRY. Commencing 00 the date of this Contract and continuing for the entire term hereof, Buyer and Buyer's representatives _ agadll shall have the right aocI privilege to enter upon the Property at any reasonable time or times for the purpose of conducting such inspecti'JIIs, evalualiOllS, planning, soil testing and other simillr IICtivitia, as Buyer shall deem necessary in order to conduct their due diligence activities and to propaIy eva1U8fe the potential development, use and enjoyment of the Property. Buyer shallllOIIduc:t such ldivities at their own cost, risk and expense, and shall indemoiJy and save Seller humless from any loss, damage or liability connected with or arising out of Buyer's entry or conduct of activities upon the Property, including but not limited to any mechanics' liens that may encumber the same. Page 4 ofS 10. CLOSING OBUGAll0NS. At closing, Seller will deliver to Buyer: (i) all keys to the Property, remote controls for garage doors, locks and alarms, if any; (ii) a list with the names, add; m and tclepbooe numbers of all companies or suppliers of utilities, IA""-Ping. tinlwood, snow plowing. SOI:Urity, imIurance and other -mea to the I'lvp.lty; and (iii) all wanaDties, manuals, instruction brochures or similar information in Seller's possession relating to the Property or Inclusions of their use, operation or 1IIIIinteDaDee. 11. CLEANING. Seller, at Sellet's expense, agrees to clean the Property for Buyet's occupancy. All rooms of the house shall be professionaJly cleaned and ready for occupucy; all ~g shall be professionally steam-eleaned and all trash removed. In adcIition, all app1iaDces, windows, cabinets, drawers and all bathrooms including tubs, sbowers, siab IIld toilets shall be clem. BUYER: SELLER: By: By: Page 5 of5 Coldwell Banker The Aspen Brokel'8, Ltd. 720 East Durant Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 The printed portions of this fonn, except differentiated additions, have been approved by the Colorado Real Estate Commission. (LP45-5-04) Lead-Based Paint Disclosure (Sales) Attachment to Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate for the Property known as: 312 W.st Rv.aan AVllDu. AaD8D. co S~Ad~ C~ S~ 81611 Zip WARNING! LEAD FROM PAINT, DUST, AND SOIL CAN BE DANGEROUS IF NOT MANAGED PROPERLY PCBalties for failure to comply with Federal Lead-Based Paint Disclosure Laws iDclude treble (3 times) damages, a<<Orlley fees, costs, and a penalty up to 510,000 (plus adjustment for inflation) for eaeb violation, Disclosure of Information on Lead-Based Paint and/or Lead-Based Paint Hazards Lead Warning Statement Every purchaser of any interest in residential noaI property on which a residential dwelling was built prior to 1978 is notified that such property may present c:xpoSW'C to lead from lead-based paint that may plal:e young children at risk of developing lead poisoning. Lead poisoning in YOWlg children may produce permanent neurological damage, including learning diAbiliti.., reduced intelligence quotioot, behavioral problems, and impaired memory. Lead poisoning also poses a particular risk to pregnant women. The Sell... of any interest in residential real property is requiredtoprovidethe buyer with any information on lead-basedpainthazards from riskassessments orinspections in the Seller's possession and notify the buyer of any known lead-based paint hazards. A risk assessment or inspection for possible lead-based paint hazards is n:commended prior to purchase. Seller's Disclosure to Buyer and Real Estate Licensee(s) and Acknowledgment (a) Sell... ..,knowledges that Seller has been infonned of Seller's obligations. Seller is aware thai Seller mUll retain a copy of thi.s disclosure for noI1ess than three years from the completion date of the sale. (b) I'i:*nce of \ead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards (check one box below): I!] Seller has no knowledge of any lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards present in the housing. o Seller has knowledge of lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards present in the housing (explain): D.J. (c) RCPdfds and reports available to Seller (check one box below): Iiif SeDer has no repom or records pertaining to lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards in tho housing. o Seller has provided Buyer with all available records and rcpom pertaining to lcod-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards in the housing (list documents below): nJ. Buyer's AckDowledgmeat (d) Buyer has read the Lead Warning Statement above and understands its contents. (e) Buyer has receivod copies of all infonnatiOll, including any records and reports listod by Seller abovo. (I) Buyer has receivod the p8IIIpb1ot"Protect Your Family From Load in Your Home." (g) Buyer acImowJedses fedenl law requires that before a buyer is obligated W1dcr any cootract to buy and sell "..) estate, Sell... shall permit Buyer a IO-day period (Wlless the parties mutually agRC, in writing. upon a diff""",t period of time) to conduct a risk assessment or inspection for the """",ce of lcod-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazards. (b) Buy.... after having reviewod the contents of this form, and any records and reports listod by Seller, has elected to l!;beck one box below): o Oblain a risk 8SllCSllI11CIIt or an inspection of tho Property for the presence of Jead-basod paint and/or lead-based paint hazards. within the time limit and und... the terms of Section 10 of the Contract to Buy and Sell Real Eslale, or o Waive the opportunity to conduct a risk .......ment or inspectiOll for the ..-- of Jead-buod paint and/or lead-basod paint hazards. Real Estate Licensee's AckDow\edgmeat Each noaI estate licensee signing below acknowledges receipt of the above. Soller's Disclosure, has infonned Seller of Seller's obligations and is aware or licensee's responsibility to CDSW'C compliance. PREPAREDBY;IIIiIgoO.__,__ LP45-5-04. lEAD-BASED PAINT DISCLOSURE (SALES). Colontdo Read ft\8te CornmiMIon R8llIFASTllSoIlwono.02006. Venlon 0,16. Softworo Ragiatolnld to, JwoaWIIay. ~_Tho_"""" Ud, au,..(') _ 11112100 15:2&:040 -~ Certification of Accuracy I certify that the statements I have made are accurate to the best of my knowledge. ~ s::(~/ Jordan (' DAn: ,v"'I/C"I~n /iO ~c;; BtTRIl DAn: M~r c;.: .~~ c;a-td /lh Real Estat Licensee (LIsting) ~ Real Estate Licensee (Selling) PREPARED BY, ~Gu__, __.... LP........ LEAD-llASED PAINT DISCLOSURE (SALES). ~ Rool EsIote Ccnwnl..... RoolFASTlI SoIlw.... C2OO6. v...... 6.16. SoftwonI RogIslorod to: Jane W 1Iqo. CoIdwoIIBankar Tho ~ _.., Lid. 111121061.:28;<3 PIIfI02012