Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20071022CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ,,<, October 22, 2007 ,,,,, 5:00 P.M. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Scheduled Public Appearances a) Harvard Innovations Award IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V. Special Orders of the Day a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Deletions and Additions c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI. Consent Calendar (These matters maybe adopted together by a single motion) P.1 a) Resolution #87, 2007 -Contract Purchase John Deere Backhoe P.11 b) Resolution #88, 2007 - REMP Funding Requests P.17 c) Resolution #89, 2007 - Contract -Painting Water Place Housing units -Binkley's VII. First Reading of Ordinances P.33 a) Ordinance #46, 2007 -Extension of Commercial Core Business Mix and Historic Interiors Moratorium - PH 11/12 P.39 b) Ordinance #47, 2007 -Extension of SCI Zone Moratorium - PH 10/29 VIII. Public Hearings P.45 a) Ordinance #45, 2007 P.47 b) Ordinance #43, 2007 P.59 c) Ordinance #44, 2007 P.121 d) Ordinance #28, 2007 P.161 e) Ordinance #36, 2007 P.197 f) Resolution #53, 2007 Continue to 1/14/08 IX. Action Items X. Adjournment - Code Amendment Historic Preservation - Commercial Core and Lodging Commission - Disconnection of Silver Lining Ranch -Jerome Professional Building Subdivision - North of Nell PUD Amendment - 555 E. Durant - Smuggler Racquet Club/Affordable Housing/Conceptual Next Regular Meeting November 12. 2007 COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M. ~,_. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jerry Nye, Superintendent of Streets THRU: Randy Ready, Asst. City Manager THRU: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Director DATE: October 5, 2007 ~/la. RE: Contract Approval 2007-4 FM for the purchase of One (1) 4x4 John Deere Backhoe/Loader for the Streets Department REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends the approval for the contract 2007-4FM for the fleet replacement purchase of One (1) John Deere 4x4 Backhoe/Loader for the Streets Department. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The 2007 Asset Management Plan contains the funds for this purchase. Ciry Council approved the Asset Management Plan as part of the 2007 Budget. BACKGROUND: This purchase is the result of a competive bid process in which Honnen Equipment was the apparent low bidder with the John Deere "mode1310J" Backhoe/Loader . DISCUSSION: The Street Department currently has a 1985 John Deere "model 510" Backhoe Loader that is in need of replacement. This machine was not replaced on the usual ten year replacement cycle plan because it was still very dependable. The existing machine did not require significant maintenance, repair costs, or result in down time at the end of the normal replacement schedule. The existing machine has provided numerous hours of service time and has provided reliable service. Due to its cun•ent age and hours of use, it is starting to require higher costs and is experiencing more frequent breakdown and maintenance issues. The AMP recommendation to replace the machine was based on avoiding a major repair expenditure. The new replacement machine will be a smaller size with an "extendable dipper stick" so that the total reach of the boom will still be equal to that of our current larger machine. We will be down sizing from a "model 510" to a "model 310". The replacement machine will still allow staff to accomplish all the depar[ments'digging needs. Since it is a smaller machine overall, it will be more versatile and a more economical piece of equipment to operate. John Deere has a good quality machine and staff feels comfortable that we will get many years of good quality life out of Page 1 of 2 this machine. The replacement machine will be placed on a ten yeaz replacement cycle plan. This plan can be reevaluated neaz the end of the expected life to see if the machine is experiencing maintenance issues. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The 2007 Asset Management plan $110,000 for the Fleet Replacement Purchase Of one (1) 4x4 Backhoe Loader. This new purchase price came in at $70,509 with options included. The trade in allowance is $8,000 on the old machine, bringing the net due to vendor price to $62,509. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The John Deere 310J will be equipped with a turbo charged 4045 EPA certified Tier 2 emissions engine. The machine also has an "Auto- Idle" feature, which means that it will automatically go to idle when controls go to the neutral position and then resume back to the set pe@k speed when controls are reactivated. Enhanced cooling package for faster cold- weather warm up time, these items will reduce the daily fuel consumption. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the contract approval for 2007-4FM for the purchase of the John Deere Model 310J 4x4 Backhoe Loader for the streets department. ALTERNATIVES: PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # _ ~ 7 of 2007 On the consent calendaz of Monday CITY MANAGER 2007 ATTACHMENTS: Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. Series of 2007 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND Honnen Equipment Company AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID DOCUMENT(S) ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a CONTRACT between the City of Aspen, Colorado and Honnen Equipment Company a copy of which contract is annexed hereto and made a part thereof. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section One That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that CONTRACT between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and , Honnen ui ment Company a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. Dated: , 2007. Michael C.Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held , 2007. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk a ~. SUPPLY PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT CITY OF ASPEN BID NO. 2007 - 4FM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into, this 25 day in September of 2007, by and between the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and Honnen Equipment ,hereinafter referred to as the "Vendor." WITNESSETH, that whereas the City wishes to purchase, One (1) John Deere 4x4 Backhoe Loader model 310J Hereinafter called the UNIT(S), in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in the Contract Documents and any associated Specifications, and Vendor wishes to sell said UNIT to the City as specified in its Bid. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Vendor, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: 1. Purchase. Vendor agrees to sell and City agrees to purchase the UNIT(S) as described in the Contract Documents and more specifically in Vendors Bid for the sum of _ Sixty Two Thousand Five Hundred Nine and no cents dollars ($62 509.00 ). 2. Delivery. (FOB 1080 POWER PLANT RD. ASPEN, CO.) 3. Contract Documents. This Agreement shall include all Contract Documents as the same are listed in the Invitation to Bid and said Contract Documents are hereby made a part of this Agreement as if fully set out at length herein. 4. Warranties. A full description of all warranties associated with this purchase shall accompany this contract document. 5. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Vendor respectively and their agents, representatives, employee, successors, assigns and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Vendor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 6. Third Parties. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom Vendor or City may assign this Agreement in accordance with the specific written permission, any rights to claim damages or to bring any suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or Vendor because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 7. Waivers. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 7-PURCH.DOC • ' ~-- 8. Agreement Made in Colorado. The parties agree that this Agreement was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 9. Attornev's Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney's fees: 10. Waiver of Presumption. This Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of the Agreement. 11. Certification Reaardina Debarment Suspension Ineliaibilitv and Voluntary Exclusion. Vendor certifies, by acceptance of this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further certifies that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that vendor or any lower tier participant was unable to certify to this statement, an explanation was attached to the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory to the City. 12. Warranties Against Continoent Fees Gratuities Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. Vendor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Vendor for the purpose of securing business. Vendor agrees not to give any employee or former employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefor. Vendor represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. 7-PURCH.DOC In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a vendor, contractor or sub-contractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Vendor; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 13. Termination for Default or for Convenience of City. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be cancelled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 14. Fund Availabilitv. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City utilizing state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 15. City Council Approval. If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $10,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. 16. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform under this Agreement. Vendor agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, section 13-98, pertaining to non- discrimination in employment. Vendor further agrees to comply with the letter and the spirit of the Colorado Antidiscrimination ACt of 1957, as amended, and other applicable state and federal laws respecting discrimination and unfair employment practices. 17. Integration and Modification. This written Agreement along with all Contract Documents shall constitute the contract between the parties and supersedes or incorporates any prior written and oral agreements of the parties. In addition, vendor understands that no City official or employee, other than the Mayor and City Council acting as a body at a council meeting, has authority to enter into an Agreement or to modify the terms of the Agreement on behalf of the City. Any such Agreement or modification to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the parties hereto. 18. Authorized Representative. The undersigned representative of Vendor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Agreement, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of Vendor for the purposes of executing this Agreement and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Agreement for the terms and conditions specified herein. 7-PORCH.DOC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City and the Vendor, respectively have caused this Agreement to be duly executed the day and year first herein written in three (3) copies, all of which, to all intents and purposes, shall be considered as the original. FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN: By: City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk VENDOR: By: Title. 7-PORCH.DOC OJOHN DEERE Customer Purchase Order for John Deere Construction & Forestry Products AJDP1168 DATE OF ORDER COMPANY UNIT DEALER ORDER NO DEALER ACCOUNT NO. CUSTOMER'S NAME & ADDRESS (First Signer) -27-2007 S 170469 ep NAME (First, Middle Initial, Last) Aspen, CI Of CASH LEASE TIME SALE SALE ^ SOC. SEC. ^ IRS N0 ^EIN N0. CUSTOMER SALES TAX EXEMPT NO (SECOND LINE OF OWNER NAME) PURCHASER ACCT SELLER'S NAME & ADDRESS STREET OR RR 1080 Power Plant Road Honnen Equipment Co. CITY STATE ZIP CODE 2358 I-70 Frontage Road Aspen CO 81611 Grand Junction, CO 81505 COUNTY PHONE NUMBER 920 5131 0 FAX NUMBER (970)920-5015 970 243-7090 ( ) - } Pitkin (97 243-7092 970 F Si ax ( ) gner) CUSTOMER'S NAME & ADDRESS (Second NAME CUSTOMER IS ADD CUSTOMER NAME TO MAIL LIST (Check One or More) ®Government t ^ ^ ®Business ^ Indivltlual ^ Construction Fores Utility ry STREET OR RR Enter Marketing Codes In boxes of right using the PURCHASER TYPE CODE MARKET USE CODE CITY STATE Zip CODE list printed on fhe Instruction Sheet as reference - CIty/T Other, n SECURE EXTENDED IS LOCATION OF FIRST COUNTY CITY STATE COUNTY CODE Pitkin Aspen CO Pitkin SE G . WORKIN U ®Accepled (Initials) ^Rejected (Initials) I (We). the untlersigned, hereby order from you the Equipment described below, to be delivered as shown btain such Equipment from the manufacturer and you shall be bilit to y o WARRANTY. 6 months full warranty (over 100 HP), 12 months full warranty (under below. This order is subject to your a of the Equipment is delayed or prevented due to Tabor disturbances, liver ili if d y e ty tOD HP) on John Deere equipment. under no liab transportation difficulties. or For any reason beyond your control. The price shown below ~s subject to your It is also subject to any new or the manufacturer i b . ce y receipt of the Equipment prior to any change in pr increased taxes imposed upon the sale of the Equipment after the date of this order E M e EQUIPMENT (Give Model, Size & Description) Hours of Use PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION NO. DELIVERED CASH PRICE OTY w c o d St d Factory Order $64,178.00 ar an John Deere 310J Backhoe Loader, new 2007 model, 310J 1 ine (79 Net Peak d En h b g oc arge Backhoe, Altitude Compensating Tur e(4WD)and Powershift l D i Items as bid Oth v r Mechanical Front Whee hp) er , Firestone 19.5L- 24 In. 10 PR (R4) Tubeless Rear 12 - Transmission , 16.5 In. 8 PR Traction Front Sure Grip Lug Tires, Cab with Dual ll F Thumb Installed $5,237.00 y u Mechanical Suspension Deluxe, Fabric, Swivel Seat with ors D 00 16 o , 300 Dual Batteries ts R counterweight 450 Ib 1 $1,0 . , , es Adjustable Lumbar Adjustment and Arm , . Minute Reserve Capacity (1900 CCA), Extendible Dipperstick with 5 Dual battery Disconnect $78.00 Function Hydraulics and Standard Stabilizers with Cam Lock 1. TOTAL CASH PRICE $70,509.00 IMPORTANT WARRANTY NOTICE: The written new equipment warranty for John Deere Construction & Forestry (John Deere) products, "Standard Warranty", is printed on the following pages of this Purchase Order and is a part of this contract. Please read it carefully before signing. No express warranty is made unless identifed on this Purchase Order. YOUR RIGHTS AND REMEDIES PERTAINING TO THIS PURCHASE ARE LIMITED AS INDICATED ON ALL (2) PAGES OF THIS PURCHASE ORDER. WHERE PERMITTED BY LAW, NO IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS IS MADE. USED JOHN DEERE PRODUCTS ONLY: John Deere will transfer remaining Extended coverage to the purchaser of a used John Deere product that has been usetl for less than the full period of the Extended coverage provided at the product's original retail purchase. This transfer is not effective unless and until John Deere's written confirmation of transfer, indicating when the transferred coverage will expire, is received by the purchaser. ALL TERMS, INCLUDING LIMITATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS, OF THE JOHN DEERE STANDARD WARRANTY COVERAGE ORIGINALLY PROVIDED FOR THE PRODUCT REMAIN APPLICABLE. I (We) offer to sell, transfer, and convey the following item(s) at or prior to the time of delivery of the above Equipment, as a "trade-in" to be applied against the cash price. Such item(s) shall be free and clear of all security agreements, liens, and encumbrances at the time of transfer to you. The following is a description and the price to be allowed for each item. QTY. 1 DESCRIPTION OF TRADE-IN 1985 Deere 5108 PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION NO. 717303 AMOUNT $8,000.00 2. TOTAL TRADE-IN ALLOWANCE $B,DDO.OO ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: I (We) promise to pay the balance due (line 8) shown hereon in cash, or to execute a Time l 3 BALANCE $62,509.00 us Sale Agreement (Retail Installment Contract), or a Loan Agreement for the purchase price of the Equipment, p fore delivery of the Equipment ordered b 4. RENT APPLIED $0.00 e additional charges shown thereon, or to execute a Lease Agreement, on or title shall remain in the seller until one of the foregoing is of the Equipment l delive i h 5. SUB-TOTAL $62,509.00 , ry ys ca herein. Despite p accomplished. 6. SALES TAX $0.00 I (We) understand that my (our) rights in connection with this purchase are limited as set forth on all (2) pages of this 7 CASH WITH ORDER $0.00 Purchase Order. 8. BALANCE DUE $62,509.00 I RAVED REGtIVtU ti111 n (t) rrtvr=o yr I PURCHASE ORDER FORM. Customer's initials ~ Date: Customer's X Accepted By Signature, Customer's Date Accept Signature DELIVERED WITH OPERATOR'S MANUAL ON: SIGNATUP DELIVERY ~ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ^r-^_Spe Hepnnlee 19-021 Elfectr.e (t5 SeplemM 20011 Prinletl ,n U 5 A ^DEALER COPY ^CUSTOMER COPY ^ SWR COPY /) 7 Page 1 of 2 ^ CREDIT COPY - JDCEC ^SERVICE DEALER COPY MEMORANDUM VI b TO: Mayor Mick Ireland and Aspen City Council ~ ~~/~/) THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Directo~V" FROM: Gazy Goodsen, Community Office for Resource Efficiency Stephen Kanipe, Chief Building Official RE: Renewable Energy Mitigation Program Funding Request DATE: October 22, 2007 SUMMARY: In January 2000 the Pitkin County Commissioners and Aspen City Council approved the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (REMP). According to the REMP Ordinance, the Community Office for Resource Efficiency (CORE) is responsible for developing proposals for spending funds collected into the REMP fund. Those proposals must be reviewed and approved by the CORE Boazd. The CORE Boazd is comprised of: J.E. DeVilbiss, Patti Clapper, Phil Overeynder, Steve Casey (Holy Cross Energy), Sally Spazhawk and Bill Stirling. CORE's Boazd has recommended approval of funding items for a total of $1,505,000. REMP funding procedure requires joint approval by Aspen City Council and Pitkin County Commissioners. (Pitkin County approved the $1,505,000 in expenditures at their 9-26-07 BOCC meeting). The current REMP fund balance is approximately $3,073,000 and the proposed expenditures equal to $1,505,000. If all of the projects are approved, about $1,568,000 will remain in the REMP fund. RECOMMENDED ACTION: CORE's Board recommends approval of Resolution # ~, 2007, authorizing spending funds generated through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move the approval of Resolution # ~, 2007, authorizing the proposed spending of funds generated through the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program." MANAGER COMM. M~a~2 ~o,L; (~i~~Zz Resolution for this ndid ng~egyl~st. ~ ~~~,f~~ CcJ~a vzd~ RESOLUTION #~ (SERIES OF 2007) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AUTHORIZING SPENDING OF FUNDS GENERATED THROUGH THE RENEWABLE ENERGY MITIGATION PROGRAM WHEREAS, On December 13, 1999, City Council Approved Ordinance No. 55 adopting the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code, and WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin Energy Conservation Code allows that the funds be spent in accordance with a joint resolution by the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners, and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the Boazd of the Community Office for Resource Efficiency approved a number of spending proposals, and WHEREAS, the spending proposals meet the screening criteria of affordable housing, cost-effectiveness, public visibility, and education, environmental benefits, energy efficiency, leverage, unique opportunity, new technologies and green design, and WHEREAS, the Renewable Energy Mitigation Program (Fund) has a balance of approximately $ 3,073,000 and the total of the proposed expenditures equal $1,543,000. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section I: The Aspen City Council does hereby authorize the Community Office for Resource Efficiency to negotiate and secure. contracts and manage the installation and/or implementation of the following projects: 1. Aspen Community School, $20,000. The Aspen Community School has secured a $20,000 grant from the state to retrofit its 35-yeaz-old building. This log structure is leaky and inefficient. A matching REMP grant would allow the school to improve the building's energy performance and mechanical systems. 2. Basalt Library, $20,000. Basalt voters approved a bond issue to build a new library which is within the Pitkin County border. Land has been secured for this project. These REMP funds would be used to improve the energy efficiency of the new library. 3. Burlingame Affordable Housing, $100,000. This would be used to "commission" the mechanical systems in Burlingame's 16 buildings. We would install outdoor resets on the 35 or 40 boilers in this project to optimize their energy performance. The excessive summer solar gain will also be addressed where possible. 4. Canary Alliance Staff Position, $70,000. The City of Aspen's Canary Alliance has completed a greenhouse gas emissions inventory, climate impacts assessment, and action plan. This money would fund the salary of the existing assistant manager of the Canary program for a little more than one yeaz. 5. Carbondale Energy Plan, $20,000. The Town of Carbondale has budgeted $140,000 in franchise fees to cover the cost of an Energy Manager to carry out the work specified by their energy and climate action plan. This money would be used to support the implementation of this work. CORE anticipates that the Carbondale effort will become a model for other Valley communities, including Aspen, Basalt and Glenwood. 6. Community and Mini-grant Programs, $100,000. Half of these funds would support an existing REMP program which provides small renewable energy and energy efficiency grants to azea non-profits, schools, and businesses. The remaining $50,000 will fund larger grants up to $15,000, based on merit. 7. CORE Climate Coordinator, $70,000. Local interest in climate protection and energy issues is growing dramatically. Developing, supporting and coordinating the Valley's climate protection activities is becoming a fiilltime job for CORE. CORE needs an additional staffmember to handle these tasks and to provide some administrative and fundraising support. 8. Energy Efficient Appliances, $35,000. This money will replenish an existing REMP program which provides rebates to Valley residents who purchase energy efficient: clothes washers, dishwashers, and refrigerators. 9. Energy Retrofit of the Carbondale Elementary School, $80,000. The Town of Carbondale is converting the old Carbondale Elementazy School to a nonprofit center. This money will be used to support an energy retrofit of the building before it is leased to its new tenants, who aze likely to include Solaz Energy International (Solaz School) and KDNK radio. 2 10. Green Design Grants, $100,000. The most cost effective time to incorporate energy efficiency and renewable energy into a building is during the initial design. The REMP funds requested here would be used to provide technical assistance for at least six projects. Priority will be given to public projects in the upper Valley. 11. Habitat for Humanity, $25,000. This money would be used to include a solaz hot water system, efficient appliances, and building envelope upgrades to a 1,300 squaze foot home in Cazbondale. $5,000 of this funding will be used to add solar to an existing Habitat for Humanity home in Pitkin County. 12. Hydropower & Geoexchange Grants, $30,000. This money would be used to encourage homeowners to implement geoexchange and/or hydropower energy systems on their property. This could take the form of education/mazketing or help with individual feasibility studies. 13. NCTF, $100,000. This grant would leverage an additional $100,000 in funding to design, develop and launch the first year of a regional "Partnership for the New Energy Economy" (based upon Denver's highly successful Greenprint program). This would represent a regional coalition of organizations and efforts from Aspen to Rifle working to reduce our dependence on oil and protect the climate. The partnership will result in a regional website, network of businesses and households, educational programs, and technical assistance and involving the business sector in implementing a more sustainable transportation system and creating a more climate friendly region, including: Bus Rapid Transit with accompanying Transit Oriented Development/Affordable Housing; Green Master Planning throughout the region, and additional REMP-like funding streams. A full memo with milestones and additional detail is available for review. 14. North Forty Fire Station, $35,000. This money will fund one-half of a solar electric system at the North Forty Fire Station. The Fire District has raised the remainder of the money from Holy Cross Energy and the Environment Foundation. 15. Pitkin County Energy Manager, $100,000. This money would support the salary and benefits of a Pitkin County energy manager for a little over one year, plus provide an additional $25,000 in project support. The Energy Manager would assume the types of duties and roles in the County government that the Canary staffprovides for the City. 16. Redbrick Lighting & Controls Upgrade. $50,000. This money would be used to upgrade the lighting and HVAC systems in the Redbrick Nonprofit Center in Aspen. 17. Solar Photovoltaic and Solar Hot Water Rebates, $400,000. This will be used to replenish an existing rebate fund that encourages Valley residents to install photovoltaic and solaz thermal systems. 18. Woody Creek Community Center, $80,000. This azea icon is undergoing a thorough remodeling to bring the building up to code. This represents an ideal opportunity to improve the mechanical systems and building envelope to save energy. 19. CORE REMP Management Fee, $100,000. Of this amount, $10,000 will be used to publicize the REMP consumer rebates. The remainder will be used to administer and manage the work described above. 20. REMP/CORE Third-Party Audit, $8,000. To ensure ongoing compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) these funds would be used to audit the financials of CORE and the REMP program. Section 2: The Community Office for Resource Efficiency will report to the Aspen City Council as needed regarding the progress and completion of the approved projects. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2007. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: City Attorney Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk MichaBl C. Ireland, Mayor 4 vi MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM : Bentley Henderson THRU: DATE OF MEMO: 10-12-07 MEETING DATE: 10-23-07 RE: Contract Approval -Water Place Housing Painting SUMMARY: Provided for your consideration is a contract for services for the repainting of the City's affordable housing units located adjacent to the water treatment facility. BACKGROUND: Repainting of the Water Place affordable housing units was initially contemplated as a capital improvement as early as 2001, and was identified in the Asset Management Plan (AMP) at that time. The improvement had always been scheduled for 2007. The timing of this effort coincides roughly with a ten year occupancy of the units. DISCUSSION: Earlier this year the city went out to bid on the project, received three competitive bids, and recommends awarding the bid to Binkley's Superior Brush of Carbondale. Funding appropriated for the project was $130,000. The bid award is for $96,797.00, with some limited additions for gutter downspout removal and replacement. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: As indicated above, this expenditure has been anticipated and reflected in the AMP since at least 2002. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachments: Contract for Services including scope of work RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a Painting contract for Binkley's Superior Brush for the painting of the Water Place affordable housing units. RESOLUTION NO. Series of 2007 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR THE REPAINTING OF 23 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 3OUT-BUILDINGS AT THE WATER PLACE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPERTY, BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND BINKLEY'S SUPERIOR BRUSH, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a Contract for repainting 23 affordable housing units and 3out-buildings for the City of Aspen, between the City of Aspen and Binkley's Affordable Brush an accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves that Contract for repainting services for the City of Aspen, between the City of Aspen and Binkley's Affordable Brush, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the Mayor or City Manager to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2007. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk H:\wp paint reso.doc AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement made and entered on the date hereinafter stated, between the CITY OF ASPEN, Colorado, ("City") and Binkey's Superior Brush, ("Professional"). For and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: Scope of Work. Professional shall perform in a competent and professional manner the Scope of Work as set forth at Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Completion. Professional shall commence work immediately upon receipt of a written Notice to Proceed from the City and complete all phases of the Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with professional skill and caze and the orderly progress of the Work in a timely manner. The parties anticipate that all work pursuant to this agreement shall be completed no later than July 1, 2008. Upon request of the City, Professional shall submit, for the City's approval, a schedule for the performance of Professional's services which shall be adjusted as required as the project proceeds, and which shall include allowances for periods of time required by the City's project engineer for review and approval of submissions and for approvals of authorities having jurisdiction over the project. This schedule, when approved by the City, shall not, except for reasonable cause, be exceeded by the Professional. Payment. In consideration of the work performed, City shall pay Professional on a time and expense basis for all work performed. The hourly rates for work performed by Professional shall not exceed those hourly rates set forth at Exhibit "B" appended hereto. Hourly rates shall apply to additional work as mutually agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. That additional work shall most commonly include the removal and reinstallation of building roof drain down-spouts. Except as otherwise mutually agreed to by the parties and not withstanding the above, the payments made to Professional shall not initially exceed $96,797.00. Professional shall submit, in timely fashion, invoices for work performed. The City shall review such invoices and, if they aze considered incorrect or untimely, the City shall review the matter with Professional within ten days from receipt of the Professional's bill. Non-Assignability. Both parties recognize that this contract is one for personal services and cannot be transferred, assigned, or sublet by either party without prior written consent of the other. Sub-Contracting, if authorized, shall not relieve the Professional of any of the responsibilities or obligations under this agreement. Professional shall be and remain solely responsible to the City for the acts, errors, omissions or neglect of any subcontractors' officers, agents and employees, each of whom shall, for this purpose be deemed to be an agent or employee of the Professional to the extent of the subcontract. The City shall not be obligated to pay or be liable for payment of any sums due which may be due to any sub-contractor. PS1-971.doc Page 1 Termination. The Professional or the City may terminate this Agreement, without specifying the reason therefore, by giving notice, in writing, addressed to the other party, specifying the effective date of the termination. No fees shall be earned after the effective date of the termination. Upon any termination, all finished or unfmished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other material prepared by the Professional pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of the City. Notwithstanding the above, Professional shall not be relieved of any liability to the City for damages sustained by the City by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Professional, and the City may withhold any payments to the Professional for the purposes of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the City from the Professional may be determined. Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Professional wanants that s/he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for the Professional, to solicit or secure this contract, that s/he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly acknowledged and understood by the parties that nothing contained in this agreement shall result in, or be construed as establishing an employment relationship. Professional shall be, and shall perform as, an independent Contractor who agrees to use his or her best efforts to provide the said services on behalf of the City. No agent, employee, or servant of Professional shall be, or shall be deemed to be, the employee, agent or servant of the City. City is interested only in the results obtained under this contract. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the sole control of Professional. None of the benefits provided by City to its employees including, but not limited to, workers' compensation insurance and unemployment insurance, are available from City to the employees, agents or servants of Professional. Professional shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Professional's agents, employees, servants and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. Professional shall indemnify City against all liability and loss in connection with, and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local taxes or contributions imposed or required under unemployment insurance, social security and income tax law, with respect to Professional and/or Professional's employees engaged in the performance of the services agreed to herein. Indemnification. Professional agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self-insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, including without limitation claims arising from bodily injury, personal injury, sickness, disease, death, property loss or damage, or any other loss of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any manner connected with this contract, if such injury, loss, or damage is caused in whole or in part by, or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by, the act, omission, error, professional error, mistake, negligence, or other fault of the Professional, any subcontractor of the Professional, or any officer, employee, representative, or agent of the Professional or of any subcontractor of the Professional, or which arises out of any workmen's compensation claim of any employee of the Professional or of any employee of any subcontractor of the Professional. The Professional agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to PS1-971.doc Page 2 provide defense for and defend against, any such liability, claims or demands at the sole expense of the Professional, or at the option of the City, agrees to pay the City or reimburse the City for the defense costs incurred by the City in connection with, any such liability, claims, or demands. If it is determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction that such injury, loss, or damage was caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the City, its officers, or its employees, the City shall reimburse the Professional for the portion of the judgment attributable to such act, omission, or other fault of the City, its ofTcers, or employees. Professional's Insurance. (a) Professional agrees to procure and maintain, at its own expense, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. Such insurance shall be in addition to any other insurance requirements imposed by this contract or by law. The Professional shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to Section 8 above by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance, or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, duration, or types. (b) Professional shall procure and maintain, and shall cause any subcontractor of the Professional to procure and maintain, the minimum insurance coverages listed below. Such coverages shall be procured and maintained with forms and insurance acceptable to the City. All coverages shall be continuously maintained to cover all liability, claims, demands, and other obligations assumed by the Professional pursuant to Section 8 above. In the case of any claims- made policy, the necessary retroactive dates and extended reporting periods shall be procured to maintain such continuous coverage. (i) Workers' Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by applicable laws for any employee engaged in the performance of work under this contract, and Employers' Liability insurance with minimum limits of FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) for each accident, FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease - policy limit, and FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) disease -each employee. Evidence of qualified self-insured status may be substituted for the Workers' Compensation requirements of this paragraph. (ii) Commercial General Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) aggregate. The policy shall be applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations), personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket contractual, independent contractors, products, and completed operations. The policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. (iii) Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance with minimum combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) each occurrence and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,00- 0.00) aggregate with respect to each Professional's owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in performance of the Scope of Work. The policy shall contain a PS1-971.doc Page 3 severability of interests provision. If the Professional has no owned automobiles, the requirements of this Section shall be met by each employee of the Professional providing services to the City under this contract. (iv) Professional Liability insurance with the minimum limits of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) each claim and ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) aggregate. (c) The policy or policies required above shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insur- ance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers or employees, or carried by or provided through any insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by Professional. No additional insured endorsement to the policy required above shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage azising from completed operations. The Professional shall be solely responsible for any deductible losses under any policy required above. (d) The certificate of insurance provided by the City shall be completed by the Professional's insurance agent as evidence that policies providing the required coverages, condi- tions, and minimum limits are in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of the contract. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certifi- cate shall identify this contract and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be canceled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. (e) Failure on the part of the Professional to procure or maintain policies providing the required coverages, conditions, and minimum limits shall constitute a material breach of contract upon which City may immediately terminate this contract, or at its discretion City may procure or renew any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by City shall be repaid by Professional to City upon demand, or City may offset the cost of the premiums against monies due to Professional from City. (f) City reserves the right to request and receive a certified copy of any policy and any endorsement thereto. (g) The parties hereto understand and agree that City is relying on, and does not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this contract, the monetary limitations (presently $150,000.00 per person and $600,000 per occurrence) or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as from time to time amended, or otherwise available to City, its officers, or its employees. City's Insurance. The parties hereto understand that the City is a member of the Colorado Intergovernmental Risk Sharing Agency (CIRSA) and as such participates in the CIRSA Property/Casualty Pool. Copies of the CIRSA policies and manual are kept at the City of Aspen Finance Department and are available to Professional for inspection during normal business hours. City makes no representations whatsoever with respect to specific coverages offered by CIRSA. PS1-971.doc Page 4 City shall provide Professional reasonable notice of any changes in its membership or participation in CIRSA. Completeness of Agreement. It is expressly agreed that this agreement contains the entire undertaking of the parties relevant to the subject matter thereof and there are no verbal or written representations, agreements, warranties or promises pertaining to the project matter thereof not expressly incorporated in this writing. Notice. Any written notices as called for herein may be hand delivered to the respective persons and/or addresses listed below or mailed by certified mail return receipt requested, to: City: City Manager City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Professional: Street Address City, State & Zip Code Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform services under this contract. Professional agrees to meet all of the requirements of City's municipal code, Section 13-98, pertaining to non-discrimination in employment. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any term, covenant, or condition hereof shall not operate as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term. No term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement can be waived except by the written consent of the City, and forbearance or indulgence by the City in any regard whatsoever shall not constitute a waiver of any term, covenant, or condition to be performed by Professional to which the same may apply and, until complete performance by Professional of said term, covenant or condition, the City shall be entitled to invoke any remedy available to it under this Agreement or by law despite any such forbeazance or indulgence. Execution of Agreement by City. This agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. Notwith- standing anything to the contrary contained herein, this agreement shall not be binding upon the City unless duly executed by the Mayor of the City of Aspen (or a duly authorized official in his absence) following a Motion or Resolution of the Council of the City of Aspen authorizing the Mayor (or a duly authorized official in his absence) to execute the same. 16. Illegal Aliens -CRS 8-17.5-101 & 24-76.5-101. a. Purpose. During the 2006 Colorado legislative session, the Legislature passed House Bills 06-1343 (subsequently amended by HB 07-1073) and 06-1023 that added new statutes relating to the employment of and contracting with illegal aliens. These new PS1-971.doc Page 5 laws prohibit all state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Aspen, from knowingly hiring an illegal alien to perform work under a contract, or to knowingly contract with a subcontractor who knowingly hires with an illegal alien to perform work under the contract. The new laws also require that all contracts for services include certain specific language as set forth in the statutes. The following terms and conditions have been designed to comply with the requirements of this new law. b. Definitions. The following terms are defined in the new law and by this reference are incorporated herein and in any contract for services entered into with the City of Aspen. "Basic Pilot Program" means the basic pilot employment verification program created in Public Law 208, 104th Congress, as amended, and expanded in Public Law 156, 108th Congress, as amended, that is administered by the United States Department of Homeland Security. "Public Contract for Services" means this Agreement. "Services" means the furnishing of labor, time, or effort by a Contractor or a subcontractor not involving the delivery of a specific end product other than reports that are merely incidental to the required performance. c. By signing this document, Professional certifies and represents that at this time: (i) Professional shall confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States; and (ii) Professional has participated or attempted to participate in the Basic Pilot Program in order to verify that new employees are not employ illegal aliens. d. Professional hereby confirms that: (i) Professional shall not knowingly employ or contract new employees without confirming the employment eligibility of all such employees hired for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (ii) Professional shall not enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to confirm to the Professional that the subcontractor shall not knowingly hire new employees without confirming their employment eligibility for employment in the United States under the Public Contract for Services. (iii) Professional has verified or has attempted to verify through participation in the Federal Basic Pilot Program that Professional does not employ any new employees who are not eligible for employment in the United States; and if Professional has not been accepted into the Federal Basic Pilot Program prior to PS1-971.doc Page 6 entering into the Public Contract for Services, Professional shall forthwith apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify such application within five (5) days of the date of the Public Contract. Professional shall continue to apply to participate in the Federal Basic Pilot Program and shall in writing verify same every three (3) calendar months thereafter, until Professional is accepted or the public contract for services has been completed, whichever is earlier. The requirements of this section shall not be required or effective if the Federal Basic Pilot Program is discontinued. (iv) Professional shall not use the Basic Pilot Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the Public Contract for Services is being performed. (v) If Professional obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the Public Contract for Services knowingly employs or contracts with a new employee who is an illegal alien, Professional shall: (1) Notify such subcontractor and the City of Aspen within three days that Professional has actual knowledge that the subcontractor has newly employed or contracted with an illegal alien; and (2) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to this section the subcontractor does not cease employing or contracting with the new employee who is an illegal alien; except that Professional shall not terminate the Public Contract for Services with the subcontractor if during such three days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. (vi) Professional shall comply with any reasonable request by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment made in the course of an investigation that the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment undertakes or is undertaking pursuant to the authority established in Subsection 8-17.5-102 (5), C.R.S. (vii) If Professional violates any provision of the Public Contract for Services pertaining to the duties imposed by Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. the City of Aspen may terminate the Public Contract for Services. If the Public Contract for Services is so terminated, Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City of Aspen arising out of Professional's violation of Subsection 8-17.5-102, C.R.S. (ix) If Professional operates as a sole proprietor, Professional hereby swears or affirms under penalty of perjury that the Professional (1) is a citizen of the United States or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal PS1-971.doc Page 7 law,(2) shall comply with the provisions of CRS 24-76.5-101 et seg., and (3) shall produce one of the forms of identification required by CRS 24-76.5-103 prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 17. General Terms. (a) It is agreed that neither this agreement nor any of its terms, provisions, conditions, representations or covenants can be modified, changed, terminated or amended, waived, superseded or extended except by appropriate written instrument fully executed by the parties. (b) If any of the provisions of this agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable it shall not affect or impair the validity, legality or enforceability of any other provision. (c) The parties acknowledge and understand that there are no conditions or limitations to this understanding except those as contained herein at the time of the execution hereof and that after execution no alteration, change or modification shall be made except upon a writing signed by the parties. (d) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado as from time to time in effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in three copies each of which shall be deemed an original on the date hereinafter written. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] PS1-971.doc Page 8 ATTESTED BY: CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: WITNESSED BY: By: Title: Date: Title Date: l~ ~/~ - PS1-971.doc Page 9 PROFESSIONAL: EXHIBTT "A" to Professional Services Agreement Scope of Work (To be completed prior to execution of Agreement) PS1-971.doc Page 10 EXHIBIT "B" to Professional Services Agreement Rate Schedule (To be completed prior to execution of Agreement) PS1-971.doc Page 11 i a7 -7V rr~iV~ ~~~7i>< f-!7 PANORAMA DR PROPOSAL cAit>a~NDAia~, ca a.~a 19~o1~a-eoeb~ NAME/ADDRESS ~ CITY OF ASPEN 130 S. GALENA ST. ASPEN, CO. 81611 DATE DUE DATE PROJECT 7/312007 ~ 7/312007 ~ WATER PLACE 17'EM DEgCRipTIO-,1 TOTAL EXTERIOR PAINTING 1) POWER WASH ALL SURFACES, SCRAPE, SAND dt PRIME ALL BARE AREA3 WITH SHERWIN WII.LTAMS EXTERIOR LATEX PRIMER. 2) REPAINT ALL BUII.DINGS ONE COAT TO COYER & MATCH EXISTING COLORS. 3)AI.L PAINTED SURFACES WII.L BE PAINTED WITH 5-W EXT LATEX SUPER PAINT SATIN TO MATCH. 4) WOOD STAIN WILL BE SUPER DECK FINISH. 5) CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ASPE(."TS OF PROJECT LISTED. 6) NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING FOR REINSTALLING OF }CHAS LIGHTS ON BUII.DINGS, VINES, ECT. 7) DOES NOT INCLUDE REPLACII3G TRIM, SIDING & HAND RAILS. 8) WILL COMPLETE THREE UNITS PER WEEK TO BE STARTED BY LAST WEEK OF AUGUST, FDdISHED t0/31/07IF WEATHER PREMTIS. Exterior 9) UNITS # 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15, 96,797.00 16,17,18,19,20,21,22 WATER PLACE&455 TERMS 30 days after completion Too coca. spxaficCioos and oondidoas an hereby TOT/U. ,w ofair s grasmee to be s way wd.MO « ~++~ aam a am wiu ~ a~em~ ady ACxEPTANCE SIGNATURE ~R00 M'IIaOR arMR ao0 MIN M elWa ~. ~bOYt W. AN oana~cu oootaymA ep~ raihar,~eoidnas of ~ heYad ors cOahW. OwaQ b urtY 4ae. baado. tid olhs neoesary __ enwuwa. Oir MOfk01s ae ary ~w.orcd by WatmaY~ C.anpambuc aw~eoa. Peet anv~.$~s svP$iuoR ~va~ 6!7 PANORAMA DR PROPOSAL CARBUNDAIB C'7~ 81623 (970 274x1278 mall (97U1963r3T36 f~ rna~-eoeb~ NAMErADDRESS CITY OF ASPEN GALENA ST. 130 S . ASPEN, CO. 81611 pgTE DUE DATE PROJECT 7/312007 7!31/2007 VI+ATERPLACE ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL DOOLIT'7'LE DR DYCLUDES 3 GARAGES. ADD ALTERNATE: CHANGE OF COLOR ON A BUILDING 5977.00 TERMS 30 days after completim The priees, apcei8wtims ~d oooditions a+e hacby ~~~ TOTAL 596.797.00 All mraid it pwareed m be of ~pecifrd Any Waetioe u ~'~ Lwn ~'~6 ma ~ ~ e~oed ~' ACCEPTANCE SK~NATURE upon w~meo orders, od wie a mqn oYr{. rbere el Ae we~ra4 npao etriasccidm~s ar dcVys bcYoad oar mood. OMr b arry 6ro, land4 nod otlxr nooeaory _.` +mnmce. a. natuf ac Poet' cased et' Walomm's canpaurloo ierusom. Pape 2 v~~ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner ~G-- THRU: Chris Bendon, Director Community Development DATE OF MEMO: October 15, 2007 MEETING DATE: October 22, 2007 RE: Extension of Commercial Core Business Mix and Historic Interiors Moratorium First Reading of Ordinance No.~L, Series 2007 Second Reading scheduled for November 12, 2007 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: A six-month extension of the "Commercial Core Business Mix and Historic Interiors" moratorium adopted under Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, as amended. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, established a temporary moratorium on the issuance of building permits in the Commercial Core Zone District, and was adopted on December 12, 2006, for asix-month period, originally scheduled to expire on June 12, 2007. This moratorium was extended for an additional six months on June 11, 2007, and is currently scheduled to expire on Dec. 12, 2007. Under this moratorium, staff has worked with a consulting team on potential code amendments with regard to the historic designation of interior elements, and with regard to the possible regulation of the mix of commercial uses. DISCUSSION: The issue of commercial mix was identified by the previous City Council in April 2006 as one of four areas of focus for the 1st Moratorium, adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006. The public feedback process on this issue began with a public wireless keypad session at the Jerome Hotel in July 2006, when approximately 10 questions were posed on this particular issue. Although staff began to conduct research on commercial mix regulatory tools in the fall of 2006, and work sessions were held with the P&Z, Council and ACRA in the early spring of 2007, the press of other moratorium-related issues left little time to focus squarely on this highly complex issue. The ls` Moratorium expired on May 29, 2007 without code amendments being reviewed or adopted regarding commercial mix. However, the 2"d Moratorium, adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 51, in December 2006, also identified commercial mix as an issue, and the prohibition on building permits in the Commercial Core Zone District effectively provided time to continue considering code amendment regarding commercial mix issues. Staff received general direction from the current Council in June 2006 to continue research and public feedback on the issue. An instant voting keypad session was held at the Jerome Hotel on September 21, which continued to explore the definition of the problem and the range of potential regulatory tools. Following the Sept. 21 keypad session, two work sessions have been held with Council and a third is currently being scheduled. The purpose of these Council work sessions is to gain additional Council feedback on the definition of the problem, in order to better identify the type of regulatory tools that may, or may not, be applicable. Following the work sessions with Council, staff will draft a recommendation regarding which regulatory tools are most applicable. Council has recently requested a staff recommendation on potential regulatory tools. After compiling a recommendation, staffs intention is to proceed through the public hearing process, first to P&Z and then to City Council. As a general matter, the public policy discussion on commercial mix has taken an extended period of time due to the highly complex nature of the problem, the sometimes experimental nature of the potential regulatory tools, and the time required to attend to various other pressing priorities. In the meantime, Council has adopted amendments to Ordinance No. 51 to ensure a reasonable measure of flexibility with regard to the issuance of building permits in the Commercial Core Zone District. With regard to potential code amendments on the historic designation of interior elements, staff has met with Council at a work session and has received sufficient direction to draft a code amendment. Staff plans to bring these potential code amendments to the Historic Preservation Commission in December, and will soon schedule public hearing dates with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council extend the moratorium established by Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006, as amended, by six months to June 12, 2008. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No.y~, Series of 2007," upon First Reading. CITY MANAGER ORDINANCE NO. (Series of 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, EXTENDING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ADOPTED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 51, SERIES OF 2006, AND AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE N0.2, SERIES OF 2007, AND AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 26, SERIES OF 2007, AND AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 37, SERIES OF 2007. WHEREAS, the City of Aspen (the "City") is a legally and regulazly created, established, organized and existing municipal corporation under the provisions of Article XX of the Constitution of the State of Colorado and the home rule charter of the City (the "Charter"); and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen currently regulates land uses within the City limits in accordance with Chapter 26.104 et seq. of the Aspen Municipal Code pursuant to its Home Rule Constitutional authority and the Local Government Land Use Control Enabling Act of 1974, as amended, §§29-20-101, et seq. C.R.S; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen enacted a temporary moratorium pursuant to Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007; and, WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, allows for the termination date of the moratorium to be extended by City Council through the adoption of an ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the City Council reaffirms the reasons for implementing the moratorium, specifically that recent land use applications seeking Development Orders in various City Zone Districts do not appear to be consistent with the goals and vision as expressed by the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan and are having the following negative effects upon the community: • Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the preservation of the unique historic character of certain structures, including their interiors and current uses; • Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the unique character of the uses of buildings and structures within the commercial core of the City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to review all existing land use codes and regulations as they affect land use development in certain Zone Districts within the City of Aspen to ensure that all land use development proceeds in a manner that is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan; and Ordinance No. 26, Page 1 Series 2007 WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to conduct a thorough analysis and assessment of the Land Use Code and regulations affecting the development of land within certain Zone Districts of the City of Aspen with particular attention to the preservation of historic interior elements, and with particular attention to a diverse, healthy and vibrant mix of commercial uses; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to investigate methods and procedures to insure the preservation of historic interior elements, and to insure a diverse, healthy and vibrant mix of commercial uses; and, WHEREAS, an extension of the moratorium termination date will enable a reasoned discussion of the desired character and rate of development and redevelopment and consideration of amendments to the Land Use Code without creating a rush of development applications and the related impacts upon the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1-Extension of Moratorium Termination Date: The termination date of the temporary moratorium enacted through the adoption of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007, is hereby extended to terminate on June 12, 2008. Section 2 -Chanties to Moratorium: Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007, shall continue in its full force and effect and nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to alter the substantive content of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006; Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007; Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007; and Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007, except as follows: ^ The termination date shall be extended as described in Section 1, above. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Ordinance No. 26, Page 2 Series 2007 Section 4• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 12~' day of November, 2007, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 7• This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22"d day of October, 2007. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2007. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Ordinance No. 26, Page 3 Series 2007 MEMORANDUM To: FROM: THRU: DATE OF MEMO: MEETING DATE: RE: Mayor and City Council VII b Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner Chris Bendon, Director Community Development 1 I'~ October 15, 2007 October 22, 2007 Extension of SCI Moratorium First Reading of Ordinance No ~ ,Series 2007 Second Reading scheduled for October 29, 2007 REQUEST OF COUNCIL: A six-month extension of the "SCI Moratorium" moratorium adopted under Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006, as amended. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006, established a temporary moratorium on the acceptance of land use applications in various Zone Districts, and was adopted on April 24, 2006, with an original termination date of October 31, 2006. On September 25, 2006, this moratorium was extended until February 28, 2007. On February 28, 2007, this moratorium was extended until May 31, 2007. On May 29, 2007, this moratorium was terminated, with the exception of all properties within the Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) Zone District. DISCUSSION: Dating back to 2006, staff has held work sessions with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, and has conducted and presented the results of extensive research into the history and trends within the SCI Zone District. More recently, staff has held informal meetings with more than a dozen business owners in the SCI Zone District located on either side of N. Mill Street. Council has requested an overview of the Obermeyer Place development, with regard to the performance of that project in relation to the SCI users there. Staff is in the process of conducting that overview, and scheduling an informal meeting with SCI business owners at Obermeyer Place. Staff s intention is to drafr potential code amendments and schedule public hearings with P&Z in December, and with Council in January. As a general matter, the question of code amendments for the SCI Zone District has taken an extended period of time due to the fundamentally different characteristics of the separate and distinct properties within this Zone District, including Obermeyer Place, the "Puppy Smith" property on N. Mill and the "riverside" property on N. Mill. Other factors have included the inherent complexity of the permitted and conditional uses within this unique zone district, and various other pressing priorities. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council extend the moratorium established by Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006, as amended, by six months to May 30, 2008. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No.~~, Series of 2007," upon First Reading. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ORDINANCE NO~~ (Series of 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, EXTENDING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ADOPTED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 19, SERIES OF 2006, AND AS AMENDED PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE N0.23, SERIES OF 2006, AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 38, SERIES OF 2006, AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES OF 2007, AND AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 20, SERIES OF 2007. WHEREAS, the City of Aspen (the "City") is a legally and regularly created, established, organized and existing municipal corporation under the provisions of Article XX of the Constitution of the State of Colorado and the home rule charter of the City (the "Charter"); and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen currently regulates land uses within the City limits in accordance with Chapter 26.104 et seq. of the Aspen Municipal Code pursuant to its Home Rule Constitutional authority and the Local Government Land Use Control Enabling Act of 1974, as amended, §§29-20-101, et seq. C.R.S; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen enacted a temporary moratorium pursuant to Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 23, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 38, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 3, Series of 2007; and as amended by Ordinance Number 20, Series of 2007; and WHEREAS, Section 2 of Ordinance Number 20, Series of 2007, extended the termination date of the moratorium adopted in Ordinance 19, Series of 2006, only for properties located in the Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) Zone District, to terminate on November 30, 2007; and WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, allows for the termination date of the moratorium to be extended by City Council through the adoption of an ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the City Council reaffirms the reasons for implementing the moratorium, specifically that recent land use applications seeking Development Orders in various City Zone Districts do not appear to be consistent with the goals and vision as expressed by the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan and are having the following negative effects upon the community: • Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the unique character of the commercial uses of buildings and structures within the City of Aspen; and, Ordinance No. 26, Page 1 Series 2007 Recent development activity indicates that locally serving businesses aze being negatively impacted, thereby losing an essential chazacter of the City's commercial economy. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to review all existing land use codes and regulations as they affect land use development in the SCI Zone District within the City of Aspen to ensure that all land use development proceeds in a manner that is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to conduct a thorough analysis and assessment of the Land Use Code and regulations affecting the development of land within the SCI Zone District of the City of Aspen with particular attention to the long-term provision of an adequate number oflocally-serving businesses; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department require an additional period of time in which to investigate methods and procedures to insure the long-term health oflocally-serving businesses; and, WHEREAS, an extension of the moratorium termination date will enable a reasoned discussion of the desired character and rate of development and redevelopment and consideration of amendments to the Land Use Code without creating a rush of development applications and the related impacts upon the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1-Extension of Moratorium Termination Date: The termination date of the temporary moratorium enacted through the adoption of Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 23, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 38, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 3, Series of 2007; and as amended by Ordinance Number 20, Series of 2007, is hereby extended to terminate on May 30, 2008. Section 2 -Chances to Moratorium: Ordinance Number 19, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 23, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 38, Series of 2006, and as amended by Ordinance Number 3, Series of 2007, and as amended by Ordinance Number 2Q, Series of 2007, shall continue in its full force and effect and nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to alter the substantive content of the above cited Ordinances, except as follows: • The termination date shall be extended as described in Section 1, above. Section 3: Ordinance No. 26, Page 2 Series 2007 This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5• The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6• A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 29a' day of October, 2007, at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 7• This ordmance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22"d day of October, 2007. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2007. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Ordinance No. 26, Page 3 Series 2007 vrt~a, MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council ,,,, ~~ FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director (I~A,~ Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer vv~~ll ~~ RE: Land Use Code Amendments -Historic Preservation Second Reading of Ordinance 45, Series of 2007 MEETING DATE: October 22, 2007 City staff is continuing to development edits and revisions to Ordinance 45 with input from representatives of the Aspen Citizens Group. Additional time is necessary to finalize the revisions and to minimize the number of follow-up edits during the heazing. A memorandum describing the edits and the revised ordinance will be submitted under sepazate cover as an addendum packet and will be distributed to City Council no later than Thursday morning. We apologize for the delay. V I11 b MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk DATE: October 11, 2007 RE: Ordinance #43, Series of 2007 - Re-establishing the Commercial Core & Lodging Commission REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Adopt Ordinance #43, 2007 on second reading, which ordinance reestablishes the Commercial Core & Lodging Commission as a permanent board. Staff has scheduled interviews with CCLC members and prospective members on November 20`h PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: This ordinance was passed on first reading at Council's October 9, 2007, and published for public hearing and second reading for the October 22"a meeting. At the September 11, 2007 work session with the members of the CCLC, Council recommended that staff draft an ordinance with the following changes: Composition shall consist of 7 members and 1 alternate who shall serve a term of four years. This is consistent with other appointed boards. In addition Council suggested there be no expiration of the board. No other commissions have a sunset date. BACKGROUND: Council established the CCLC in 1981, to advise and recommend programs for the core such as circulation, signage, mall improvements, graphics etc. The CCLC is involved in existing core activities such as mall leases and the Saturday Market. A sub-committee of CCLC reviews all applications for the Saturday Market. The CCLC is the liaison between businesses and Council. Since their inception, CCLC has tackled newspaper racks, trash compactors, and ordinance. CCLC worked with staff on the Downtown Enhancement Pedestrian Plan which was installed on Mill and Hyman. CCLC was instrumental in establishing the original farmer's market and later recommended to Council its expansion to two blocks. CCLC worked with the city's downtown business catalyst and with individual business to establish a business improvement district. Ordinance 1 was amended by Ordinance 56, Series of 1981, which reduced the quorum from 4 to 3. The term was set to expire December 31, 1985. Ordinance 24, Series of 1986, reenacted the board for another 5 years. Ordinance 6, Series of 1988, changed the geographical area under the board's purview to encompass Dean Street, Monarch Street, Spring Street and the Lodge zones at the base of Aspen Mountain. The original geographical area was Main to Durant and Hunter to Monarch streets. The Commercial Core & Lodging Commission term was further extended by Ordinance 49, Series of 1991. In 2001 Council adopted Ordinance 40 (attached) which renewed the term of operation for the Commercial Core & Lodging Commission and increased the number of members to 5 regular members and 2 alternates and set a sunset date of December 31, 2006. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The CCLC is currently staffed by personnel from the City Clerk's office and creating the CCLC as a permanent board should not incur any additional costs. There is no budget request associated with this ordinance or with the CCLC. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: As this is an existing Boazd, there should be no environmental impacts. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Ordinance #43 on second reading. ALTERNATIVES: Council could dissolve the board. This would result in Council having to review and approve the mall leases; appoint a staff person to oversee the Saturday market and to deal with the commercial core issues. Council could also adopt an ordinance extending the term of CCLC for another five years. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance #43, Series of 2007 on second reading". CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance #43, 2007 Ordinance 40, 2001 Current CCLC Board Members ORDINANCE NO. !3 (Series of 2007) DE ORIBIN HE OMPOSIT ONCTOERM AND QUALIFICATIONS OF COCMMISSION N MEMBERS, THEIR POWERS, AND DUTIES; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS BY PERSONS AGGRIEVED BY ACTIONS OF THE COMMERCIAL CORE AND LODGING COMMISSION AND ESTABLISHING RULES OF PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE COMMERCIAL. CORE AND LODGING COMMISSION IN EXERCISING IT'S FUNCTIONS. WHEREAS, the City Council established the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission by Ordinance No. 1 (Series of 1981) which was amended by Ordinance No. 56 (Series of 1981) reducing the quorum from 4 to 3. WHEREAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission term was originally set to expire on December 31, 1985, and was extended by Ordinance No. 24 (Series of 1986), to December 31, 1991. WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 6 (Series of 1988), the Commission's geographic area of concern was changed and an alternate member was added to the composition of the Commission; and WHEREAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission term was further extended by Ordinance 49 (Series of 1991); and Ordinance No. 40 (Series of 2001) to December 31, 2006. WHEREAS, staff and Board recommend making this a permanent board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. That the City of Aspen Commercial Core & Lodging Commission is hereby established as follows: Section 2. Composition Term Qualification. The Commission shall be constituted as follows: (a) The Commercial Core and Lodging Commission shall consist of seven (7) members and (1) alternate who shall serve a term of four (4) years (although there shall be no restraint on the number of terms any members may serve). Alternates shall vote only in the absence of a regulaz member. H: cclc coreordinance (b) All original appointments shall be for a period of four (4) yeazs and made by the City Council. (c) All members of the Commission shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council and maybe removed by a majority vote of the whole City Council. There shall be no restraint upon the number of terms any member of the commission may serve. (d) No member of the City Council, Mayor, City Employee, not any appointed officials shall serve on the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission. (e) There shall be imposed no age or residency requirement for membership on the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission, nor shall candidates for appointment be required to be qualified electors. Section 3. Powers and Duties. The Commercial Core and Lodging Commission shall have the following powers and duties, all of which shall be exercised subject to the laws of the state and municipality, with appropriate conditions and safeguazds, and in accordance with the public interest and the most beneficial development of the Aspen Commercial Core and Lodging Area: (a) To advise and recommend further development and implementation of plans and programs for the Commercial Core and Lodging Area such as circulation, pazking, sidewalks, landscaping, lighting, signing, graphics, alley improvements, public transit, and improvement to existing mall azeas; (b) To develop and recommend methods of funding the above plans and programs, by, for example, exploring and considering special assessment districts, local matching fund programs, capital improvement fund programs and state and federal grant programs; (c) To develop and review programs that various groups may sponsor to promote the Commercial Core and Lodging Area as a whole; (d) To recommend to the City Council such new legislation as it may deem in harmony with its function and the matters given to it for administration, and also to recommend revisions of existing legislation affecting the Commercial Core and Lodging Area's condition, development and administration, as it shall deem advisable for the protection of the public health, safety and welfaze; (e) To manage the operation of the Aspen Saturday Market and to advise and H:ccrc coreordinance recommend possible future development of future community programs and events in the spirit of the Aspen Saturday Market; (f) To provide a liaison with existing community events and programs and to advise on what efforts might be undertaken to maintain and/or enhance such events and programs; (g) To perform such other duties as the City Council may form time to time by ordinance or otherwise impose upon it. Section 4. Anneals. Any person aggrieved by any action of the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission may appeal such decision or order to the City Council with thirty (30) days from the date of the decision or order appealed from. An appeal is perfected by filing notice thereof with the City Clerk. Such notice shall contain an appropriate reverence to the decision or order appealed from, and duplicate copy of the same shall be forwazded by the City Clerk to the Chairman of the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission. If the City Council fails to provide the remedy prayed for, or any person is otherwise aggrieved by the action of the City Council on appeal, such person may appeal the action within thirty (30) days thereof in a court of record of competent jurisdiction. Review shall not be extended further than to determine whether the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission or City Council has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. Section 5. Rules of Procedure. A quorum for the transaction of business of the Commission shall consist of four (4) of the members. The Commission shall establish regular meetings and special meetings maybe called by the Secretary of the Commission on the request of the Chairman or any two members, on at least twenty-four (24) hours written notice to each member of the Commission provided that a special meeting maybe held on shorter notice if all members of the Commission aze present or have waived notice thereof. No business shall be transacted at any special meeting unless it has been stated in the notice of such meeting. All regular and special meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public except for executive (closed door) meetings as may be permitted by law. Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and H:cclc coreordinance shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. Section 7. Public Hearing. A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the day of , 2007 at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, seven days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2007. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2007. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk H: cclc coreordinance ORDINANCE NO. Xy (Series of 2001) AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A RENEWED TERM OF OPERATION FOR THE COMMERCIAL CORE AND LODGING COMMISSION UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2006; DESCRIBING THE COMPOSITION, TERM AND QUALIFICATIONS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS, THEIIi POWERS, AND DUTIES; PROVIDING FOR APPEALS BY PERSONS AGGRIEVEII BY ACTIONS OF THE COMMERCIAL CORE -AND LODGING COMMISSION AND ESTABLISHING RULES OF PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED SY THE COMMERCIAL CORE AND LODGING COMMISSION IN EXERCISING IT'S FUNCTIONS. WHEREAS, the-City Council established the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission by Ordinance No. 1 (Series of 1981) which ordinance was amended by Ordinance No. 56 (Series of 1981); and WHEREAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission term was originally set to expire on December 31, 1985, and was extended by Ordinance No. 24 (Seriesof 1986), to December 3i, 1991; and WHEREAS; by Ordinance No. (Series of 1988), the Commission's geographic azea.of concern was changed and an alternate member was added to the composition of the Commission; and WHEREAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission term was further extended by Ordinance 49 (Series of 1991); and: WHEREAS, the City Council desires to re-establish the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission for a period of five (5) years, and todefine and establish the geographic azea that the Commercial Core-and Lodging Commission should address as that area bounded by Dean Street; Monarch Street; Spring Street; the Lodge and Lodge 1 Zones at the base of Aspen Mountain; and that portion of the Ute Avenue azea that is primarily devoted to lodging; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to add a second alternate member. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY-THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Fcrahfichment of Cnmm;cc;nn .That there is hereby established the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission for the City of Aspen, Colorado, for a term ending on December 31, 2006. Nothing herein shall prevent the re-establishment of said Commission on or after December 31, 2006, by appropriate action of the City Council at its election. Section 2. Cnm~nc;finn; Term;~iialifiratinn The Commission shall be constituted as follows: (a) The Commercial Core and Lodging Commission shall consist of five (5) members and two alternates who shall serve a term of three (3) yeazs (although there shall be no restraint on the number of terms any members may serve). Alternates shall vote only in the absence of a regulaz member and when appointed, an alternate shall be designated as acting for. the absent member. (b) All original appointments shall be for a period of three (3) years (or the balance of the term of the Commission, whichever is less), and made by the City Council. Nothing herein shall be construed to constitute an extension of the term of the Commission beyond that provided in Section 1 hereof. (c) All members of the Commission shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council and maybe removed by a maj ority vote of the whole City Council. There shall be no restraint upon the number of terms any member of the commission may serve. (d) No member of the City Council, Mayor, City Employee, not any appointed officials shall serve on the Commercial Care and Lodging Commission. (e) There shall be imposed no age or residency requirement for membership on the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission, nor shall candidates for appointment be required to be qualified electors. Section 3. Pn~.,erc anA n»ties. The Commercial Core and Lodging Commission shall have the following powers and duties, all of which shall.be exercised subject to the laws of the state and municipality, with appropriate conditions and safeguards, and in accordance with the public interest and the most beneficial development of the Aspen Commercial Core and Lodging Area: (a) To advise and recommend further development and implementation of plans and programs for the Commercial Core and Lodging Area such as circulation, pazking, sidewalks, landscaping, lighting; signing, graphics, alley improvements, public transit, and improvement to existing mall areas; (b) To develop and recommend methods of funding the above plans and programs, by, for example, exploring and considering special,assessment districts, local matching fund programs, capital improvement fund programs and state and federal grant programs; (c) To develop incentives-for participafion in and implementation of Commercial Core and Lodging Area programs; (d) To develop and review programs that various groups may sponsor to promote the Commercial Core and Lodging Area as a whole; (e) Upon referral by the City Council, to review-and recommend approval or disapproval of special uses and programs using downtown streets, sidewalks or malls; (f) To tecommend to the City Council such new legislation as it may deem in harmony with'its function and the matters given to it for administration, and also to recommend revisions of existing legislation affecting the Commercial Core and Lodging Area's condition, development and administration, as it shall deem advisable for the ptotection of the public health, safety and welfaze; (g) To perform such other duties as the City Council may form time to time by ordinance or otherwise impose upon it. Section 4. Ann .al` Any petson aggrieved by any acfion of the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission may appeal such decision or order to the City Council with thirty (30) days from the date of the decision or order appealed from. An appeal is perfected by filing notice thereof with the City Clerk. Such notice shall contain an appropriate reverence to the decision or order appealed from, and duplicate copy of the same shall be forwarded bythe City Clerk to the Chairman of the Commercial Core and Lodging-Commission. If the City Council fails to provide the remedy prayed for, or any person is otherwise aggrieved by the action of the City Council on appeal, such person may appeal the action within thirty (30) days thereof in a court of record of competent jurisdiction. Review shall not be extended further than to determine. whether the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission or City Council has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. Section 5. R„1PC ~f Prncerli,re- A quorum for the transacrion of business of the Commission shall consist of three (3) of the members, The Commission shall establish regulaz meetings and special meetings maybe called by the Secretary of the Commission on the request of the Chairman or any two members, on at least twenty-four (24) hours written notice to each member of the Commission provided that a special meeting may be held on shorter notice if all members of the Commission aze present or have waived notice thereof No business shall be transacted at any special meeting unless it has been stated in the notice of such meeting. All regulaz and special meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public except for executive (closed door) meetings as may be permitted by law. Citizens shall have a reasonable opportunity to be heazd and all minutes and other records of action s of the Commission shall be made available to the public. The Commission shall adopt by-laws for the conduct of its business not inconsistent with the ordinance and shall adopt such rules of procedure as it deems necessary. Section 6. cPVerah;l; r If any section, subsection, sentence,. clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof. 4 Section 7. P„hi,'~ uearine A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the day of , 2001, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the Ciry Council of the City of Aspen on the /~ .day of ~~, 2001. ATTEST; , Kathryn S. h, Gi Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of 2001 Helen Kahn Klanderulcj~ Mayor A~TESTC - Kathryn S. ch, ity Clerk CJK-08/z9/2001-c:\David\COREOrdinaaces. doc 5 D Bill Dinsmoor, Chair John Starr Terry Butler, Vice-chair Mark Goodman Don Sheeley, alt Shae' Singer Vacant Enablina Leaislation appointed 4/93 4/96 2/97 12/2003 1!2005 1 /2005 1/2005 term 12/2006 12/2006 1/2008 12/2006 1/2008 1/2008 1 /2008 The CCLC was established by Ordinance #1, 1981, and the terms were set at five years or December 31, 1985, whichever is first. Ordinance #24, 1986 extended the commission to December 1991, and Ordinance #49, 1991 extended the commission. Ord. 40, 2001 extended the commission to Dec. 21, 2006; added a second alternate member and revised the term from two years to three years. Powers and Duties A. Advise and recommend on circulation, parking, sidewalks, landscaping, lighting, signing, graphics, alley improvements, public transit, malls. B. recommend methods of funding these programs. C. develop incentives for participation in these programs D. review programs that groups may sponsor to promote the commercial core. E. review special uses and programs using downtown streets or malls F. recommend legislation affecting the commercial core and lodging area's condition, development. Appeals -Any person aggrieved by any action of the CCLC may appeal to the City Council within 30 days. An appeal is perfected by filing notice with the City Clerk. Meetings First and third Wednesdays at 8:30 a.m. Membership G COMMISS Qualification -Preference for members ~emoraadum TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor and Members of Council James R. True October 15, 2007 Ordinance No. 44, Series of 2007, to Disconnect Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision from the city limits of the City of Aspen Attached for your consideration and review is a proposed ordinance that, if approved, would disconnect Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision from the city limits of the City of Aspen. A substantially similar application was considered by the Council on May 14, 2007. That application was denied by a vote of 3 to 1. There is nothing in the state statute or municipal code that prohibits an applicant from resubmitting an application to disconnect following a denial. The parcel proposed for disconnection is part of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision located on the eastern edge of the City limits. Attached please find a Petition for Disconnection by Ordinance submitted by Sister Andrea Jaeger, the founder of Little Star Foundation. The petition describes the reasons for the request and history of this parcel. I have asked city staff members to be present at the public hearing of the ordinance to describe any issues that the city staff may wish to bring to City Council's attention before approving the ordinance. Also, attached hereto please find a memorandum from the Community Development Department that makes a recommendation regarding this matter. State law authorizes City Council to adopt an ordinance to disconnect lands that are within and adjacent to the boundary of the City of Aspen upon the filing of an application by the property owners and a finding of the City Council that the best interests of the City would not be r~reiudiced by the approval of the disconnection. The attached proposed ordinance contains the requisite findings and, if adopted, would disconnect the parcel from the city limits of the City of Aspen. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me. G:\jolm\word\memos\Little Staz disconnect.doc REQUESTED ACTION: Denial or Approval of Ordinance No. 44, Series of 2007, on second reading. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: cc: City Manager G:\john\word\memos\Little Star disconnect.doc ORDINANCE NO. 44 (Series of 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE DISCONNECTION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS THE "LITTLE STAR FOUNDATION RANCH DE-ANNEXATION." WHEREAS, on September 11, 2007, the owner of the property proposed to be disconnected from the City of Aspen did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a "Petition for Disconnection by Ordinance" pursuant to Section 31-12-501, C.R.S; and WHEREAS, Section 31-12-501, C.R.S. sets forth the procedure required to disconnect a tract of land within and adjacent to the boundazy of a city. WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and determine that approval of the Petition for Disconnection of said territory to be in the City's best interest; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1. That the tract of land described in the Petition for Disconnection, commonly referred to as the "Little Star Foundation Ranch de-annexation", and as legally described below, is hereby disconnected from the City of Aspen, Colorado, in accordance with Section 31-12-501, C. R.S. Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, according to the Final Plat thereof recorded December 30, 1994, in Plat Book 35 at Page 86 of the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado. Section 2. The City Clerk of the City of Aspen is hereby directed as follows: (a) To file one (1) certified copy of this ordinance in the office of the Ciry Clerk of the City of Aspen. (b) To certify and file two (2) copies of this ordinance with the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. (c) To request the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County to file one certified copy of this ordinance with the Division of Local Government of the Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado. Section 3. The City Engineer of the City of Aspen is hereby directed to amend the Official Map of the City of Aspen to reflect the boundary changes adopted pursuant to this ordinance. Section 4. The land so disconnected shall not thereby be exempt from the payment of any taxes lawfully assessed against it for the purpose of paying any indebtedness contracted by the City of Aspen while such land was within the limits thereof and which remain unpaid and for the payment of which said land could lawfully be taxed. Section 5. That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6. That 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 the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. z A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. day of 2007, INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of 2007. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, Ciry Clerk 3 2007. s MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planner) M~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director 1 'll~/~I DATE OF MEMO: October 15, 2007 V~ MEETING DATE: October 22, 2007 RE: 1490 Ute Ave Petition for Disconnection from the City of Aspen REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Council has been asked to approve a petition for disconnection by ordinance of the 6.487 acre pazce] located at 1409 Ute Avenue. The parcel is also known as Lot 5 in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. BACKGROUND: In 1997 the property owner, Silver Lining Ranch, requested annexation into the City and requested rezoning and a Growth Management Exemption. Subsequent to the annexation, the pazcel was rezoned to Academic (A) and Conservation (C), both with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay. The Applicant was also granted a Growth Management Exemption for anon-proSt entity qualifying as an essential public facility. Prior to annexation, the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision was approved by the Pitkin County BOCC. Below is a map indicating the lots in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision; all are within the Growth Boundary. Page 1 of 4 The subdivision includes six lots and a large open space parcel. The Land Use approvals from the County included five growth management allotments for single-family homes on Lots 2 - 6. These Lots were zoned AR-2 (Residential - 2 Acre) and under the approved subdivision were permitted to include 6,500 squaze feet of floor area, plus 4,000 squaze feet of exempt sub-grade floor azea and 750 squaze feet of exempt gazage area. Of the six lots, only one, Lot 5, was ever annexed by the City. DISCUSSION: Based on the Petition for Disconnection, it appeazs the property owner is interested in disconnecting from the City in an effort to revert back to the previous zoning and approvals received in the County prior to Annexation. Regazdless of if the property is disconnected or not, the property would be required to undergo a land use process in order to either change zoning in the City or establish zoning in the County. Attached as Exhibit A is a map of the area. The areas in blue are located within the City, and the areas in green aze located in the County. Lot 5, located in the City, is in pink. A lazge version of this map will also be available at the public hearing. City Zonin¢ If the Petition is not granted and the property stays in the City, the property owner would be permitted to retain the current zoning, but a similaz activity or use would be required to occur on the Lot in order to comply with the permitted uses in the Academic (A) and Conservation (C) zone districts (See Exhibit B for a list of the permitted uses in these zone districts). If, however, a change in use is desired, the property would need to be rezoned in order to accommodate that use. As indicated in the map attached as Exhibit A, the surrounding azeas in the City include an Affordable Housing development zoned AH/PUD (Ute Pazk Townhomes), the Aspen Club zoned Rural Residential (RR PUD), and single-family and duplex homes zoned R-15B and R-15 PUD. The adjacent zoning in the County is AR-2, Residential - 2 Acre, which is intended "to provide for a moderate density, transition zone between moderate and low density residential land uses." (Pitkin County Land Use Code) If the pazcel was zoned to a residential use for the purposes of constructing asingle-family or duplex dwelling unit, the property would be required to undergo a Growth Management Review and provide affordable housing mitigation for the new squaze footage. The lot is 6.487 acres, or approximately 282,573 squaze feet. If the property owner pursued (and the City granted) rezoning of the entire pazcel to R-15 (Moderate Density Residential), R-30 (Low-Density Residential), or RR (Rural Residential) to accommodate a single family residence or duplex on the property, the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a single family home would be approximately 11,251 squaze feet and the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a duplex would be approximately 13,997 square feet. Staff, however, would recommend that the area currently zoned as Conservation (C) remain in that zone district in order to continue to preserve the natural resources in the azea, and would recommend that only the Academic (A) zone be considered for re-zoning to residential. If this occurred, the azea able to be built on and the allowable floor area would be reduced, per Section 26.710.022 of the Land Use Code. (See Exhibit C) This portion of lot includes approximately Page 2 of 4 147,000 squaze feet of lot area. If only this portion of the property was re-zoned to a residential use (R-15, R-30, or RR), the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a single family home would be approximately 8,540 squaze feet and the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a duplex would be approximately 9,930 squaze feet. Currently, the parcel contains a structure of approximately 18,000 squaze feet. If the parcel was re-zoned in the Ciry and the structure was not demolished, it would be anon-conforming structure with respect to Floor Area. This could be remedied by placing a PUD on the Lot which would establish dimensional requirements for the property. Staff would recommend that a PUD replace the existing SPA in this circumstance. The Applicant has not indicated an interest in zoning the property to amulti-family zone district, but this is another potential avenue the Applicant could pursue should the property remain in the City. County Zoning Should the Petition be granted, the owner would be required to receive land use approvals from the County. This would entail site plan review and zoning. While it is not certain exactly what zoning would be granted in the County, it is likely the property would be re-zoned to AR-2 (Residential - 2 Acre) in accordance with the original subdivision approval and the zoning in the rest of the subdivision. Exhibit A indicates the azea of the subdivision and the current County zoning for Lots 1 - 4 and Lot 6. If the pazcel were zoned in accordance with the rest of the subdivision, it is likely the lot would have the same dimensional requirements as the other single family lots in the subdivision. Further, it is likely the property would be subject to the covenants and restrictions in the Subdivision as well as all subdivision approvals. This would include 6,500 square feet of floor area above-grade plus 4,000 square feet of exempt sub-grade floor area and 750 squaze feet of exempt garage azea. Lot 5 received a Growth Management Allotment from the County when it was originally approved by the BOCC in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. Growth Management Allotments do not expire in the County, so if the Lot reverts back to the County no Growth Management review would be required. Part of the original subdivision approvals required that each lot provide an on-site ADU as mitigation for the first four bedrooms built; if the home is built with more than four bedrooms, further mitigation would be required. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Under its tax-exempt status as anon-profit company, the property has been exempt from paying property tax since its annexation into the City. The petition for disconnection states that the applicant believes the sale of its property for single-family residential development will provide the highest monetary benefit, and it is presumed the parcel will revert to asingle-family home should the de-annexation be approved. If this parcel reverts to asingle-family use, or any other use not associated with anon-profit entity, it will lose its tax exempt status and will begin paying property taxes. The City will lose this potential revenue if the petition is granted. City services such as police, fire, utilities, and administrative services have been provided since the time of annexation. These services will not be impacted negatively if the property remained in the City. It is even likely that City services may be reduced with the development of asingle-family use. Page 3 of 4 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council not approve the Petition for Disconnection. If the property remains in the City there is an opportunity for it to remain an Academic use. Staff believes this opportunity provides greater benefit to the Community than an additional single family residence. Disconnection may eliminate this opportunity. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Map Exhibit B -Academic and Conservation Zone District permitted uses Exhibit C -Section 26.710.022, Zoning of lands containing more than one underlying zone district Page 4 of 4 Exhibit B Stillwater Ranch De-Annexation 26.710.230 Academic (A). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Academic (A) zone district is to establish lands for education and cultural activities with attendant research, housing and administrative facilities. All development in the Academic zone district is to proceed according to a conceptual development plan and final develop-ment plan approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Areas. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Academic (A) zone district: 1. Private school or university, teaching hospital, research facility or testing laboratory, provided that such facilities are enclosed and there are no adverse noise or environmental effects; 2. Auditorium and other facilities for performances and lectures; 3. Gallery; 4. Museum; 5. Library; and 6. Administrative offices. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425. 1. Boardinghouse and dormitory for housing students and faculty of schools and other academic institutions; 2. Student health care facility; 3. Student and faculty dining hall; and D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned area. Exhibit B Stillwater Ranch De-Annexation 26.710.220 Conservation (C). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Conservation (C) zone district is to provide areas of low density de- velopment to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the production of crops and animals, and to contain urban development. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Conservation (C) zone district: 1. Detached residential dwelling; 2. Park, playfield, playground and golf course; 3. Riding stable; 4. Cemetery; 5. Crop production, orchards, nurseries, flower production and forest land; 6. Pasture and grazing land; 7. Dairy; 8. Fishery; 9. Animal production; 10. Husbandry services (not including commercial feed lots) and other farm and agricultural uses; 11. Railroad right-of--way but not a railroad yard; 12. Home occupations; 13. Accessory buildings and uses; and 14. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520.040; and 15. Temporary special events associated with ski areas including, but not limited to, such events as ski races, bicycle races and concerts; with special event committee approval. C. Conditional uses. The Following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Conservation (C) district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425. 1. Guest ranches; 2. Recreational uses including a riding academy, stable, club, country club and golf course; 3. Ski lift and other ski facilities; 4. Sewage disposal area; 5. Water treatment plant and storage reservoir; and 6. Electric substations and gas regulator stations (not including business or administration offices). D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Conservation (C) zone district. 1. Minimum lot size (acres): 10. 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (acres): 10. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): 400. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 100. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): 30. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 30. 7. Maximum height (feet): 25. 8. Minimum distance between principal and accessory buildings (feet): No requirement. 9. Percent of open space required for building site: No requirement. 10. External floor area ratio: (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record): same as R-15 zone district. 2 ~XYIi~P~~~ each permitted and conditional use is compatible with surrounding land uses, is served by adequate public ' 'ties, and is consistent with the environmental sensitivity of the City and its surrounding azea s al resources. All development wi h zone district shall be consis- tent with the purposes stated for one district in thi pter. Any use which is not specifically listed in this Chapter as a permitted or con ' ' m a zone district shall be considered prohibited, unless otherwise interpreted by the Co ty a went Director pursuant to Chapter 26.306. 26.710.020 Zone distri stablished. The City of Aspen ' ereby divided in several zones, known and designated as ' ed in this Chapter, to serve the ores stated above and in each Section of this Chapter describing the 'dual zone 26.710.022 Zoning of lands containing more than one underlying zone district. Whenever any parcel of land shall contain more than one underlying zone district, the following rules shall apply: A. Proposed use not allowed in al[ zone districts. When a parcel of land contains more than one un- derlying zone district and the proposed use is not allowed in all of the respective zone districts, then: I. The use can only be developed on land in which it is a permitted or a conditional use. 2. The external floor area and density which shall apply to the use shall be calculated based only on the land area of the zone district in which the use is a permitted or conditional use. The off- street pazkingrequirements and other dimensional requirements which shall apply to the use shall be those of the zone district in which the use is a permitted or conditional use, but shall be calculated on the basis of the land area and development of the entire pazcel. B. Proposed use allowed in all zone districts. When a pazcel of land contains more than one underly- ing zone district and the proposed use is allowed in all of the respective zone districts, then: 1. The use shall be developed by comparing each dimensional and pazking requirement of the re- spective zone districts and applying the more restrictive of each requirement. These require- ments shall, however, be calculated based on the land azea and development of the entire paz- cel. 2. The only exception shall be when the azea of the pazcel which is designated with the zone dis- trictwhich permits the higher density constitutes more than seventy-five (75) percent of the entire land azea of the pazcel. In this case, the use shall be developed using the dimensional requirements and off-street parking requirements of the zone district pemvtting the higher density, which shall be calculated on the basis of the land azea and development of the entire pazcel. City of Aspen Land Use Code. June, 2005. Part 700, Page 3 PETITION FOR DISCONNECTION BY ORDINANCE (De-Annexation of a 6.487-Acre Parcel) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR CITY COUNCIL TO DIRECT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO EXPEDITE REVIEW OF A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR REZONING, GMQS EXEMPTION AND STREAM MARGIN REVIEW Before the Aspen City Council Applicant: Representatives: Little Star Foundation Richard Y. Neiley, Jr. formerly known as Silver Lining Foundation Neiley & Alder, Attorneys and Kids Stuff Foundation, Inc. 201 North Mill Street, Suite 102 256 Milagro Way Aspen, CO 81611 Hesperus, CO 81326 (970) 925-9393 Property: Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, 1490 Ute Avenue City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado Glenn Horn Davis Hom, Incorporated 215 South Monarch Street Aspen, CO 81611 (970)925-6587 I. INTRODUCTION The Applicant Little Staz Foundation, through its founder Sister Andrea Jaeger and its Board of Dtrectors, has determined that it can no longer continue to operate its non-profit facility in the City of Aspen. Little Staz Foundation has been providing long-term care and lifetime opportunities for children with cancer and their families for 16 yeazs, all at no cost to the families. Financial pressures and logistical difficulties, along with the fact that approximately 70% of the Foundation's work is performed at various hospitals azound the .country, have compelled the Foundation to relocate from its facility at the end of Ute Avenue adjacent to the Aspen Club to a ranch outside of Durango, near Hesperus, Colorado. As a consequence, the Foundation needs to sell its Aspen facility so that it can continue to fund its charitable mission and adapt to the needs of its recipients. The Applicant seeks an Ordinance of the City of Aspen disconnecting its property located at 1490 Ute Avenue from the City of Aspen. The procedure for this request is set forth in the "Disconnection by Ordinance" statute, C.R.S. § 31-12-501, and is sometimes referred to as "de-annexation." De-annexation would effectively return and restrict the properly to the single- family residential uses pemutted under Pitkin County's approval of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. De-annexation would be the most expeditious means of achieving the Applicant's objective. Pitkin County has already allocated a residential allotment to the property. Alternatively, the Applicant requests that City Council direct the City Community Development Department to expedite an Application for Land Use Review seeking rezoning of the property from its current status, partially Academic (A) and partially Conservation (C), to zoning consistent with the surrounding residential land uses, Rural Residential (RR) or Moderate Density Residential (R-15), Growth Management Quota System exemption for change of use and stream margin review for a single family residential structure. An application for "de-annexation" for the subject property was heazd by City Council on May 14, 2007, at which time the application was denied on a 3 to 1 vote. The application was denied based upon a conclusion that de-annexation of the property would not be in the best interests of the City of Aspen.. The Applicant is dissatisfied with the outcome of the applicaflon. First, subsequent to the hearing, the Applicant learned that City Councihnember Ton a had an impernussible conflict of interest but nonetheless had participated in discussions concerning and voted on the application. The letter from the Applicant's attorney to City Attorney John Worcester dated May 25, 2007 regazding the conflict of interest is appended ' The Applicant's Foundation was initially incorporated in Colorado under the name Kids Stuff Foundation, Inc. As the work of the Foundation evolved, the name was changed to Silver Lining Foundation to better reflect the Foundation's work: The Foundation is now known as Little Staz Foundation. Sister Andrea Jaeger describes the Little Staz Foundation name as follows, "There have been thousands upon thousands of children and families we have had the honor to lmow and provide with love and help. Cancer has claimed the lives of so many children. Families aze in a constant state of grief, sorrow and loss. Out of respect to those families, we felt that the Little Staz Foundation name would be a wonderful tribute to the daughters and sons, sisters and brothers, friends and family members that lost thew lives to cancer and aze missed every day, knowing that we all can look for a little staz in the sky and imagine that it is a child's heart and spirit shining on all of us." Page 1 of 7 hereto as Attachment 7. In brief, Councilman Torre was employed by the Aspen Club at the time of the hearing. The Aspen Club is an adjacent property and its principal Michael Fox sought to acquire the subject property at a discounted price through the Cancer Survivor Center which is housed in the Aspen Club and of which Mr. Fox is on the board of directors. As a consequence of Totxe's opposition to the application, the Applicant does not believe it received a fair hearing on May 14, 2007. Second, at the May 14, 2007 hearing, City Planning Director Chris Bendon informed City Council that he believed a rezoning application for the subject property could be accomplished in 4 to 6 months. One of the reasons that the Applicant had pursued de-annexation of the property was that City Planning Staff had previously informed the Applicant's representative that rezoning. and related land use proceedings would take a considerably longer amount of time than "de-annexation" of the property. Additionally, the consensus was that it would be more expeditious to return the property to single family residential zoning under the pre-existing County regulations and PUD approvals. The implication at the May 14, 2007 hearing was that rezoning of the property could be accomplished as quickly as a de-annexation and subsequent rezoning by Pitkin County. The Applicant's representative has since been informed by Mr. Bendon that the 4 to 6 month time estimate was based upon the Community Development Department receiving direction from City Council to expedite the land use application, direction that was not discussed or given at the May 14, 2007 hearing. Third, at the May 14, 2007 hearing, Riggs Klika, a boazd member of the recently formed Aspen Cancer Survivor Center, had testified that that organization had offered to purchase the subject property for continued non-profit purposes and that other non-profits in the Valley were interested in utilizing the facility. The Aspen Cancer Survivor Center is affiliated with Michael Fox's Aspen Club. The "offer" about which Mr. Klika testified was, however, illusory in that it was for a price of approximately 25% of the value of the property and was not supported by any financial capability. The "offer" was from a newly established non-profit that has no money with which to buy the property and no track record of raising substantial sums of money. Mr. Klika also testified that he had contacted other non-profit organizations in the Valley who expressed interest in using the Little Star facilities. While non-profits might well be interested in the facility, the Specially Planned Area ("SPA") regulations applicable to the property would not permit uses other than those specifically approved for the Applicant's operations. Thus, the suggestion that the property might be appropriate for use as a "non-profit center" is not realistic given the lack of .financial resources and the. restrictive zoning. Furthermore, any change in use would have to be approved by the Stillwater Ranch Homeowners Association, which has akeady expressed a preference that the property be returned to single- family zoning. Ongoing quasi-commercial uses aze in conflict with concerns recently expressed by the City Council in connection with the Aspen Club's application for expansion, related to traffic on Ute Avenue and the appropriateness of such uses in single-family neighborhoods. II. HISTORY/CURRENT STATUS OF THE PROPERTY At the present time, the property is not being utilized as a facility to assist children and families of children with cancer and is listed for sale. The Applicant has concluded that it is simply not economically or practically feasible to continue its mission out of its facility in Page 2 of 7 Aspen. The Applicant believes that rezoning the property for single-family residential purposes will allow for the prompt sale of the property. The proceeds will be utilized to further the charitable mission of the Little Staz Foundation. In December of 1994, the Applicant was deeded the real property that is the subject of this application. Mrs. Benedict conveyed to the Applicant's predecessor Kids Stuff Foundation, Inc., by Bargain and Sale Deed, the real property as a "charitable gift and donation" without any limitation or condition as to its use. Mrs. Benedict expressly informed Sister Andrea Jaeger that she was free to sell the property. A copy of the Bazgain and Sale Deed is appended hereto as Attachment 1. The Applicant was free to then sell the property, develop it for charitable, non-profit purposes, or us it for any other purpose it deemed desirable. There aze no deed restrictions on the use or sale of the property other than subdivision and zoning regulations (see the title commitment appended hereto as Attachment 9) The Applicant determined that the best use of the property would be the development of a facility for the caze and treatment of children with cancer and their families. After a lengthy planning process and extensive fund raising, the Applicant proceeded through the City's annexafion and rezoning process to establish its campus on the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision property. In 1997, the Applicant sought annexation into the City of Aspen for purposes of developing a facility to pursue its charitable mission of providing health and related services to children with cancer and. their families. By Ordinance No. 1C, Series of 1997, the Aspen City Council approved the annexation. A copy of that Ordinance is appended hereto as Attachment 2. Aa part of the annexation process, the subject property was rezoned, in part to the Academic (A) Zone District and in part to the Conservation (C) Zone District. The property was designated as a Specially Planned Area ("SPA"). The rezoning and SPA designation were accomplished through a public hearing process resulting in approval of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1997, a copy of which is appended hereto as Attachment 3. Subsequent to rezoning and approval of the SPA plan, the Applicant constructed a facility on the property which is comprised of approximately 13,750 squaze feet of Floor Area Ratio. The improvements include residential, treatment, food service, recreational and other facilities. The Applicant operated its non-profit facility for the benefit of children with cancer on the property unti12006. During the approximate 7 years of operation, Applicant headquartered its programs at the facility and provided services to thousands of children and their families. During that period of time, the Applicant has established itself as the pre-eminent foundation for providing these unique services. The Applicant, through the tireless efforts of its founder Sister Andrea Jaeger, has gained an unparalleled national and international reputation for quality and compassionate caze of children with cancer and their families. However, over the course of its operations, Applicant has realized that maintaining a facility in a city where the cost of services and employees is exceptionally high, where it has proven extremely difficult to find qualified Page 3 of 7 employees, and where the costs and logistics of transportation aze frequently challenging, was not the best and most efficient use of the Foundation's resources. Although the Applicant has concluded that continuing its operations in Aspen is not the most economically efficient use of its resources and is not the best logistical location for the children and families it serves, it remains dedicated to providing these services in the State of Colorado, with all it has to offer, as well as nationally and internationally. In the spring of 2006, the Applicant moved its facilities in southern Colorado, southwest of Durango. The Applicant detemuned that the availability of recreational and related activities at lower costs of operation in the Durango area would enhance the long-term sustainability of the Foundation's work. As a result, the Applicant has decided to sell the property which is the subject of this application and utilize the funds generated from that sale to support, continue and expand its charitable work. The Applicant has contacted the Stillwater Ranch Homeowners Association and has been advised that the Association supports this application. Legal counsel for the Homeowners Association has provided a letter in support of this application, a copy of which is appended hereto as Attachment 5. The subject property will be reincorporated as a residential component of the Subdivision subject to the control of the Association with respect to permitted uses and the extent and design of development and will be restricted to one single-family residence. In summary, the Applicant has concluded that the campus it created for the care and treatment of children with cancer is no longer viable in Aspen. Although the improvements on the subject property are substantial, they may not be suitable for residential use in their current configuration. The Applicant anticipates that, if removed, the improvements will be salvaged and recycled to the greatest extent possible or that the existing building will be remodeled to single-family residential uses. The Applicant, based upon recommendations from its advisors, has concluded that the highest and best use for the property is for a single family residence. It is the Foundation's conclusion, based on extensive attempts to sell the property with its- present improvements to another non-profit, that other non-profits will have a difficult time affording and operating this facility in the same way as the Foundation. The sale of the property for that purpose will generate funds to allow the Applicant to carry on its work with sick children and their families. Since the May 14, 2007 hearing (indeed, since well before .that time), the Applicant has attempted to sell the property but has been unable to do so because of the narrowly constrained uses to which the property is restricted. III. DE-ANNEXATION PROCEDURE The practical effect of "de-annexation" is that the subject property will revert to the zoning applicable to the balance of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision and will be subject to the covenants of that Subdivision, the subdivision approvals and the jurisdiction of Pitkin County. Those Subdivision approvals expressly restrict development to one single-family Page 4 of 7 residence and accessory uses on the property. The property will revert to residential use and will be subject to the zoning and floor azea ratio restrictions generally applicable to the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. The Applicant has met with Pitkin County Planning staff and has engaged in a work session with the Pitkin County Commissioners. A copy of Glen Horn's letter of November 14, 2006 to Cindy Houben of the Pitkin County Community Development Department discussing the subdivision approvals for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision and the consequences of de-annexation is appended hereto as Attachment 4. The Applicant believes that Pitkin County will support this application subject to a requirement that the Applicant proceed through a County zoning and site plan review to insure that future development is consistent with the Stillwater Subdivision development approvals.2 The Aspen Municipal Code contains no provisions related to disconnection or de- annexation of properties. However, the Colorado statutes provide a mechanism whereby a property owner can seek to have its property disconnected from the City. That statute reads as follows: 31-12-501. Application -enactment -filing. When the owner of a tract of land within and adjacent to the boundary of a city or town desires to have said tract disconnected from such city or town, such owner may apply to the governing body of such city or town for the enactment of an ordinance disconnecting such tract of land from such city or town. On receipt of such application, it is the duty of such governing body to give due consideration to such application, and, if such governing body is of the opinion that the best interests of the city or town will not be prejudiced by the disconnection of such tract, it shall enact an ordinance effecting such disconnection. If such an ordinance is enacted, it shall be immediately effective upon the required filing with the county clerk and recorder to accomplish the disconnection, and two certified copies thereof shall be filed by the clerk in the office of the county clerk and recorder of the county in which said tract lies. The county clerk and recorder shall file the second certified copy with the division of local government in the department of local affairs as provided by section 24-32-109, C.RS. The procedure to accomplish disconnection is simple and requires only the adoption of an ordinance from the City Council following the required public hearing disconnecting -the subject property from the City of Aspen. As stated in the statute, a a The memorandum of City Planning Staff of May 8, 2007, a copy of which is appended as Attachment 6, demonstrates that upon rezoning the Floor Area Ratio for the property would be between 11,251 and 13,997 squaze feet under the City Land Use Code if all of the property was rezoned,. and between 8,540 and 9,930 squaze feet if only a portion of the property was rezoned. As discussed in Glenn Horn's memo to Cindy Houben, redevelopment of the property under the County Subdivision Approvals would result in a residence in the lower range of that permitted under the City Land Use Code. Page 5 of 7 disconnection ordinance shall be enacted if the City Council is of the opinion that the best interests of the City of Aspen will not be prejudiced by the disconnection. While the standazd for disconnection obviously involves an element of discretion, it is the Applicant's view that the reversion of the subject property to single-family residential uses will not in any way prejudice the best interests of the City. Rather, "de-annexation" will result in a reduction in traffic on Ute Avenue and will minimize conflicting uses with surrounding residential properties. IV. REZONING PROCEDURE -CITY OF ASPEN Rezoning to single-family residential uses within the City would be consistent with surrounding zoning and the covenants of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. It would also comport with the City's objectives of minimizing traffic on Ute Avenue. The rezoning process is, however, complex, expensive and time consuming. The Applicant was surprised that Mr. Bendon testified at the May 14, 2007 hearing that the rezoning and stream margin review process could be accomplished in as little as 4 to 6 months. Had the Applicant been informed of this when it initially conferred with City staff in 2006, the Applicant would have been in a position to request an expedited review process at the May 14, 2007 hearing. The City rezoning process involves the submission of an application for rezoning, a change of use Growth Management Exemption and stream margin review. The application would have to be considered by both the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council. The practical effect of this process would be the vacation of the SPA plan for the property and the inclusion of the property in a residential zone district. If City Council detemunes that de-annexation is not appropriate for the property, the Applicant believes it would be appropriate for City Council to direct staff to expedite the rezoning process. The Applicant is currently constrained by lack of sufficient financial resources to pursue its charitable mission to the fullest extent. Sister Andrea Jaeger has repeatedly stated that the lack of funds to pursue its mission severely restricts its ability to provide comfort and relief to children suffering from cancer and their families. This lack of funds literally has a negative effect on the quality of life of children suffering from cancer. Each month of delay through the rezoning process is a month during which life supporting work can not be performed by the Applicant with the funds it will realize from the sale of its property. In its memo to City Council in advance of the May 14, 2007 hearing, Planning Staff identified only one specific reason why de-annexation should not be approved for the property. That reason was the loss of tax revenues to the City of Aspen. The property does not presently generate tax revenues to the City. The sooner the property can be rezoned and sold, the sooner the City will receive tax related revenues from the property. City Staff did not identify Page 6 of 7 any planning or land use reasons why the property should not revert to single-family residential use. V. CONCLUSION The City initially approved the annexation, rezoning and SPA status in 1997 based upon a specific development proposal to create a facility to provide charitable services to children with cancer and their families. Applicant's mission continues despite the fact that it has determined that conducting its operations in a facility in Aspen is impractical. Applicant's facility is now .sitting empty and, thus, neither benefits the .children that the Little Staz Foundation serves nor generates revenues to be used to further its charitable mission. At present, the property is a financial burden to the Applicant. Because of the strict limitations of the SPA approval, the facility cannot be used by third party non-profits or others without being rezoned. The result of disconnection will. be a reduction of impacts on the City and surrounding properties and, specifically, a significant reduction in historic traffic volume on Ute Avenue. Disconnection would be the most expeditious means of achieving a rezoning of the property. Because of the reduction of impacts, de-annexation with its concomitant reversion of the property to single-family residential use would serve the best interests of the City of Aspen and would facilitate the Applicant's charitable mission. If City Council duects the staff to expedite rezoning, the property could be converted to single-family residential uses as much as a full yeaz or more sooner than proceeding through the usual land use review time frame. Given the mission of the Applicant, expedited processing of the Application for rezoning would allow the Applicant to more vigorously and effectively assist thousands of children and family members that seek its assistance in times of great personal, emotional and financial hazdship. Direction to expedite the land use review process would grant to the Applicant a significant benefit in recognition of the work the Foundation has performed in the Aspen community for the past 7 yeazs. A denial of this application would leave the Applicant in limbo regarding its property for perhaps as long as two years. The Applicant is obligated as anon-profit, charitable foundation to seek the greatest value it can for its property. This can best be achieved through disconnection and the subsequent application of Pitkin County zoning and subdivision regulations. Although rezoning through the City land use review process would also achieve this objective, the costs associated with the process will be substantially greater than those related to "de-annexation." The City's land use review process also represents a significantly higher level of uncertainty with respect to the fmal outcome than do existing County land use approvals. The net result of either process would be the return of the property to single- family residential uses, a reduction in overall traffic impacts on Ute Avenue, and consistency with the uses of the bulk of the neighboring properties. We urge City Council to lend assistance to the work of this longstanding charitable Foundation so it may continue and expand its mission. Thank you. Page 7 of 7 ORDINANCE NO. '~ b (Series of 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE DISCONNECTION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS THE "LITTLE STAR FOUNDATION RANCH DE-ANNEXATION." WHEREAS, on March 7, 2007, the owner of the property proposed to be disconnected from the City of Aspen did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a "Petition for Disconnection by Ordinance" pursuant to Section 31-12-501, C.R.S; and WHEREAS, Section 31-12-501, C.R.S. sets forth the procedure required to disconnect a tract of land within and adjacent to the boundary of a city. WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and determine that approval of the Petition foYDisconnection ofsaid territory to be in the City's best interest; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1. That the tract of land described in the Petition for Disconnection, commonly referred to as the "Little Star Foundation Ranch de-annexation", and as legally described below, is hereby disconnected from the City of Aspen, Colorado, in accordance with Section 31-12- 501, C. R.S. Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, according to the Final Plat thereof recorded December 30, 1994, in Plat Book 35 at Page 86 of the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado. Section 2. The City Clerk of the City of Aspen is hereby directed as follows: (a) To file one (1) certified copy of this ordinance in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Aspen. (b) To certify and file two (2) copies of this ordinance with the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day October, 2007. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Davis Horn~• ~ - PLANNING & :REAL ESTATE CONSULTING ,~ November 14, 2006 ' Cindy Houben Pitkin County Community Development,Director 130 South Galena Street • Aspen,' CO. 81611 RE: Silver Lining Ranch, Stillwater Ranch Lot 5 Dear Cindy: The Kids First Foundation has moved the Silver Lining Ranch to southwest Colorado and is selling the Aspen property where the Rarich has been operating since it was built in 1999. The Silver Lining Ranch is a facility which assists children with cancer.. The Foundation found that cancer patients who visited the Aspen facility had difficulty adjusting to the altitude in Aspen. It is also faz more affordable to operate the Ranch in southwest Colorado. Davis Hom Inc has been hired to reseazch the existing development approvals for the property, Stillwater Ranch Lot 5, for potential futuze owners. Of particulaz interest is the possibility of "disconnecting" the property from the City of Aspen and again becoming a part of unincorporated Pitkin County under the existing Stillwater Ranch approvals which applied to the property prior to annexation into the City of Aspen in 1997. We therefore are providing you this summary of land use actions and approvals related to the property in hopes of returning to these original Pitkin County approvals. Stillwater Ranch Subdivision is a Pitkin County subdivision which contains six lots plus an open space pazcel. The Subdivision was approved by the Boazd of County Commissioners pursuant to Resolution 94-223 on December 20, 1994 and is recorded at Book 770, Page 783 of the County records. The Final Plat for the Subdivision is recorded at Plat Book 35, Page 86. Five Growth Management Quota System allotments were granted for five of the six lots pursuant to BOCC Resolution 94-125. The fathering pazcel is Lot 6 which had an existing house (Fritz and Fabi Benedict's house) and did not need a GMQS allocation. (See Attachments 1, 2 and 3 for Resolution 94-233, the recorded plat and Resolution 94-125.) ~ The six lots in Stillwater Ranch Subdivision include the following: Lot 1: Approved as a free mazket loY at general submission; ultimately. doriated by the Benedicts as an affordable housing lot since the project was. one GMQS allotment short after the , first competition. This avoided going to a second yeaz of GMQS competition the following yeaz. At first Lot 1 was to be sold as a free market plot with funds going to the affordable housing program, but later approvals were obtained for an affordable housing project which is now built and occupied. ALKE DAVIS AKP S GLENN HORN AICP 215 SOUTH MONARCH SL • SUITE 104 • ASPEN, COLORADO 8161 1 •970/925-6587 • N1X:970/925-5180 adavis@roEnet ghom@rof.net i... Lot 2: Free mazket lot, now developed with a 9,701 *squaze foot house owned by Frederic Home*; ,,_ Lot 3: Free market lot, now developed with a 9,809* squaze foot house owned by Thomas Reagan*; Lot 4: Free mazket lot; under construction; major plat amendment approved to shifr and enlazge the approved existing principal building envelope, to establish an accessory building envelope and to amend the floor azea for the lot to allow for aday-lighted basement. (See BOCC Resolution #124-2004 in Attachment 4.) This lot is owned by Charles R. Bellock and is approved for 11,250 aggregate squaze feet: 8,600 squaze feet with 2100 sf on the lower level, a maximum of 1,900 squaze feet exempt sub-grade square feet and a 750 squaze foot exempt gazage. Lot 5: The subject property was originally approved as a free mazket lot and was granted a GMQS allotment through BOCC.Resolution 94-125. The Kid's First Foundation (Silver Lining Ranch) was the beneficiary of the gift of Lot 5 by the, Benedict family for use as the Silver Lining Ranch. After the.. gift, the property was annexed into the City of Aspen through City of Aspen Ordinance No. 11 of 1997 and Resolution 97-04, both approved in March, of 1997. (See Attachment 5 for these documents.) These documents granted. approval of the annexation, a rezoning from AFR-2 to Academic (A) /Conservation (C)SPA; a GMQS exemption for development associated with anon-profit entity, consolidated Conceptual and Final SPA Review, Conditional Use Review and Special Review. All approvals were granted in order to develop and operate the Silver Lining Ranch.. The facility has 18,000 squaze feet including several affordable housing units. Lot 6: The former home of Fritz and Fabi Benedict and the fathering parcel of the subdivision, now owned by Peterand Julie Gerson. * Square footage and owners aze per Pitkin County Assessor. The Pitkin County approvals for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision are for four free mazket bedrooms per lot plus additional free mazket bedrooms with further affordable housing mitigation. The approvals for the first four bedrooms require an above grade,. deed restricted one-bedroom affordable housing unit to be located within the approved building envelope. More bedrooms would require approval for more affordable bedrooms or cash in lieu. As shown above in the previous individual lot discussions, much lazger homes with more than four bedrooms aze typical for the Subdivision. The subject property is developed with 15 bedrooms i'n 18,000 square feet. Prior to the development of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, Stillwater Ranch Pazcels was subdivided into three pazcels by state legislation which allowed subdivision of land over 36 acres in size. Stillwater Ranch Parcels include Pazcel One, with 52 acres that was subdivided into six lots plus the open space parcel in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, and Parcels Two and Pazcel 2- r Three, both 36.02 acre pazcels now owner} by the Roll International Corporation. Pazcel 3 is developed with a 14, 688 squaze foot home and Pazce12 is vacant. There is a 2.45 acres outpazcel within the six lot Stillwater Ranch Subdivision owned by Susan and Helen Hunt. This property is surrounded by the subject property, Lot 5 Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. The improvements were built in 1949 and included a 2,686 squaze feet house, a 306 second sepazate unit and a 676 squaze foot shed. Other surrounding uses are the Fleck house, Callahan Subdivision Lot 12 &12A with 1.9 acres, 6,447 squaze feet plus a 3,275 squaze foot second unit used as a cazetaker unit; Lot I1 Callahan Subdivision with 1.1 acres under construction and the Aspen Club, adjacent to the west. In summary, since the Silver Lining Ranch has moved to southwest Colorado,.. the Kids First Foundation wishes to pursue abandoningahe City approvals, disconnecting from the City, returning to the original single family approvals of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision and making the subject property subject to and entitled to benefits from the zoning andsubdivision approvals applicable to the other free market lots in the subdivision. This single family use was intended for this 6.457 acre lot and is most compatible with the neighborhood and uses in the azea. Please let us know if you have any questions or if we can provide further. information. At this point, we are simply interested in your opinion regarding this proposal.. For your information and convenience, the following attachments have been included. Thank. you for your assistance. Attachment 1: BOCC Resolution 94-233~approving Stillwater Ranch Subdivision; Attachment 2: Recorded Final Plat for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision; „i, ~, Attachment 3: BOCC Resolution 94-125 granting five GMQS allotments for the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision Lots 1 through 5; ,;: Attachment 4: BOCC Resolution 124-2004 granting a major plat amendment approval pertaining to Stillwater Ranch Lot 4; the Bellock property; and Attachment 5: City of Aspen Ordinance No. 11 of 1997 and Resolution 97-04 regazding City approvals for the Silver Liring Ranch. , , Sincerely, DAMS HORN INCORPORATED GLENN HORN AICP _3_ ~, ~,.. ATTACHMENT~_ REC DOC 377678 8-770 P-783 12/30/94 04:05P PG 1 OF B' 0.00 SILVIR DRVIS PITKIN~COUNTY CLERK b RECORDER EEaOLDTIOE O! TEA EOAED O! COOETY COEEI/aIOEEAE O! PITRIE QOOETY, COLOAADO~ 6AAMTIy9 DMAILID AIID 1IEaL PIJT APPAOV,L TO TEE ETILL1fATEA A1111Cd sCEDIYIEIOE/POD `Aewlutioa ,}s4~ Si4iTEL! 1. Pabianna Henadict,(heranfter "Applicant");has applied to the Board o! County Commissioners of Pitkin County, (harealtar "Hoard"), to subdivide the Stillwater Aanch into six lots. z. The subject property is zoned AFR-2, PUD.~" 3. Tha property is located adjacent to and east of theCity of Aspen, southwest of Highway H2, Wore spacificelly described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto. 4. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed thiespplication at their regularly scheduled publio hearing on'Jehuary 19, 1994, and recommended General submiesion_approval subject to conditions. 5. The Board granted five GEQB allotments to the applicant by Resolution Ro. 94-125. ~- 6. The Board heard the General Submission application at a regularly scheduled and noticed public hearing on August 30, 1994, at which time evidence andteatimony was presented in regard to this application. 7. Tha Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Detailed and FinalPlat application et their regularly scheduled public meeting on November S, 1994, and recommended approval subject to conditions. s. Tha Planning and Zoning commission reviewed this appllcetlon I ~ ~. ~, i~ r .37767A H-770 P-7B4 12/30/94 04:05P PG 2 DF B Reeolutiem lte. !4-~ Dage 2 for Scenic Overlay requirements at a rsgularly scheduled public hearing on Novambnr• 29, 1994, and approved the Scenic Overlay raviav subject to conditions by their Resolution No. PS-94-15. 10ei, SSeBB10RE, HE IS ABaOLVED by the Hoard of County Commissioners that it ,hereby grants Detailed and Final Plat approval to the applicant subject to the following conditions: 1. All utility extensions shall be located underground, and 'appropriate easements shall ba dedicated to the various public and private utilities as may be required. All utility extensions shall be boated in the property's existing road system to ninimizesite disturbance. If utility extensions era proposed outside o! approved road alignments, these axtanaione shall be shown for review end approval at betailad Submission. 2. All development on Lots 1 through 5 shall be liaited to aooass roads, the individual driveways, d"tility nxtenaions, irrigation ditches, fences meeting Divihion' of "wildlife requirements and the building envelopae:"~'~No disturbance, including vegetation removal, (unless required by"the county for ~tire protection) shall occuz outside these areas. Landscaping outside of building envelopes may be` permitted upon approval by the Planning Department. 3. Tha applicant shall dedicate a fishing easement along .the southerly bank of the river to include the river and Pive Peet of bank above the high water mark. A fishing easement shall also be granted between the common boundary of the out parcel ,. ~ 377678 8-770 P-785 -'12/30/94 04t05P pp 3 OF 8 lteeolutioa Ye. fa Page ~ and Lot 6 and the centerline of the river. The applicant shall work withthe County to realign those portions of the "winter" trail that are located within hazardous avalanche zones, to the extent feasible. 4. All rasidancee ehdll ba connected to the ~Aepen Consolidated Sanitation Districts (ACSD) aain sewer line that tuna through the property. The owners of sold lots shall pay the normal Connection fees, along with an additional. prorated surcharge that will be used to recover the costs of repairing a downstream constraint. The pro rata share shall bedetermined by the ACED. If a sewage pumping system is necessary on any parcel, a conventional septic tank shall pratreat•deffluent prior to discharge into a pumping chamber, as recommended by the Environmental Health Department. ,. 5. The applicant shall aeka a contrlbutionoP 612,600 to the County trails prograa prior to recordation of the final plat. Ho building permit shall ba Sasued within the 3ti11water.Ranch Subdivision until ~ the ~COUnty shall have .expanded the contribution on.specific trails iaproveaenta. 6. The applicant shall obtain access permits and submit erosion and sediment control plane as required to the county Engineer for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. 7. The Fire District shall be allowed on the property to check fire hydrants and yraterpreaeure prior to building permit issuance. 8.. The Applicant or owners shall provide one, above~grade, low xaaolutioa 1fo. sa-~ Page 4 income, one-bedroom affordable housing unit on each of the five new lots within their designated. building envelopes, concurrently with the construction 6f each four-bedroom free market unit. An appropriate deed restriction shall be executed and filed with the Houelnq Office. The affordable m LL 0 a a a 9 r a a m 9 C~J w r i 4 6 n n i m m n .n n n ri units shall meet or exceed Hausinq Offices minimum, net livable area requirement for low income units, and shall be deed restricted to the Category fl lncome, price and occupancy guidelines in effect at the time of issuance of a building permit. Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval is hereby granted to allow smaller lot sizes ae necessary for the provision of detached or attached affordable housing units on' Lots 2 and 3. ~- 9. Dogs shall be kenneled or leashed at all times.~~Fencing shall comply with Division of Wildlife standards, including a maximum height of 42", four strands or less. 10. Prior to final plat recordation, the applicant shall supply ~. evidence of an adequate water supply. - ' 11. The protective covenants Sot the Stillwatar'Ranch~SUbdivision shall ba revised to permanently rastriat the use otthe Open Space Parcel to agricultural uses and `improvements, the pasturing of horses and related uses andimprovaments, and such other open space uses and improvements as may be approved from time to time by the Stillwater Ranch Homeowners Association, and the continuation of existing uses. The covenants shall also prohibit Purther subdivisionofthe open space Parcel, although a lot line adjustment shall be- permitted between the Open Space Parcel and the gut-Parcel if . County and landowner approval can be obtained. { P 4 ~ mpoltrtioa lto. s• ~ -. Pag e ! 12. On or before lurch 1, 1995, the applicant shall form a Homeovnars' Association comprised of the owners of the alx (6) lots in the Stillwnter Ranch Subdivision, and shall convey the Open Space Parcel to the Homeowners' Association. Tha deed shall reserve the exclusive use, control and expense of the Open Space Parcel to Pablenne Henadict and Fredric A. Sanedict !or the rest of their lives. 17. Removal of mature vegetation outside of any building envelope on Lots 1 through 5 ie prohibited except. as provided .for in ~ Condition 2 above. Removal of mature .trees within the o building envelopes shall require approval of atree removal ~~ ~ plan by the Planning Office. Nature traae~maana any deciduous n tree of six-inch caliper at diameter-breast-height or any a o evergreen taller than six feat in height. ' , ~* 14. Tha northern boundary of the building envelope on Lot 1 shall d ~ be relocated twenty (20j fast to the south to reduce potential M - visual impacts. The applicant may relocate the eastern and/or N ^' western boundaries of the building envelope eo as to aaintain m the size of the building envelope. n a 15. The building height on Lot 1 shall be limited to a maximum of 6 20 feet measured from existing grade or finished grade, . r ~ whichever is lower, to the top of a flat roof or the midpoint of a pitched rool.. The ridge of a pitched roof shall not m n n exceed 25 feat above existing ar finished grade, whichever is n M lower. i ~ 16. The building height on Lot 2 shall be limited to {i) a maximum i .. Aasolutioa mo. s4- Daga i of 20 feet aeasurad Pron the existing elevation of the northeast corner of the building envelope to the top of a flat roof or the midpoint of a pitched roof, or (ii) the maximum height allowed in the 11PR-2 Zona District, whichever is lower. T'he ridge of a pitched roof shall not exceed 25 fast above said existing elevation. Tha aoolicant shall .atahlial. e.1w m LL 0 a a 5 r 5 a m 5 ~a m n a 6 n n i m m n n n fq elevation by Piald survey and shall incorporate the soma in the~Protectiva Covenants Por the Stillwater Ranch subdivision. 17. The height limitations imposed on Lote 1 and 2 may be varied subject to obtaining a new 8oenic Overlay approval pursuant to the standards and procedures in ePPact at the time of a new application. 18. The owner of Lot 1 shall submit a landscape plan for review and approval by the Planning Office prior to the issuance of a building permit for the residence on Lot 1. Tha purpose of the landscape plan ahall'be to reduce the visual impact of development on Lot 1 Prom Highway 82. 19. Section 2(P) of the covenants (lighting) shall be revised to preclude outside lights on the north side of theibuildinga on Lots 1 and 2 (facing Highway 82). The architectural "guidelines" shall be renamed to "requirements°. 20. With the exceptiono! one entrance light at the intersection oP Highway az and stillvater Road, and one outdoor light for the garage or home entrance (unless otherwise required by the Uniform Building Code), access drive and landscape "accent" r, lighting shall be prohlbitad on Lota 1 and 2. Low level i. ': '.i".r m LL O r a a u7 b r m a P 6 m m r i e r r w n Aeeolutioa ro. s4-~ Page 7 walkway lighting, however, shall be allowed for safety purposes. All exterior lighting shall comply with the applicable requirenenta oP the Pitkin County Land Uaa code. 21. Livestock grazing and livestock impounding is prohibited on Lots i through 5, with the axoeption of horses, which may be impounded on Lota 4 and 5. Livestock grazing and livestock impounding is permitted within the Open Space parcel and 6. 22. All .material representations made by the applicant in the application end public aeatings chall be adhered to and considered conditions oP approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPAOVBD AND ADOPTED ON TH8 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1994. A SST , ne on s, Deputy C rk and Record APPROVED AS TO FOR!!: ~/ Tim to tt, Cou ty t rosy slw/fk.benodiat.detailad.raeo HOARD OF COUNTYC0MMI33IONERS of PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO MicHhSL c, Ik6~..4u0 By: kS , , airman Date._ -~T APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Rr'Sllaallne Koyy an; ~-~~~ -~~` county P15nninq Director S7diiblt wow P7IRCEL 1, STILLNHTER R71NC8 PERCIIS, according to tha First 1laandad Plat theraot recorded Deea~bar 2, 1993 iSl Plat Book 33 at Page 36. COUNTY OP PIT1@I, BTSTE OP COLOR7~D0. m LL O 0 LL S 6 S 5 S P 9 ~`7 _ N O P n I p 9 n r m m n .n n n m JAN. 16.2007 2:OOPM GATES KNEZEVICH GARDENSWARTZ N0. 9248 P. 2 lAW OFPICEB OF ORTES, KNEZEVICH, GARDENSWARTZ & KEI.l.X; P.C. rROPESSKmAL DaaDRA-raN naRD aoOR, ABPENPLA?ASULOrvc Saa E. HOPKNS AVENUE LEONARDM OA7lD A6PEN.COLORADO.0/0H RICHARD AKNEZEVIGH TELEPHONE I>na1@a110D TED D. OARDENSwMTL FACSMM1E (970) 9pA-7121 DAV[I d NSLLY MANIA MORROW OF COUNSEL. JOHN T KEILY ~~OLT,,mn ANNE MARIE MCPNlE January 16, 2007 Vrn FACSIMILE (970) 588-3786 Little Star Foundation c% Andrea Jaeger, Director 405 Rancho Milagro Way Hesperus, CO 81326-8752 Re: Loi 5 Stlllwaier,Ranch Deaz Ms. Jaeger: I em the attorney for the Stillwater Ranch Open Space Association. At our last annual meeting held on August 2, 2006, the Silver Lining Ranch indicated its desire to sell Lot 5 at Stillwater Ranch for single family use. -This would require a re-zoning from its current academic zoning. The Association instructed me to prepare a letter indicating that the Association would support a change in zoning on Lot 5 from academic to svagle family use, but would not support any other rezoning. The purpose of this letter is thus to indicate the rapport of the StiYlWater Ranch Open Space Association for a change in zoning on Lot 5 from academic to single family use. This letter will also confirm that upon the sale of Lot 5 to a,third party and upon its retuta to single family zomag,-the new owner of Lot S would be entitled to vote as a member of the Association pursuant to the tc~s ofthe Protective Covenants. Please feel free to contact me with any gttestians~ Sincerely, DBK/maf Ones, KtvLZrvrcH, GIuWSNSR'ARTZ & BEI.T.Y, P.C. John T. Kelly for David B. Kelly 200/ZOOCSj ,T.L'IViI2I NOSHO~Vf NNV'IOTId~ %V3 Z6~ST ffiI.L LOOZ/OT/TO MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planner THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Director DATE OF MEMO: May 8, 2007 MEETING DATE: May 14, 2007 RE: 1490 Ute Ave Petition for Disconnection from the City of Aspen REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Council has been asked to approve a petition for disconnection by ordinance of the 6.487 acre parcel located at 1409 Ute Avenue. The pazcel is also known as Lot 5 in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. BACKGROUND: In 1997 the property owner, Silver Lining Ranch, requested annexation into the City and requested rezoning and a Growth Management Exemption. Subsequent to the annexation, the pazcel was rezoned to Academic (A) and Conservation (C), both with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay. The Applicant was also granted a Growth Management Exemption for anon-profit entity qualifying as an essential public facility. Prior to annexation, the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision was approved by the Pitkin County BOCC. Below is a map indicating the lots in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision; all aze within the Growth Boundary. Page 1 of 4 The subdivision includes six lots and a lazge open space pazcel. The Land Use approvals from the County included five growth management allotments for single-family homes on Lots 2 - 6. These Lots were zoned AR-2 (Residential - 2 Acre) and under the approved subdivision were permitted to include 6,500 squaze feet of floor azea, plus 4,000 square feet of exempt sub-grade floor area and 750 squaze feet of exempt gazage area. Of the six lots, only one, Lot 5, was ever annexed by the City. DISCUSSION: Based on the Petition for Disconnection, it appeazs the property owner is interested in disconnecting from the City in an effort to revert back to the previous zoning and approvals received in the County prior to Annexation. Regazdless of if the property is disconnected or not, the property would be required to undergo a land use process in order to either change zoning in the City or establish zoning in the County. Attached as Exhibit A is a map of the azea. The areas in blue are located within the City, and the areas in green aze located in the County. Lot S, located in the City, is in pink. A lazge version of this map will also be available at the public hearing. City Zoning If the Petition is not granted and the property stays in the City, the properly owner would be permitted to retain the current zoning, but a similaz activity or use would be required to occur on the Lot in order to comply with the permitted uses in the Academic (A) and Conservation (C) zone districts (See Exhibit B for a list of the permitted uses in these zone districts). If, however, a change in use is desired, the property would need to be rezoned in order to accommodate that use. As indicated in the map attached as Exhibit A, the surrounding areas in the City include an Affordable Housing development zoned AH/PUD (Ute Park Townhomes), the Aspen Club zoned Rural Residential (RR PUD), and single-family and duplex homes zoned R-15B and R-15 PUD. The adjacent zoning in the County is AR-2, Residential - 2 Acre, which is intended "to provide for a moderate density, transition zone between moderate and low density residential land uses." (Pitkin County Land Use Code) If the pazcel was zoned to a residential use for the purposes of constructing asingle-family or duplex dwelling unit, the property would be required to undergo a Growth Management Review and provide affordable housing mitigation for the new squaze footage. The lot is 6.487 acres, or approximately 282,573 square feet. If the property owner pursued (and the City granted) rezoning of the entire parcel to R-15 (Moderate Density Residential), R-30 (Low-Density Residential), or RR (Rural Residential) to accommodate a single family residence or duplex on the property, the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a single family home would be approximately 11,251 squaze feet and the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a duplex would be approximately 13,997 squaze feet. Staff, however, would recommend that the area currently zoned as Conservation (C) remain in that zone district in order to continue to preserve the natural resources in the azea, and would recommend that only the Academic (A) zone be considered for re-zoning to residential. If this occurred, the area able to be built on and the allowable floor area would be reduced, per Section 26.710.022 of the Land Use Code. (See Exhibit C) This portion of lot includes approximately Page 2 of 4 147,000 squaze feet of lot azea. If only this portion of the property was re-zoned to a residential use (R-15, R-30, or RR), the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a single family home would be approximately 8,540 square feet and the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a duplex would be approximately 9,930 squaze feet. Currently, the pazcel contains a structure of approximately 18,000 square feet. If the parcel was re-zoned in the City and the structure was not demolished, it would be anon-conforming structure with respect to Floor Area. This could be remedied by placing a PUD on the Lot which would establish dimensional requirements for the property. Staff would recommend that a PUD replace the existing SPA in this circumstance. The Applicant has not indicated an interest in zoning the property to amulti-family zone district, but this is another potential avenue the Applicant could pursue should the property remain in the City. County Zoning Should the Petition be granted, the owner would be required to receive land use approvals from the County. This would entail site plan review and zoning. While it is not certain exactly what zoning would be granted in the County, it is likely the property would be re-zoned to AR-2 (Residential - 2 Acre) in accordance with the original subdivision approval and the zoning in the rest of the subdivision. Exhibit A indicates the area of the subdivision and the current County zoning for Lots 1 - 4 and Lot 6. If the parcel were zoned in accordance with the rest of the subdivision, it is likely the lot would have the same dimensional requirements as the other single family lots in the subdivision. Further, it is likely the property would be subject to the covenants and restrictions in the Subdivision as well as all subdivision approvals. This would include 6,500 squaze feet of floor azea above-grade plus 4,000 squaze feet of exempt sub-grade floor azea and 750 squaze feet of exempt garage area. Lot 5 received a Growth Management Allotment from the County when it was originally approved by the BOCC in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. Growth Management Allotments do not expire in the County, so if the Lot reverts back to the County no Growth Management review would be required. Pazt of the original subdivision approvals required that each lot provide an on-site ADU as mitigation for the first four bedrooms built; if the home is built with more than four bedrooms, further mitigation would be required. FINANCIALBUDGET IMPACTS: Under its tax-exempt status as anon-profit company, the property has been exempt from paying property tax since its annexation into the City. The petition for disconnection states that the applicant believes the sale of its property for single-family residential development will provide the highest monetary benefit, and it is presumed the parcel will revert to asingle-family home should the de-annexation be approved. If this pazcel reverts to asingle-family use, or any other use not associated with anon-profit entity, it will lose its tax exempt status and will begin paying property taxes. The City will lose this potential revenue if the petition is granted. City services such as police, fire, utilities, and administrative services have been provided since the time of annexation. These services will not be impacted negatively if the property remained in the City. It is even likely that City services may be reduced with the development of asingle-family use. Page 3 of 4 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council not approve the Petition for Disconnection. If the property remains in the City there is an opportunity for it to remain an Academic use or turn to a single family use. Further, if the property was changed to a single- family use and lost its tax exempt status property tax revenue would be generated for the City. If the Petition for Disconnection is granted, the City loses this potential revenue. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Map Exhibit B -Academic and Conservation Zone District permitted uses Exhibit C -Section 26.710.022, Zoning of lands containing more than one underlying zone district Page 4 of 4 Exhibit B Stillwater Ranch De-Annexation 26.710.230 Academic (A). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Academic (A) zone district is to establish lands for education and cultural activities with attendant research, housing and administrative facilities. All development in the Academic zone district is to proceed according to a conceptual development plan and final develop-ment plan approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Areas. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Academic (A) zone district: I. Private school or university, teaching hospital, research facility or testing laboratory, provided that such facilities are enclosed and there are no adverse noise or environmental effects; 2. Auditorium and other facilities for performances and lectures; 3. Gallery; 4. Museum; 5. Library; and 6. Administrative offices. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425. 1. Boardinghouse and dormitory for housing students and faculty of schools and other academic institutions; 2. Student health care facility; 3. Student and faculty dining hall; and D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned area. Exhibit B Stillwater Ranch De-Annexation 26.710.220 Conservation (C). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Conservation (C) zone district is to provide areas of low density de- velopment to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the production of crops and animals, and to contain urban development. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Conservation (C) zone district: 1. Detached residential dwelling; 2. Park, playfield, playground and golf course; 3. Riding stable; 4. Cemetery; 5. Crop production, orchards, nurseries, flower production and forest land; 6. Pasture and grazing land; 7. Dairy; 8. Fishery; 9. Animal production; 10. Husbandry services (not including commercial feed lots) and other farm and agricultural uses; 11. Railroad right-of--way but not a railroad yard; 12. Home occupations; 13. Accessory buildings and uses; and 14. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520.040; and 15. Temporary special events associated with ski areas including, but not limited to, such events as ski races, bicycle races and concerts; with special event committee approval. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Conservation (C) district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425. 1. Guest ranches; 2. Recreational uses including a riding academy, stable, club, country club and golf course; 3. Ski lift and other ski facilities; 4. Sewage disposal area; 5. Water treatment plant and storage reservoir; and 6. Electric substations and gas regulator stations (not including business or administration offices). D. Dimensional requirements. The fallowing dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Conservation (C) zone district. 1. Minimum lot size (acres): 10. 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (acres): 10. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): 400. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 100. 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): 30. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 30. 7. Maximum height (feet): 25. 8. Minimum distance between principal and accessory buildings (feet): No requirement. 9. Percent of open space required for building site: No requirement. 10. External floor area ratio: (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record): same as R-15 zone district. 2 - 4 N~II,~Y & AI,D~R ATTORN$YS Please Reply To: zot North Mill Street, Suite ioz Aspen, Colorado St6u (97o)9z5-9393 Fax (97o)9z5-9396 RICHARD Y. NEIEEY, JR. EUGENE M. ALDER JOHN E. NEII,EY 680o Highway Sz, Suite t, Upper Level _ Glenwood Springs, Colorado 8i6ot (97o)9za-9393 Fax (97o)9z3-9399 May 25, 2007 VIA HAND DELIVERY John Worcester, Esquire Aspen City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Little Staz Foundation; Petition for Discoanection by Ordinance Deaz john: On May 14, 2007, the above-referenced Petition came before the Aspen City Council for consideration and was denied on a 3 to 1 vote. The purpose of this letter is to express our concern regarding the fairness of the hearing on the Petition and request that the City of Aspen set a new hearing, at which time the Petition can be presented to a forum that is not tainted by violations of the Municipal Code Rules of Conduct governing City Council members, §§ 2.02.030 and 2.02.050. Specifically, we object to the fact thaf Councihnember Torre participated in the hearing and voted in opposition to the Petition. We believe his participation influenced other members of the City Council to vote against the Petition and denied the applicant the right to a fair and impartial hearing. The property that is the subject of the Petition is located on Ute Avenue adjacent to the Aspen Club. In the recent past, the owner of the Aspen Club, Michael Fox, has attempted to purchase the subject property, without success. Mr. Fox sits on the Boazd of the Aspen Cancer Survivor Center which is housed in -the Aspen Club. A representative of the Aspen Cancer Survivor Center, Riggs J. Klika, appeazed at the May 14, 2007 hearing and expressed opposition to the Petition. Unbeknownst to us at the time of the hearing, Councilman Torre is an employee of the Aspen Club. Apparently, he is on the teaching staff at the tennis center. Subsequent to the hearing, we learned that until some time last fall, Torre was a fizll-time employee as the head tennis pro at the Aspen Club. We understand he now maintains an ongoing employment relationship with the Club. Letter to Mr. Worcester May 25, 2007 Page 2 As you aze awaze, Municipal Code §§ 2.02.030 and 2.02.050 prohibit a Councihnember from perfomung a direct official action in circumstances in which he. has a substantial interest in the outcome of the proceeding. Given the circumstances of this case, it is cleaz to us that Torre should have disclosed his conflict of interest and refrained from participating in the hearing and voting on the Petition. Indeed, he recused himself from participation in the appeal of Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution No. 9 - 1001 Ute Avenue, which also came before City Council on May 14, 2007. We understand the reason for his recusal was that he sometimes teaches tennis at the Gant tennis courts which aze located on the 1001 Ute Property under a long term lease. Cleazly, if this represented an acknowledged conflict of interest, participation in the Little Staz Petition hearing was prohibited. Instead, following presentation of the Petition by the applicant and staff, Torre was the first Councihnember to speak, and his comments were directed at insuring that the Petition was denied. We believe Tone's conduct represents a fundamental violation of my client's right to a fair and impartial hearing before an unbiased and objective City Council. We further believe that the only way to remedy this violation is for the Petition to be presented to the City Council for consideration without the participation of Torre. As a result of the outcome of the hearing on May 14, 2007, my client has proceeded to work with the City Planning Staff to seek a rezoning of the property under the provisions of the Municipal Land Use Code. We obviously do not know the outcome of such proceedings, and we have not yet been able to determine how long it will actually take to process the application despite the fact that the Community Development Director stated at the hearing that he believed an application could be expedited in 4 to 6 months. We aze unable to detemune how this can be accomplished at the present time despite numerous attempts by our land use planner to establish a basis for this time frame with the City staff. Thus, we believe the only appropriate course of action is for the City to set this matter for a new hearing before a fair and impartial City Council. Please let me know your thoughts on this matter at your eazliest convenience. truly yours, & ALDER Y. Neiley, Jr. RYN/agk cc: Sister Andrea Jaeger Rick Stone, Esquire Glenn Horn SCHEDULE OF ATTACHMENTS 1. Bargain and Sale Deed from Fabienne Benedict to Kids Stuff Foundation, Inc., dated December 30, 1994 2. City of Aspen Ordinance No. 1 C, Series of 1997 3. City of Aspen Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1997 4. Letter with attachments from Davis Horn, Inc. to Cindy Houben, Pitkin County Community Development Director, dated November 14, 2006, including Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution 97-04 5. Letter from attorneys for Stillwater Ranch Open Space Association dated January 16, 2007 6. Memorandum from City Planning Staff to City Council dated May 8, 2007 7. Letter from Richard Y. Neiley, Jr. to City Attorney John Worcester dated May 25, 2007 8. Letter from Applicant authorizing representation 9. Title Commitment for subject property 377E85 B-770 P-B26 1/30/94 @4c15P PG 1. OF 2 REC 62LVIR DRVIS PITKIN COUNTY CLERK i RECORDER 30.00 E1+R43-IE AED BALE DEED ]Dion AZL Ifall BY TBEBE PREBEpTBs TEAT ?OR '7~]iD aB R CEAAITAH]iE GIFT AliD DDRATIOa, the undersigned TAEIaRLSE EEMaDICT (^DOTOr^) hereby donates, sells and conveys to EIDB• aT13PB TDIIaD71TI0a, IEC., a Colorado not-for-profit corporation ("Donee"), whose address is P.o. Box 10970, Aspen, Colorado 81612, the following real property situate in the County of Pitkin, States of Colorado, to wit: Lot 5, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, according to the Final Plat thereof recorded December 30, 1994 in Plat Book. 3,L at Page ~ of the real property records of Pitkin County, Colorado, together with a perpetual,non- excluaive easement, right-of-way and joint user right along, within and beneath the existing road easement between the Ute Avenue Cul-Da-Snc and the Out Parcel, as --shown on said Final- Plat (as said road easeaent was created in the Deed recorded in BooK 188 at Page 82 oP the Pitkin county records), for purposes of access, ingress and egress to Lot 5 and the installation of underground utilities serving lot 5. DOC @. @@ With all its appurtenances, subject to the following: -.----(a):; In the event~_that Donee utilizes.. part of th8-.existing road easement between the Ute Avenue Cul-De-Sac and the0ut Parcel" '~ for purposes of access to Lot 5, Donee shall share equally withthe owner of the Out Parcel the costs and expenses of aaintaininq and snow-plowing the portion of said access road actually used by Donee. (b) Lot 5 and the road and utility easement are conveyed hereby in an "asis" condition, subject to all patent or latent conditions or problems of any kind or nature, and further subject to all title matters of record or otherwise, specifically including without limitation: - (i) Road easement and other matters described in Deed recorded in Hook 188 at Page 82_and in instrument recorded in BooX 380 at Page 425. - -_- _ _-. ,- _,- ~-. - - (ii) All matters contained on the FirstAmended Plat of '`--- `the Stillwater Ranch Parcels recorded--in-PlatBook 33-.at Page '" ~ ~ (iii SOCC Resolution Ho. 94-~3~r¢corded in.BooK. Oat =- Page'~.. (iv) All matters contained on the Final Pla of Still a~er Ranch Subdivision/PUD recorded in Plat Book ~~S at Page ~. 377685 B-770 P-827 12/30/94 04:i5P PG 2 OF 2 (v) Subdi ision Improvements Agreement recorded in Soox 'f~ at Page (vi). Protective Covenants7~ for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PIID recorded in Book F-~--~ at Page ~. (vii) Fisherman's Easement Agreement recorded in Boon ~6 at Page ~~, (va.i Grant of Utility Easement recorded in Boo)c ~ at Page ~. (ix) water service Agreement between the City of Acpen and Donor recorded in Boo)c ]1~ at Paga']~. '~ (c) Zn accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 3(c) oP the Protective Covenants for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, on or before March 1, 1995, Donor is obligated to form a Aomeovners' Association to own, govern and maintain the Open space Parcel depicted on the Final Plat of Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PIID. The members of the Association will be the owners of the six (6) Lots in Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, and the Association will have the power to levy and collect general and special assessments on such members for purposes of paying the costs and expenses of owning, improving, maintaining, caring for and operating the Open .Space Parcel. By its acceptanaeof this Bargain and Sala Deed, Donee shall ba fleemed to have consentefl. to and approved the formation of said Homeowners' Association, to have consented to being a member thereof, and to have agreed to execute any and all. documents that may be required in connection with the formation thereof. Signed and delivered this 30th day of December, 1994. DOMOR: ~ c.uc.a ~tu[~~ - Fab~enne Bane~ict 6TAT8 OB COLORADO ) ^s. COIIRTY OB PITEZDI ) ""`_. The'"foregoing~~instrument--was-aGcnowledged_bafore me this 30th day of December, 1994 , by Fabienna Benedict. -°.- ~-=- -= --- wITNE88 m hand and offi 1 al. My commission expire s:$f~f5 ~.._ _.......:_ <, ._._,(SEAL) aa~o~. 2 ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~«{ ~~~~f~ ~U ~~~~~ ~~~~ 1111 X06813 M/7!/188T 11.378 ORDINtINCE 1 et 3 R 10.80 0 0.08 N 0.00 PITKTN CCUNTY 'CLERK ORDINANCE NO. IC (Series of 1997) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCII. OF '17 fE CI"I'Y' OF ASPEN. COLORADO, APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TF.RRITORY'1'O'I'HE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO BE KNOWN AND DE.4IGNATED AS THE "STILLWATER RANCH SUBDIVISION, LOT 5 PARCEL" ANNEXATION. WHEREAS, on November 19, 1996, the owner of [hc property Proposed to be annexed did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a Petition for Aunexation of territory to the City of Aspen: and WHEREAS, [he petition, including accompanying copies of xn annexation map, has been ' reviewed by the City Attorney's Office and the City Engineer and found by them to contain the information prescribed and set forth in §31-12-107, C.R.S.: atul WFIEREA.S, the owners of one hundred percent (1(X196) of the azea proposed to be annexed, exclusive of streets and alleys, have consented in writing tv the atntexation; and - WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 6R, Series of 1996) at its regulaz tneetiag on November 25, 1996, did £md and determine said Petition for Annexation m Ue in _ substantial compliance withthe provisions of §31-12-107, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 3, Series of 1997) at its regular meeting on January 13, 1997, did fmd~and detetmine, following a public heating, said Petition for Annexation to be in substantial compliance with §§ 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and deurmine that approval of the annexation of said territory to be in the City's best interest; ~ -: -- : -. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE.CITY COUNCII. OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: -; -. .. , ... Itllll 11111111111 illll N11 IINII 111111 NI 11111 IIII idl X00613 06/23/1lt97 11:378 ORDIIMMICE 2 of 3 R 16.00 0 0.00 R 0.00 PITKIR COl1N'LY CLEIIK Section 1, Tha[ the tract of land de~crilxxi in the Petition for Arvtexation, commonly referred to as the "Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, Lca.S Parcel", and as shown on the annexation map, is hereby annexed to the City of Aspt:n, Colorado. CPrHnn 2. The City Clerk of the City of Aspen is hereby directed as follows: (a) To file one copy of the annexation neap witlt the original of this annexation ordinance in the office of [he City Clerk of the City of Azpon. (b) To certify and fde two copies of this arutcxatiou ordinance and of the annexation map with the Clerk artd Recorder of the County of Pitkin. State of Colorado. (c) To request the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin C.tnuuy to file one certified copy of this annexation ordinance and of the annexation snap with the Division of Lora[ Government of the Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado. ~i0~. The Ci[y Enginwr of the City of Aspen is hereby directed to atnencl the Official Map of the City of Aspen to reflex the Uowulary changes adopted pursuant to this annexation ordinance. __ _... . S ;nn 4, That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordina~e is for aay reason held invalid or unconstiturional in a court of compctcnt jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed 'a separaU:, distinct and independem provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions [hereof. -^tinn That this ordinance shall not have any effect on existigg litigation - _ ...._ atd shall not operate as as abatement of any..action.,or.proeeedipg itow„pending under_or_by. _ ,_ virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided,<and .the.-same. shall ~6e construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. .. _..,......_ - - __ ~-. ~ _ I Illlll Ilui 111111 Illll illl 111111 Illiil Ill 11111 Iill li~~ 405613 00/23/1507 11:37N ORDINNNCE 3e1 3 R ]6.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKtN COUNTY CLFAK A public hearing on the ordinanar shalt be txad on the wry' day of ~, 1997, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PLIBLISHSD as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the ~ day of -~-~.c7~~ .1997• Q.~,.,. r~.~-.-~--~'1- 10~ Bcnnen, Mayor ATTEST: !YJ1.G . ~ ~ r~ Kathryn S. K ,City Clerk ~ FINA~LL~Y~ ad~o/pted, ppa~~dfa'}~d ~pgrgvgll~tlus 1~5~- day of l~C.alUrtX iii f:/~ "T.~i. 199!!7. ~..) / i l.. t~ cc • ~ John S. ~ ennett, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. I h, tty Clerk ~ - - - -- -- -, - - - 'sdllwner.or0 ..._ _. _ 3 11111111111111111 IIIII illl 111111 Ililll III 11111 IIII till 407014 N/23/1007 11:408 ORDiNRNCE 1 of 11 R 70.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PIMIN COUNTY CLERK AN ORDINANCE OF TAE CITY COUNCIL OF THE. CITV OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO APPROVE TIC CONCEPTUAIIFINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TO REZONE I.OT 5 OF THE STILLWATER RANCH TO TIM ACADEMIC (A) AND CONSERVATION (C) ZONE DISTRICTS, AND TO GRANT A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR ANON-PROFIT ENTITY QUALIFYING A6 AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY ORDINANCE No. ~.L, SERIES OF 1997 WHEREAS, the owner of L.ot 5 of the Stillwetcr Ranch Subdivision, Kids StuffFouadation, (hereafter "ApplicanY7 submitted en application (hereafter "Plan") to the Community Development Departrnent to rezone to the Academic and Conservation zone disVicts and to designate the property as a Specially Planned Aree (SPA); and WHEREAS, the Applicant has also requested approvnl of n GMQS Exemption to recognize the Foundation as a nonprofit entity qualifying as im essential public facility pursuant to Section 26.100.050(Cx2)(ax(3)) of the Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Lot 5 of the Stillwater Subdivision contains approximately 6.457 acres located in Pitkin County, immediately adjacent to the City of Aspen, in the AFR-2 zone district; end ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'WHEREAS, ttie City~tWrci(; by Resolution No. 68, Series of 1996 and Resolution No. 3, Series-- -.. _~ _, ;,:: of 1997, at its mgular meetings on November 19, 1996 and Jarurary 13, 1997, respectively, did find the subjoct pazcel to be eligible for annexation, meeting the provisions of the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission roviewed the Plan in accordance with thou procedures ut forth at Sections 26.92.020 and 26.80.030(A) and (B) of the Aspen MunicipalCode and did conduct public hearings thereoa on March 4, 1997 and March l I, 1947; and .. l ~~ ~ ~ . ~ WIMREAS, upon ieview and consideration of the Plan, agency and public comment thereon; and -~---. those applicable standards as contained. in Chapter_26 of thp, Aspen Municipal Code, [o wit, Section `" 26.92.020 (Text and Map Amendments) and Section 26.80.040(B) (Development in a,Speyially Planned _ i ~~~iii ~ii~i iiua a~n uii mm uaii ui ia~ii au uu ~40l024 00/S~/itHT 11[408 OIIDINRNCE Z et 11 R 00.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PIfKIN CWRfTY f:L.E1tlC Area), the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of [he Final SPA Ihwelopme[tt Plan and the proposed map amendment by a vote of 5-0; and ~yHERF.AS, pursuant to Resolution 97-04, the Plamting and Zoning Commission H[rther granted Special Review approval for parlcingand Conditional Use Review approval for dormitory housing, a health care facility and a dining hall in the Academic zone disricr, and a s.vimming pcwl in [he Conservation zone district; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 97-04, the Planning and Toning Commission further granted 8040 Greenline Review and Stream Margin Review approvals; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and wnsidered the Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has rovicwed and wnsidered those recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission in Rcsolution 97-04, and has taken and considered'public comment at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Kids Siuff Foundation is a unique institution which enhances our community, end that designating the property ns a Specially Planned Aroe benefits the city's rosidents and visitors by allowing flexibility to accommodate the variety of proposed uses; and WHEREAS, the City Council fords that the proposed uses at the upper bench (described as "The West Part of Lot 5" in Exhibit "A'7 of Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision aro consistent with the purpose of the Academic zone district `Ro establish lends for education ettdculturel activities with attendant research, housing end administrative facilities"; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed uses ac the lower bench (described as "The East Part of Lot S' in Exhibit "A") of Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision are consistent with tbe _.,. ;. - purpose of the Conservation zone district "to provide..areasof,low, densityd~velopment 1o enhance pu to - .. ...- rocroation, conserve natural rosourees, encourage the production of crops and animals, and to contain urban development":and ... ___ -. - 2 i ~iiii~ loll iuiii ~i«i i~i~ lino ~iiiii iii ~iiii uii viii ~asei4 aiaaiun iit4M ORDiNIWCE ~ s/ 11 R 00.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKiN COU/TY C6EOK WHF,REAS, the City Council finds that proposed housing units will be deed-restricteA in accordance with the housing guidelines, are compatible witlt surrounding uses and will have a minimal impact oa the land; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed use qualities for a GMQS Exemption as a nonprofit entity pursuant to Section 26.100.050(C)(2xaX(3)) of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plan is consistent with the goals and elemenu of the Aspen Area Community Plan and with the public welfare end the purposes and intent of Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY TILE CITY COUNCTI. OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Rectlon t : pursuantto Section 26.92.020 (Standards of Review) of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council finds av follows in rogetd to the proposed map amendments: The proposed amendments are not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 26 of the Municipal Coda or the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed amendments are compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, and will have a minima[ impact on the natural environment. 3. _ The proposed amendmenu will promote the public interost end character of the City of Aspen. > Pursuant to Saction 26.92 of the Aspen Municipal Code, tha City of Aspen Zone District Map is hereby amended to rozone the upper batch of Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, desen'bed in Exhibit "A^ as "The Wort Part ofI.ot 5,^ to the Academic zone district with a Specially Planned Area ( ) ay, and the lower ixncit of Lot 5 of the Stillwate[ Ranch Subdivision, described in Exhibit."A_ :. - , ~. .. ~ ~ . .. SPA Over{ ` ~ " ~. - ~as "The East Part of Lot 5; 'to the Conservation zone district with a Specially Planned Arcs (SPA) Overlay. -. The legal description is attached as Exhibit "A.° , - - - -_ -- 3 ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ fill! ~~~~~~ (~~~~~ ~~~ X1111 ~~~~ IIII 405014 M/23/1007 lle4lR ORDINRNCE 4 ~f 11 R 50.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 ~ITK1N COUNTY CLERK G Ion '+: Pursumt to Section 26.100:050(C)(2xa)((3)) of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Kids. Stuff Foundation~is hereby granted a GMQS Exemption as a nonprofit cittity qualifying as m assmtia! pubiie facility. Seetloe 4: Pursumi to the Endings set forth in Section 1 above, the City Council's approval of the Plan is subject to Ciry Council approval of the Pdition for Annexntion by duly enacted Ordinmce mnexing the, subject property to the City of Aspen, and is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant and the City Council shell enter into an SPA agreement binding the real property to my conditions placed on the development order approving the ('final development plan. 2. The Final development plan, which shall consist of the site plan of the entire site; site improvement survey of the area being developed, including building footprints, utilities, easements, and landscaping; building elevations; and the Specially Planned Area (SPA) agroemam, shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recordaq and shall be binding upon the property owners subject to the development ardor, thou successors and assigns, and shalt constitute the development regulations for the property. Development of the property shall ba limited to the uses, density, configuration, and nll other elemonu and conditions sat forth on the final development plan and SPA agroement. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the final development plm and SPA agreement within a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days following its approval by City Council shall render the plan invalid. Reconsideration of the Final development plan and SPA agroement by the Commission and Ciry Council will be required before its acceptance and recording, 3. The final development plan shall be recorded prior to submission of any building permits for the proposed housing units: - - ~ - -- ~ ~ ~- - 4. AlI conditions imposed by the Planning and Zoning Commission's March 17, 1997 Conditional Use, Specie! Review, 8040 Otartline, and Stream Margin Review approvals, as outlined in Resolution 97-04, shall cony forward oa conditions of the City CouneiYapprovaks grmted pursumt to this Ordinmce. . 5. No construction or building permits shall be issued until tltc parcel htu been finally annexed into the City of Aspen. 6. All material ropresmtations made by the applicant in the application end during public hearings shall be adhered to and rnnsidered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended. ~tioe e; This Ordinmce shall not affect any existing litigation end shall not operate as an abatement of___ :_._ - _. >. - ,: my action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue oftlte ordinmtas repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shell be conducted and concluded dndei such prior ordinaxes. 4 1111111 Ilill 111111 Illli IIII 111111 111111 III 111111111 IIII 400014 00/23/1007 11:408 ORDINANCE S of 11 R 50.00 D 0.00 N 8.00 PITKIN COUNTY CLERK GCtina 6: If any sexliou, suhscetiuu, sealencq clatiu, ph rnse, or portion o1' ibis Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or wtantslitmional in n court of enmpdcnt jurisdiction, such portion shall be deuned a aeperate, distinct and independent provision rind shall not atlcet tha validity of the remaining portions thereof. SenNnn 7; A public henrin~ on the Onlin:utcewas held on the 14th day of April, 1997, at 5:00 p.m. in [he City Council Chambers, Aspen City H:dl, Aspen Culurnd,r, fifteen (1 S) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same wax puhlished in a nuwspalx:r of guncnd circulation within the City of Aspen. SeeHon S: This Ordinance shall not become cfl'eccive unless and until the Ciry Council approves the Petition for Annexation by duly rn:tcled Ordinance annexing the subject property to the City~ofAspen. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ciry Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Community Development Director INTRODUCED, RLAD AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided bylaw, by Ute Ciry Council of the City of Aspcn on thr<~_day of~~.24 N.~S 1992 ,, ..i :• t ,-t ~ ` ~ ... t f es . A J tf~ , ICatit~;n S.~bch, City~Clerk IJ Joho nnett, Mayor ~ ~ . ' FINALLY adopted, passed and approved This /T day o 1997. e~--- ,? t ~' ~~. ~ John Bet ett, Mayor • Attars : ~~ __ > E. ____ r. "•ICaM .rya S. K City Clerk :tifN"~ i• 5 !OKVINAwc~1,7°.11, lY9+j 3••16-1~7 t1:OIP1.1 -FROt4 PAPER CHASE/PACES 9705~fi387DD ~ EXH~BITA' 111111 1111 111111 Illli Iltl 11111111111.1111111111111111 ;upino Surveys, Inc_ X14 06/7J/1N7 iI14M1 ORDil6WC! post Okica Efox 1730 6 of 11 R 76.00 D 6.60 N 0.00 rITKIN COIR(T'f CLERIC Aspen, COloratlo Bi612 970 925 2608 ~ ~~ ~ _ ' MARCH 14, 1997 -- J08 NO. 97-1 XIDS STUFF FOUNDATION LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR RE-20NING OF LOT 5, STILLWATER RANCH/P_U,D. DESCRIPTION OF THE WEST PART OF LOT 5 THE WEST PART OF LOT 5, STILLWATER RANCH SUBDIVISION/ P.V.D., PITAIN COUNTY, COLORADO MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWSs BEGINNING'.; AT THE .WEST.CORNER 'OF SAID LOT 5: _ THENCE SOUTH.84°O1 '-42" EAST 199-73 FEET; - --- - - THENCE NORTH 09°24'26" EAST 417.59 FEET: THENCE SOVTH 89°13'19" EAST 28.00 FEET; TEENCE SOUTH 51°15'00" EAST 65.00 FEETi TRENCE SOVTH 36°30'00" EAST 132.~Z6 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 327.32 FEE2; THENCE NORTH 77°15'00" WEST 90.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 18°47'00" WEST 296.66 FEET) ,;., THENCE NORTH.30°14 '~96",->wlESfi 1'92..41,:€EET; - ~~+ -- ~--- THENCE 153.02 FEETRLONG-TAE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE - TO~THE LEFT HAVING A~RADSUS OF 60.00 FEET AND WHOSE CHORD HEAR9 NORTH 4B°03'50" WEST 114_80 FEETt TEENCE NORTH 55.45'00" WEST 45.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 52°22'39" WEST 46-93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 2'.562 ACRE9, MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION OF THE EAST PART OF L01' 5 _ _ THE EAST PART OF LOT 5, STILLWATER RANCH„SUBDIVISION/ _ .. - ._. .__ ,..:_., _ _ -.. _ P.U.D., PITXIN COUNTY, COLORADO.MORE. PARTICULARLY - °. '~ - - DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWSt ' BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST cOxNER-0F 5AI DLOT Sv_.- THENCE SOUTH 00.09'36" WEST 168.88 FEET; -- -- THENCE SOUTH 32°27'17" EAST 73.71 FEET; RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMLSSION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN THE ACADEMIC (A) AND CONSERVATION (C) ZONE DISTRICTS, SPECIAL REVIEW'OF PARKDQG REQUIREMENTS: 8040 GREbNLINE REVUEW, AND STREAM MARGW REVIEW FOR THE KIDS STUFF FOUNDATION DEVELOPMENT' LOCATED ON LOT 5 OF THE STILLWATER RANCH SUBDMSION, AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF REZONING AND CONCEPTUAL/F1NAL SPECL4LLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR T1TE KIDS STUFF FOUNDATION DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON LOT S OF THE STILLWATEA RANCH SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN Resolution 9'7-Q~- -- WHEREAS, The Community Development Dcpartrnent received an appliwtim from The Kids Smff Foundation, for Conditional Use Review for dormitory housing, a health cart facility and ¢ dining hall in the Aeedemic mne district and for a swimming pool m the Conservation zone disMcr Speefal Review for putting requirements N the Academic zone disvicr 8040 Greenline Review; Stream Margin Review; Rezoning; and, ConceptuaVFinel Specially Planned Arm (SPA) Review; and WHEREAS, Pursuant [o Section 36.60.040 of the Aspen Munieipai Code, Condtional Uus may be approved by the Planning end Zming Commission; pursuant to Section 26.64.040 of the Aspm Municipal Code, p¢rkingrequircments in the Academic une district may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission through Special Review; pursuaht to Section 26.68.030 of tiro Aspen Municipal . - - Code, 8040 Groenlirte Reviews may be approved by the Planning md-Zoning Commiasion; and pursuant to Section 26.68.040 of the Aspea Municipal Code, Stream Mugu Reviews may be approved by Me Planning and Zoning Commission: and - WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.92.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commissim shalt make a mommrndation m the Ciry Counci! regatdMg requests to amend the Offtclal Zone District Msp; and pursuant to Section 26.80.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code, tha Planning - and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding Conceptual/Final .Specially Planned Aces(3PR).Development Plan proposals: •-and '.="-- "- ~-"='"-~ WHEREAS, the Housing Office, City Engineering, Parks Depattment, Aspm Consolidaud Smitation Disvict, Environmmtal Health Deparment and Community Development Department reviewed the proposals and rocommended approval of each with conditions: and ' WHEREAS, the above referenced application was legally nodcedfor a public hearing; and . ' WHEREAS, during ilte public hearing az a cootiwad meeting on Mazch I1, t997, the Pluming and Zoning Commiasion approved by a SA vote the Conditional Usw with conditions, the Special Review with conditions, the 8040 Grsenline Review with conditions, and the Stream Margin Review with conditions; and. ' WHEREAS, during a public hearing at a continued meeting on March 1 1, -1997, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval by,a 3-0 vote ofahe roquest mamrnd the Official Zone .:....... ...... . _._. __ _. District Map and the Concepmnl/Final Specially Planned Area (SPA) Development Plan proposal - -. NOW, THEREFORE SE IT RESOLVED b}the.Commissiont:~~"~ _._. -..~ .._, -.:-.. _ - i 11111111111 IIINI II1N IIII 111111111111111111111111111 106014 00/Z6/1007 88r4M OIIDINRNCE 7 of 11 R 66.00 4 0.00 N 0.00 FITKIN CCUNiY CLERK A. Condidond Use: That the Conditional Use for dormitory housing: a health tare facility and a dining hall in the Academic (A) zone district, end a swimming pool in the Conservation (C) zwta district at Kids Stuff Foundation on Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision is approved wiN the following conditioro: 1. Prior to the issuance of any 6uild(ng permiss the applicant shall: a) Instill any new surface utilities requiring a pedcstsi Or other above ground equipment on an easement provided by the property ownm and not within the public rights-of-way; b) [.oceu any additional proposed wnstnution in such n way that h does not encroach into en existing utilitycnacment or public right-of--way; c) Agree to jom any futtue improvemrnt district(s) which may ba formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way; the agreement shall be axecu[ed and recorded concurrently upon approval of this application; d) Submit a "Site Improvemem Survey' w the Engineering Department; e) Indicate all utility meter locations and trash containment areas on fnal developmon[ plane; f) Ensure that the project meats all mnolF design stmdards of Section 26.88.040(Cx4)(t) w[th the building pennifapplicarion, and provide a drainage report and mitigation plan signed and stamped by an engineer registered in [he Sate of Colorado; - - g) Submit a permanent ttosion Control plan and a temporary sediment wntroi plan and conuinatent plan Cor she construction Dhase; and h) Needles end other <onuminated items will need to be handled as medical wasu and the operamr will need to canvas[ with a medical waste pick up hauler to properly dispose of these items. ' 2. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy (CO), the applicant shalh a) Submit ns-bulb drawings of dre project showing property lines, building footprint, - - - - ~- easements, any encroachments, envy points for utllides enuring the propetry boundaries and any ocher improvements [o the AspeNPitkin County Data Processing Deparvnrnt in accordance with Ciry GIS rcqutrements, if and when, any exterior renovation or remodeling of theproperty occurs that requtres a budding permit: b) Permit Community Development Department and Housing Office staff to inspect the properly to determine compliance with the wndltions of approval; c) Be required to sign a sidewalk, curb and guter agreement with the Ciry; d) Increase the width of the access easement through the property m twenty (20) feet in order to meet emergency access width requirements, and amttgenry access to the new building must be twrnty (20) feet wide. That is, [he driving surfam must ba twenty (20) feet wide axrd must be cleared of snow Cor the full width. A dedieau0 fire mgirte mrn around that will remain .. , ;... - frx oC parked cars, meeting Fve Marshal mquirements, must be provided; e) Psve the driveway: and. - ~ ~ t) The Environmental Health Deparmen[ shall approve both ~pkns and spccilications oCall ,..: .. °_~ :-. food urvice facihtiea. A minimumof two (Z) weeks ahall ba-secesasry forthe Department-m ._ . -- - ... _. ' - review sad approve plans. Also, final approval from the Envtonmemal Heshh Department is required before opening for busintss, and prior m issuanu oCa Colorado Food Service License. _, . 1 Illlil 11111Illlli IIIII Illl 111111 {1111 III IIIII IIII IIII ~ax14 Osinilan 1tr4N1 gID1NRNC! et 11 R 00.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 fITNIN CDtRiTY CLERK 3. Also prior m issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall consult with Ciry departments rcgardin8 the following: a) City Engineering for design of improvements, imluding landscaping, within public rights-of--way: . b) parka Department foc tree removal, landscaping, and seleetion.af vegendve species, as well as provisions for trail taseman[c and fencing design: e) Ciry Streets Department for street improvements, end shall obtain permits for any work or developmenq including landscaping, within public rights-of--way; and, d) Aspen Consolidaud Sanitation District and the Department of Environmental Health for drainage provisions for the swimming pool, grease and oil interceptor provisions for the kitchen, oil and sand interceptor provisions for the garage, and 61ood home'snd harardou9 waste disposal provisions for Me medical suite. 4, Prior to the issuance of any building penniB, a review of any proposed minor changes from the approvals, as set forth herein, shall be made by the Planning and Engineering Lxpertments, or referred beak to the Planning and Zoning Commission. S. Onc (1) year after the commencement of operation, an employment audit shall be conduc[cd by the Housing I3eparonent The permanent staff cults shell be deod restricted with priority for uac of these units to personnel of the Foundation, end categorized as to those employees residing in [he units (Category 1, 2, or 3; but Category 4. for the two-bedroom, lower-lave) unit). 6. Deliveries to the fuiliry for ail services (i.e., food, medkal supplies, etc.) shall be limited to the hours between 6:00 s.m. and 7:00 p.m.. and consolidation of deliveries will be implemented to the maximum extent practi<abk. 7. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and durhtg public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall-be adhered m and shall be considered wnditians of approval, unless orherwix amended by a Boerd/Commission having authority to do so., B. Special Review: That the Special Review for off-streot parking requirements in the Academic (A) mne d'utrict at Rids 8mff Foundation on Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision rcquuing three (3) garaged parking spaces for vans and ten outdoor parkingspaces meets the standards of Section 26.64.040(6) of the Aspen Municipal Cade and is approved with the following ronditions: 1. Ono (1) year after commencement of the facility's operation, a parking audit/study be conducted by the applicant end submitted [o the Community Development Department for review. If'the findings indicate that the provided perking is not adequate mitigation will need to be proposed by the applicant and approved by the Commission pursuant to Special Review in accordanco with Section 26.ti4.04D(B) of the Municipal Code. 2. All material representations made by the applicant in this npplicntion and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and shall ba considered conditions - - ~. of approval, unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commissionhaving authority. to doso = C. 8040 Groanlln Review: - - - - _ .That the 8040 Greenline Review for tilt Kids Stutf Fouodation development propdaal oo Lot 5 of rho ` ~ - Stillwater Retch Subdivision meets the standards of Section 26.68.030 of the pspen~Munieipal Cede and Ir•-. - -_ . approved with the following conditions: -_ ,. _ .. 1111111 11111 lafll fill 1111 lllll IIII111111111118 WI 4CJf1s tgs/zs/gM7 i1rHq oNOIIVANC! (g rs! 11 N Of.00 D b.00 N 0.0! ~ITKIN COllfflY CY.~tK 1. Regarding the horn tscil{ties s) Careful housekeeping and cleanup of ail areas eheli occur on a regular, daily buts; b) Runoff through this arcs shall be convollsd by frosting diversion swales to keep runotT from the stable area from traveling off the property or Into nearby rivers; c) One (1) year after commencemeo[ of the facilityY opernt{on, a hone population and water quality audit/emdy shall be conducted by the applicant aM submitted [o Ne Community Developanem Department for review. If the findings indicate that the water quality is below acceptable levels, a fifty (50) foot buffer Cram areas ehu could be costly contaminated, such as the river, 100.year flood plain and wttlands, will be implemented and maintained to protect riparian vegetation, alluvial soils and groundwater aM surtece water, d) An evaluation shall be done to determine the "carrying capacity" of the area For horses as compared m land arcs available; e) If concerns arise, the Asper/Pitkin Environmental Health Department reserves the right to requiro water quality sampling at the owner's expense; 2. Prior to issuance of any building permiu or use of the facility, Ote applicant shall provide proof to the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department [het proposed midgadon measures aro suRcient to offset increases in PMia and trcffc Doused by the project: 3. At (east thirty (30) days prior m issuance of a building permit the plnos and speci£cadons complete with piping layout, equipment and mechanical speoifications along with design calculuions, shalt bs submined for review and approval by the AspeNPitkin Environmental Health Departrnent; 4. All maudal reprosentntions made by the applicant is this application and during public matings with the Planning and Zooing Commission shall be adhered to and shall be considtted conditions of approval, uNtss otherwise emended by s Eoard/Commission having aumority to do so. O. Stream Margin Review: That [he Stream Margin Roview for the Kids Smff Foondation development proposal on Lot S of the Stillwattt Ranch Subdivision meets the smndarda of Section 26.68.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code and is approved with the following conditions: 1. The spplitnnt shall work with the Parks Department to design a fentt around tha stable with rail. logs [hat nee capable of being dismantled to allow debris associued with flood waters to pass throughdre properly; 2, The proposed location of the swimming pool and horse stable be moved to at least fifteen (IS) from the edge of the top of slope, ss determined by the Aspect Fatgineering Department. All portions of all strutturcs~construction must fall within the approved building envelope; 3. If any outdoor lighting u proposed, said lighting shell be low and downcast with no light(s) _ directed toward the river or located down the'slopc, Any end ell outdoor lighting will -feature -- - - _ down-directional and sharp cut-off fixtures: 4. A plat documrnt(ng the approved building envelops es related to survryed information shall be.. - ~ submined to and, approved by the Asprn Enginxring Department. This plat shell include revised _ - and shall be recorded '-' _--- site sections meetlng the standard set forth by Section26.68.040(Bx 10), _ -- -- within I80 days of stream margin review approvla~l; - I~~III ~IIII "I"I I~"I II" (N'I' ~II"I III t'I'II ICI Intl 400014 00/Xg/1007 SSt40R ORDINRNCE 10 et IS R 00.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN WUIfTY CLER i n~ui ~iiu iii~ii iiii~ aii iiuu ii~ii m~ini~i ui uii X0!/14 M/23/SM7 31t4/R OROINRNCE 11 ~f 1! R 06.00 D 0,00 N 0.00 ~ITKIN COUNTY CLER 5. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetings. with the. Planning and boning Commission shalt be adhered [o and shall be considered conditions of approvol, unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commission having authoriry to do ao. E. Rezoning: That a recommendation to approve the rezoning u reques[e~ by the applicant, provided the annexation requeu is spproved, is forwarded m the City Council. That in. the Commission eocommenda to Couacll that the subject parcel be zoned Academic (A) on the upper bench, Conservation (C) on the lower bench, and Spxiaily Planned Area (SPA) overlaying the entire parce4 subject to both ffic dimensional requirements adopted by Council through the approval of a Specially Planned Area and the parking requirements adopted by the Commission through [he approval, with two (2) conditions, of the Special Review request. F. Specially Planned Arcn: Thai the Commission recommends that Council designate Lot 5 of me Stillwater Raoch as a Specially Planed Atea (SPA) and allow for the consolidation of conceptual and fatal SPA review. The Commission fbrthu eowmmends that Council accept the following dimensional rcquiroments for the Academic (A) zone district portion of the SPA: 1. Minirattm Lot Size: 6 acres 2. Minimum Lot Ares Per Dwelling Uni[: 1.5 acre pcr unit 7. Minimum Lot Width: 200 fttt 4. Minimum Fronl Yard: 30 feet - 5. Minimum Side Yard: 20 feet 6. Minimum Rear Yard: 20 feu 7. Maximum Height:. 28' to the mid-point of the roof, as measured on all sides of the building, except for the east elevation, which shall not exceed 32.5' m the mid-point 6. Minimum Distance Between Principal and Accessory Buildingc: No roquirement. except that required by building code. 9. Percent of Open Space Acquired for Building Site: 30 percent 10. P.xtetnd Floor Area Ratio: Floor area shall not exceed 14,000 square feet t 1. Inumai Floor Aren Ratio: No requirement. In addition, the Commission recommends that Council finds that the proposed SPA meets all applicable staodnrds (I-g) of Section 26.80.040(6) ~ttd Could ba approved with the condition that an SPA plat shall be approved by the Enginaerytg Dbpprtafe etxrded within 1 BO days final SPA approval. G. Ceneml Provisions: ' .• ; ,~. r ~+•,f~/ `~~ tr ~ 1. That this Resolutionshall not bccomA e~teCdv I e.tptlt/sy~atid uncil~tbe City Council approves the Petition for Annexation by duly enafie~(ryjic`t,intlatCing the subject property to the City of Aspen. J:rr., C, r: jt 2. All material representations made by the applr'ffin 6r is application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall d to and shall be considered. conditions of approvol, unless otherwise amended by a Board/Co mission having authority to do so. " APPROVED by the Commission at its continued meetingotrMarch-11, 1992 ~ ~ , ~ ~----- ~-~_-~--- ~ ~ ~ - '-- " 1- _ Attest: -- ~ ~ kie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Planning~a~nd~,Zoning Commission: -. Sara Garton, Chairperson ~... - "." Davis Horn~• PLANNING & REAL ESTATE CONSULTING . ! ,, November 14, 2006 Cindy Houben Pitkin County Community Development;Director 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Silver Lining Ranch, Stillwater Ranch Lot 5 Dear Cindy: The Kids First Foundation has moved the Silver Lining Ranch to southwest Colorado and is selling the Aspen property where the Rarich has been operating since it was built in 1999. The Silver Lining Ranch is a facility which assists children with cancer.'. The Foundation found that cancer patients who visited the Aspen facility had difficulty adjusting to the altitude in Aspen. It is also faz more affordable to operate the Ranch in southwest Colorado. Davis Hom Inc has been hired to reseazch the existing development approvals for the property, Stillwater Ranch Lot 5, for potential future owners. Of particulaz interest is the possibility of "disconnecting" the property from the City of Aspen and again becoming a part of unincorporated Pitkin County under the existing Stillwater Ranch approvals which applied to the property prior to annexation into the City of Aspen in 1997. We therefore are providing you this summary of land use actions and approvals related to the property in hopes of returning to these original Pitkin County approvals. Stillwater Ranch Subdivision is a Pitkin County subdivision which contains six lots plus an open space pazcel. The Subdivision was approved by the Boazd of County Commissioners pursuant to Resolution 94-223 on December 2Q 1994 and is recorded at Book 770, Page 783 of the County records. The Final Plat for the Subdivisiop is recorded at Plat Book 35, Page 86. Five Growth Management Quota System allotments were granted for five of the six lots pursuant to BOCC Resolution 94-125. The fathering pazcel is Lot 6 which had an existing house (Fritz and Fabi Benedict's house) and did not need a GMQS allocation. (See Attachments 1, 2 and 3 for Resolution 94-233, the recorded plat and Resolution 94-125.) ~' ' The six lots in Stillwater Ranch Subdivision include the following: ,, Lot 1: Approved as a free market loYat general submission; ultimately donated by the Benedicts as an affordable housing lot since the project was. one GMQS allotment short afterthe - first competition. This avoided going to a second yeaz of GMQS competition the following year. At first Lot 1 was to be sold as a free mazket lot with funds going to the affordable housing program, but later approvals were obtained for an affordable housing project which is now built and occupied. ALKE DAVK AICP f GLHdN HORN AKP 215 SOUiH MONARf}I ST. • SUITE 104 • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 •970/925-6587 • FAX:970/925-5180 adwisCkof.net ghom@rotnet Lot 2: Free mazket lot, now developed with a 9,701 * square foot house owned by Frederic Home*; ,; ,, Lot 3: Free mazket lot, now developed with a 9,809* squaze foot house owned by Thomas Reagan*; Lot 4: Free mazket lot; under construction; major plat amendment approved to shift and enlarge the approved existing principal building envelope, to establish an accessory building envelope and to amend the floor azea for the lotto allow for allay-lighted basement. (See BOCC Resolution #124-2004 in Attachment 4.) This lot is owned by Chazles R. Bellock and is approved for 11,250 aggregate squaze feet: 8,600 square feet with 2100 sf on the lower level, a maximum of 1,900 squaze feet exempt sub-grade squaze feet and a 750 squaze foot exempt garage. Lot 5: The subject property was originally approved as a free market lot and was granted a GMQS allotment through BOCC.Resolution 94-125. The Kid's First Foundation (Silver Lining Ranch) was the beneficiary of the gift of Lot 5 by the.. Benedict family for use as the Silver Lining Ranch. After the. gift, the property was annexed into the City of Aspen through City of Aspen Ordinance No. 11 of 1997 and Resolution 97-04 both approved in Mazch, of 1997. (See Attachment 5 for these documents.) These documents granted approval of the annexation, a rezoning from AFR-2 to Academic (A) /Conservation (C)SPA; a GMQS exemption for development associated with anon-profit entity, consolidated Conceptual and Final SPA Review, Conditional Use Review and Special Review. All approvals were granted in order to develop and operate the Silver Lining Ranch. The facility has 18,000 squaze feet including several affordable housing units. Lot 6: The former home of Fritz and Fab Benedict and the fathering parcel of the subdivision, now owned by Peter and Julie Gerson. * Square footage and owners aze per Pitkin County Assessor. The Pitkin County approvals for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision aze for-four free mazket bedrooms per lot plus additional free market bedrooms with further affordable housing mitigation. The approvals for the first four bedrooms require an above grade, deed restricted one-bedroom affordable housing unit to be located within the approved building envelope. More bedrooms would require approval for more affordable bedrooms or cash in lieu. As shown above in the previous individual lot discussions, much larger homes with more than fouz bedrooms are typical for the Subdivision. The subject property is developed with 15 bedrooms ih 18,000 square feet. Prior to the development of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, Stillwater Ranch Pazcels was subdivided into three parcels by state legislation which allowed subdivision of land over 36 acres in size. Stillwater Ranch Parcels include Parcel One, with 52 acres that was subdivided into six lots plus the open space pazcel in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, and Pazcels Two and Pazcel -2- Three, both 36.02 acre pazcels now owned by the Roll International Corporation. Pazce13 is developed with a 14, 688 squaze foot home and Pazce12 is vacant. There is a 2.45 acres outpazcel within the'six lot Stillwater Ranch Subdivision owned by Susan and Helen Hunt. This property is surrounded by the subject property, Lot 5 Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. The improvements were built in 1949 and included a 2,686 squaze feet house, a 306 second separate uriit and a 676 squaze foot shed. Other surrounding uses are the Fleck house, Callahan Subdivision Lot 12 &12A with 1.9 acres, 6,447 squaze feet plus a 3,275 squaze foot second unit used as a cazetaker unit; Lot 11 Callahan Subdivision with I.1 acres under construction and the Aspen Club, adjacent to the west. In summary, since the Silver Lining Ranch has moved to southwest Colorado,. the Kids First Foundation wishes to pursue abandoning the City approvals, disconnecting from the City, returning to the original single family approvals of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision and making the subject property subject to and entitled to benefits from the zoning and,subdivision approvals applicable to the other free market lots in the subdivision. This single family use was intended for this 6.457 acre lot and is most compatible with the neighborhood and uses in the azea. Please let us know if you have any questions or if we can provide further information. At this point, we are simply interested in your opinion regarding this proposal. For your information and convenience, the following attachments have been included. Thank you for your assistance. Attachment 1: BOCC Resolution 94-233~approving Stillwater Ranch Subdivision; Attachment 2: Recorded Final Plat for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision; -i_ Attachment 3: BOCC Resolution 94-125 granting five GMQS allotments for the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision Lots 1 through 5; , . ;,,ti Attachment 4: BOCC Resolution 124-2004 granting a major plat amendment approval pertaining to Stillwater Ranch Lot 4; the Bellock property; and Attachment 5: City of Aspen Ordinance No. 11 of 1997 and Resolution 97-04 regarding City approvals for the Silver Lining Ranch. ; Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED GLENN HORN AICP -3- ATTACHMENT~~ 377678 8-770 P-783 12/30/94 04:05P PG 1 OF 8' REC ~ DOC SILVIR DRVIS PITKINcCDUNTV CLERK b RECORDER 0.00 EE/OL9TIOE O! TEE E01Ep O! COOETY COE1lIyyIOE~y O! PITEIE OODIIlY, COLOAADO~ OAl11TZE0 D6"271ILED 111D lI1D)L P7,1T APIAOYaL TO THE ETILLEATB EAECH EIIEDIVIEIOE/PDD- `aewlutioa fy4~ Si4SSELd 1. Fabisnne Benedict, (haraafter `Applicant"),hns applied to the Hoard o! County commissionary oP Pitkin County, (hereafter "Board"), to subdivide the Stillwater Ranch into~six lots. 2. The subject property 1y Zoned AFR-2, PDD.~' 3. Tha property iy located adjacent to and east o! the city of Aspen, southwest of Highway 82, more specifically described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto. 4. The Planning andZOning Commission rwiewed thisapplicatian at their regularly scheduled public hearing on January 18, 1994, and racommsndad General Submisaion_epproval subject to conditions. 5. The Board granted five GEQS allotments to the applicant by Resolution No. 94-125. 6. The Board heard the General Submission application at a regularly scheduled and noticed public hearing on August 30, 1999, at which time evidence andteetimony was presented in regard to this application. 7. Tha Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Detailed and Final Plat application at their regularly scheduled public meeting on November 8, 1994,, and recosmanded approval subject to conditions. B. Tha Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed this application ~,i ,r . ~.. .. 377678 A-770 R-784 12/30/94 04:05P PG 2 OF B Aesolutiom xo. f1-~ Doge 2 for Scenic overlay requirements at a regularly scheduled public hearing on tlovamber• 29, 1994, and epproved the Scenic Overlay review eubjact to wnditiona by their Resolution No. PS-94 -15. xox, THmlHioRH, HE IT HseOLVED by the Hoard of County commissioners that it ._hareby grants Detailed and Final Plat approval to the applicant subject to the following conditions: 1. All utility extensions shall be located underground, and appropriate easements shall be dedicated to the various public and private utilities as may be required. All utility extensions shall be located in the property's existing road system to minimize .site disturbance. If utility extensions era proposed outside of approved road alignments, these extensions shall be shown for review and approval et Detailed Submission. 2. All development on Lote 1 through 5 shell be limited to access roads, the individual driveways, utility' extensions, irrigation ditchac, fences seating Divieion'~ oP "Wildlife requirements and the building envelopes:"'`'NO disturbance, including vegetation removal, (unless required by'the county for 'tire protection) shall occur outside these areas. Landscaping outside of building envelopes may be' permitted upon approval by the Planning Department. 3. The applicant shall dedicate a fishing easement along the southerly bank of the river to include the river and five Peat of bank above the high voter mark. A fishing easement shall also ba granted between the common boundary of the out parcel 377678 B-770 P-7B5 '12/30/94 04t05P PO 3 OF 8 muolutiea lfe. fs- page ~ and Lot 6 and the centerline of the river. The applicant shall work withtha County to realign those portions of the "winter" trail that era located within hazardous avalanche zones, to the extent feasible. 4. All residences shell be connected to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation Districts (ACSD) gain sewer line that runs through the property. The ornate o! said lots shall pay .the normal connection fees, along with nn additional. prorated surcharge that will be used to recover the costa of repairing a downstream constraint. The pro rata shareshall be determined by the ACSD. if a sewage pumping system ie necessary on any parcel, a conventionnl septic tank shall pratreat~.effluent prior to discharge into a pumping chamber, as racommandefl by the anvironnental Health Department. ,. 5. The applicant shall nuke a contribution o! 612 ,.60o to the County trails program prior to recordation of the final plat. No building permit shall be issued within the Stillwater Ranch subdivision until the County shall have expended the contribution on apecilic trails improvements. 6. The applicant ahall~bbtain access permits and submit erosion and sediment control plane as required to the county Engineer for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. 7. The Pire District shall be allowed onthe propa~ty to check fire hydrants and :water pressure prior to building permit issuance. 8. The Applicant or owners shall provide one, above grade, low ReeolutiOA ITO. 91 Pegs 1 income, one-bedroom affordable housing unit on Hach of the five new lots within their designated building envelopes, concurrently with the construction of each four-bedroom Lree market unit. An appropriate deed restriction shall be executed and filed with theHOUSing Office. The affordable units shall meet or exceed Housing office's minimum, net livable area requirement for low income units, and shall be deed restricted to the Category /1 lncome, price and occupancy guidelines in effect at the time of issuance of a building m permit. Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval is hereby o granted to ellow smaller lot sires as necessary for the a provision oP detached or attached affordable houelnq unite on' n Lots 2 and 3. a 9. Dogs shall be kenneled or leashed at all times. Fencing shall 9 ~+' comply with Divlsion of Wildlife standards, including a a m maximum height of 62", four strands or less. 9 lo. Prior to final plat recordation, the applicant shall supply ~,~ i. evidence oP an adequate water supply. m il. The protective covenants for the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision n n shall be revised to permanently restrict the use oY the open s Space Parcel to agriculturaluses and `improvements, the r M1 ~ pastuiinq of horaee and related uses and improvements, and m such~othar open space uses and lnprovemente as may be approved r ~ from time to time by the Stillwater Ranch Homeowners n ro Association, and the continuation oY existing uses. The covenants shall also prohibit further subdivision~ofthe open Space Parcel, although a lot line adjustment shall be~ permitted between the Open Space Parcel and the qutParcel if County and landowner approval can be obtained. { i Aesolntioa so. 9t Page i 1Z. on or before !larch 1, 1995, the applicant shall Form a Homeowners' Association aomprisad of the owners of the six (6) lots in the 6tillwater Aanch Subdivision, and shall convey the Open Space Parcel to the Homeowners' Association. The deed shall rnsarve the exclusive use, control anfl expense of the Open Space Parcel to Fabienna Benedict and Fredric A. Benedict Por the rest of their lives. 13. Removal of nature vagatation outside of any building envelope on Lots 1 through 5 is prohibited except. ae provided .for in m Condition 2 above. Removal of mature .trees within the o building envelopes shall require approval of atree removal ~ plan by the Planning office. Nature treesmeana any deciduous N ~ a tree of six-inch caliper at diameter-breast-height or any a evergreen taller than six feet in height. -. m ~ 14. Tho northern boundary of the building envelope on Lot 1 shall m m be relocated twenty (20) teat to the south to reduce potential r°p - visual impacts. The applicant may relocate the eastern and/or N western boundaries of the building envelope ao ae to saintain m the size of the building envelope. r ,j, 15. The building height on Lot 1 shall ba limited to a maximum oP n 20 feet measured .from existing grade or finished grade, . r ~ w whichever is lower, to the top of a Plat roof ortha midpoint _ of a pitched root., The ridge oP a pitched roof shall not m exceed Z5 teat above existing or linished grade, whichever is n "~ lower. 16. The building height on Lot 2 shall be limited to {i) a maximum Aeeolutiom Yo. !t-~ Dage oP 20 feet aeasured from the existing elevation of the northeast corner of the building envelope to the~top of a flat roof or the midpoint of a pitched roof, or (ii) the maximum height allowed in the AFR-2 Zona District, whichever is lower. The ridge of a pitched roo! shall not exceed 25 feet above asid existing elevation. The applicant shall esteblieh eaifl elevation by field survey and shall incorporate the same in the~Protective Covenants for the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. 17. The height limitations imposed on Lots 1 and 2 may be varied subject to obtaining a new Scenic Overlay approval pursuant to the standards and procedures in effect at the time of a new m o application. 19. The owner of Lot 1 shall submit a landscape plan fvr review m n anfl approval by the Planning Office prior to the issuance of a a building permit for the residence on Lot 1. Tha purpose of 6 a the landscape plan ehell'be to reduce the visual impact of a a development on Lot 1 from Highway 82. P ~ 19. Section 2(P) of the covenants (lighting) shall be revised to r ~~ -preclude ouiaide lights on the north side of the~buildinga. on m Lots 1 and 2 (facing Highway S2). The architectural n a "guidelines" shall be renamed to "requirements". y 20. With the exception rot one entrance light at the intersection _m of Highwny b2 and Stillwater Road, and one outdoor light for . the garage or home entrance (unless otherwise required by the m ~ Uniform Suildinq Code), access drive and lanflscape-"accent" n rq lighting shall b6 prohibited on LOta 1 and 2. Low level ,,: ~. ; m LL 0 n c~ a a N 6 r m a P 6 N c r r~ e n r w m r n n ~~ aaaolutioa ^o. f9-~ Page 7 walkway lighting, however, shall be alloyed Lor safety purposu.~ All artarior lighting .shall comply with the appliaabie raquiramenta of the Pitkin County Land Uea code. 21. Livestock grazing end livestock impounding is prohibited on Lots 1 through 5, with the exoaption of horses, which may be impounded on Lots .4 and 5. Livestock grazing and livestock impounding is permitted within the Open Space parcel and 6. 22. All .material representations mode by the applicant in the application end public meetings shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON TH8 20TH DAY OF DECEt~ER, 1994. A EST ns on s, Deputy C rk and Record APPROVED AS TO FORK: Tim to tt, Cou ty t rney eiw/fk.benodict.detailad.reao HOARD OF COONTYCOMMI33IONERS OF PZTRZN COVNTY, COIgRADO pAicH.hsf- c. IR6MUA By: h3 airman Date: /1~QU . _, APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 7_~..ii r.Cf 1 /.s=~.a.r~ fi.'Sazann6 Roy an; "' County Pl nning Director Pxhibit "A" PARCEL 1, STSLLW7\TER RANCH Pan~`*ra, acrnrding to the Firet Amended Plat therao! recorded December 2, 1997 in Plat Hook 37 at Page 3{. COUNTY OP PITEIN, STATE OP COLORADO. m LL O C7 a a 6 S b S P 9 M .N. e m n i n m n n m m r .o n n m S ° ~ f ° fk, ~. ~ ~ .YqY > ° ~ i ~ ~ {etn i ~ H O ~ ~4 ~ i ~ ~Y<~ i O <EEKJ y. ~y Yf f~hx '=5, a v~ • ~ ~ 6 vs£ ~Si[J 5 h u x i O 5~ ~ ~ ~ 54;+!I n rc 1zG ti.: ~~ V £ a r_ w S, J~ ~~ Z i ~ F #4 { LL L` ~ V i~> CZ7 at'_~ ~ a 5 ~ 6~0 '3 ~ R~r ,'. a ma t~'4 ' ~ ~YJ,`~ `a r ~h~ ~ ~ ~~5 f .... 7 iz y' a ~ p~"~~;s°g~~~r~u~~ .i~ Sd (1~ SiK ~~..r~~Fi g ~~ yF'S:„ a{Elt O F mEg>r { f,J N LL t.~d~~{('~~(F~JR~~~~h~rh,~~~F ~~ 7x W /~ 1lJ~Y IIZYl1V°'xy€ZS„ k-.4 .. .Y. I'1( L a~0 0 ,"S~~R~RMK~~Fi9~j~i F~~''yNy > it S~r ~4y~R S~n~Pok J4 ~~ ry6y Y ypyp t,. li K ~ILJ.yku (r ~{,{O 1.~ 6 N ~ i~`na(~'~w ~lC t~CI~CJ~~„ 1A x ~V ° t a ,4I ~~ ~ ~3.`~~~V9e: 3~n~: ~9i;; ~3h ~Z~. ~ yr~ ~~%r a a Rsl.. z5 LJJ So~~~~Y_""•~~dk~dj~j~t~ € r ~ , ~3~'z~ ~~~~ ~p'~ ~}22 R37 yg{~d 5~ 9~~8 Q ~~-f„ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h s 9~ a~~' ~y~ ae 9~ € 3 ~~~k~3$Y C~~B,~~J~R ~~ ~ ~ ; n~ ~ ~~ ° ~ iJ~a "~ik orb i~~~ ° ~ {~ g~ -J ~ ~r~l~ik,Rr > 6 3 h 1i ~J ~`~F s g ~' ~„~ BJr~~ a3~ t~~5` ~ K'F ° 'hr ~ G ~~ ~ $r E f a ~,~ x Pppy (n ~, i.~y ~sT'~~y~$~~dy~@r~ Z ~,~il~y ~~~(,, ~' ~`~A J~ $i `' ~`~i~ ° ~ ~3Srk 5~d r~JxChJ4Tu~d~Po~Y~ 3~ ~ i JWF~~~ N ~"~Y y R i Rtl~ ~~YF fR~} ~ 0~~ ~u !6 rs ~.fn Yn"Ss)E z rho~E ° ~ x $ k' r[ S~s~ ~ ~~! Sr, '~xG 33~ ~Sz ~r`~t J h =~Y_ o K3 ~ ~ ~Y x ~~p 6~~r, :_ ~ Rg9~ ' ~,5 a~r$ b4i~~~x k,~ s z ~ 5 ~ "h u kr °+1 ~~ Y 4 S ~~"~SrtykerYR4~vq~ic~FY3~~ ~ x ~~~i§ f- ~~~~ ~~~~ i+~~~~ ~ey( £~~~ ~p~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ .,h5~,~~iKY9d YxF l~e~t ~.Z G 9 ~}KY~s' ~ ;;,'y<etf xEhs~.,k~iG, .k2~3~8 .s~a -.6y'f' ~ xk Fk Y~2~G yy k g p F ~! a.9 O 5 ~RfS~°°~~ F~ ri 4~c~`~ ~3SSkQ .f~~ (~k6>~r ~R~9 ~ Yh9~fe q ~~S~vJ .~SF~~° ~d~ a t8 u err <j,1g2 ~1%~j~R <~R uE,7~~I ~p39Qx~Zy u15 ri5u Fx ~ i~~~ °SWCy ~F g~ k ~k~~pp?t~ °j .b y~~ Y'h'.i'(n~ Yr$F~'h6 ?v.if Qz 9*~+1.! ~ ~Fg~ "Kn~~~ +y~ v~~i{~t ~~i{` 5>ok ~~{ ~S E:~~:.ts •. ~ uYSu ~Z ~~~ ¢ ~ @~x ~ Y ~~ F[ ~~ ~ ~ ~J~u .R~-~6du~ £~!' d Fx s` ~', dg ~Z~{r ~ ~ ~§ ~~ ~J~z§ ~~~yl ~ ~ eJ ~~~~ ~'~ Fd K~o ~~ ~qr FY uY 3 ~ F Y' u~] Y x P ~ J k ( 6 ~S KF { €3a4g~=€g~°~e' .~. 'V ~gu~ F r a r 2 p ~pk y z ~ ~ ~ gp5~ ~ -rrxk~ "~1'W F<@i~~ry5~'_~~~Fj3'~v>;ti~:~ ii`Pk"C r ~~ p9 ~S 2•~ ~~ ? Y 3 Jk QJ,~~Pi}y~ ~'k~JY='e~r vll ~(1lu~,pnyddtltl~ F S ygS{'~~~}}JJY r~ ' ~0ylk Y Y~;~(Y;1~~ ~~ "2333 k ~ Y~ ii~F1ii!,'i C R4. i~YQ ~KK~;~idl-uI z~ Gu Y~ y~ f? ~ ' ]N]N{ 4iNF g~ >~k~ 8~ ~ ~` ~ U 6~nly ~~~Rt ~~~~~YR ah_y% ~i~ L ia~eii zi Y~' ~ G~C~` "~ '8~ ! ~~ k ~~i ~~ ~~•~3~ w„ w r R)- 1 R 3 €i22 a uu ) w W J tE.J ~ ~ ;) s pfig) c yt , '.FM: n~~j °'Z3 n-~F 9 ~ .: r3g6' LL z ~ yyh) khr CkJ°pp~~l~' 8 u Z 6~ a ~fi °z~, ~~. )~4~Y~! G.6 ?'v'~z i. 1t3~ ~I 5~ F~.F ~~ 3 vF F8 ~~~ ~~'± k'y u ~i.,i`Y :~azxx'~6 .yGyJaGw ~QF~i:}~"S'@ ~kFvWo_rtl4,3~JyFky~ {j1u~F kirk nFpX k ~ 6~sh~'~~ jy[~g r. ~$F =i! LL JIJ V~f !J~Ytlr ~h0yy K~ AS~~JrZR h^~ ]G3Q Y gY.ky _FY ~~k ~ f (' ~YF °~ =i ~\ ~ ~~YA1 yJ, .~~~_FYYI,p (~ ,eSSS~3: <~ilf yu~b€~r <~R ~? ¢V idi~ J~7~F, L ~ e \ ~y~e hJ f .. W i~b }' Y k}r C ii Y x V ~y~. F~ N j Y 21~ ~YZ ~ ~~J3 ~~~~~SI Y. ~9 +~~ uKri 3•. u [.:.v, d:.bF'n'<. arc=_vk ~i~ sY~~'4?sk'n~,~Y~e>rR~3F~'r ~r:h~~~id4~~ ko Y.tu2F~ ~j~k(1'~~8~~~~i~_ Eijl ~YUII . ,44[ 444: ;[f4 ` -fif Siff n'1! M1i.'I y s~ 7 k t ~~ ~# Y 5~ qe ~ ~~ u k ~5i 4 ~ 6R e ~ R 99~ i ~l I ~qR ~' y E P '~y~~~.' ~M ~y ~ ~ ^ a ° ~T / a Sd;: J~ n i~ M lb ~ ~ ~ O ~ n t ~ , a rp-gp M-wr{ d ` 6 :.h 6+ .~ tl 11 ~ ~4 ~ ~ \3. ~~`i r ~ r I g J ~ ' \ J%j ~ A'hP \ 4 ~ ^ Hlvaon ~~ t l ~ I .. 5 i _~~~ 4 _ ... ~ _ vh• czz w,..,~ $ M „ / 8~ ~~ k k~ ~~ pp d a , 4, . __ °•Np +'~.~ .~or~ , . 2R ~f 9g~ /~F kp34 I ~ K ~~ d,R} R` ", e4e Y8~ ~.\ \.~ 4~ 4,~ k~F~.~' <' '` a Z ~_ m N Z ~ // LL q € J ~ ~ s ~~ N ~ r.! ~e e r. S !M mn y ,.,, a.~w .y +,. ~ ~~+ ~ ~- t , -- . y +uam,ec ` ~ k ~ ~ axc~ ~~ / ~ / ~y~ 1l6 O4 ~~ [a 111 (~ ~ ~ >.m.NNIY .core Y~ F / .~ J a $.`,r H.~fO! 9 ~ ~' ~ c ~ .P ] ~S iyac+l S J O cH.n• 6 ~ g J. p wormv~•~ , -- ~ ° " ` V M wva n s~ ' ~~ ~ ~ i ~: S Qt N ~: y r \ , iC j 7a fi. 3 ° Z t ~ ~ I s1~it z~=4 f _ p R ~ F- ~ ~ ~ S W O n ! RR '\ ,. ~ $ ~ i~\ d_ ~x ~ i . Vb - n ~ , V ~ y Ky I y~fyy a ! r Y y ~y+ 3 Y n,.. .;,~ J 1 A> ~~~ ~ 4~a r fi~'~i ~ ; a " `t,~'`f~. ,',~~ G ~i 4 m $ ;, y ~' ' // ~ N7ic. § Y oo /jjpp,~~ / ~ ~~ ' I~ ~ pp V~ ` I I 11~+ n /' ; 1 N.~ ,~; ;.,t, ~L~.~.:.. i ~ R I t t• ~~ ~ .. - ..~ . ~ r t ,k4 ; ., _ '...~ •r~^•r REC DOC • 2 19P PG 1 OF 3 O,OD 4. i i I b rt 172192 E T55 P-TPO O]/lb/94 t s _ SILV IP DRVIS P ITkIN COUNTY GLcR!` ~' RECORDER BEHOLOTI~ Of TBH BOAaO ~ COOtlTr CWO[ISBIOIBRe. ,,. OY PITRIB COO1ffIr QpyOBAHOr OaAR 1IS 7IVH O80aTB ~,OEaEB'f Qs~ BIaTHS AyyOTMfaTH TD Tae HHHBaxcf e:ILLBATn aASCB egsarvfsldM. Sssolsiioa f94-~j 1, Pabienne Benedict, (hereaftaz "&ApPPlicant" ~ , requested that the Board of County Coamissionera, (hereaft'r "Hoard.)., grant excess OraWth 1[anagament Quota Syetes A71otr°nts for the Benedict ,StillWatar Aaach Pu=suaM to Section 5-510.3(a) of the Lend Des Coda. and adjacent to, the 2, The property is located wutheaet of, City of Aspen (as described on Exhibit 'A' attached). 3, The Hoard heard this application at their isqular seating on June 28, 1994, at Which times evidence and testisony Was presented regarding this application. - oafs lication furthers cosmunity 4 y The Board finds that this app trails fez public use and by providing a site for esPloYee housing, significant open specs. ~(~ t~ I)O~, THH6E10R8. 88 IT RSSOLVBD fi the Doard oT County N Grovth Management Comnissionars that it hereby grants five (5) Quota 6ysten Allotsents to thn Applicant subject to the requi=cement that the Applicant cosplste all further subdivision raviaW ' beginning with and including General gubnission to the Board. `.; A S I ! '~ ~ r I 11--11 ~~ 8asolutioa 80. 94-.}J '~ Yaga ~ fl ID ~ SHE 2aTN DAY OZ SDaar 1994- . APPNOVSD AtlD ~~ CgDIiBGIONERB DF BOARD OP CODNTY I PITICIN CODNT4~ COIOR1100 ~ A EBT ll1 By / ~4` ,` Robert C. a {~ ae te1S0 BS~- DatA: ~I DepatY C ark a~ Recorder CONTENT: i - -APPROVED AB TO i APPROVED AS TD PORN: ~~~ sv ~ Eo eaan.Dlr ' ~ ` Tia 8hiteitt, County Planning ~.. ' aunty Atto I iI . V { 1 372192 B-45S P-Til CP/18/94 12:19P PG 2 OP 3 i { ! t i P~ « ,.:' i ~! 1 1 (5~, i i ~ c~ Lot y- Il~~~II I~III I~II~~~II ~I ~~II~I~~~~IfI~~~I~~I~III I~I~I~II ~~ 0/006/02004 03:27F R e.ee. o e.mm ,;. ~, RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIpNERS OF PITICIN CoUlv'CY, COLORADO, GRANTt]VG T~,,~ELLOCIC:MAJOR PLAT AMEN]?11~ENT FOR LOT 4' STILLWATERRANCHSUBDIVi530N ~` t2esn,ntion Nn.iay_ZOO4 ATTA~HI1/IENT~ Recitals 1. Charles Aellock "Applicant", htts applied to the Pitkin County Bond ofCounty Commissiunecs, "BOCC", for a Major Plnt .Kmendment tai shit} and enlarge the building envelope, a~eate u development envelope and amend a condition of approval that limits Flour area un the lot to alhiw fur allay-lighted hasemeut. 2. The lot is.located east of Aspen, vnd is more specitica0y described as Lo[ 4, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. i, i. ;~ 3. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this application attheir regularly scheduled public meeting on June 1, 2004, at which time they recommended approval by a vote of4-0. 4. The Board heard the request on I # reading at their regularly scheduled and duly noticed public . hearing on July 2A, 2004, at whichtime evidence and testanony were presented with respect to this application. Second reading was held on August 11, 2004. S: The Board finds that this application is consistent with the applicable Sections of the Pitkin County Land Use Code.. NOW TIIEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners that it hereby grants approval to the Bellock Major Plat Amendment subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of BOCC Resolution Nos. 94-132, 94-156, 94= 233 and 99-10~ttnless otherwise replaced or aznended by the conditions of this approval. 2. The Applicant shall prepare an Amended Plat for Lot 4, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision in accordance with Pitkin County Land'Use Code Sections 5-40 and 5-60-OAO to establish azr accessary development envelope, and shift and enlarge the existing prin~ipal building envelope. 3. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, entry or ranch gates, and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the approved building envelope except for access, grading, landscaping and wildfire mitigation, which can occur within the designated development envelope. Construction, staging, parking, utility and driveway extensign and maintenance shall occur within approved building/development envelope, or acres driveway. 4. Prior to the submission ofa building permit, the Applicant shall be7equired to make acash-in- lieu payment to the Aspen/Pitkin Housing Audtority of$Z20,400 for housing mitigation for Lot 4, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. This payment shall constitute the full mitigation requirement from the original Subdivision approvals regarding the housing. >. Prior to the issuance of a building pentiit, the Applicant shall submit a landscaping and grading plan [o Community Development for review and approval. l Resolution No./~' -2004 ~ I IIIIII VIII IIIIIIIII~I III IIIIII ~II~~ III r~~l~llllll~I a~ 68005 03.27E Page ~ ~ S SILVia DBMS PI TKIFI CDUIITY CD `, ~ R 0.00 n 0.00 6. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 022-2000, the Applicanu are subject to the Fair Share Requirements and shall pay a road impact fee. 7. Prior to the submission of a building permit, the Applicant shall be required to obtain an AcecsslDrivcway Development permit for the constnlction of the new access. H. Lighting shall comply with the Pitkin County lighting standards at the time of installation. 9. ,The residence shall have a l1Lwr area limitation of 8,b00 square feet ns calculated~al lime of building permit, with 2,100 square feet of flour urea located un the lower level. Exempt sub-grade space shall be limited to 1,900 square Ceet as calculated at time of building permit, and shall maintain a permanent separation (wall) fiom non-uxernpt floor area, as depicted in Exltiblt A. The lot shall maintain a 750 square foot exemption from the calculation of t7oor area far a garage. The aggregate square footage on the Lot shall not exceed t 1,250 square feet. 10. The Applicant shall adhere to al) material representations made by the application or in public meetings. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PUBLISHED IN THE ASPEN TIMES on the28th day of June, 2004. INTRODUCED AND FIILST READ at the regular meeting and public hearing on the 28th day of July, 2004. APPROVED AND ADOPTED AFTER SECOND READING on the 11th day of Augttst, 2004 BOARD OF COUNTY COMItJ(ISSIONERS OF PTTICIN COUNTY, COLORADO /, l]i-'~ Dorothea F_ams Chair APPROVED AS TO John EI County Date: 4- ~'- o~ APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~.-~{ - Cindy ouben, Community Development Director Case #040-04 PID #2737184050D4 y1~i5d: ~1t1-2dati q a 4 ~ F! F ' C ~F~ 2 ~" ~ ~' .~ ~ F, o^~ ~ ~ • ,; ~ A 'i U~ O ~~ ~y ~~ ~ Q1 -rVl F ~ g p q ~ y W ' w ~: ~ ~,- 2 A . ~ J'r ~ '~~ -~~~Vj.. _.., ,., , ,~~ ..; ,j I;..,:~. ~~ ~.: i'ii ;il a' ~'~ ~~~ ~~ ., ~~~5E9 R i. ~~~ ~: `, ~ ~t ,. ~~~ 1 1 ~; I~\t ~ ~4 ~ .. ~ ~a. _ _._. i I llllll VIII~IIIIIIIIiI III IIIII~ II~~~IIN I~II~IOII~IIO 10©6g0 0003:27F e '' s y 6 ,,.. ~ "~ r..• F '~ U ,,, '•^_~; q ~ CG/11 O ~`7 j ~~ 0. ~ ; ~~ H .~ MEMORANDUM TO: Pitkin County Boazd of County Commissioners Regulaz Meeting-August 11, 2004 TIIRU: Cindy Houbena, Co~ qty Development Director FROM: Ezra Louthis, Planner RE: Bellock Major Plat Amendment for Lot 4 Stillwater Ranch Subdivision--2nd Reading SUMMARY: The Applicant is requesting a Subdivision Exemption for a Major Plat Amendment to relocate and enlazge the existing building envelope, create a development envelope, and amend a condition of approval that limits the maximum floor azea on the lot to 6,500 sq. ft. The Applicant is requesting to enlazge the envelope by 566 square feet, and to shift the envelope slightly to the south, away from the adjacent property. 1n addition to the amendment to the existing building envelope, the Applicant is requesting the creation of a development envelope for access, grading and landscaping purposes around the building envelope. The request for the development envelope is partially related to the need for access and subsequent grading to occur outside of the designated envelope, as well as the need for the relocation of the Nellie Bird.Ditch and the pond drainage aoound the proposed house. Lot 4 has the right to relocate the Nellie Bird Ditch and the drainage for the pond per the Final Plat and the Covenants for the Subdivision. The Applicant is also requesting to increase the maximum allowable floor azea from 6,500 sq. ft. to 8,600 sq. ft., while limiting the below grade space to 1,900 sq. ft., and maintaining a gazage exemption of 750 sq. ft. (11,250 sq. ft. total). The request by the Applicant for more floor azea beyond what is allowed by the existing approvals is based on the contention that due to site topography, the house design cannot meet below grade requirements for the 4000 feet of exempt space, and that some of the basement will have to be daylighted. The Applicant also wishes to buy out the lot's affordable housing requirement, in which the lot is required to provide an onsite Category Unit pursuant to the Subdivision approvals. ~ APPLICANT: Charles Bellock REPRESENTATIVE: Vann Associates, LLC LOCATION: Lot 4, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD ZONING/LOT SIZE: The property is zoned AFR-2 and contains approximately 4.433 acres. BACKGROUND: The BOCC voted 4-0 in favor of the Bellock application with a direction that the Employee Housing Mitigation requirement be reviewed at 2nd Reading. The Applicant had requested to mitigate the requirement from the original Subdivision approval by paying acash-in-lieu amount equal to the cost of aone-bedroom, Category 1 Unit at time of subdivision review (1994), plus adjusted CPI (this is what the P&Z recommended as well). The Applicant has not submitted anything formal to Community Development regarding the Mitigation requirement, but has indicated that he will have a new proposal for the Board. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Boazd adopt the following motion, "to approve the 2nd Reading of the Bellock Major Plat Amendment" subject to the conditions in the attached resolution. MEMORANDUM TO: Pitkin County Boazd of County Commissioners Regulaz Meeting -July 28, 2004 ~G~ TIIItU: Cindy Hoube~Community Development Director FROM: Ezra Louthis, Planner RE: Bellock Major Plat Amendment for Lot 4 Stillwater Ranch Subdivision-1~` Reading (public hearing) SUMMARY: The Applicant is requesting a Subdivision Exemption for a Major Plat Amendment to relocate and enlazge the existing building envelope, create a development envelope, and amend a condition of approval that linrits the maximum floor area on the lot to 6,500 sq. ft. The Applicant is requesting to enlazge the envelope by 566 square feet, and to shift the envelope slightly to the south, away from the adjacent property. Ih addition to the amendment to the existing building envelope, the Applicant is requesting the creation of a development envelope for access, grading and landscaping purposes azound the building envelope. The request for the development enyelope,'is partially related to the need for access and subsequent grading to occur outside of the designated envelope, as well as the need for the relocation of the Nellie Bird Ditch and the pond drainage azound the proposed house. Lot 4 has the right to relocate the Nellie Bird Ditch and the drainage for the pond per the Final Plat and the Covenants for the Subdivision. The Applicant is also requesting to increase the maximum allowable floor azea from 6,500 sq. ft. to 8,600 sq. ft, while limiting the below grade space to 1,900 sq. ft., and maintaining a gazage exemption of 750 sq. ft. (11,250 sq. ft. total). The request by the Applicant for more floor area beyond what is allowed by the existing approvals is based on the contention that due to site topography, the house design cannot meet below grade requirements for the 4000 feet of exempt space, and that some of the basement will have to be daylighted. ' The Applicant also wishes to buy out the lot's affordable housing requirement, in which the lot is required to provide an onsite Category Unit pursuant to the Subdivision approvals. APPLICANT: Chazles Bellock REPRESENTATIVE: Vann Associates, LLC LOCATION: Lot 4, Stillwater Ranch Subdiyision/PUD ZONING/LOT SIZE: The property szoned AFR-2 and contains approximately 4.433 acres. BACKGROUND/EXLSTING CONDITIONS: The property was originallypart of the 124-acre Stillwater Ranch (Benedict Ranch), which was divided into 3 sepazate lots in 1993. Lot 1 (52 acres) was . then subdivided into the 6-lot Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD in 1994 pursuant to BOCC Resolution Nos. 94-156 (Conceptual) and 94-233 (Detailed/Final). Lot 4 is part of the 6-lot Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, which received its development rights in a unique way. The Subdivision originally applied for GMQS allotments for development rights in 1993, in which it competed with the Moore PUD. The Moore PUD scored better than Stillwater, and Stillwater was granted no development rights per the GMQS competition. With potential changes in the Land Use Code contemplated at the time which would have limited allotments available to this Subdivision in 1994, the Applicant chose to apply for four GMQS allotments in excess of the available Metro Area Quota for 1993 pursuant to Code Section 5-510.3 (a) which stated: "In awazding allotments in any given year, the Boazd of Memorandum: Bellock, Lot 4, atillwater Ranch Subdivision Major Plat Amendment July 28, 2004 County Commissioners may authorize construction in excess of the maximum number of dwelling units specified in Section 5-510.1(a) by as much a9 twenty percent (20%) of the quota established, provided, however, that any such excess shall be offsetby a corresponding reduction in allotments given in successive yeazs such that every fifth yeaz the allotment within the previous five yeazs shall not be in excess of the cumulative total prescribed by Section 5-510.1(a)." This Code Section provided no criteria to determine when it was appropriate to grant such excess allotments, just that the excess couid be provided. As part of the Application submitted by the Applicant for the excess allotments in 1994, the Applicant voluntarily limited the squaze footage on the lots to 6,500 square feet as well as donated land for open space and affordable housing (see Attachment C). PLANNING AND ZONING COMMENTS: The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Zj voted 4-0 to pass on a recommendation of approval of the Applicant's request for the Major Plat Amendment. As part of the motion, they requested that a landscape and gading plan be submitted to alleviate concems over screening of the residence, and that the built residence reflect what has been represented from a design standpoint. ST. 1. Zoning: Joanna Schaffner, the County Zoning Officer, commented on concems about setback requirements (which will be adhered to by the Applicant), and the request for the floor area increase. Ms. Schaffner commented that the Applicant has not demonstrated that he cannot meet the requirements of below grade exemption,. and that it appeazs to be a design issue and does not warrant a floor azea amendment. She cautions against creating a precedent based on design issues. Referral memos received have been attached for your reference. -; ,i i `, REFERRAL CONIlYIENTS: The following agency has been referred on this case. Memorandum: Bellock, Lot 4, .,.,llwater Ranch Subdivision Major Plat Amendment July 28, 2004 MAJOR PLAT AMENDMENT Pursuant to Section 3-190-090, a subdivision exemption for a major plat amendment may be permitted subject to compliance with the following standards: A. Amendments shall be consistent and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Response: The proposed amendment to slightly enlazge the building envelope and rotate it to the south is compatible and consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. The relocation of the envelope slightly to the south makes the (proposed) house less visible by the adjacent lot, yet still maintains a clustered . pattern. The request for a development envelope for access, grading and landscaping purposes is similaz to the amendment granted to Lot 2, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD, which created a development envelope for access and landscaping. In general, the request is compatible, and is required to a certain degee for the placement of access that complies with the Fire District standazds for driveway width and tumazounds, and for the relocation of the proposed pond drainage easement and the Nellie Bird Ditch. However, it is unclear to Staff why the proposed development envelope needs to extend past the building envelope to the west, since the realigned drainage ditch from the pond is to the south of the building envelope and it appeazs could stay to the south. Considering there exists a number of mature Aspen trees and natural screening from the Open Space, the Roazing Fork and Lot 6 of the Subdivision in this area, Staff feels it is appropriate to maintain that azea as outside the development envelope: Regarding this issue during the P&Z meeting on June 1st, the Applicant offered that the relocation of the pond drainage required the development envelope in this azea, and felt that providing a grading and landscaping plan during the building permit process to Community Development for review and approval would al]eviate any screening concerns. The P&Z's recommendation is reflected in the conditions of approval. The request for the amendment to the allowed floor area is not consistent with the surrounding neighborhood or the original review. As noted in the Application, Lot 4 does contain slopes that Lots 2 and 3 do not. Lots 2 and 3 are developing with a 6,500 sq. ft. maximum, utilizing the 4,000 below grade exemption. The Applicant indicates that because of site topography and constraints, it cannot design a house that will be able to utilize the full below grade exemption. As Ms. Schaffner indicated in her comments, sites on steeper and more constrained lots, such as Red mountain, have developed their below grade exemptions that meet the code requirements. She then goes on to state that it is a design issue, and should not substantiate the request for additional squaze footage on the Lot. Furthermore, although the underlying zoning of AFR-2 would allow for a house of 8,931 sq. ft., Staff feels that the maximum allowable floor area should remain at 6,500 sq. ft. as represented in the application when the Lots received the excess allotments in 1993-94, and as dictated in BOCC Resolution No. 94-165. Memorandum: Bellock, Lot 4, arillwater Ranch Subdivision Major Plat Amendment .July 28; 2004 ail B. Additional community impacts resulting from the amendment shall be completely mi#igated by the applicant Response: Relocating the building envelope to the south will limit some of the visual impacts by locating the development down the slope. Staff is concerned that allowing the development envelope to extend beyond the proposed western edge of the building envelope, and into some mature Aspen trees, will result in the grading out of that area, and the destruction of natural screening from the river, the open space and Lot 6. At the P&Z meeting the Applicant offered to provide a landscape and grading plan at buildine permit for review and approval to alleviate these concems.`__~~_~~ proposed development and building envelope as seen facing east from the west property line. View of building envelope facing northeast. Memorandum: Bellock, Lot 4, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision Major Plat Amendment July 28, 2004 C. The amendment must comply with the standards of this Code whichever are applicable. Response: The proposed amendments comply with the standads of this Code. D. In no case shall a major plat amendment be utilized to increase the number of lots on a plat. Response: No new lots aze created. BUILDING ENVELOPE ENLARGEMENT AND SHIFT: Staff concludes that the proposed building envelope and shifr is appropriate and consistent with the neighborhood and the original reviews. DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPE: Staff concludes that the proposed development envelope for access, grading and landscape purposes is appropriate and necessary for the location and design of the access, as well as the relocation of the pond .drainage and Nellie Bird Ditch. However, Staff feels that the portion of the development envelope to the west of the western boundary of the proposed building envelope is not appropriate considering there exists a number of mature Aspen trees and natural screening from the Open Space, the Roaring Fork and Lot 6 of the Subdivision in this azea, and that by establishing the envelope could result in the destruction of that area. Based on a site visit and existing conditions, it appeazs that the pond drainage could be routed to avoid that azea. As noted before, the P&Z voted to approve the request and to add a condition of approval that would require a landscape and grading plan for review to assure that proper screening was maintained. MA2IIMDM FLOOR AREA INCREASE: Staff concludes that the request for additional floor azea from 6,500 sq. ft. to 8,600 sq. ft. is neither consistent with the neighborhood, or the original review which allocated the excess allotments based on a representation that the Lots would be limited to 6,500 sq. ft. As noted by Ms. Schaffner, it appeazs that the below Bade Code requirements can be met on a lot such as this, and that a design issue should not substantiate the request for more floor area. The P&Z, however, felt that the unique nature of the Subdivision would preclude the Applicant's request from creating a precedent, and that by limiting the overall squaze footage (including exempt below grade squaze footage) on the lotto 11,250 s . ft. would not be of significant concern. ~ S ill ~ ~- ~ ~ EMPLOYEE HOUSING NIITIGATION REQUIREMENT: ~-v. `7~`Z° Staff concludes that Condition No. 8 of BOCC Resolution 94-233 (Detailed and Final Plat Approval), which requires that a fully deed-restricted, Category 1 affordable housing unit be constructed on-site can be mitigated by paying a cash-in-lieu amount equal to the cost of aone-bedroom, Category 1 Unit at time of subdivision review (1994), plus adjusted CPI. If at the time of building permit submission the Code has been amended regazding alternative mitigation for previously approved deed restricted rental units, the Applicant shall comply with the Code in effect at that time. RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the Boazd pass the following motion, "to approve the Bellock Major Plat Amendment on 1# reading" subject to the following conditions, and setting 2nd Reading for August 11, 2004." Memorandum: Bellock, Lot 4, :,~illwater Ranch Subdivision Major Plat Amendment July 28, 2004 ATTACHIYIENTS: A. Draft Resolution B. Zoning Comments C. Application for excess allotments D. Staff Memo to P&Z June 1, 2004 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMLSSIONERS OF PTTKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, GRANTING THE BELLOCK MAJOR PLAT AMENDMENT FOR LOT 4, STII.LWATER RANCH SUBDIVISION Resolution No. -2004 Recitals 1. Chazles Bellock "Applicant", has applied to the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners, "BOCC", for a Major Plat Amendment to shift and enlazge the building envelope, create a development envelope and amend a condition of approval that limits floor azea on the lotto allow for aday-lighted basement. 2. The lot is located east of Aspen, and is more specifically described as Lot 4, Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. 3. The Planning and Zoning Commission heazd this application at their regularly scheduled public meeting on June 1, 2004, at which time they recommended approval by a vote of 4-0. 4. The Board heazd the request on 1~` reading at their regulazly scheduled and duly noticed public hearing on July 28, 2004, at which time evidence and testimony were presented with respect to this application. Second reading will be held on August 11, 2004. 5. The Board finds that this application is consistent with the applicable Sections of the Pitkin County Land Use Code. NOW THEREFORE BE TT RESOLVED by the Pitkin County Boazd of County Commissioners that it hereby grants approval to the Bellock Major Plat Amendment subject to the following conditions, which shall run with the land and be binding on all successors in interest: 1. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of BOCC Resolution Nps. 94-132, 94-156, 94- 233 and 99-108 unless otherwise replaced or amended by the conditions of this approval. 2. The Applicant shall prepare a~ ended Plat in acc ~ pnce with Pitkin County Land Use Code Sections 5-40 and 5-60-040. G~ t/~-~.J-- // 3. No development, including grading, excavation, fill placement, berming, landscaping, entry or ranch gates, and vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the approved building envelope except for access, grading, landscaping and wildfue mitigation, which can occur within the designated development envelope. Construction, staging, parking, utility and driveway extension and maintenance shall occur within approved building/development envelope, or access driveway. 4. 'Prior to the submission of a building permit, the Applicant shall be;equired to make acash-in= lieu payment to the Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority equal to the amount required for aone- bedroom, Category 1 Unit at time of Final Plat Approval (1994), plus adjusted Denver/Boulder CPI to the date of building permit submittal. ~~ at the time of building permit submission the Land Use Code has been amended to provide for an alternate means of providing required housing mitigation in cases where deed restricted rental units had been approved, the Applicant shall comply with the amended terms of the Land Use Code] ~ ~ '1 ~v}'~ 'v ~ (7w~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~1.1L Resolution No. _-2004 Page 2 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a landscaping a d grading plan to Community Development for review and approval. -~j+ ~ ~ `,yy~ S~vi~ G wl] os 6. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 022-2000, the Applicants aze subject to the Fair Shaze Requirements and shall pay a road impact fee. 7. Prior to the submission of a building permit, the Applicant shall be required to obtain an Access/Driveway Development permit for the construction of the new access. 8. Lighting shall comply with the Pitkin County lighting standards at the time of installation. 9. The residence shall~have a floor azea limitation of 8,600 square feet as calculated at time of building permit, with 2,100 squaze feet of floor area located on the lower level. Exempt sub-grade space shall be limited to 1,900 squaze feet as calculated at time of building permit, and shall maintain a permanent sepazation (wall) from non-exempt floor azea. The lot shall maintain a 750 squaze foot exemption from the calculation of floor area for a garage. 10. The Applicant shall adhere to all material representations made by the application or in public meetings. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARu';TG PUBLISn"ED IN THE ASPEN TIMES on the 28th day of June, 2004. INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at the regulaz meeting and public heazing on the 28th day of July, 2004. APPROVED AND ADOPTED AFTER SECOND READING on the 11th day of August, 2004 ATTEST: Jeanette Jones Deputy Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Ely, County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO Dorothea Farris Chair Date: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: d Houben, Community Development Director Case #040-04 PID #273718405004 M E M O R A N D II M TO: Ezra Louthis, Planning FROM: Joanna S. Schaffner, Zoning Officer DATE: May 10, 2004 RE: Stillwater Ranch Subdivision ' Lot 4, Major Plat Amendment Parcel ID# 2737-184--05-004 I have reviewed^the above referenced application and offer the following comments. 1.Unless PUD setback variances have been granted, all development greater than 30 above or below the natural grade must coy setback requirements. Development within development envelopes is not exempt from _requirements. or will be inches in .height nply with yard building / yard setback 2. The applicant proposes. an amendment to allow an additional 2,100 sf of floor area on the site, because the applicant claims it can not meet the requirements of the below grade exemption, thereby creating an "inequitable situation" since the applicant is "unable to'develop as much exempt basement floor area .as these neighboring properties" (Lots 2 and 3). The Stillwater Ranch Subdivision approval currently limits development to 6,500 square feet of floor area (plus 4,000 square feet of below grade area and 750 square feet of garage area exempt from Floor Area.) The applicant states that the amendment would not change the overall limitation on the size of the improvements on the property, remaining at 10,500 square feet (same as Lots 2 and 3). This is unclear: 6,500 sf + 4,000 sf + 750 sq ft = 11,250 square feet. The below grade exemption was adopted in 1994 because it was believed at that time, that the only impacts to large homes was visual. Since below grade areas couldn't be seen, they were exempted from floor area up to 4,000 sf. Based on the AFR-2 zone district, the allowed floor area for a 4.433 acre parcel is calculated using the following sliding scale.: Lot Size: 4.433 acres x 43,560 sf = 193,101 sf 25,000 sf x 25,000 sf x 50,000 sf x 100,000+sf x 13 = 3250 09 = 2250 05 2500. O1 = 931 8,931 sf The total allowed floor area for a 4.433 acre lot is 8,931 sf. Plus, if in the Urban Growth Boundary, (as is Lot 4) the parcel is allowed a 4,000 square foot below grade exemption and a 750 square foot garage exemption. Note: Ponds are not deducted from lot size to determine lot area. The applicant has not demonstrated that it cannot meet the requirements of the below grade exemption. Because "the lot is not flat" is obviously not an excuse as is evidenced by all the below grade exempt areas on Red Mountain. The fact that material from the gravel operation was deposited on the site can be mitigated. This appeazs to be a design issue and does not warrant a floor area amendment. Zoning staff cautions against creating a precedent by increasing allowed floor areas based on design issues. ATTACHM~~`~ ,~' RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR CONDFfIONAL U_$3.'S.IlYTHE.AtAD~IKiC (A~_AND CONSERVATION.(G)ZONE DiSTRiC[S'3P~OIAL R&VULW~OF PARKING REQVIREI~THNTS, _ ~ 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW. AND STREAM MARGIN REVIEW FOR TILE KIDS STUFF ROUNDATION DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON LOT 3 OP THt STILLWATBR RANCH SUBDIVISION, AND RECOtbD17ENDINC APPROVAL OF REZONING AND CONCEPTUAIJRINALSPEGIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE KIDS STUFF FOUNDATION DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON LOT S OF THE SftLLWATER RANCH SUBDMSION, CITY OF ASPEN Resolution 97~- WHEREAS, The Community Development Depanmeot received an application finrn'17,e Kids SmK Foundation, for.Conditbnal Use Review Ior dormitory housing, a health care CuUtty and a diving hall in Ole AcademiclQpe diatriet and for a swimmin, j~ool in q~Cpnutvatim +^a ds _tn*+g: Spacial Review foe parking requhemeau In the Academic lone district; 8040 Oreenliae Review; Stream Margin Review; Rezoning; and, ConceptuaVFinal Specially Planned Area (SPA)Review; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Secion 36.60.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Condhional Uses may be approved by the Planning. and Zoning Commission; pursuant to Section 26.64.040 of the Aspeo Municipal Code, parking requ'vemena in Ote Academic zone district may he approved by the Aienning and Zoning Commission though Special Review; pursuant to Section 26.66.030 of the Aspen Municipal Coda, 8040 Grernline Reviews may he approved by She Planniog and Zoning Commiuion; and pursuant to Section 26.66.040 of the Aspen Municipal Coda Stream Margin Reviews may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission; end WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.92.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a tecommendadon m the Ciry Concil rcgardMg requests to amend the Official Zone District Map: and pursuam to Section 26.80.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planing and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding CoaceptuaVFinal Specially Planncd Alen (SPA) Development Plan proposals; and WHEREAS, the Housing Ofnce, Ciry Engineering, Perks Dapvtrnent, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Environmental Health Department and Community DevelapmenrDepartmeat reviewed the proposals and recommendW approval of each with eondiions; and WHEREAS, the above referenced application was legally noticed for a public hearing; sad WHEREAS, during the public hearing at a cominued meeting on March 11, 1997, the Planning end Zoning Commission approved bye S-0 vote the Condidonal Uses with conditions, the Special Aeview with conditions, the 8040 Gmniiae Review wi[h conditions, and the Stream Margin Review with conditions; and. WHEREAS, during a public hearing az a continued meeting on March 1 1, 1997, the Planning and Zoning Commiuton recommended approval by a 3-0 vote of the request m amend tha'O~cid Zona District Map and the ConecptuaVFinsl Specially Planned Area (SPA) Deveopment Plan proposal. NOW, THEREFORE HE li RESOLVED by the Commissioo i ~~~N iiiii ~~ui~ ~i~i ~~~ii, ~ i~ai i~a uu 7 e1 11 R 6E. o0 p 0.l0 N O.M PITKIN COUNTY (xslllC- A. CondidonW Vx: That the Conditional Vx forptllmjtory housing;.a.health oare>3cjlhy an ~sllnit~g hall Ig ch~padpmic t„IV (i-1 (A) rmle district, and s swimming pool in the Conxrvatbn (C) zone district at KithSntff Foundation on ~~ ~,~I,y}~ h <_~.}- Lot S ofthe Stillwater Ranch Subdivision is approved with the following conditions: 1. Prior to Ne iseurnce of any building permiu the applicant shall: e) Inatsll any new surface utilities rcquiriag a pedcatal or other above ground equipment on an easement provided by Ne property owner end nm within the public rights-of-way; b) [.«an any additional proposed construction in each a way that h does not encroach inm an existing utllity~ememrnt or pubiia right-oR-way; e) Agree, to join any fume improvement district(s) which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvemenu in adjacent public rights-of--way; the agreement shall be executed and recorded concurrently upon approval of Nis application; d) Submit a "Site Improvement Survey" ro the F,ngineeNng Departmenq -~ e) Indicate all utility meter locations and trash containment areas on £mal development Alms; f) Ensure Nat Ne project meets all runoff design standards of Section 26.88.040(CX4)(t) wlN the bW Wing permiYapplicadon, and provide a dniosge report and mitigation plan signed and stamped by m engineer registered in Ne Stets of Colamdo; g) Submit a pamanen[ erosion control plan and a temporary sediment control plan and containment plan for Ne tonsfroctlon phase; and _.-. . -. _ - h) . Needles acrd oNa ctmtaminated Items will need to be handled as medlesl waste and she operator will need to contract wiN a medical waste pick up hauler to properly dispox of Nex items. 2. Prior to the issuance of • Certificate of Occupancy (CO), Ne applicant shall: a) Submit m-built drawings of Ne project ahowiag property lines, building footprint, essemenn, any rncroxhments, easy points for utilities enuring Ne properly boundsries and any other improvements to Ne AspeNPitkin County DW Processing Department in axordaneo with Ciry GIS rcqubemrnts, if attd when, any exterior rcnovatioa or remodeling of Ne property occurs Nst requves ^ building permit: b) Permit Community Development Department and Housing OfEce stafY u [rmpect the property m deurmine compliance wiN the candhlona of approval; c) Be roquired to sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter agreement wiN Ne City; d) Increase Ne width of Ne access easemrnt Nrough Ne property [o twenty (20) feet In ardor to meet emergency access w;dN requvemenb, end emergency aecsaa to dse sew building must be twenty (20) feet wide. That is, Na driving swthce enact be twenty (20) fee[ wide and must be cleared of snow for the firll widN. A dedicaud t7re engine rum arouwd Nu will remain free of perked can, meeting F've Marshal rcquiromrnts, must be provided; e) Pave Nc drivawaY: and, ,' t) The Environmental Hea1N Deperonen[ shall approve 6oN plans and apecif(ent[ons of all food xrvice facili[lea A minimum of t[vo (2) weeks ahW 6e necessary for Ne Depsmnent m review and approves plans. Also, final approval ffom Ne Environmrntal Heahh Department is required before opening for business, and prior u issuance of a Colorado Food Sarvim Licenx. i , ~ i~iia iiiii ~niu ~ ~i inn ~~ iu ~~m ua mi ~ilr~>« 00/2S~IlN7 sir4N1 oMi1001eR • of 11 R N.N D 0.00 N 0.00 }ITK[N COIRfTY CLERK 3. Also prior to issuance of epy building permits, the applicant shall consult wim Ciry deparmtmts regarding ttu following: e) City Engineerbrg Tor design of improvemmts, Including landscaping. within public rights-of--way: b) Parks Departmrn[ for tree removal, iandsesping, and selection of vsgstative species, as well as provisiow for trail esst:ments and faneing design; c) Ciry Streets Depamment fa meet Improvements, and shall obtain pennib for my work w development, including landscaping, within public rights-of-way; and, d) Aspen Consolidated Sanitulon District and the Deparunent of Environmental Health for drainage provisions for the swimming pool, grease and oil interceptor provisions for the kitchen, oil~md sand inmrceptor provisions far Ne garage, and blood home ~md harardow wrote dispeael provisions for the medical suite. 4. Prior to the iaaumce of my building permits, a review of my proposed minor changes ftom the approvals, ss set fords herein, shnll be made by the Planning and Engineering Departmrnu, or referred back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 5. One (I) year after the wmmmcemeat of operation, m employment wdit shall be conducted by the Howing IXparmtmt. The permanent staff mils shall be deed restricted with priority for we of thne units to personnel of the Foundation, and categorized ss to those employeee residing in the unity (Category I, 2, or 3; but Category 4 for the two-bodroom, lower-level unit). 6. Deliveries to the facility for all services (i.e.. Food, medical supplies, etc.) shall be limked to the hour between 6:00 sm. and 1:00 p.m.. and wnsolidation of deliveries will be impiemantcd ro the maximum axten[ practicable. 7. All materal rcpreaentations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and shell be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commisslon having minority [o do so. B. Spacial Review: -' That the Special Review for otf-strca parking rcqu'vemrnts in the Academic (A) zone district at Klds Stuff Foundation on Lot 5 of tfie Stillwater Ranch Subdivision requiring three (3) garaged parking spaces for vtuts and tan omdoor parking spaces meets the stmdards of Section 26.d4.040(B) of the Aspen Municipal Code and is approved with the fallowing conditions: _ - ' 1. Ooe (I) year after commencement of the facility•e operation, a perking mditlstudy be wnduaed by the applicmt tu[d submitted m tlw Community Development Department for review. if the findings indicate that the provided parking is not edegwt0. mi[igatlon will need to lx proposed by the applicant end approved by the'Commisaion pursumt to Special Review in mcordnnee with Secdon 26.64.040(8) of the Municipal Code. f- 2. Ail material roprcxntaiions made by the applicmt in this application and during public meatirtgs _ with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and shall b0 considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amendcd by a Board/COmmissioo having mthority to do so. C. 8040 Greanlin Review: That the 8090 Groanlina Review for the Kids Stuff Foundation development propdsel on Lot 5 of the St111water Ranch Subdivision meets die standards of Section 26.68.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code and is approved with the following conditions: 11111111111 llllil #111111 III 111111111111111 IIII neess• ai~itNn ig[an amINNNC! s .~ its a ee.ee o e.ee N O.N t•ITKiN CoUNrV i:1.ERK 1. Regarding the horx facilities: a) Carcfbl houxkeeping and clemup of ail area9 shalt occur an a regular, daily bmis; b) RunoRmrough this area ahHl be controlled by pma[Og divartion swalm m keep mnotfavm the stable area t}om [rovaling oR the property or lom nearby riven; - e) One (1) ya.r alter wmmmcement of the fxiliry's operation, a hone population and warm qualiry audit/study ,hall bt emduetad by dra applicant and eubmitmd m rite Community Developmrnt Department for review. if the findings indicate that the water quality is below ac«pnble levels, a filly (SO) foot butler from areas that could be easily contaminated, wch as the river, 100.yeau flood plain and wetlands, will be voplemented srtd maintained m protect ripuim vege[a[ion, alluvial soils wd groundwater and surfice water, d) An evaluation shall be done to determine the "csrry[ng «pacity" of the area for horses as compared to land area avaikble; e) If con«ma erix, me AsperdPltkin Envirmmmtal Health Department roservea the right to requiro water qualiry sampling at the owner a expense; _.. 2. Prior to isaum« of my building permib or use of the fapiliry, the epplicm[ shall provide ptoofto the AsperJPitkin Environmenwl Health Depatmmt that proposed mitigation measures aro autTicient to offset increases in PMta and trafYc cnused by the project; 3. At (east thirty (30) days prior m issumce of a building permit. the pima and specifications complete with piping layout, equipment and mechanics{ speoifxations along with design calculations, shall be submitted For mview and approval by the AspeNPitkin Environvtmtai Health Department; 4. All material [epresmtations made by the applicant in thic application and during public mtxtings with the Plarming and Zoming Commission shall be adhered m and shall be considered condkkns of approval, unless otherwix amended by a Board/COmmission having authority m do so. D. Stream Margin Review: That the Stream Margin Review for the Kids Stun Fomdatim development proposal on Lot S of Ole Stillwater Amd[ Subdlvisian meeu the standards of Section 26.66.040 of the Asprn Municipal Code and is approved with the following conditions: - - 1. The applicant shall work with the Parks Depermtmt to design a fence around the stable with rail. logs that ere capable of heing dismmded to allow debris associated with tbod waists m pass through tfie property; ~ - 2. The proposed location of the awhnming pool and hone stable be moved to at Iaest fifteen (IS) from eha edge of the top of slope, as determined by the Aspen Engineering DepaKmmt All portions of all struetttrcs/constmtction muse fall within the approved building rnvebpe; 7. If my outdoor ligh[ing is proposed, said lighting shall ba low and downcast with rw light(s) directed toward the river or located down the slope. Any and all outdoor i~ghting will feamro down-directional and ahsry cut-off fixtures; 4. A plat documcnting the approved building envelope as related m wrveyed informatkn shall be submitted m and approved by the Aspm Engineering Department. This plat shell include revised site saetlons meeting Ne standard sat foM by Section 26.68.040(8X!0). and shall be recorded within I80 dgys of stream margin mview. approval; i ii~ai iiui ~~i~iun iii mug ruin ~ nail iu iu ' '; 4Mf14 !{/2D/SM7 S1t4N1 OMIIMtICE lO e1 11 R tl~.80 D O.ti! N !.M t•><TKIN COIMit CLER i i~iui m~ iiiiu ii~u iiu iu~iinu of uim m u~ Me.n~ wxsiit~ 13r4M Lnarttti ><s .~ ><>t R as.ee o e.lea N e.se ~incse eaurtr a.ele 5. All materiel reprnentations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetargs with the PlannlnL and Eoning Commission shall be adhered to and shall he considered conditions of approval, unlaas otherwise amendcd by a Boatd/Cammission having authority m do w. E. Rezoning: 1 That a recommendation m approve me rczon ing as requested by the applleen; provided the anexadon request is approved, is fotwnrded to the Ciry Council. That is. tha Commission recommends to Council that the subject parcel be zoned Acndemie (A) on the upper bench, Conservation (C) on me tower bench, and Speoklly Planned Area (SPA) overlaying the entire parcel wbject to both the dimeasional requirements adopted by Council through the approval of a Specially Planned Arw and the parking requiremrnts adopted by the Commission through the approval, with two (2) conditions, of the Special. Review request. F. Specially Planned Area: Thnt the Commission recommends that Council designate Let 5 of me Stillwater Ranch d a Specially Planned Area (SPA) and allow for the consolidation of eoneeptwl sad final SPA roview. The Commission tbrther recommends that Council accept the following dimensional roquiremenm for the Awdetnic (A) zone district portion of the SPA: 1. Minimum Lot Size: 6 acres . 2. Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit: 1.5 acro per unit ' ]. Minimum Lot Width: 200 feet 4. Minimum Front Yard: 30 feet 5. Minimum Side Yard: 20 ftet 6. Minimum Rear Yard: 20 feet 7. Maximum Height. 28' ro the mld.poinc of rite roof, u measured on all sides of the building, except for the cut elevation, which shall not exceed 32.5' to the mid•polnt. 6. Minimum Disrattoe Between Principal and Accessory Buildings: No requirement, except that rcqufrtA by building code. 9. Pereeat of Open Spsa Required for Buildmg Site: 30 percent 10. External Floor Arca Rs[io: Floor area shall no[ exc 11. Intema-l~gloor tea o: requtrcmrnt. In addition, the Commission recommends [hat Council finds that the proposed SPA meets all applicable standards (1-g) of Section 26.80.040(8)~;t[d uld be approved with the nondition that an 9PA pia[ shall be approved by the Engineer(pg Dt~pryrre riled within 1 BO days final 5PA approval. O. General Yrovisiom: '?; ~ JJ~„I~~+~ t/ jr` !, 1. That this Resolution shall not becoafA etTeetive.gnll`y'~aa~~ until the City Council approves the - Position for Annexation 6y duly enad(etsiOrditfgilce,{nt~ariLtg the wbject proparry m the City of Aspen. J! r ~ C, y: ~ !- 2. All material representations made by the applit~ E~aPPltcation and during public meetings with the Platming end Zoning Commission shall ed to and shalt be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a Hoard/Co mission having au[horlry to do so. APPROVED by the Commission at its continued meeting on March 1 I, 1997. Attest: Planning and Zoning C~om/mirastwon:/ (~ yw kie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk era Garton. Chairperson 7'J~~c.G /~; ~ 99~ Illlil 11111 111111 lull Ilil ull{111111111111111 IIII IIII gTTgcHIVIENr .5 400034 aisaifM7 33.4M olrofwllx«;E -~_ 3 et YS R 96.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 rIMfN COIOfTt CLLRK lC~ AN ORDINANCE OF TAE CITY COUNCIL OF TEII': CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO APPROVE THE COTTCEM'UAL7FINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TO REZONE LOT S OF Tt1lE STILLWATER RANCH TO THE ACADEMIC (A) AND CONSERVATION (C) ZONE DISTRICTS, AND TO GRANT A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR ANON-PROFIT ENTITY QUALIFYING AB AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY 012DDVANCE No. ~_, SERIES OF 1997 WISEREAS, the owner of l.ot 5 of the Stillwater Ranclt Subdivision, Kids StvffFovndation, (hereafter "ApplicanY7 submitted an application (hereafter "Plan°) to the Community Development Departrnent to rezone to tho Academic and Consorvation zone districts and to designate the property as a Specially Planmd Area (SPA); and WHEREAS, the Applicant has also requested approval of a GMQS Exemption to roeogoize the Foundation as a nonprofit erttity qualifying as m essential public facility pursumt to Section 26.100.050(Cx2Xax(3)) of the Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Lot 5 of the Stillwater Subdivision contains anoroximately 6 457 ecros located in Pitkin County, immediately adjecem to the City of Aspen, in thn AFR-2 zone d.i~ and WHEREAS, the Ciry Covncil, by Resolution No. 68, Series of 1996 and Resolution' No. 3, Series of 1997, at its rogular meetings on November 19, 1996 and Janrtary 13, 1997, respectively, did find the subject parcel to be eligiblo for annexation, meeting the provisions of the Municipal Annexation Aot of 1965; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoaing Commission roviewed the Plan in accordance with those procedures set forth at Sections 26.92.020 and 26.80.030(A) trod (B) of the Aspen Municipal Code and did conduct public hearinga~tfieraon on March 4; 1997 sod March ! 1, 1997; and W)gEREAS, upon review and wnsidetation of the Piaq agenry and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards as wntainod in Chapter Z6 of the Aspen Municipal Coda, to wit, Section 26.92.020 (TeM and Map Amondmems) and Section 26.80.040(8) (Development in a Specially Plmned . , . , i ii~ai ~iai iiim uii~ iii ism ~uii ui i~~u iiu u~~ •eesss ~siaailar u~4RR tlRDSwwce Z ~f 11 R 60.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CL.ORK Area), the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of [he Final SPA Development plan and the proposed map amendment by a vote of 5-0; and ~yHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 97-04, the Planning and Zonhtg Commission fbrther granted Special Revitnv approval for parking and Conditional Use Review approval for dormitory housing, a health care facility and a dining hell in the Academic mne district, and a swimming prwl in the Conservation mne district; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 97-04, the Planning and 7.oning Commission further granted 8040 Greenline Review and Stream Margin Review approvals; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewacl and considet~ad dtu~Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has roviewed and wnsidered those recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning end Zoning Commission in Resolution 97-04, and hw taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Kids Stuff Foundation is n unique ink enhances our community and that dasifmalina the R~pnxty-as~.~necially Planned Arogbanafits the citv,s residents and visitors by allowing flexibilit to aocommodata the vari proposad.yses:-apd WHEREAS, the City Council fmds that the proposed uses et We u ~ ben4h(dasccibod~s "The West Part of Lot 5" in Exhibit "A'7 of Lot 5 of the Stillwetesr Ranch Subdivision ero .consistent with the purpose of the Academic mne district "to establish lends for education and cultural activities with attendant roseareh, housing and administrative facilities"; and WHEREAS, the City Council fmds that the proposed uses at the lower benc}i (described au "The East Part of Lot 5^ in Exhibit "A") of Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision ate consistent with the purgpga of the Conservation amine d199iS#_'to provide erase of low density development to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, entourage the production of crops and animals, and to contain urban development": and I IIIII Ills 1111111IN1 IIII !1111 Illlil lu 11111111 IIII dOJ0f4 M/2i/1tN17 11~OON OIIDSNRNCE 0 et 11 R 90.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 rfTKIN COIRfTY CL.El11C WHEREAS, the City Council finds that proposed housing units will be deed-restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines, arc compatible with surrounding uses and will have a minimal impact on the Imd; and WHEREAS, the City Council £tnde that the proposed use qualifies for a OMQS Exemption as a nonprofit errtity pursuant to Section 26.100.050(Cx2xaX(7)) of the Municipal Cock; and WHEREAS, the City Cotutcil finds that the Plan is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Ama Community Plan and with the public welfare and the purposes end intent of Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE BE 1T ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCII, OF THE.CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Frrtlnn 1: Pursuant to Section 26.92.020 (Standards of Review) of the Aspen Municipal Codo, the City Council finds as follows in mgard to the proposed map ammdmmds: The proposed amendments am not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code or the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed amendmerds am compatible with sturounding zone districts end land uses, and will have a minimal impact on the natural environmem. 3. The proposed amendments will promote the public intarost end character of the City of Aspen. StxNon 2: Pursuant to Section 26.92 df the Aspen Municipal Code, the City of Aspen Zane District Mep is hereby amended to rezone the upper bench of Lot 5 of the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision, described in Exhibit "A" as "The Woet Part of Lot 5,^ to the Academic zone district with a Specially Planned Ama (SPA) Overlay, and the lower bench of Lot S of the Stillwater Rmch Subdivision, described in Exhibit "A" as "The East Part of Lot 5; ' to the Cottsefvation zone district with s Specially Planned Area (SPA) Overlay. The legal description is attached u Exhibit "A." _. ~ ~~e~~) ~~~~~ ~~~~~) ~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ {06014 N/2J/SM7 11.4611 oRD1NRNCE { eI 11 6 66.00 D 0.00 N O.M ~iTK1N COUNTY CSEItK ~ inn '+: Pursuant to Section 26.100.050(C)(2xax(3)) of the Aspen Municipal Cade, the Kids. Stuff Foundation i+ heroby granted a GMQS Cxemptimt. m a nonprolit entity quelitying es an aasential publio facility. G~t1oe 4: Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section i above, the City Council's approval of ilia Plan is subject to City Council approval of the Petition for Annexation by duly enacted Ordinance annexing the subject property to the City of Aspen, and is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant and the City Council shall enter into an SPA agreement binding the real property to any conditions placed on the development order approving the final development plan. 2. The final development plan, which shall consist of ilia site plan of the entire site; site improvement aurvey of the aroe being developed, including building footprints, utilities, easemanta, and landscaping; building elevations; and the Specially Planned Area (SPA) agroement, shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Jerk an eco er and sh 1 be ti4n8m' g SiiSK a property owners subject to die ve opmen or cr thoi. successors and assigns, en3aha11-constitute the eve opmen regu ations for the property Development of the property shall ba limited to the uses, density, configuration, and all other elemonts and conditions sat forth on the final development plan and SPA agreement. Failure on the part of the applicant~to~record the fiml development plan and SPA agreement within a period of ono hundred and of 160 days following its approval by City Council shall render the plan invalid. Reconsideration oftha final development plan and SPA agroemant by the Commission and City Council will be required before its acceptance aitd recording. 3. The final development plan shall be recorded prior to submission of any building permits for the proposed housing unite. 4. All wnditions imposed l+y the Planning and Zoning Commission's March 17, 1997 Conditional Use, Special Review, 8040 Oreenline, and Stream Margin Review approvals, es outlined in Resolution 97-04, shall awry forward as conditions of the City Council approvals granted pursuant to this Ordinance. 5. No construction or building permits shall be issued mail the parcel has been finally annexed into the City of Aspen. 6. All material representations made by the applicem in the application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended. ~yay;~: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation end shell oat operate es an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as heroin provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. 111111111~~1111111 II111 IIII 111111111111 III 111111111 I11~ 406614 N/21/1667 11:48A ORDINANCE ~ of 17 R 56.00 D 0.00 N 0.68 PIMIN COIMTY C4ERK ton 6; If any sexliou, subsectiuu, sentenca, clause, phrnae, a~ portion o1'this Ordinance is for any reeaan held invaltA nr wtconstihn tonal in :+ court of comp.+tunt}uriadlction, such portion ahdl be deemed t separate, distinct and independent pmvisiat and shall not street the validity oCffi0 remaining portions thereof. Se¢tton 7: q public huarin~ nn the Urdin:uwe was held on the 14th day of April, 1997, at 5:00 p.m. in Lhe City Council Chttmbcrs, Aspen City Hsdl, Aspen Culotndu, lifteen (I S) duy+ prior to whicfi hearing a public notice of the acme wns published in a newspalxr of genend circulation within the City of Aspen. 'Chia Ordinance shall not becwne effective unless and until the City Cotmcil approves the Petition for Annexation by duly cnacled Ordinance annexing the subject property to the City of Aspen. APPROVED AS TO FORM: ---r City Attorney APPROVED A5 TO CONTENT: Community Oevelopmeut Director ]WTRODUC£.D, READ AND OR7>EREU PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City C Council of the City of Aspen on lhes~_ day of / /~.2 4 NCI , 1997. - :'y ' t :,f ' : `mo ICafh[an S.~buh, City'Clerk JohtMay ~~ I' ~., FINALLY adopted, passed and appnwed this ~7 deyoft 1997. (((////// Ic~-- ,''4 ,' ~+ John Bet Mayor i ~Attes ~'~Katftcyn S. K >, Gity Clerk rOR4rNRMGr"s-b.rl, tY9'Fj 3-~1d-1997 d:OIF't1 FRG14 PARER CHASE/PAGES 9705633700 E~(H~gIT A' Arpine Surveyc, Inc. Posl Office Sox 1730 Aspen, Cobre_do 81612 970 925 2688 MARCH 14, 1997 l i i~nii i~~ii iiu~i mn iii mn~ iinii i~ i~ut iiii un 400014 M/xl/iN7 11r4M ORDINNNCC 0. d 11 R 00.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 ~ITKIN COUNTY CLERK J08 NO. 97-1 RIDS STUFF FOUNDATION LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR RE-EONING OF LOT 5, STILLWATEA RANCH/P.V.D. DESCRIPTION OF THE WEST PART OF LOT 5 THE WEST PART OF LOT 5, STILLWATER RANCH SUBDIVISION/ P. U'. D., -PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWSt HEGINNING'.:AT THE .WEST.'CORNER'OF SAID LOT 57 THENCE SOUTH 84°01.42" EAST 199.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 09.24'26" EAST 417.59 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 89°13'19" EAST 25.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 51°15'Op" EAST 65.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 36°30'00" EAST 132.26 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 327.32 FEET: THENCE NORTH 77°15'00" WEST 90.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 18°47'00" WEST 246.66 FEET: THENCE NORTH 30°14'46" WEST 192.41 FEETi. THENCE 153.02 FEET ALONG TAE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT CIIRVE TOTHE LEFT HAVING ARADIUS OF 60.00 FEET AND WHOSE CHORD BEARS NORTH 48°03'30" WEST 114.80 FEET! THENCE NORTH 55°45'00" WEST 45.46 FEET; THENCS NORTS 52°22'39" WEST 46.93 FEET TO THE POLNT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 7.562 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION OF THE EAST PART OF LOT 5 THE EAST PART OF LOT 5, STILLWATER RANCH SUBDIVISION/ P.U.D., PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED A8 FOLLOWSs BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE SDUTH 00.09'36" WEST 168.88 FEET/ THENCE SOUTH 32°27'17" EAST 73.71 FEET; JAN. 16.2007 2:OOPM GATES KNEZEVtCH GARDENSWARTZ N0. 9148 P. 2 uwoffiols or GATES, KNEZEVTCH, GARDENSWARTZ & KELLY, P. C. PROEES910NAL COI80fUTgN 7NIRGROOR, ASP&l PIA2A EULOrvG Sa51. MOPIWSAVEeK1E LEONMDM OAT!! ASPEH.COLOMDp, Hett R~CIIAROAKNF:EVICH TELlPNGnE (IIItl, B20.1]W TED D. GARDlNSWArtTZ PACSMILE (9701 ePA-tut onvq e. pair MArtw n+onaow ofcoursEl. JOXNT KEIIY mk®oMpla..,m~ ANNE MARIE MCPlp!G 7anuaty 16, 2007 VIn FACSIMILE (970) 588-3786 Little Star Foundation c% Andrea Jaeger, Director 405 Rancho Milagro Way Hesperus, CO 81326-8752 Re: Lot S StIllwater,Rafich Deaz Ms. Jaeger: I am the attorney for the Stillwater Ranch Open Space Association. At our last annual meeting held on August 2, 2006, the Silver Lining Ranch indicated its desire to sell Lot 5 at Stillwater Ranch for single family use. This would require a re-zoning from' its current academic zoning. The Association instruetcd me to prepare a letter indicating that the Association would support a change in zoning on Lot 5 from academic to single family use, but would not support any other rezoning. The purpose of this letter is thus to indicate the support of the Stt7lwater Ranch Open Space Association for a change in zoning on Lot 5 from academic to single family use.. This letter will aiso confirm that upon the sale of Lot 5 to a,third party and upon its retuto to single family zoning,-the new owner of Lot S would be entitled to vote as a member of the Aasociation pursuant to the teams ofthe Protective Covenants. Please feel free to contact me with any questions Sincerely, DBK/maf GATES, KNEZEVICa, GARDENSwARTZ & BELLY, P.C. ~~ John T. Kelly for David B. Kelly Z00/ZOO IIsJ 7t,L'IV1II NOSHOOVf NNd'IOIR'~ YV3 Zfi~ST 9fLL LOOZ/9T/TO MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planner THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Deputy Director DATE OF MEMO: May 8, 2007 MEETING DATE: May 14, 2007 RE: 1490 Ute Ave Petition for Disconnection from the City of Aspen REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Council has been asked to approve a petition for disconnection by ordinance of the 6.487 acre pazcel located at 1409 Ute Avenue. The parcel is also known as Lot 5 in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. BACKGROUND: In 1997 the property owner, Silver Lining Ranch, requested annexation into the City and requested rezoning and a Growth Management Exemption. Subsequent to the annexation, the pazcel was rezoned to Academic (A) and Conservation (C), both with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay. The Applicant was also granted a Growth Management Exemption for anon-profit entity qualifying as an essential public facility. Prior to annexation, the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision was approved by the Pitkin County BOCC. Below is a map indicating the lots in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision; all aze within the Growth Boundary. Page 1 of 4 The subdivision includes six lots and a large open space pazcel. The Land Use approvals from the County included five growth management allotments for single-family homes on Lots 2 - 6. These Lots were zoned AR-2 (Residential - 2 Acre) and under the approved subdivision were permitted to include 6,500 squaze feet of floor area, plus 4,000 squaze feet of exempt sub-grade floor azea and 750 squaze feet of exempt gazage area. Of the six lots, only one, Lot 5, was ever annexed by the City. DISCUSSION: Based on the Petition for Disconnection, it appeazs the property owner is interested in disconnecting from the City in an effort to revert back to the previous zoning and approvals received in the County prior to Annexation. Regazdless of if the property is disconnected or not, the property would be required to undergo a land use process in order to either change zoning in the City or establish zoning in the County. Attached as Exhibit A is a map of the area. The areas in blue are located within the City, and the areas in green aze located in the County. Lot S, located in the City, is in pink. A large version of this map will also be available at the public hearing. City Zonine If the Petition is not granted and the property stays in the City, the property owner would be permitted to retain the current zoning, but a similar activity or use would be required to occur on the Lot in order to comply with the permitted uses in the Academic (A) and Conservation (C) zone districts (See Exhibit B for a list of the permitted uses in these zone districts). If, however, a change in use is desired, the property would need to be rezoned in order to accommodate that use. As indicated in the map attached as Exhibit A, the surrounding azeas in the City include an Affordable Housing development zoned AH/PUD (Ute Park Townhomes), the Aspen Club zoned Rural Residential (RR PUD), and single-family and duplex homes zoned R-15B and R-15 PUD. The adjacent zoning in the County is AR-2, Residential - 2 Acre, which is intended "to provide for a moderate density, transition zone between moderate and low density residential land uses: ' (Pitkin County Land Use Code) If the parcel was zoned to a residential use for the purposes of constructing asingle-family or duplex dwelling unit, the property would be required to undergo a Growth Management Review and provide affordable housing mitigation for the new square footage. The lot is 6.487 acres, or approximately 282,573 square feet. If the property owner pursued (and the City granted) rezoning of the entire pazcel to R-15 (Moderate Density Residential), R-30 (Low-Density Residential), or RR (Rural Residential) to accommodate a single family residence or duplex on the property, the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a single family home would be approximately 11,251 squaze feet and the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a duplex would be approximately 13,997 squaze feet. Staff, however, would recommend that the area currently zoned as Conservation (C) remain in that zone district in order to continue to preserve the natural resources in the area, and would recommend that only the Academic (A) zone be considered for re-zoning to residential. If this occurred, the azea able to be built on and the allowable floor area would be reduced, per Section 26.710.022 of the Land Use Code. (See Exhibit C) This portion of lot includes approximately Page 2 of 4 147,000 squaze feet of lot azea. If only this portion of the property was re-zoned to a residential use (R-15, R-30, or RR), the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a single family home would be approximately 8,540 squaze feet and the allowed Floor Area Ratio for a duplex would be approximately 9,930 squaze feet. Currently, the pazcel contains a structure of approximately 18,000 squaze feet. If the pazcel was re-zoned in the City and the structure was not demolished, it would be anon-conforming structure with respect to Floor Area. This could be remedied by placing a PUD on the Lot which would establish dimensional requirements for the property. Staff would recommend that a PUD replace the existing SPA in this circumstance. The Applicant has not indicated an interest in zoning the property to amulti-family zone district, but this is another potential avenue the Applicant could pursue should the property remain in the City. Count~Zoning Should the Petition be granted, the owner would be required to receive land use approvals from the County. This would entail site plan review and zoning. While it is not certain exactly what zoning would be granted in the County, it is likely the property would be re-zoned to AR-2 (Residential - 2 Acre) in accordance with the original subdivision approval and the zoning in the rest of the subdivision. Exhibit A indicates the area of the subdivision and the current County zoning for Lots 1 - 4 and Lot 6. If the parcel were zoned in accordance with the rest of the subdivision, it is likely the lot would have the same dimensional requirements as the other single family lots in the subdivision. Further, it is likely the property would be subject to the covenants and restrictions in the Subdivision as well as all subdivision approvals. This would include 6,500 square feet of floor azea above-grade plus 4,000 squaze feet of exempt sub-grade floor azea and 750 squaze feet of exempt garage area. Lot 5 received a Growth Management Allotment from the County when it was originally approved by the BOCC in the Stillwater Ranch Subdivision. Growth Management Allotments do not expire in the County, so if the Lot reverts back to the County no Growth Management review would be required. Part of the original subdivision approvals required that each lot provide an on-site ADU as mitigation for the first four bedrooms built; if the home is built with more than four bedrooms, further mitigation would be required. FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Under its tax-exempt status as anon-profit company, the property has been exempt from paying property tax since its annexation into the City. The petition for disconnection states that the applicant believes the sale of its property for single-family residential development will provide the highest monetary benefit, and it is presumed the parcel will revert to asingle-family home should the de-annexation be approved. If this pazcel reverts to asingle-family use, or any other use not associated with anon-profit entity, it will lose its tax exempt status and will begin paying property taxes. The City will lose this potential revenue if the petition is granted. City services such as police, fire, utilities, and administrative services have been provided since the time of annexation. These services will not be impacted negatively if the property remained in the City. It is even likely that City services may be reduced with the development of asingle-family use. Page 3 of 4 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends City Council not approve the Petition for Disconnection. If the property remains in the City there is an opportunity for it to remain an Academic use or turn to a single family use. Further, if the property was changed to a single- family use and lost its tax exempt status property tax revenue would be generated for the City. If the Petition for Disconnection is granted, the City loses this potential revenue. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Map Exhibit B -Academic and Conservation Zone District permitted uses Exhibit C -Section 26.710.022, Zoning of lands containing more than one underlying zone district Page 4 of 4 Exhibit B Stillwater Ranch De-Annexation 26.710.230 Academic (A). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Academic (A) zone district is to establish lands for education and cultural activities with attendant research, housing and administrative facilities. All development in the Academic zone district is to proceed according to a conceptual development plan and final develop-ment plan approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Areas. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Academic (A) zone district: 1. Private school or university, teaching hospital, research facility or testing laboratory, provided that such facilities aze enclosed and there are no adverse noise or environmental effects; 2. Auditorium and other facilities for performances and lectures; 3. Gallery; 4. Museum; 5. Library; and 6. Administrative offices. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district, subject to the standazds and procedures established in Chapter 26.425. 1. Boardinghouse and dormitory for housing students and faculty of schools and other academic institutions; 2. Student health care facility; 3. Student and faculty dining hall; and D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned area. Exhibit B Stillwater Ranch De-Annexation 26.710.220 Conservation (C). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Conservation (C) zone district is to provide aeeas of low density de- velopment to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the production of crops and animals, and to contain urban development. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Conservation (C) zone district: 1. Detached residential dwelling; 2. Park, playfield, playground and golf course; 3. Riding stable; 4. Cemetery; 5. Crop production, orchazds, nurseries, flower production and forest land; 6. Pasture and grazing land; 7. Dairy; 8. Fishery; 9. Animal production; 10. Husbandry services (not including commercial feed lots) and other farm and agricultural uses; 11. Railroad right-of--way but not a railroad yard; 12. Home occupations; 13. Accessory buildings and uses; and 14. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520.040; and 15. Temporary special events associated with ski areas including, but not limited to, such events as ski races, bicycle races and concerts; with special event committee approval. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Conservation (C) district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425. I. Guest ranches; 2. Recreational uses including a riding academy, stable, club, country club and golf course; 3. Ski lift and other ski facilities; 4. Sewage disposal area; 5. Water treatment plant and storage reservoir; and 6. Electric substations and gas regulator stations (not including business or administration offices). D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Conservation (C) zone district. 1. Minimum lot size (acres): 10. 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (acres): 10. 3. Minimum lot width (Feet): 400. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 100. 5. Minimum side yazd setback (feet): 30. 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 30. 7. Maximum height (feet): 25. 8. Minimum distance between principa- and accessory buildings (feet): No requirement. 9. Percent of open space required for building site: No requirement. 10. External floor area ratio: (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record): same as R-15 zone district. N~II,~Y & AI,D~R ATTORN~Z'S Please Reply To: tot North Mill Street, Suite toe Aspen, Colorado 8t6u (970)925-9393 Fax (970)925-9396 RICHARD Y. NEII,EY, JR. EUGENE M.ALDER JOHN E. NEII,EY 6800 Highway 8z, Suite t, Upper Level _ Glenwood SPrinK_s, Colorado 8t6ot (970)928-9393 Fax (970)928-9399 May 25, 2007 VIA HAND DELIVERY John Worcester, Esquire Aspen City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Little Staz Foundation; Petition for Disconnection by Ordinance Deaz John: On May 14, 2007, the above-referenced Petition came before the Aspen City Council for consideration and was denied on a 3 to 1 vote. The purpose of this letter is to express our concern regarding the fairness of the hearing on the Petition and request that the City of Aspen set a new hearing, at which time the Petition can be presented to a forum that is not tainted by violations of the Municipal Code Rules of Conduct governing City Council members, §§ 2.02.030 and 2.02.050. Specifically, we object to the fact thaf Councihnember Torte participated in the hearing and voted in opposition to the Petition. We believe his participation influenced other members of the City Council to vote against the Petition and denied the applicant the right to a fair and impartial hearing. The property that is the subject of the Petition is located on Ute Avenue adjacent to the Aspen Club. In the recent past, the owner of the Aspen. Club, Michael Fox, has attempted to purchase the subject property, without success. Mr. Fox sits on the Boazd of the Aspen Cancer Survivor Center which is housed in -the Aspen Club. A representative of the Aspen Cancer Survivor Center, Riggs J. Klika, appeazed at the May 14, 2007 hearing and expressed opposition to the Petition. Unbeknownst to us at the time of the hearing, Councilman Torre is an employee of the Aspen Club. Appazently, he is on the teaching staff at the tennis center. Subsequent to the hearing, we learned that until some time last fall, Torre was afull-time employee as the head tennis pro at the Aspen Club. We understand he now maintains an ongoing employment relationship with the Club. Letter to Mr. Worcester May 25, 2007 Page 2 As you aze awaze, Municipal Code §§ 2.02.030 and 2.02.050 prohibit a Councihnember from performing a direct official action in circumstances in which he has a substantial interest in the outcome of the proceeding. Given the circumstances of this case, it is cleaz to us that Torre should have disclosed his conflict of interest and refrained from participating in the hearing and voting on the Petition. Indeed, he recused himself from participation in the appeal of Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution No. 9 - 1001 Ute Avenue, which also came before City Council on May 14, 2007. We understand the reason for his recusal was that he sometimes teaches tennis at the Gant tennis courts which aze located on the 1001 Ute Property under a long term lease. Clearly, if this represented an acknowledged conflict of interest, participation in the Little Star Petition hearing was prohibited. Instead, following presentation of the Petition by the applicant and staff, Torre was the first Councihnember to speak, and his comments were directed at insuring that the Petition was denied. We believe Tone's conduct represents a fundamental violation of my client's right to a fair and impartial hearing before an unbiased and objecfive City Council. We further believe that the only way to remedy this violation is for the Petition to be presented to the City Council for consideration without the participation of Torre. As a result of the outcome of the hearing on May 14, 2007, my client has proceeded to work with the City Planning Staff to seek a rezoning of the property under the provisions of the Municipal Land Use Code. We obviously do not know the outcome of such proceedings, and we have not yet been able to determine how long it will actually take to process the application despite the fact that the Community Development Director stated at the hearing that he believed an application could be expedited in 4 to 6 months. We aze unable to detemrine how this can be accomplished at the present time despite numerous attempts by our land use planner to establish a basis for this time frame with the City staff Thus, we believe the only appropriate course of action is for the City to set this matter for a new hearing before a fair and impartial City Council. Please let me know your thoughts on this matter at your earliest convenience. truly yours, & ALDER Richard Y. Neiley, Jr. RYN/agk cc: Sister Andrea Jaeger Rick Stone, Esquire Glenn Horn Little Star The City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Cokxado 81611 Re: Petition for Disconnection by Ordinance -Lot 5, Stlllwater Ranch Subdivision, 1490 Ute Avenue, Aspen, Colorado Dear Mayor Klanderud and Members of the City Council: The Little Star Foundation has submitted a Petition for Disconnection of its above- referenced real property. The Pettbn was submitted on or about March 6, 2007 by our attorneys Neifey & Alder and our planners Davis Hom, Incorporated. Please accept this letter as confirmation that Little Star Foundation wishes to proceed with the Petition for Disconnection and that our attomey~; and planners are authorized to act on behalf of the Little Star Foundation in connection with the Petition. Thank you for your donsideration of this matter. Very truly yours, LITTLE STAR FOUNDATION sy S~~ / Sister Andrea Jaeger Little Star Foundation • 256 Rancho Milagro Way • Hesperus, Colorado 81326 800.543.6565 • www:littlestar.org • info@littlestar:org ~YESl1Ic"3ii~ ~~ 1~°~Ott ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance American Land Title Association (1966) AUTHORIZED AGENT: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVE. 3~FLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970-925-1766-PHONE 970-925-6527-FAX 877-217-3158-TOLL FREE E-MAIL ADDRESS: TITLE MATTERS: CLOSING MATTERS: Vince Higens-wince@sopris.net TJ Davis-tjd@sopris.net Brandi Jepson-brandi@sopris.net Joy Higens-joy@sopris.net (Closing & Title Assistance) Issued By j~I~erS~itlelnsutanee~izpo on Home Office: 101 Gateway Centre Parkway, Gateway One Richmond, Virginia 23235-5153 1-800-446-7086 B 1004-268 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: August 7, 2006 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT20871 PRO 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: (b) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 0.00 Premium$ 0.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: (c) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: KID'S STUFF FOUNDATION INC., A COLORADO NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: CITY OF ASPEN SILVER LINING RANCH SPA, LOT 5, STILLWATER RANCH SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof recorded September 26, 1997 in Plat Book 43 at Page 69. PITHIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPHINS, ASPEN, CO.81611 97492ri-1766 Phone/970.9256527Fsx 877-217-3158 Toll Free Schedule A-PG.1 This Commitment is invalid unless the Insuring Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT Countersigned: SCHEDULE B -SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: THIS COMMITMENT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THE COMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS AS DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THE COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE. SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States as reserved in United States Patent recorded December 14, 2011 in Book 55 at Page 196. 8. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners recorded December 20, 1994 in Book 770 at Page 783 as Resolution No. 94-233. 9. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Utility Connection Permit and Water Service Agreement recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 770 at Page 791. 10. Those terms, conditions, provisions, obligations, easements, restrictions, assessments and all matters as set forth in Protective Covenants for Stillwater Ranch Subdivision/PUD recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 770 at Page 796, deleting therefrom any restrictions indicating any preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 11. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Subdivision Improvements Agreement recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 770 at Page 818. 12. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Fisherman's Easement Agreement recorded December 30, 1994 in Book 770 at Page 821. 13. Easements, rights of way and all matters as disclosed on Plat of subject property recorded December 30, 1994 in Plat Book 35 at Page 86 and SPA Plat recorded September 26, 1997 in Plat Book 43 at Page 69. 14. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 1 C, Series of 1997 by Aspen City Council recorded June 23, 1997 as Reception No. 405613. 15. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1997 by Aspen City Council recorded June 23, 1997 as Reception No. 405614. (Continued) SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS - (Continued) 16. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Occupancy Deed Restriction recorded October 17, 1997 as Reception No. 409578. 17. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Trench, Conduit and Vault Agreement with Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc., recorded December 9, 1997 as Reception No. 411465. 18. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations of Contract for Electric Service granted to Holy Cross Electric Association, Inc. recorded October 15, 1998 as Reception No. 423228. 19. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter Improvement Agreement recorded July 12, 1999 as Reception No. 433254. 20. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Letter Regarding Aspen Carriage Lease Consignment recorded October 10, 2002 as Reception No. 473198. 21. Any question, dispute or adverse claim as to any loss or gain of land as a result of any change in the river bed location by other than natural causes, or alteration through accretion, relict ion, erosion or avulsion of the center thread, bank, channel or flow of waters in the Roaring Fork River River lying within subject land; and any question as to the location of such center thread, bed, bank, bed or channel as a legal description monument or marker for the purposes of describing or locating subject lands. NOTE: There are no documents in the land records of the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado accurately locating past or present location(s) of the center thread, bank, bed, or channel of the above River or indicating any alterations of the same as from time to time may have occurred. AND Any rights, interest or easements in favor of the riparian owners, the State of Colorado, The United States of America, or the general public, which exist, have existed, or are claimed to exist in and over the waters and present and past bed and banks of the Roaring Fork River River. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS FJCCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2 NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominium or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owner's policy when issued. Please contact the Company for further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage". Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122) (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurers Authorized Agent; (c) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate or other appropriate research will be ordered from the County Treasurer by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. Pursuant to House Bill 01-1088 (CRS 10-11-123) If Schedule B of your commitment far an Owners Title Policy reflects an exception for mineral interests or leases, pursuant to CRS 10-11-123 (HB 01-1088), this is to advise: (a) There is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals or geothermal energy in the property and (b) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owners' permission. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT20871 PRO A and B are attached. LANDAMEI~ICA Dear LandAmerica Customer: The Financial Services Modernization Act recently enacted by Congress has brought many changes to the financial services industry, which includes insurance companies and their agents. One of the changes is that we are now required to explain to our customers the ways in which we collect and use customer information. The statement attached to or on the reverse side of this letter is the privacy policy of the LandAmerica family of companies. The tluee lazgest members of the family -Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, and Transnation Title Insurance Company -may issue policies and handle real estate closings in virtually every part of the country. A number of other companies in the family provide other real estate services, and some operate more locally. You may review a list of LandAmerica companies on our website (www.landam.com). You may also visit our website for an explanation of our privacy practices relating to electronic communication. Our concern with the protection of your information has been a part of our business since 1876, when the company that is now Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company issued its first policy. We will continue to protect the privacy, accuracy, and security of customer information given to us. No response to this notice is required, but if you have questions, please write to us LandAmerica Privacy P.O. Box 27567 Richmond, VA 23261-7567. LandAmerica Companies Title Insurance Companies: Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company of New Jersey, Industrial Valley Title Insurance Company, Land Title Insurance Company. Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, Title Insurence Company of America, Transnation Title Insurance Company, Transnation Title Insurance Company of New York Relocation and Mortgages: Commonwealth Relocation Services, CRS Financial Services, Inc., LandAmerica Account Servicing, Inc. Title Agents: Austin Title Company, ATACO, Inc., Albuquerque Title Company, Atlantic Title & Abstract Company, Brighton Title Services Company, Capitol City Title Services, Inc., CFS Title Insurance Agency, Charleston Title Agency; Charter Title Company of Fort Bend, Galveston, and Sugarland; Commercial Settlements, Inc., Commonwealth Land Title Company; Commonwealth Land Title Company of Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Washington, Congress Abstract Corp., Cornerstone Residential Title, Cumberland Title Company, First Title & Escrow, Inc., Gulf Atlantic, Harbour Title, HL Title Agency, Lawyers Title Company; Lawyers Title of Arizona, EI Paso, Galveston, Nevada, Pueblo, San Antonio, Lawyers Title Settlement Company, Lion Abstract, Longworth Insured, Louisville Title Agency of Central Ohio, Lorain County Title Company, M/I Title Agency, NIA/ Lawyers Title Agency, Oregon Title, Park Title, Partners Title Company, Pikes Peak Title Services, RE/Affirm Title Agency, Rainier Title Company, Residential Abstract, Residential Title, Rio Rancho Title, Texas Title Company, Title Transfer Service, Inc., TransOhio Residential Title Agency, Transnation Title & Escrow, Union Title Agency, University Title Services, Wilson Title Company Appraisals and Ancillary Services: LandAmerica OneStop, Inc. Forth 3391-6 (May 2001) LANDAMERICA PRIVACY POLICY What kinds of information we collect. Most of LandAmerica's business is title insurance, but there are companies in our family that provide other real estate services to consumers. We collect information about you, (for instance, your name, address, telephone number), and information about your transaction, including the identity of the real property that you are buying or financing. We obtain a copy of any deeds, notes, or mortgages that are involved in the transaction. We may get this information from you or from the lender, attorney, or real estate broker that you have chosen. Our title insurance companies then obtain information from the public records about the property so that we can prepare a title insurance .policy. When we provide closing, escrow, or settlement services, mortgage lending, or mortgage loan servicing, we may get your social security number, and we may receive additional information from third parties including appraisals, credit reports, land surveys, escrow account balances, and sometimes bank account numbers to facilitate the transaction. If you are concerned about the information we have collected, please write to us. How we use this information. The company giving or specifically adopting this notice does not share your information with marketers outside its own family. There's no need to tell us to keep your information to ourselves because we share your information only to provide the service requested by you or your lender, or in other ways permitted by law. The privacy laws permit some sharing without your approval. We may share internally and with nonaffiliated third parties in order to carry out and service your transaction, to protect against fraud or unauthorized transactions, for institutional risk control, and to provide information to government and law enforcement agencies. Companies within a family may share certain information among themselves in order to identify and market their own products that they think may be useful to you. Credit information about you is shared only to facilitate your transaction or for some. other purpose permitted by law. How we protect your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need the information to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with law to guard your nonpublic personal information. We reinforce the company's privacy policy with our employees. Agents that may be covered by this policy. Often, your transaction goes through a title insurance agent. Agents that are part of the LandAmerica family are covered by this policy. Agents that are not part of the LandAmerica family may specifically, in writing, adopt our policy statement. Form 3391.6 (May 2001) Pitkin County Title, Inc. Privacy Policy We collect nonpublic information about you from the following sources • Information we receive from you, such as your name, address, telephone number, or social security number; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliates, or others. We receive this information from your lender, attorney, real estate broker, etc.; and Information from public records We do not disclose any nonpublic personal information about our customers or former customers to anyone, except as permitted by law. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information to provide the products or services requested by you or your lender. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that company with appropriate federal and state regulations. LAWYERS Title Insurance CORPORATION, a Virginia corporation, herein called the company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulatidns hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and tenninate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers, the Commitment to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company. LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION ~,,rt*'sa9tr,~ y a .~J -~'* /.~Il~ ~j' il45 Attest ~ -- • Secretary h ~ } By: President Conditions and Stipulations 1. The tens "mortgage;' when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any ad of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in under taking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the ExGusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modifed herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. ALTA Commitment-1966 Cover Page Form 1004-268 ORIGINAL v~~~a MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council /~ ~ ~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director I ' 1/~~ FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Director ~~~ RE: Jerome Professional Building (201 N. Mill Street) Subdivision and Extension of Vested Property Rights Review Second Readine of Ordinance No. 25, (Series 20071 MEMO DATE: October 9, 2007 MEETING DATE: October 22, 2007 SPECIAL NOTE: This staff report is new since the June 25~" first reading and addresses the issues raised by City Council at the first reading of this application. It contains the following: • A summary of the issues raised from the last meeting with additional information provided by Staff and the Applicant; • Staff recommendation & motion; and • A revised ordinance. Also attached is the original staff report of June 25, 2007. This is attached primarily to show the development proposal, background and dimensional standards table associated with the development so that you have this information at hand. Please refer to the original June 25th staff report to reference the exhibits. SUMMARY AND FIRST READING QUESTIONS: At the June 25s' first reading for the Jerome Professional Building application, the City Council raised a number of issues that they asked to have addressed in further detail prior to the scheduled second reading and public heazing on the application. Below, the concerns voiced by the City Council are itemized issue by issue. The Applicant's representative has responded to the questions in Exhibit I. Comments from Staff follow in a separate, italicized paragraph. 1) Provide more detail on the Special Review process and review criteria allowing an increase in Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the commercial and free-market component within this application. Under the regulations in place at the time of this land use application, an applicant has two FAR schedules to operate under when designing a project: I) the overall maximum allowable FAR for the parcel of land (2: 1), and 2) individual FAR caps based upon the type of use such as commercial, affordable multi family housing, or free-market multi family housing. For both the commercial and free-market multi- family uses, the maximum individual FAR cap is .75:1 which may be increased to 1:1 by the Planning and Zoning Commission through Special Review as provided in section 26.430.040.A., Dimensional Requirements. Additionally, the free-market multi family housing FAR cannot exceed the commercial FAR in this project. Below are listed the two review criteria provided in Section 26.430.040 A., Dimensional Requirements. In granting any increase in FAR via Special Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission is required to determine that both standards are met. 26.430.040 A. Dimensional requirements. Whenever the dimensional requirements of a proposed development are subject to special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met. I) The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. 2) The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts or surrounding land uses or will mitigate those impacts including, but not limited to, the effects of shading, excess traffic, availability of parking, or blocking of a designated view plane. The Special Review requests were approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Resolution No. 26, Series of 2006. 2) Provide more information on the Vested Rights request including the vested rights criteria used to review the request. Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights (Exhibit B) regulates the conferring of a vested property right to a site specific development plan. As written in the chapter, "A vested property right shall preclude any zoning or land use action by the City or by an initiated measure, " that would impact the approval. As written, a vested property right is granted for a period of three years, although a residential subdivision may request an exemption from this timeframe. The City's counsel has maintained that any other request for a variation in the three year vesting period is at the sole discretion of the City Council. A vested property right provides a timeline in which a developer can rely on the approvals granted with the expectation that a developer will act upon the approvals within a reasonable timeframe. Conversely, once the timeframe expires, if the developer has not acted upon his or her approvals the development is then subject to the rules and regulations in effect at the end of the vesting period. For example, since this application was submitted both the maximum height for this zone district and the commercial design standards have been amended. As noted in the Applicant's application, the reason for the request of a five year vesting period rather than a three year period is the need to accommodate the terms of existing leases for some of the office space in the building. Also mentioned in the exhibit submitted by the Applicant is the statement that the Applicant no longer needs the extended vesting period for the existing leases, although the five year vesting period is still being requested. An Applicant that has an existine vested right may request an extension or reinstatement of the vested property right through Section 26.308.010 C, Extension or Reinstatement of Vested Rights. Reasonable conditions can be imposed on the Applicant such as compliance with any amendments to the land use code. In reviewing the request, "City Council shall consider, but not be limited to, the following criteria.• a. The applicant's compliance with any conditions requiring performance prior to the date of application for extension or reinstatement; b. The progress made in pursuing the project to date including the effort to obtain any other permits, including a building permit, and the expenditures made by the applicant in pursuing the project; c. The nature and extent of any benefits already received by the city as a result of the project approval such as impact fees or land dedications; d. The needs of the city and the applicant that would be served by the approval of the extension or reinstatement request. " 3) Provide a list of tenants and the duration of the existing lease terms. The Applicant has provided a list of tenants and the terms of their leases in Exhibit 1. As noted in the exhibit, the Applicant no longer needs extended vesting for existing leases but is requesting the five year vesting period. 4) Why aze affordable housing units deed restricted at a Category 4 level? Most growth management reviews in the land use code, and the reviews specific to this application, require affordable housing mitigation at Category 4 level. The Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Guidelines provide for seven income categories (1-7) plus Resident Occupied units. According to the housing guidelines, Category 4 is defned as "middle-income level" in Aspen and Pitkin County. The categories and related income amounts were derived from a number of sources as outlined in the guidelines. 5) Rent control in relation to the Telluride Case. YVhen required affordable housing units are to be rental units, a 1/10 of one percent interest in the ownership of each unit is required to be deeded to the AspenlPitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA). This ownership interest has been deemed adequate by the City and APCHA to address rent control issues. 6) Who can buy units if they aze "for sale" and who has the first right of purchase? The Planning and Zoning Commission granted approval of the affordable housing units as rental units on August I5, 2006. According to the provisions of Resolution No. 26, Series of 2006, the homeowners association may own the units and rent them to qualified residents, however, if any unit is deemed out of compliance for over a period of one year all units will be listed for sale through the Housing Authority's lottery system. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the project is consistent with the goals of the AACP in providing amixed-use building that is located within the city near transit and within walking distance to the commercial core. The refined design of the project, as shown in the exhibits of the June 25~' memo, enhances the visual compatibility, character, and charm of Aspen. The housing provided is located neaz the commercial core and close to mass transit options. Due to changes in the land use code since this application was submitted and potential future changes, staff does not recommend extending the vesting period to five yeazs. If a five yeaz vesting period is granted by the City Council, The five year vesting timeline should be included in the motion so that staff may change the ordinance accordingly. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMITIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2007, approving with conditions, the Subdivision and granting of Vested Property Rights of Jerome Professional Building Redevelopment on second reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -Review Criteria and Staff Findings (provided in June 25`s packet) Exhibit B - Plannin~ and Zoning Commission minutes dated August 1, 2006 (provided in June 25 packet) Exhibit C -Planning and Zoning Commission minutes dated August 15, 2006 (provided in June 25`s packet) Exhibit D -Resolution No. 26 (series of 2006) of the Planning and Zoning Commission (provided in June 25`" packet) Exhibit E -Definition of Subdivision (provided in June 25~' packet) Exhibit F -Renderings of the building reviewed and approved by the Commission (provided in June 25~h packet) Exhibit G - Application provided in June 25~' packet) Exhibit H -Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit I -Applicant's Response to June 25w Questions, memo dated 9/24/07 June 25`n Staff Memo APPLICANT /OWNER: Jerome Professional Building Condominium Association, Inc. REPRESENTATIVE: Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC. LOCATION: Lots P, Q, R, and S, Block 78, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, commonly known as 201 N. Mill Street. CURRENT ZONING & USE: Located in the Mixed Use (MU) zone district. The building is a two/three story office building containing nineteen condominium units. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant is requesting to develop amixed-use building containing sub-grade pazking, three (3) affordable housing units, six (6) free-market housing units, and commercial/office uses. REQUESTED COUNCIL APPROVALS: The Applicant requests of the City Council approval of the subdivision and extension of vested property rights for a five year period. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission granted approval of three growth management reviews, commercial design review, special review, and made a recommendation of subdivision approval STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the subdivision request and a standazd three year period for the vested property rights request. GENERAL BACKGROUND This application was submitted in April of 2006, prior to the passage of the moratorium and therefore not affected by it. The application was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission in August of the same yeaz. As a result of the hearings conducted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Resolution No. 26 (Series of 2006) was passed by a five to zero (5-0) vote (Exhibit D of June 25`s memo). The Planning and Zoning Commission's resolution approved three growth management reviews, commercial design review, special review, and made a recommendation of subdivision approval. During the heazing of August 15, 2006, the Applicant's representative stated that three of the off-street pazking spaces associated with the proposal will be dedicated for use by the affordable housing units (Exhibit C of June 25s' memo). This representation is included in the attached ordinance. Photo: 201 N. Mill Street The Applicant is requesting subdivision approval because the development of multi- family dwelling units requires approval of subdivision pursuant to the definition of subdivision in the City's land use code (see section 26.104.100, Definitions, and Exhibit E June 25`h memo). This is a procedural rather than technical subdivision in the sense that the creation of multiple dwelling units is considered an act of subdivision rather than a typical subdivision in which land is divided into lots. If the Applicant is interested in creating individual ownership interest in the units, condominiumization must be undertaken. Once construction is nearly completed but prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the developer must file a condominium plat and associated documents for review and approval by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. This is required to demazcate ownership units within a single building. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals of City Council to redevelop the site: Subdivision for the construction of multiple dwelling units pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480 (City Council is the final review authority who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission). Vested Property Ri¢hts for the development proposal, which allows the development to be built after approval without meeting any zoning or land use changes during a prescribed time period, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.308 (City Council is the final review authority). The Applicant is requesting a vesting period of five yeazs rather than the standard three yeaz period. The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) reviewed the Application on August 1, 2006 and August 15, 2006. The minutes from these meetings aze attached as Exhibits B and C. The Applicant received the following approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Resolution 26, Series 2007 (Exhibit D June 25`s memo): • Growth Management Review for Expansion/New Commercial, Lodge, or Mixed- Use Development in the development of a new mixed-use building pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040 C.2.(The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). Growth Management Review for Free-Mazket Residential Units within aMixed- Use Project in the development of new free-mazket residential units within a mixed-use project pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040 C.6. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). Growth Management Review for Affordable Housing in the development of affordable housing pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.040 C.7. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority, who may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal). • Commercial Design Review for amixed-use development within the City of Aspen requiring a building permit pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.412. Special Review for an increase in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of both the Commercial use and Free-Market Multi-Family Housing use of the building pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.430.040 A. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Applicant, Jerome Professional Building Condominium Association, Inc., has requested approval to demolish an existing office building located at the corner of North Mill Street and East Bleeker Street that is located on a 12,000 square foot lot and redevelop the site with a new mixed-use building containing commercial, affordable housing, and free mazket residential uses. The existing property is located in the Mixed- Use zone district. The site is sloped and the new five story building (some of which is below grade) proposed contains: A completely sub-grade parking gazage. Vehicular access to the property and the garage will be from the platted, but currently unimproved, alley right-of- way that is adjacent to the north property line of the subject property. The gazage will provide twenty pazking spaces, four of them in a tandem configuration. • The next level is partially above and below grade and contains the lower level of two (2) of the affordable housing units and commercial/office space. • The third level is above grade on all sides and contains the upper levels of two (2) affordable housing units and commercial/office space. • The fourth level contains three (3) free-market units and one (1) affordable housing unit. • The fifth level contains three (3) free-mazket units. The following table compazes the proposed development dimensions with the dimensional requirements of the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district. Table 1: Co m azison of Pro osed vs. Re u ired Dimensional Re uirements - ,. ~ a~ __.. __. _ ~. ,~ ~ {L' ~' y ' t 4Y~' v j ! y~ '» } _ ~_.yx- fl ` 3 ~p~_g r ~'F Minimum Lot 12,000 sq. ft. 3,000 sq. ft. Size Minimum Lot 120 Feet 30 Feet Width Minimum Lot N/A Not applicable to a mixed use development Area/Dwellin Minimum Front 10 Feet 10 Feet (which may be reduce to 5' by Special Yazd Setback Review Minimum 7 Feet 6.66 Feet Alternative Front (Corner lots aze required to provide one front yard Yazd Setback meeting the minimum setback and one at 2/3 the required front yard setback) Minimum Side 5 Feet 5 Feet Yard Setback Minimum Reaz 5 Feet 5 Feet Yazd Setback Maximum Hei ht 32 Feet 32 Feet (for a mixed use buildin ) Floor Area Ratio 23,957 sq. ft. .88 or 10,515 Cumulative Maximum: Commercial:.75:1 up to (FAR) sq. ft. 2:1 or 24,000 sq. ft. 1:1 (by S ecial Review) .25 or 3,000 Affordable Housing: No s . ft. limitation .87 or 10,442 Free-Mazket:.75:1 up to s . ft.* 1:1 (b S ecial Review Minimum Off- 20 spaces** Residential -Multi-Family within amixed-use Street Parking Residential: 9 spaces buildin :One space per unit or 9 spaces. 100% may Commercial: 11 spaces be provided through apayment-in-lieu. Commercial: One space per 1,000 net leasable sq. ft. of commercial space or 10.75 spaces. 100% may be provided throu h a ayment-in-lieu Notes: * -The Mixed-Use zone district requires that the total free-mazket residential Floor Area on the pazcel be no greater than the commercial Floor Area. * * -Four of the pazking spaces are in a tandem configuration so that access to two of the spaces aze potentially obstructed. Unless approved by Special Review, the proposed configuration can only count as eighteen (18) spaces towards the parking requirements. The existing development contains eighteen parking spaces and the Land Use Code allows for an existing deficit in parking to be maintained when redeveloped. Consequently, the Applicant meets the pazking requirement. STAFF COMMENTS: SUBDIVISION: The Applicant is requesting subdivision approval because the development of multi- family dwelling units requires approval of subdivision pursuant to the definition of subdivision in the City's land use code. In reviewing the subdivision portion of the application, Staff believes that the proposal meets the applicable subdivision review standards established in Land Use Code Section 26.480.050, Review Standards. Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the infill development goals established in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan. VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS: The Applicant is requesting a vested property right for the proposed development plan for a period of five (5) years rather than the standazd three (3) yeaz period. The Applicant is requesting the longer vesting period "to accommodate the terms of existing leases for some of the office space in the building." Vesting provides an Applicant a timeframe in which the Applicant can rely on the approvals granted in a site specific development plan. It allows the Applicant to undertake and complete the development and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan. Once vested, a development plan shall not be required to be amended as a result of "any zoning or land use action by the city or by an initiated measure" during the vesting period. If the vested rights expire, the project will be subject to any new regulations that may impact the approval granted. The Land Use Code typically provides for a three year vesting period and a variation from that period is at the sole discretion of the Ciry Council. The Ciry does have a process for extending or reinstating vested rights (Section 26.308.101 C., Extension or Reinstatement of Vested Rights). An extension, if granted would be approved by the City Council. Staff recommends that the longer vesting period not be granted, as it does not provide a community wide benefit. SCHOOL LANDS DEDICATION: Given that the proposed development constitutes a full subdivision review, Land Use Code Section 26.620, School Lands Dedications, requires that the Applicant either dedicate lands for school function or pay acash-in-lieu payment. The Applicant has proposed to pay acash-in-lieu payment pursuant to the fee schedule established in Land Use Code Section 26.620. Staff has included a condition of approval in the proposed ordinance requiring that the Applicant pay the School Lands Dedications fee prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed development. PARK DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE The Applicant is required to pay a Parks Development Impact Fee for additional bedrooms added to the site and additional net leasable created, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Impact Fes. As the submitted plans do not show the number of bedrooms for the free-market units and the net leasable is an estimated figure, the Park Development Impact Fee for this project shall be calculated at the time of building permit submittal. The application for this project preceded the adoption of the new Transportation Demand Management (TDM)/Air Quality impact fee. Therefore, the TDM/Air Quality impact fee shall not be assessed. Staff has included a condition of approval in the proposed ordinance requiring that a Parks Development Impact Fee be paid at prior to building permit issuance. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: The City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Water Department, Aspen Sanitation District, Housing Department, and the Parks Department have all reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have been included as conditions of approval when appropriate. ORDINANCE N0.25 (SERIES OF 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS SUBDIVISION REVIEW AND VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS FOR THE JEROME PROFESSIONAL BUILDING REDEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 201 NORTH MILL STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, PITHIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel Nos. 2737-073-17-010 through 2737-073-17-028 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from all of the owners and directors of the Jerome Professional Building Condominium Association, Inc., requesting of the Planning and Zoning Commission three (3) Growth Management Review approvals, Commercial Design Review approval, Special Review approval and a recommendation of approval for Subdivision to redevelop a building known as the Jerome Professional Building located at 201 N. Mill Street; and, WHEREAS, the growth management reviews were for approval for a new mixed-use building which contains 10,750 sq. ft. of net leasable area, approval for the development of six (6) free-market residential units totaling a Floor Area Ratio of .87:1, and approval for the Development of three (3) affordable housing units with a total of 3,099 sq. fr. of net livable area; and, WHEREAS, as part of the land use review, the Applicant requested Commercial Design Review approval for the proposed mixed-use building; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant also requested Special Review approval to increase the individual floor azea ratios (FAR) for both the commercial and free-mazket multi- family use of the property. The effective zoning at the time of application allows an overall cap of 2:1 (24,000 sq. ft.) for the entire pazcel and permits an applicant to request, through Special Review, an increase in both the free-mazket multi-family use and commercial use of the property from .75:1 to a maximum of 1:1. For the commercial use, the Applicant requested an increase from .75:1 to .88:1 (or an additional 1,515 sq. ft. in floor azea) and for the free-mazket multi-family use, the Applicant requested an increase from .75:1 to .87:1 (or an additional 1,442 sq. fl. in floor azea); and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requested a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission of subdivision approval because the development of multi-family dwelling units requires approval of subdivision pursuant to the definition of subdivision in the City's land use code; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application at a public heazing on August 1, 2006, and upon recommendation of the Community Development Department, continued the public hearing to August 15, 2006; and, Page 1 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 WHEREAS, upon further review of the application at the August 15ei continuance, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and took and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on August 15, 2006, via Resolution No. 26 (Series of 2006), the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission found that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standazds and that the approvals and recommendation of approval of the land use requests were consistent with the goals and objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted approval of the three (3) Growth Management Review requests; the Commercial Design Review request; and the Special Review request. The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended approval of the Subdivision request to allow for the development of a mixed-use building that contains 10,750 sq. ft. of net leasable azea and a commercial F.A.R of .88:1, six (6) free-market units totaling a Floor Area Ratio of .87:1, and providing three affordable housing units with a total of 3,099 sq. ft. of net livable azea by a vote of five to zero (5- 0); and, WHEREAS, once the land use approvals and recommendation of approval were granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Applicant requested Subdivision approval and Vested Property Rights approval (for a period of five rather than three yeazs) of the City Council; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standazds, the Community Development Department recommended approval, with conditions, of the proposed subdivision request and a three yeaz time period for vested property rights; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 9, 2007, the City Council opened the heazing, took public testimony, considered pertinent recommendations from the Community Development Director, and referral agencies and adopted Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2007, approving with conditions, Subdivision and Vested Property Rights. WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all the applicable development standazds and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Page 2 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 Section 1:General Development Approval Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves Subdivision Review and Vested Property Rights for the Jerome Professional Building Redevelopment and Subdivision. The Commercial use F.A.R. is approved at .88:1 and the Free-Market Multi-Family use F.A.R. is approved at .87:1 for the development of a mixed-use building containing six free-mazket units, three affordable housing units containing a minimum of 3,099 sq. ft. of net livable azea, and a commercial component containing a maximum of 10,750 sq. ft. of net leasable area. The exterior design of the building shall be constructed as represented to the City Council and shown in Exhibit A of this ordinance. Section 2: Plat and A¢reement The Applicant shall record a subdivision agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Chapter 26.480, Subdivision, within 180 days of approval if City Council provides final approval of the subdivision request. The Applicant has requested and the Community Development Director has agreed, as provided for in Section 26.480.070 E., Recordation, to allow the subdivision plat to be recorded concurrently with the future condominium plat. Once construction is nearly completed but prior to an issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the developer shall file a condominium plat and associated documents for review and approval by the City Engineer and Community Development Director as outlined in land use code section 26.480.090, Condominiumization. Section 3: Buildine Permit Application The building permit application shall include the following a. A copy of the final recorded Ordinance (Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2007) and recorded P&Z Resolution (Resolution No. 26, Series 2006). b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, 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. Any applicable fees will be required for a storm drainage connection to the City system. e. An excavation stabilization plan, construction management plan (CMP), and drainage and soils reports pursuant to the Building Department's requirements. The CMP shall include an identification of construction hauling routes for review and approval by the City Engineer and Streets Department Superintendent. Special emphasis should be directed to the CMP because of the close quarters on the lot. Material Page 3 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 staging, parking and material handling aze major concerns. A tower crane should be considered for material handling on site to minimize traffic disruptions. f A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Health Department. g. A detailed excavation plan that utilizes vertical soil stabilization techniques, or other techniques, if appropriate and acceptable, for review and approval by the City Engineer. h. Accessibility and ADA requirements shall be addressed to satisfactorily meet adopted building codes. Section 4: Dimensional Requirements The redevelopment of the building as presented and approved by the City Council complies with the dimensional requirements of the Mixed-Use (MU) zone district, including the FAR limits approved by Special Review and noted in Section 1 of this ordinance. Section 5: Eneineerin¢ Replacement of the sidewalks, curbs, and gutters need to be addressed with development of the project. If snow melting sidewalks are installed, the adjacent curb and gutter will also need to be heated so the runoff can go into the City of Aspen existing collection system. Permits will be required for any work within a City Right-Of--Way. No penetration, inclusive of soil nails, is allowed within the city right-of--way. Section 6: Affordable Housin¢ a. The affordable housing requirements of the project shall be met with provision of three (3)two-bedroom Category 4 units. b. Rental units aze allowed with the following conditions: 1) The units have the ability to become ownership units at such time as the owners request this change and/or at such time as the APCHA deems one of the units out of compliance for over a period of one yeaz. At such time, all units will be listed for sale with the Housing Office as specified in the deed restriction at the Category 4 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. 2) Rental of the units shall be open to all qualified employees in Aspen and Pitkin County and shall not be tied to employment; however, the owner(s) of the commercial or free-mazket residential units may still choose qualified renters and the tenants may still be employed by the commercial component. The HOA may maintain ownership of the units. Page 4 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 3) The governing documents of the development shall be drafted to reflect the potential for the rental units to become ownership units; i.e., the Protective Covenants, By-Laws, Articles of Incorporation, etc. Since the project is a mixed free-mazket/deed-restricted project, the assessments shall be determined based on the price values of the free-mazket component compared to the deed- restricted component. This language shall be required in the Covenants associated with the project. No changes to this restriction shall be allowed without the APCHA's approval. 4) As long as the units remain as rental units, APCHA or the applicant shall structure a deed restriction for the employee housing units only such that an undivided 1/10`h of 1 percent interest in the ownership of each of the employee units 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. c. The homeowners' association shall be established to reflect the potential for the units to become ownership units. The assessments shall be based on the differential between the mazket values of the free-mazket component compazed to the deed-restricted component. This language shall be required in the Covenants associated with the project. The Covenants shall be reviewed by Housing Office staff prior to approval. No changes to this restriction shall be allowed without the APCHA's approval. d. Three off-street parking spaces within the development's pazking gazage shall be provided and designated for the occupants of the deed-restricted units. e. The deed-restriction shall be recorded at the time of recordation of the Condominium Plat and prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Section 7: Fire Mitigation NFPA 13 needs to be applied to the residential component of the project. Fire alarms aze required. Cazbon monoxide detectors are required. Stand Pipes for fire protection need to extend into the basement. Service size needs to account for the required fire flows. The alley size needs to accommodate aerial fire truck access for a minimum width of 20 feet or as otherwise approved by the Fire Marshal. Section 8: 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. Each of the units within the building shall have individual water meters. Page 5 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 Secfion 9: Sanitation District Requirements a. 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 cleaz water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. b. On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD. c. Oil and Grease interceptors (NOT traps) aze required for all food processing establishment; Locations of food processing shall be identified prior to building permit; even though the commercial space is tenet finish, interceptors will be required at this time if food processing establishments aze anticipated for this project. d. Oil and Sand separators aze required for pazking gazages and vehicle maintenance establishments. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells. Elevator shafts drains must flow thru o/s interceptor. e. 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. Shazed service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is served by a single service line. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways. f Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hazd landscaping may impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district. g. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. h. The glycol heating and snow melt system must be designed to prohibit and dischazge of glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage azeas must have approved containment facilities. i. 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. j. Applicant's civil engineer will be required to submit existing and proposed flow calculations. Section 10: 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 has sufficient capacity for the redevelopment. If a new supplemental transformer is required to be installed, 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 Section 11: Environmental Health Page 6 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 Using standazd Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Rates, this development will generate 94 additional trips per day, and 13 pounds of PM-10 per day. Thus this development will have a negative effect on the air quality if mitigation measures are not implemented. To provide such mitigation, the Applicant may consider providing free bus pass for employees, having the businesses and Homeowner's Association actively participate in the City's Transportation Options Program (TOP), and provide secure bike storage. Section 12: Exterior LiahtinE All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Section 13: School Lands Dedication Fee Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.620, School Lands Dedication, the Applicant shall pay afee-in-lieu of land dedication prior to building permit issuance. The City of Aspen Community Development Department shall calculate the amount due using the calculation methodology and fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. The Applicant shall provide the market value of the land including site improvements, but excluding the value of structures on the site. Section 13: Impact Fees Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Impact Fees, the Applicant shall pay a Parks Development impact fee assessed at the time of building permit application submittal and paid at building permit issuance. The amount shall be calculated using the methodology and fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit submittal. As the land use application was submitted prior to adoption of the Transportation Demand Management (TDM)/Air Quality impact fee, the fee shall not be required. Section 14: Parks a. Excavation: any excavation under the drip line of a tree to be preserved will need to approved and receive a drip line permit along with the tree permit. The existing foundation wall may need to remain in place at the location adjacent to a tree that is to be preserved, and vertical excavation may be required and over digging will be prohibited in such zones; work in these zones will need to be coordinated with the Parks Depaztment. The Pazks Department will require a detailed plan showing the location of the existing foundation and how it corresponds with the proposed new foundation. This note must be represented on the building permit set. b. Tree Protection: A vegetation protection fence shall be erected at the drip line of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site and their represented drip lines. A formal plan indicating the location of the tree protection will be required for the building permit set. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of 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 before any construction activities are to commence. Root damage is required Page 7 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 to be minimized by preserving the existing foundation, unless an alternative is acceptable and approved by the Parks Department, around the large Spruce Tree. c. An approved tree permit will be required before any demolition or access infrastructure work takes place. Mitigation for tree removals shall be required. d. The applicant will need to contract with a tree service, and have them on-call in order to address all roots greater than 2 inches in diameter. Roots 2" or greater shall be professionally pruned by the on-call tree service. Root trenching will be required azound all trees that will be subject to excavation under the drip line or next to the drip line. This can be accomplished by an experienced tree service company or trained member of the contractor's team. e. Landscaping and Sidewalk landscaped area: Landscaping in the public right of way will be subject to landscaping in the ROW requirements, including: o Street tree plantings shall be evenly spaced a minimum of 20 foot on-center. o ROW plantings require adequate irrigation pressure and coverage. o Improvements to the soil profiles of the ROW (amending the current soils to improve air, water filtration and increase longevity of the new plantings) may be necessary and shall be reviewed by the Pazks Department. o Tree trenches will need to be utilized for the street tree plantings. Bleeker Street planting can be accomplished with an attached curb and sidewalk with a brick paver accent. £ Applicant should work with the developer of the adjacent property (to the west) to coordinate the access issues, tree removals and grading associated with opening of the alley. Section 15: Vested Rights The development approvals granted pursuant to Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 26, Series of 2006 and herein shall be vested for a period of three (3) yeazs 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 property: 201 N Mill Street, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, by Ordinance No. 25 Series of 2007, of the Aspen City Council. Page 8 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 Section 16: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awazded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 17: 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 18• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 19: A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 9~' day of October, 2007, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 25s' day of June, 2007. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2007. Attest: Page 9 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney List of Exhibits Exhibit A -Approved Exterior Elevations Page 10 of 10 Ordinance No 25, Series of 2007 Exhibit H SUBDIVISION REVIEW Section 26.480.050 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements. a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding The project provides affordable housing within the city limits which meets one of the AACP's housing goals. It also contains new development within the Urban Growth Boundary which is a goal of the managing growth section of the AACP. With the location of the development, the building supports the opportunity for choice in travel modes: transit, walking, and bicycling. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the area. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed mixed- use is consistent with the land uses in the immediate vicinity which include commercial office uses, affordable housing uses and free-market multi family uses within the downtown area. Staff finds this criterion to be met. c. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future development of surrounding areas. Staff Finding As the application indicates, the surrounding properties are close to fully developed. Therefore, Staff does not believe that the proposal will adversely affect the future development of the surrounding properties. Staff finds this criterion to be met. d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable requirements of this Title. Staff Finding The proposed development is in compliance with the mixed-use zone district requirements and meets all other land use regulations. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 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, which will be paid prior to building permit issuance. Thus, staff finds this criterion to be met. F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to applications for which all growth management development allotments have been granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter 26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is required to obtain such growth management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, § 2) Sta{f Finding Allotments for the proposed six free-market units, three affordable housing units, and an additional 3,200 of net leasable are available. September 24, 2007 Mayor Ireland and the Aspen City Council c/o Ms. Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Director 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 via email to: jennifep@ci.aspen.co.us RE: Jerome Professional Building Redevelopment, Subdivision Application Dear Mayor Ireland and the Aspen City Council: Tlus letter has been prepared in an effort to provide concise and direct responses to the questions raised on June 25, 2007 during first reading of the Jerome Professional Building (JPB) subdivision application. Based on our notes from that evening, seven separate information requests were presented: 1) an explanation of the special review requests and the criteria used by the Planning and Zoning Commission in reviewing and granting those approvals; 2) the criteria to be used in the review of a request for extended vested property rights; 3) a list of existing tenants in the JPB with the amount of time remaining on each lease; 4) an explanation of why the proposed affordable housing units are to be deed restricted at the Category 4 level; 5) an explanation of how rent-control legislation and the so-called Telluride case are being addressed with rental deed restrictions; 6) a description of how initial sales are to be handled in the event that the affordable housing become ownership units; 7) an explanation of how the proposed affordable housing satisfies codified mitigation requirements. 1) Special Review Criteria and Approvals The applicant had been preparing plans and an application fora 2006 GMQS submittal when, on March 28, 2006, City Council adopted Emergency Ordinance No. 12. The emergency ordinance was introduced to the public and adopted in a period of just two days, and there was no way of anticipating the code changes that resulted. With project design near completion, said ordinance changed the rules to establish for the first time a maximum residential unit size of 2,000 net livable square feet and to require that commercial Floor Area be not less than free market residential Floor Area. RECE~1/ED 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 ASPEN, COLORADO 8 Qs1 i' lG~~ PHONE: (970) 925-781 9 FAX: (970) 925-7395 CI'T'Y CF ASPEN COMh1UNITY DEVELOPMENT .Se~~tember 24, 2007 GMQS submittals are a closed competition where the first submittal would be the first in line to receive a limited number of available allotments; consequently, it is imperative that submittal for an allotment be made as quickly after the start of the GMQS year as practicable. Due to the emergency adoption of the new rules, the applicant unexpectedly found themselves required to quickly complete several revisions to the proposed design. A result of the emergency ordinance limiting unit size was the originally planned units having to be split up into a greater number of smaller units. Smaller units are not as efficient as larger units in their use of floor area for circulation, corridor space and egress needs, so the overall square footage of the building had to increase. When this increase was coupled with the requirement that the square footage of the commercial space not exceed the free market residential space, the commercial space had to increase to at least equal the increase in the residential space. Virtually all the floor area approved in the special review request is necessary to provide the aforementioned circulation and egress needs. Due to the rather immediate conception and adoption of the emergency ordinance, we believe that the increases in floor area resulting from the need to provide circulation to meet building codes were unintended consequences of the emergency ordinance. A further effect of these new regulations was a need to increase the size of the affordable housing units to ensure that the additional square footages (even though in circulation space) would be fully mitigated to the level required by the Code, which we have done. Another, and possibly unintended, consequence of the emergency ordinance was an increase in our parking requirements under the Code due to the additional number of units. In reviewing our special review approval, it is worthy to note that we are providing the affordable housing units with assigned parking spaces even though we are not able to provide assigned parking to all the users of the non-deed restricted space in the building. The above-described course of events caused the need to request special review approvals. Prior to adoption of the emergency ordinance, the applicant intended to avoid the need for any special review approvals. The portion of the submitted application addressing the special review requests and applicable review standards has been excerpted and attached hereto for easy reference as Exhibit SR-1. On August 15, 2006 the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the special review request by a five-to-zero (5-0) vote as part of Resolution No. 26, Series of 2006 (recorded on September 11, 2006 as Reception Number 528466). -2- September 24, 2007 2) Review Criteria for the Extended Vested Property Rights Request The Code includes review criteria for an extension of previously granted vested rights beyond a period of three years. Section 26.308.010(C), states that: 1. In reviewing a request for the extension or reinstatement of vested rights the City Council shall consider, but not limited to [sic], the following criteria: a. The applicant's compliance with any conditions requiring performance prior to the date of application for extension or reinstatement, b. The progress made in pursuing the project to date including the effort to obtain any other permits, including a building permit, and the expenditures. made by the applicant in pursuing the project; c. The nature and extent of any benefits already received by the city as a result of the project approval such as impact fees or land dedications; d. The needs of the city and the applicant that would be served by the approval of the extension or reinstatement request. Most of these standards are not directly applicable to review of the current request for a five year period of initial vested rights. That said, the request will serve the needs of and be consistent with the goals of the City, especially with respect to growth management. That is, the City of Aspen has gone to great lengths to revamp its growth management system and to limit (or at least phase to moderation) the impacts of development and construction on its citizens' and visitors' quality of life. At the same time, the last two-to-three years has seen approval of a great many redevelopment projects, some of which are quite large by local standards. Given the three year vesting period that came with such approvals, it is reasonable to anticipate this pipeline clearing by the year 2010. The recently adopted code amendments will decrease the number of approvals and, in turn, the rate of growth/development that can be approved in the coming three year period. Further, the newly adopted codes establish three years as the term of validity for new GMQS approvals. Accordingly, it follows that allowing the Jerome Professional Building redevelopment a five year vested rights period will facilitate its associated construction and growth related impacts to be phased into what figures to be a slower development period. Conversely, forcing its development within the coming three year period means the impacts of construction will be felt at a magnified level as it will have to occur within the same time period as the current backlog of approved pipeline projects. -3- September 24, 2007 3) Existing Tenants £~ Remaining Lease Periods Please refer to the attached tenant list at Exhibit T-1. As the attached list shows, existing lease options no longer extend as far out as was the case when the application was filed. At that time the tenant in space 109 had an option that had to be exercised by October 1, 2007, that would extend the lease until October 31, 2010. This tenant has terminated its lease and the space has since been taken with a termination upon renovation provision. There was also another tenant with an option to renew until November 31, 2011, but they did not exercise that option. At this point, although the longest term of an existing lease is January 31, 2011, the leases are terminable upon 90 days notice of the commencement of the redevelopment and if the redevelopment were to commence at the earliest time allowed under the lease, the latest date that a tenant has a right to remain is August 1, 2008. Therefore, the applicant no longer needs extended vesting to accommodate existing leases. However, the relocation necessities of existing businesses housed in the Jerome Professional Building and the general desire of the community to slow down the pace of construction still represent valid reasons for approving a five year term of vested rights. The law firms of Klein Cote Edwards, P.C., and Krabacher Sanders, P.C. will need to find approximately 6,000 square feet of office space during the redevelopment of the building and will relocate into the new building once it is completed. This amount of office space is very hard to find in Aspen and is likely to result in relocation to the mid valley while maintaining only small offices in town for the duration of the construction period. This burden will also fall upon the other businesses, including the law firm of Neiley and Adler, P.C., as well as on the planning offices of Haas Land Planning, LLC and Alan Richman Planning Services. Each of these small business owners contributes to the Aspen community and will need flexibility and time to find adequate spaces for relocation. 4) Reason for Category 4 Affordable Housing Deed Restrictions The affordable housing mitigation requirements of the Code are outlined in Secfions 26.470.040(0)(2) and (7). The governing standard of the Code states that, Sixty (60) percent of the employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge development, according Section Z6.470.OSO.A, Employee Generation Rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash-in-lieu thereof. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.0.7, -4- September 24. 2007 Ajfordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Mitigation for Free-Market residential units within amixed-use project shall be pursuant to Section 26.470.040.0.6 -Free-Market Residential Units within aMixed-Use Project. [emphasis added] This adopted and codified Code provision is consistent with the AACP, which states that, "We should endeavor to bring the middle class back into our community. We should discourage sprazol and recognize its cost to the character of our community, our open spaces and our rural resources as Buell as the fiscal expenses associated with the physical infrastructure of spraznl." The Housing Guidelines maintain seven (7) Categories of affordable housing; in furtherance of this AACP goal, the Code was written to require affordable housing at the middle category level, namely Category 4. The proposal provides high-quality Category 4 units in the heart of the community and thereby serves to forward all aspects of this AACP goal. 5) Rent-control and the so-called Telluride Case Over the past several years, the City has been approving rental affordable housing mitigation units pursuant to Section 26.470.040(C)(7)(e) of the Code, which states in relevant part that, The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, or its Board of Directors, at its sole discretion, may authorize affordable housing units owned and associated with a lodging or commercial operations to be rental units if a legal instrument, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures permanent affordability of the units. In the current case, the APCHA Housing Board has approved the proposed mitigation units (owned and associated with commercial operations) to be rental units. This approval was finalized by the Planning and Zoning Commissions approval of the growth management requests under which the above-cited standard was considered. The legal instrument offered by the applicant and accepted by the City is identical to the method of ensuring affordability and enforceability that has been used and accepted in association with several projects over the last several years. That is, Section 6, sub-article b.4. of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 26, Series of 2006 (recorded September 11, 2006 as Reception Number 528466) states that, -5- September 24, 2007 As Zong as the units remain as rental units, APCHA or the applicant shall structure a deed restriction for the employee housing units only such that an undivided I/10th of 1 percent interest in the ownership of each of the employee units 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. It has consistently been the City Attorney's position that an ownership interest vested in the Housing Authority is adequate to address rent-control and related enforceability issues. 6) Initial Sales should the Affordable Housing become Ownership Units Section 6, sub-article b.1. of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Number 26, Series of 2006 (recorded September 11, 2006 as Reception Number 528466) states that, The units 12ave the ability to become ownership units at such time the owners would request this change and/or at such time the APCHA deems one of the units out of compliance over a period of more than one year. At such time, all units will be listed for sale with the Housing Office as specifced in the deed restriction at the Category 4 maximum sales price based on the Guidelines in e~}'ect at the time offnal plat approval for all units and all units shall be sold through the lottery system as specified in the Guidelines. Thus, initial sales of the affordable housing units will be handled by APCHA through its lottery system; however, there remains one approved exception to this rule, namely that the homeowners' association (HOA) can maintain ownership of the units for rental under the terms of the APCHA Housing Guidelines. This approval and the language contained in the cited condition are consistent with the applicable Code standard found in Section 26.470.040(C)(7)(e), which states in relevant part that: The proposed units shall be deed restricted as `for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. -6- September l4, 2007 Consistent with this Code standard, the APCHA and the Planning and Zoning Commission have approved the owners' ability to select the first qualified purchasers provided said purchasers are the HOA, with subsequent rental of the units done in accordance with the APCHA Guidelines. 7) Satisfaction of Codified Affordable Housing Mitigation Requirements Satisfaction of all codified affordable housing mitigation requirements is explained in detail on pages 11-16 of the submitted application. The portion of the submitted application addressing satisfaction of all applicable affordable housing mitigation requirements has been excerpted and attached hereto for easy reference at Exhibit AH-1. While not mentioned in the attached excerpt, it is worth noting that the project's free market residences are relatively small: Unit 1 contains 1,020 square feet of net livable area; Unit 2 contains 1,701 square feet of net livable area; Unit 3 contains 1,994 square feet of net livable area; Unit 4 contains 944 square feet of net livable area; Unit 5 contains 1,575 square feet of net livable area; and, Unit 6 contains 1,647 square feet of net livable area. By comparison, the affordable housing units contain 1,050, 1,105 and 944 net livable square feet, respectively. This project's free market unit sizes average 1,480 square feet of net livable area while the affordable housing units average 1,033 net livable square feet. The free market and affordable units are integrated within one building within shared floors/ stories. The point being made is that the affordable housing units are of excellent quality and of comparable size to the free market units. Furthermore and of equal importance, the free market units of the size and location proposed herein are not going to be large employee generators like the large homes found in the peripheral areas of Aspen and Pitkin County. These apartments will not require the hiring of caretakers as an association will manage and maintain the common areas and their relatively small size, means that they will not generate the number of employees associated with their construction or long term occupancy as compared with larger free market residences which have historically been allowed to be built. Moreover, as previously mentioned, although not required by the Code, each of the affordable units will be given a designated on-site parking space within the subgrade garage. We look forward to further discussing the Jerome Professional Building subdivision application at the second reading hearing now scheduled for October 8, 2007. Should you have any additional questions or desire greater -7- September 24, 2007 clarification, please do not hesitate to contact Haas Land Planning, LLC at the numbers and address provided or by email at mhaasQsopris.net. Very truly yours, H D PLANNING, LLC Mitc aas, AICP Owner/ Manager EXHIBITS: SR-1: Special Review Excerpt T-1: Tenant List AH-1: Affordable Housing Excerpt -8- Special Review \E~XHI~BI~T ~/~-~1---~-- The MU zone district establishes maximum Free-Market Multi-Family Housing and Commercial floor area ratios (FAR) of 0.75:1 each, but allows each of these maximums to be increased to as much as 1:1 by special review. The proposed development uses: 1) aFree-Market Multi-Family Housing FAR of 0.87:1 (0.79:1 without common circulation areas); and, 2) a Commercial FAR of 0.871:1 (0.774:1 without common circulation areas). As such, special review approvals are necessary to allow each of these FAR. The applicable review standards are found in Section 26.430.040(A) of the Code and are provided below in indented and italicized print. The standazds are followed by response demonstrating consistency and/or compliance therewith, as applicable. 1. The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. The proposed redevelopment provides amixed-use building that adds commercial and office space and integrated free-market and affordable housing in an appropriate location, on a bus route and in immediate proximity to the municipal parking garage, the public library, the Rio Grande park, Clark's Market, Carl's Pharmacy, several banks, bars and eateries, and the entire downtown. The proposed mass, height, density, configuration, and amount of open space are consistent with the dimensional requirements of the underlying MU zone district. All of the proposed setbacks meet or exceed the requirements of the MU zone district. The pedestrian experience along both East Bleeker Street and North Mill Street will benefit from: the opportunity to provide commercial uses of benefit to the community along this heavily used pedestrian link to the commercial core, bringing interest, vitality and convenience to the pedestrian experience; sidewalk and landscape buffer improvements; increased visual interest will be created by replacing a blank brick wall along the sidewalk with an articulated building that includes windows at the pedestrian level; and, a building that simply better integrates with the pedestrian experience than does the existing structure by providing inviting entryways and a better relationship with surrounding grades. The building design is compatible with the surrounding land uses, which include the two- story brick Moss Entertainment/old KSPN office building; the "Blue Vic" property, for which a lot split was recently approved to create a 6,000 square foot, MU-zoned parcel immediately adjacent to the subject property; the rear side of the five-story brick Hotel Jerome and its parking gazage and trash area; the two-story brick Community Banks building; and, the three-story brick Children's Library side of the Pitkin County Library. The proposed structure employs brick as a primary building material to provide for consistency with adjacent structures, while integrating "softer" building materials on the upper levels to reduce the feeling of weight and mass. The comer location is accentuated, as suggested by the City's Commercial Design standazds. The mass of the proposed structure and its upper levels are appropriately shifted away from downhill properties and towards the five-story rear facade of the Hotel Jerome. This also serves to maintain view corridors from residential properties to the west/northwest, and reduce the effects of shading on adjacent properties. The commercial FAR special review request is for 1,455 square feet of additional floor area, of which some 1,162 squaze feet aze actually in common circulation azeas (non-unit spaces). Similazly, the free-mazket residential FAR special review request is for 1,442 square feet of additional floor area, of which some 1,018 squaze feet are actually in common circulation azeas (non-unit spaces). In essence, therefore, special review is being requested for approximately 293 square feet of commercial space and 424 square feet of free-market residential space. These are very modest requests when considering that the Code allows an applicant to request a great deal more. 2. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts including, but not limited to, the effects of shading, excess traj~c, availability of parking in the neighborhood, or blocking of a designated view plane. The proposed development will not adversely impact surrounding uses. As briefly explained above, the mass of the proposed structure and its upper levels aze appropriately shifted away from downhill properties and towazds the five-story rear fagade of the Hotel Jerome. This also serves to maintain view corridors from residential properties to the west/northwest, and reduce the effects of shading on adjacent properties. Bleeker Street is impacted and shaded by the historic Hotel Jerome structure and the proposed development, located north of the Hotel Jerome building, has no effect whatsoever on the shading of Bleeker Street. Removal of the existing encroachments into the North Mill Street right-of--way will serve to enhance traffic and pedestrian safety by increasing sight distances both from the Bleeker Street stop sign and from vehicles traveling up North Mill Street to turn onto Bleeker. Removal of the vehiculaz access drive into the existing pazking lot and replacement with alley access will also serve to ensure that there will not be two curb cuts/vehiculaz access points within fifteen feet of each other on North Mill Street. This will increase safety for pedestrians and drivers alike. The pazking needs of the development are being satisfied on-site with a subgrade gazage accessed from an alley. No designated view planes will be affected by the proposed redevelopment. To the extent that the development might create any impacts relative to shading, traffic, parking or anything else, such affects will not result from the modest amount of additional floor azea requested through special review. The requested special review approvals are very modest in scope and even more modest in affect. JEROME PROFESSIONAL BUILDING TENANT LIST EXHIBIT Legal Property Tenant Term Size s.f. Option JPB 1-B Suite #102 Neiley & Alder 2 yrs to 501 sf No 9/30/06 JPB 1-C Suite #103 Klein, Cote & 4 yrs to 936 sf 90 day notice Edwards, LLC 1/31/2011 ifrenovation JPB 1-D Suite #103 Krabacher & 4 yrs to Share w/1-C 90 day notice Sanders, PC 1/31/2011 ifrenovation JPB 1-EF St Regis 11/19/03 1091 sf No Suite #106 Residence Club to of CO 10/31 /07 JPB 1-G Alan Richman 3 yrs to 237 sf No Suite #107 Planning Services 7/31/08 JPB 1-H Haas Land 9 yrs to 310sf No . Suite #108 Planning, LLC 6/30/08 JPB 1-I Krabacher & 4 yrs to 304 sf 90 day notice Suite#109 Sanders, PC 1/31/2011 ifrenovation JPB 1-A Suite #101 Cyr & Company 2 yrs to 301 sf 90 day notice 4/30/09 after April 30, 2008 Affordable Housing EXHIBIT ~_ c) Sixty (60) percent of the employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge development, according Section 26.470.OSO.A, Employee Generation Rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing or cash-in-lieu thereof. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.0.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. Mitigation for Free-Market residential units within amixed-use project shall be pursuant to Section 26.470.040. C.6 -Free-Market Residential Units within aMixed-Use Project. The proposed development's consistency with Sections 26.470.040.0.6 and C.7 of the Code is demonstrated in the next sub-section of this application. Pursuant to Section 26.470.OSO.A.S of the Code, YVhenever affordable housing is provided on-site (with actual units) in order to satisfy one requirement, the same on-site affordable housing may also be used to satisfy any other affordable housing requirement concurrently. For example: A mixed-use project may require two affordable housing units to mitigate an increase in commercial employee generation, and two affordable housing units to mitigate free-market residential development. In this case, providing two on-site affordable housing units shall satisfy both requirements concurrently. Therefore, in the case of a mixed use project, it is necessary to analyze the affordable housing mitigation requirements attributable to each use type in the proposal and meet the higher of the two requirements. In the current case, the mixed use project includes a free mazket residential component as well as a commercial/office component, each with its own affordable housing requirement. The two requirements must be established and compared to determine the effective/combined requirement. With regazd to the project's commercial component, Section 26.470.OSO.A of the Code provides that development in the MU zone district generates 3.7 FTE per thousand squaze feet of net leasable first-floor area, and 2.775 FTE per thousand squaze feet of upper and lower floor net leasable area (NLA). The standard above, explains that the mitigation is required only for the employees generated by "additionaP' commercial development. Given these Code provisions, in order to determine the mitigation requirement, one must calculate the employee generation of the various levels of commercial NLA in both the existing structure and the proposed structure, then calculate the difference. This difference is the number of employees generated by the redevelopment. Category 4 housing must be provided for 60% of the employees generated, and the housing must be provided in a manner consistent with the requirements of Section 26.470.040.0.7 of the Code. The existing structure contains 3,775 square feet of first floor NLA and 3,775 square feet of upper floor NLA. Therefore, the existing first floor generates 13.97 FTE ([3,775s.£/1,000s.fJ x 3.7), and the existing upper floor generates 10.48 FTE ([3,775/1,000] x 2.775). In total, then, the existing structure generates 24.45 FTE (13.97 + 10.48). While the project includes approximately 12,650 squaze feet of commercial/office space, it is conservatively estimated that 85% of this total will be NLA since not yet designed tenant-driven finishes will include circulation corridors, bathrooms, and storage area that the Code excludes from NLA. By way of comparison, approximately 81% of the existing JPB commercial space is NLA per the Code definition. Therefore, for purposes of determining employee mitigation requirements, the development includes 10,750 square feet of NLA, of which 5,590 square feet are basement and upper floors and 5,160 square feet aze on the first floor. Because of the slopes adjacent to the site, a portion of level two is considered basement space while the remaining area is considered first floor space; likewise, most of level three is considered first floor space while the remaining portion is considered upper level space (see floor plans). In total, one full level is considered first floor space. As such, the basement and upper floor NLA generates 15.51 FTE (5.59 x 2.775), and the first floor NLA generates 19.09 FTE (5.16 x 3.7). In total, the redevelopment generates 34.6 FTE (15.51 + 19.09). The 24.45 FTE credit from the existing building is now applied, bringing the total increase in employee generation to 10.15 FTE (34.6 - 24.45). Since 60% of the incremental increase in employee generation must be mitigated, the end requirement attributable to the commercial component of the redevelopment is housing for 6.09 FTE (10.15 x 60%). With regazd to the project's free market residential component, Section 26.470.040.0.6 of the Code explains that, "Affordable housing Net livable space, for which the finished floor level is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to thirty (30) percent of the additional free- market residential net livable space, for which the ,finished floor level is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher." The existing structure does not contain any residential squaze footage; thus, all free market net livable azea in the proposal is "additional." The proposed development includes 8,881 net livable square feet of free market residential space, all of which is above natural and finished Bade. Therefore 2,665 square feet of above-grade net livable affordable housing space (8,881 x 30%) is required. Per Section 8 of the 2006 Housing Guidelines, every 400 squaze feet of affordable housing is equivalent to housing for one (1) FTE; therefore, the end requirement attributable to the free market residential component of the redevelopment is housing for 6.66 FTE (2,665 = 400). Since the proposal includes on-site provision of affordable housing (with actual units), pursuant to Section 26.470.050.A.5 of the Code, the effective affordable housing requirement is 2,665 square feet of affordable housing net livable area, housing not less than 6.66 FTE. The proposal includes three (3) two-bedroom affordable housing units. Pursuant to Section 26.470.050(A)(2) of the Code, each of these units houses 2.25 FTE. The three proposed two-bedroom units provide housing for 6.75 FTE in 3,099 squaze feet of net livable azea, all of which is above-grade. These units exceed the requirement. Each of the proposed affordable housing units are consistent with or exceed the 2006 Housing Guidelines requirements for minimum net livable azea in a Category 4 two-bedroom unit. Overall, the redevelopment plan is consistent with the APCHA Guidelines, the AACP, and all applicable Land Use Code criteria. d) The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure or such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fre and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and road and transit services. The project is a redevelopment of an existing building. The property is already served with public infrastructure, services, and facilities. The additional demand represented by the proposal will not in any way exceed existing capacities and will be mitigated through payment of tap fees, permit fees, impact fees, and the like. b Free-Market Residential Units within a Mixed Use Proiect, Section 26.470.040(0)(6) Section 26.470.040.C.2.c of the Code (as addressed above), requires that mitigation for free-market residential units within amixed-use project be reviewed pursuant to Section 26.470.040.0.6 of the Code. Standazds "a)", "b)" and "d)" of Sections 26.470.040.0.6 and 26.470.040.0.2 aze identical, and these standards have been addressed above. As such, the lone remaining review standard of Section 26.470.040.C.6.c is provided below in indented and italicized print and followed by a response demonstrating consistency and compliance therewith. c) Affordable housing net livable space, for which the finished floor level is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to thirty (30) percent of the additional free-market residential net livable space, for which the finished floor level is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher. Additional net livable affordable housing space beyond this reguirement may be developed below Natural or Finished Grade but shall not count towards this criterion. Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Section 26.470.040.0.7, Affordable Housing, and be restricted to Category 4 rate as defned in the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower Category designation. The existing structure does not contain any residential squaze footage; thus, all free market net livable area in the proposal is "additional." The proposed development includes 8,881 net livable square feet of free mazket residential space, all of which is above natural and finished grade. Therefore 2,665 squaze feet of above-grade net livable affordable housing space (8,881 x 30%) is required. Per Section 8 of the 2006 Housing Guidelines, every 400 square feet of affordable housing is equivalent to housing for one (1) FTE; therefore, the end requirement attributable to the free mazket residential component of the redevelopment is housing for 6.66 FTE (2,665 - 400). The proposal includes three (3) two-bedroom affordable housing units. Pursuant to Section 26.470.050(A)(2) of the Code, each two-bedroom unit provides credit for housing 2.25 FTE. The three proposed two-bedroom units provide housing for 6.75 FTE in 3,099 squaze feet of above-grade net livable area. These units exceed the requirement. Each of the proposed affordable housing units are consistent with or exceed the 2006 Housing Guidelines requirements for minimum net livable area in a Category 4 two-bedroom unit. Overall, the redevelopment plan is consistent with the APCHA Guidelines, the AACP, and all applicable Land Use Code criteria. c A,~fordable Housin~Section 26.470.040(0 The development of affordable housing deed restricted in accordance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria: a) Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the new units, pursuant to Section 26.470.030. C, Development Ceiling Levels. This standard has been addressed above in response to the standards of Section 26.470.040.0.2. b) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. This standard has been addressed above in response to the standards of Section 26.470.040.0.2. c) The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of Directors. The proposal includes three (3) affordable housing units: Unit 1 contains two-plus (2+) bedrooms and 1,105 square feet of net livable area; Unit 2 contains two-plus (2+) bedrooms and 1,050 square feet of net livable area; and, Unit 3 contains two (2) bedrooms and 944 squaze feet of net livable area. Two of the three units aze described as two-plus bedroom units since each includes an area for office/guest use. All three units include plenty of storage space as well as private laundry facilities. All (100%) of the finished floor area in the affordable housing is above grade and provided with ample natural light. The proposed affordable housing units are consistent with or exceed the 2006 Housing Guidelines requirements for minimum net livable area in the unit-types proposed. As required by the Code, the units will be deed restricted at the Category 4 rate. This proposal is consistent with the APCHA Guidelines, the AACP, and all applicable Land Use Code criteria. d) Affordable Housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units or buy-down units. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty (50) percent or more of the unit's net livable square footage is at or above Natural or Finished Grade, whichever is higher. Off-site units shall be provided within the City of Aspen city limits. Units outside the city limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to 26.470.040.D.2. Provision of affordable housing through a cash-in-lieu payment shall be at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of these methods. The proposed affordable housing mitigation is being provided in the form of actual newly-built, 100% above-grade on-site units. The on-site units are within both the city limits and the Infill Area. e) The proposed units shall be deed restricted as `for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to select the f rst purchasers, subject to the aforementioned gualifications, with approval from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority or the City of Aspen to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, or its Board of Directors, at its sole discretion, may authorize affordable housing units owned and associated with a lodging or commercial operations to be rental units if a legal instrument, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, ensures permanent affordability of the units. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this mandatory "for-sale"provision. The proposed affordable housing units will either be: a) "for sale" and transferred to qualified purchasers in accordance with. the APCHA Guidelines provided, however, that the applicant shall retain the right to select qualified first purchasers; or, b) owned and associated with on-site commercial operations to be rental units, provided, a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures permanent affordability of the units. The remaining provisions of this standard are understood by the applicant. [NOTE: this description was revised during hearings before the APCHA Board and the Planning and Zoning Commission; the resulting approvals outline the revisions to allow rental of the units and ownership by the HOA.] MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council vine FROM: Jason Lasser, Planner ~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~~ DATE OF MEMO: October 11, 2007 MEETING DATE: October 22, 2007 RE: 555 East Durant Avenue- Planned Unit Development (PUD), Second Reading of Ordinance #36, Series of 2007, REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to grant approval for the development of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) on the property known as the North of Nell, located at 555 East Durant Avenue. The North of Nell Condominium Association, represented by its Manager, Joe Raczak, has submitted this land use application requesting the following: 1.) PUD overlay of the property to establish the dimensional standazds for the structure as conforming (specifically an increase in the residential FAR and overall FAR) to allow for exterior mechanical wall covers to be constructed, which will enclose part of the existing deck space. BACKGROUND: The North of Nell Condominium building was built in 1969 in compliance with the standards in effect at the time. According to Section 26.312.020 and 26.312.030 of the Code, non-conforming uses and structures may continue to operate as they aze, but only normal maintenance procedures can be conducted and no extensions or expansions are allowed. The North of Nell Condominiums will be affected by the new development of the Residences at Little Nell on Dean Street. The lowering of the street will expose additional existing building wall of the North of Nell, which will increase the calculated floor area. In order to help rectify the situation, the applicant proposes a PUD overlay to establish the existing non-conforming dimensional standards as legal for this property. REVIEW PROCESS' The applicant requests the following land use approvals for the project described above: 1) Planned Unit Development (PUD); According to Section 26.445.040 of the Land Use Code, establishment of dimensional requirements and density may be approved with the adoption of a Final PUD development plan. In this case, the applicant proposes a PUD to establish the existing floor azea; Final Review Authority: Citv Council G'\city\JasonUL CasesUL CiNCouncil\North of Nell\NON 10-22-2nd Readine CC\Memo NorthofNe112ndReadine doc Page I of 4 BACKGROUND/EXISTING CONDITIONS: The North of Nell is a mixed-use commercial/residential development with 40 residential and 12 commercial units. Existing underground parking holds 61 spaces. A shop, storage and utility rooms are also located in the basement. The building is located in the Commercial Lodge (CL) zone district. Total floor azea in the zone district is limited to a floor area ratio (FAR) of 3:1 or 83,658 sq. ft. based on a lot size of 27,886 sq. ft. According to the applicant, the FAR of the existing building is 2.9:1 (82,306 sq ft./27,886 sq ft). Due to the lowering of Dean Street the individual FAR for the commercial component will increase although no additional square feet will be created. With the material changes to the building being proposed, the FAR for the residential component will also increase. Currently the FAR of the residential component is non-conforming. Below, are a number of tables that show the allowable and proposed FARs of the building. On October 2, 2006, Hearing Officer Timothy E. Whitsitt noted that the improvements and construction activity on Dean Street should coincide with the neighboring development to prevent prolonging the disruption of vehicular and pedestrian use. However, "it may not obtain a building permit for this construction without addressing the calculated increase in it's nonconforming FAR and obtaining an approval for that increase from the City". Therefore, this application for an increase in FAR was exempt from the moratorium. TOTAL FLOOR AREA EXISTING FLOOR AREA PROPOSED FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 82,306 83,739 TOTAL F.A.R. 2.95:1 3.0029:1 TOTAL PERMITTED F.A.R. 3:1 COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA EXISTING FLOOR AREA PROPOSED FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 21,154 22,924 TOTAL F.A.R. .76:1 .82:1 TOTAL PERMITTED F.A.R. 1:1 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA EXISTING FLOOR AREA PROPOSED FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 60,762 60,815 TOTAL F.A.R. 2.17:1 2.18:1 TOTAL PERMITTED F.A.R. .5:1 G~\ciriUasonUL-CasesUL-CibCouncil\North of Nell\NON 10-22-2nd Reading CCUvlemo NorthotNell 2ndReadine doc Page 2 of 4 DISCUSSION: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD): The Applicant is ieC]UCStlrig Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval to establish dimensional standards for the structure as conforming pursuant to the definition of a planned unit development.) In reviewing the planned unit development (PUD) portion of the application, Staff finds that the proposal meets the most of the applicable planned unit development review standards established in Land Use Code Section 26.445.050, Review Standards, as outlined in Exhibit A. However, the application does not meet the intent of the architectural character review criteria. Although the design of the building is outdated, there are many condominium and lodge structures of the same era in Aspen that all contribute to the local architectural character and are appropriate for the environment in which they are located. The visual interest of the saw- tooth roof adds to the character of the building, seeking to reduce the perceived length of the eave. It is staff's opinion that the saw-tooth eave of the flat roof seeks to emulate a chalet style gable. The proposed straight line cut to the eave will increase the perceived mass and the addition of applied painted gutter seam brackets will not break up the building vertically. It is Staff's opinion that the request to demolish the saw-tooth roofline due to gutter pricing savings is not appropriate and is inconsistent with goals of the AACP as it relates to "Design Quality ". The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) to City Council by a vote of three to two (3 - 2). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff does not find the azchitectural character review criteria of Planned Unit Development to be met with the removal of the saw tooth roof, and recommends approval with condition that both saw tooth roofs be maintained on the building. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance #36 Series of 2007 upon second reading." If council agrees that the saw tooth roofs should be maintained a condition of approval should be included in the motion. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Planned Unit Development (PUD) -Staff Findings Exhibit B: Determination of Administrative Hearing Officer Exhibit C: DRC minutes/notes Exhibit D: Dean (Ave.) Street improvement plans Exhibit E: May 15, 2007, July 17, 2007 P+Z Minutes Exhibit F: Resolution No. 19, Series of 2007 PPlanned Unit Development, pursuant to Land Use Code section 26.445.040, is defined as "a zoning overlav classification or desienation under which certain zone district reeulations may be varied to encouraee flexibility and innovation in the development of land..." G\ciriUasonUL-CasesUL-CiriCouncilWorth of Nell\NON 10-22-2nd Readine CCUvtemo NorthofNell 2ndReadine.doc Page 3 of 4 Exhibit G: Applicant F.A.R. Calculations Exhibit H: Elevations of the proposed Exhibit I: Application `~ -'~,-~ - E4-= a~ G'\cityUasonUL-CasesUL-CiriCouncil\North of NeIIWON 10-22-2nd Readine CC\Memo NorthofNell 2ndReadine.doc Page 4 of 4 ORDINANCE NO ~ 6, (SERIES OF 2007) A ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO LEGALIZE THE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS WITH CONDITIONS, FOR THE NORTH OF NELL CONDOMINIUMS, 555 EAST DURANT STREET, LOTS A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H AND I, BLOCK 97, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2 73 7-182-4 9 051 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the North of Nell Condominium Association (Applicant), requesting approval of a Planned Unit Development and rezoning as a PUD, described as Lots A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H and I, Block 97, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado due to the lowering of Dean Street; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Pazking, City Engineering, Building, and Parks, as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral comments, and the applicable Land Use Code standazds, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the Planned Unit Development for the North of Nell Condominiums with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application at a public heazing on May 15th, 2007, and upon recommendation of the Community Development Department, continued the public heazing to June 5th, 2007; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission did not meet due to lack of quorum on June 5, 2007, and upon recommendation of the Community Development Department, continued the public hearing to July 17, 2007; and, WHEREAS, upon further review of the application at the July 17th continuance, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and took and considered public comment at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, on July 17th, 2007, via Resolution No. 19 (Series of 2007), the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission considered and discussed the application and G:\cityVasonVL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22- 2nd.Reading.CC\Appr.CC.Ord.10.22.07.doc found that the development proposal meets all applicable development standazds and that the approvals and recommendation of approval of the land use requests were consistent with the goals and objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission found that the Resolution (No. 19, Series of 2007) furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission found that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standazds and that the approvals of the development proposal aze consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommends City Council approve the Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map, by a vote of three to two (3-2); and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public heazing on October 22, 2007, the City Council opened the heazing, took public testimony, considered pertinent recommendations from the Community Development Director, and referral agencies of the City of Aspen and adopted Ordinance No. _, Series of 2007, approving with conditions, a planned unit development to legalize the existing non-conforming dimensional requirements and an amendment to the official zone district map; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets many of the applicable development standazds and where the standazds are varied, 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 welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall record a PUD agreement that meets the requirements of Land Use Code Chapter .26.445.070 (C) PUD Agreement, within 180 days of approval if City Council provides final approval of the PUD request. Section 2: Zoning Map G:\cityVason\JL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22- 2nd.Reading.CC\Appr.CC.Ord.10.22.07.doc The Community Development Director shall cause an amendment to the City of Aspen Official Zone District Map to reflect a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay on the property described as 555 east Durant Street, Lots A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H, and I, Block 97, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado Section 3: Dimensional Calculations Dimensional calculations of this PUD shall be as follows as presented by the applicant to the Planning and Zoning Commission for the July 17ei public hearing: TOTAL FLOOR AREA EXISTING FLOOR AREA OVERALL FLOOR AREA APPROVED THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE TOTAL FLOOR AREA 82,306 83,739 TOTAL F.A.R. 3:1 3.0029:1 TOTAL PERMITTED F.A.R. 3:0029:1 COMMERCIAL FLOOR EXISTING FLOOR AREA COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA AREA APPROVED THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE TOTAL FLOOR AREA 21,154 22,924 TOTAL F.A.R. .76:1 .82:1 TOTAL PERMITTED F.A.R. .82:1 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR EXISTING FLOOR AREA COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA AREA APPROVED THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE TOTAL FLOOR AREA 60,762 60,815 TOTAL F.A.R. 2.17:1 2.18:1 TOTAL PERMITTED F.A.R. 2.18:1 Section 4:Conditions Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, North of Nell Condominiums, pazcel identification of 2737-182-49051, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the proposed Planned Unit Development, subject to the following conditions: Prior to final approval, the applicant will provide a PUD plat that reflects actual floor area and ratio as calculated according to the Aspen Land Use Code. G:\city\JasonUL-Cases\JL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22- 2nd.Reading.CC\Appr.CC.Ord.10.22.07.doc 2. A PUD Agreement and Amended PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). Prior to issuance of any building permit for any improvement to the building, the applicant shall submit building elevations and design details showing the design as approved by the North of Nell Condominium Association. The design shall be approved by the Community Development Director. Building permit applications shall conform to the approved design. The applicant shall file a Notice of PUD in the Clerk and Recorders office of Pitkin County subsequent to receipt of a development order, or prior to issuance of a building permit. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to this application, whether in public hearings or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such plan approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6• This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 22s' day of October, 2007. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2007. Attest: G:\cityVason\JL-Cases\JL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22- 2nd.Reading.CC\Appr.CC.Ord.10.22.07.doc Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney G:\cityVason\JL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22- 2nd.Reading.CC\Appr.CC.Ord.10.22.07.doc EXHIBIT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. A development application for PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements (staff findings follow each requirement): A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The proposed development is consistent with all applicable elements of the AACP, specifically with regard to community chazacter. The AACP emphasizes the need to "create spaces" and to "encourage a diverse retail environment". The PUD will legalize the existing dimensional requirements which will be affected by the lowering of Dean Street. The excavation will expose additional existing wall azea which affects the calculation of floor azea. The newly exposed wall will serve as a new pedestrian retail fagade that connects to the Gondola plaza. Staff finds this to be consistent with the AACP. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the chazacter of existing land uses in the surrounding azea. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The chazacter of the existing land uses in the area is chazacterized with a variety of uses-residential, commercial, lodge and office. The proposed PUD is consistent with this chazacter of mixed land uses. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding azea. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES This proposal should not have an adverse impact on the future development of the surrounding area. The newly created pedestrian street is consistent with the present and future uses for the surrounding azea. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments aze available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES G:\cityVason\JL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc The expansion of overall floor azea is exempt from GMQS, in accordance with Section 26.470.070.A.7. of the Code. The proposal will not increase net leasable square footage or the number of lodge. units. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. The proposed dimensional requirements are listed below: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding azea. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural chazacteristics of the property and surrounding azea such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landfonns. d) Existing and proposed man-made chazacteristics of the property and the surrounding azea such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, pazking, and historical resources. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES The structure has existed in this location for almost forty yeazs and is located in an area of mixed uses. Pedestrian circulation will be improved by this development. The newly accessible retail on the south side of the existing building will be compatible with the surrounding land uses and natural and man-made characteristics with the proposed PUD. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding azea. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? ~ YES The proposed dimensional requirements seek to establish the existing dimensions as the legal standards for the property for an increase in floor area due to development activities of the neighboring property. The establishment of the PUD is to allow for a nonconformity created by the lowering of Dean Street. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cazs used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common pazking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. G:\cityVason\JL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The existing number of off-street parking spaces will not be affected by this development. The existing pedestrian access, proximity to the bus station and proximity to the city center are consistent provide adequate alternatives for the development. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There aze not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES According to the review by the Development Review Committee, there exists adequate infrastructure capabilities to the structure. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES There aze no natural hazards or critical site features impacted with the proposal. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: G:\city\JasonUL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific azea plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical chazacteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattem, land uses, and chazacteristics. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE The density is not proposed to be increased. This standard is not applicable because no new dwelling units or commercial space aze proposed. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features on the site which aze unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town aze preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NO The pedestrian experience around the North of Nell building is inconsistent and uninviting; however the building is built lot line to lot line allowing little in the way of pubic spaces. The Dean Street improvements will affect the building to enhance the character for the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD, those changes aze part of another PUD, The Residences at Little Nell. The applicant is proposing to change the eave line of the property. The visual impact of the proposed straight eave will elongate the perceived length of the building and will eliminate the specific reference to the past. The existing eave has been noted as a significant characteristic of the existing building by historic preservation staff. With the removal of the saw tooth eave, staff finds that this criterion will not been met. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES There is only one structure on the site, so clustering has already been achieved. G:\cityUasonUL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc 3. Structures aze appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehiculaz and pedestrian movement. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The structure is oriented pazallel to the public street. The proposal will increase pedestrian movement and provide improved visual interest on the Dean Street elevation. 4. Buildings and access ways aze appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Fire and emergency service vehicle access is adequate to serve their needs. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. STAFF FINDING: I DOES IT COMPLY? YES/NO There aze sidewalks along the south, east and west sides of the property providing adequate pedestrian access, but there is a lack of handicap access on the South or West elevations. The structure was approved and constructed at a time when handicap access was not a requirement. To make the newly created retail on the Southwest corner handicap accessible an elevator would be required at the interior lobby of the West 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Site drainage appeazs to be accommodated properly and does not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings aze appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NOT APPLICABLE D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen azea climate. G:\cityVasonUL-Cases\JL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, aze preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The neighboring development is responsible for the landscaping associated with the lowering of Dean Street. The proposed development will provide adequate landscaping. E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting ef£cient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed azchitecture of the property, represent a chazacter suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of neazby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solaz access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less- intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? NO G:\cityVasonVL-CasesVL-CityCouncil\Notth ofNell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc Although the design of the building is outdated, there are many condominium and lodge structures of the same era in Aspen that all contribute to the local architectural chaaacter and are appropriate for the environment in which they are located. The visual interest of the saw-tooth roof adds to the character of the building, seeking to reduce the perceived I length of the eave. It is staffs opinion that the saw-tooth eave of the flat roof seeks to emulate a chalet style gable. The proposed straight line cut to the eave will increase the perceived mass and the addition of applied painted gutter seam brackets will not break up the building vertically. It is Staff's opinion that the request to demolish the saw-tooth roofline due to gutter pricing savings is not appropriate and is inconsistent with goals of the AACP as it relates to "Design Quality". In addition to building's architectural character, the history of the project is significant as it relates to the initiation of Aspen's growth management system. The new height of the building (proposed) is of concern, as it seeks to maximize the overall height, increasing to 42'. The height is reached by applied architectural arches that have additional metal ornaments, which could vary by several inches in detail and construction. In addition, existing roof vents and chimney construction aze not included in the drawings, but site examination finds the height of the elements to be questionable. It is Staff s opinion that the new arches do not wan•ant an increase in height and Staff is requesting that the existing saw-tooth roof retnain. The lower saw-tooth eave does add to the architectural character at the pedestrian level, which Staff finds to be in compliance with the site design criterion; "existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town aze preserved". Staff has concerns about the vertical stucco `columns' and base materials. The columns framing the primary entry do not connect with the base and are stacked vertically on sidelight windows adjacent to the door. The base material only covers approximately two (2) feet of the ground level off of grade. It is Staff s opinion that the base material For the entire height of the ground level would be more consistent. Relating specific details, color and palette to the surrounding structures is not a requirement for the PUD. It is Staffs opinion that the proposed colors (teal, purple and terracotta) seek to match the Little Nell and Gondola Plaza buildings which will increase the perception of a `base village' which is inconsistent with the existing eclectic and diverse chaaacter. Section 26.412.030 Applicability, which applies to all commercial, lodging, and mixed use development with a commercial component, states that development which impacts the exterior of the building is subject to the Commercial Design Standards. Future exterior design changes will be subject to the Design Standards in place at the time of that application. Staff finds that the proposal does not address the pedestrian experience and Staff finds that this criterion has not been met. G:\cityVason\JL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_]P.doc F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glaze or hazazdous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? ~ YES Staff has not yet reviewed the outdoor lighting for the building. Consequently, a condition of approval has been added requiring inspection of the lighting prior to sign off on any building permit and the bringing of any non-compliant lighting into G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the chazacter of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shazed facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES Dean Street improvements will affect the building to enhance the chazacter for the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: G:\cityVasonUL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements aze provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES This development does not propose additional impacts to the City's infrastructure capabilities. I. Access and Circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other azea dedicated to public or private use. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The structure has direct access from a public streets. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and pazking an•angement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads aze proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES No additional traffic congestion is created by this development. J. Phasing of Development Plan. The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical azeas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable G:\ci~yVasonVL-CasesUL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. STAFF FINDING: DOES IT COMPLY? YES The establishment of the floor azea will coincide with the lowering of Dean Street. G:\cityUasonUL-Cases\JL-CityCouncil\North of Nell\NON.10-22-2nd.Reading.CC\Review Criteria_JP.doc ~x~ie~~ ~ CITY OF ASPEN, STATE OF COLORADO Administrative Appeal Hearing APPEAL PURSUANT TO ORAINANCE No. I9, SERIES OF 2006 In the Matter o£ the Appeal of ) NORTH OF HELL CONDOMINIUM ) ASSOCL4TION ) And ) TIIE CITY OF ASPEN ) DICTERMINATION OF' ADMIIVIS'f W1,TIVE HEARING OFFICER The following is the determination of Administrative Bearing Officer Timothy E. Whitsin with respect to the appoal of North of Nell Condomiioium Association ("North of Ne11") pursuant to the terms of The City of Aspen Ordinance No. 19, Series of 2006 ("Ordinance 19'~ and regarding the applicatiozt of the moratorium established by Ordinance 19 to the development plans for his property located at SSS E. Durant Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. Procedutral Background Ordinance 19 was finally adopted by the Aspen City Council to become imtnediately effective pursuant to its declaration of emergency on Apri125, 2006. That Ordinance established e moratorium of six months op the submission of new land use applications and upon the issuance of new Building Permits within certain designated none districts, including the Commercial Lodge ("`CL's lone District in which the North ofNell is located. Ordinance 19 further incorporated a process for any property owner to lodge an appeal with the City' as to the applicability of the moratorium to his property or development plans. All said appeals, under Section 5 of Ordinance ] 9, are to be heard by a Rearing Offrcer appointed by the City Manager. Cily Manager Sleve Barwick has appointed the undersigned Hearing Officer to hear and determine appeals pursuant to Ordinance l9. While Ordinance 19 as originally adopted incorporated asix-month, moratorium, the Aspen City Council on September 23, 2006; enacted an extension of that moratorittzn through February of 2007. The North ofNell, represenu the ownership of the property located at 555 E. Durant Avenue, consisting of approximately 40 residential condominiums, ] 7 commercial condominiums and appurtenant parking and common amenities. It approached the Aspeu Community Development Department with a plan to undertake certain cosmetic renovations to the South side of the farst floor of the North of Nell building. It was rejected based upon the moratorium on permit applications undez Ordinance 19. North of Nell has requested relief from the moratorium, claiming financial hardship undez Section S.B of the Ordinance. That application for relief was accepted by the Community Development Dopamnent and art appeal hearing was scheduled by mutual agreement on September 29, 2006, in Aspen, Colorado. Appellant North ofNeU was represented by General Manager Joe Raczak and architect Randy Wedum, Also encoding the hearing to provide information as to the proposed construction project by dte Residences at little Nell was John Smpa. The City of Aspen was represented by Senior Planner James Lindt. Factual Background The Nordr of Nell has been in existence and occupied as a multiple use residential/commeroial cotxiominium complex since 1969. Jt is further noted that the North of Nell is considered nonconforming as it currently exceeds the useable FAR under the Commercial Core zone distrlot regulations on the property on which it is located. Pot this reason, any increase In calculated FAR for the North of Ne11 is prohibited under the Aspen Municipal Code without rite grant of permission from the City for the increase in nonconformity. Tito development is adjacent, on its South side, to Dean Street, where the historic grade of that street left a portion of ibe North of Neil's fast floor below street level. This condition has in the past led to a calculation under the PAR regulations which reduced the actual foot area calculation for the first floor of the NoNt of Nell under the Code, due to its subgrade condition. An turrelated development on property across Dean Street from the North of Nell has resultt:d in an agreement with the City that the grade of peen Street will be lowered approximately tluee (3) fcet in connection with the commencement of constructor of that project, which is scheduled to commence by April of 2007 (referred to hereinafter as "the Dean Street Project'. As a result, all of the first floor of rite North ofNell building will subsequently be at grade on Dean Street Corresponding with that change, the PAR calculation for the'Nordr of Nell will ebenge since it will then be entirely at or above grade, resulting in an increase in calculated FAR. This increase in PAR results solely by virtue of dre calculation under the Code as a result of the grade change in Dean Street and despite the fact that there will be no change whatsoever in the developed and occupied space within the North of Nell. North of Neil has determined that it would like to undertake a cosmetic renovation or reconstntction of the first floor exterior wall an the South side.of its stmcture in connection with the change of grade oCDean Street, which will expose a portion of drat wall that was previously subgrade and which, fez that reason, has never been provided any exterior finish. North of Nell wishes to coordinate this project with the consuuction on Dean Stroat, however, it may not obtain a building permit for this construction without addressing the calculated increase in its uoncotrfottxdrrg PAR and obtaining an approval for that increase from the City. That application and approval are, in turn, prohibited by the moratorium of Ordinance 19. North of Nall has no control over the timing and scheduling of Ute Dean Street project. This project has been approved and is already scheduled for conswction early in 2007.1f North of Nell is not pettnitted, due to the moratorium, to undertake its proposed r~nsotead of a sine lee titue, then there will be several consequences. First, and most importantly, 8 construction project on Dean Street requiring closure of a portion of that street, traffic control and the attendant costs and inconvenience, there will be two such projects. This further results in exponentially increased construction costs for North of Nell in its own renovation project. Instead of having the oppomrEtity to utilize the same contractors to undertake its renovation at the same time as the Dean Street project, it will he forced to re-mobilize those contractors or others at a later date, thus losing considerable economies of scale and duplicating mobilization costs. Even worse, the North of Nell contractors would end up needing [o tear out some of the construction completed in the Dean Street Project in order to complete its work, at considerable inconvenience and additional cost. The testimony from Mssrs. Wedum and Satpa at the hearing indicated that the result would be to increase the North of Nell's project cost from approxtmafely $250,OOO.p0 to as muoh as 5600,000.00. This tes[lmottyy was suppotted by correspondence introduced by North of Nall from l~lr. Jeffery W. Hanson, Operations Manager of Swinerton Builders. Swinerton is the general contractor for the Dean Stxeet Project. Mr. Hanson's correspondence confirmed that costs would be greatly increased for North of Nell if it is not permitted to undertake irs project along with the Dean Street Project. It is noted [ltat the City did not dispute any of the evidence presented as to the substantial cost impact of forcing North of Nell to undertake its project after, rather than concurrent with, the Dean Street Project and at the hearing conceded that this situation constitutes a financial hardship. Aeternalnation Having considered the presentation of each of the patties at the hearing and the requirements of Ordinaace 19, the hearing officer determines es follows: 1. 'fhcre was considerable testimony and written documentation submitted supporting the position of North of Nell that the application of the moratorium, which would result inevitably in the delay of its construction project to follow the Dean Street Project instead of concurrent with it, would work a severe economic hardship upon North of Nall. It is determined that these increased costs do constitute uoroasonable financial hardship constituting unrecoverable financial loss to appellant Notth of Nell. 'these costs and losses consulate increased project costs resulting from the application of the moratorium, which are separate from and independent of the base value of the property, IRS depreciation rules, or rho reaidual.value of the property. 2. The costs and losses that would be suffered by Notth ofNell aze unique to its particular property and circumscattces, such that its rights are being substantially deprived by the application of the moratorium. 3, 3. It is fiuthtr noted chat this is nor the sort of development activity which Ordinance 19 was intended to control, in that: e. The project involves the development of no new occupied space whatsoever, but is solely an exeerios renovation to an existing, occupied structure; anal b. The application of the moratorium in this instance will result in an increase rather Than a decrease in construction activity on Dean Street, as it will prevent the merging of the Dean Street and North of Nell projects and prolong the disruption of vehicular and pedestrian use on Dean Street. Based upon the foregoing it is the determination of the Hearing Officer thaz iflQorth of Neff is not permitted tine to the application of the moratorium to make application to the City for an allowance of its increased FAIL, it will suffer substantial, financial hardship end substantial unzecgverable Bnancial loss, the circumstances of which loss are unique to North of Nell. Therefore It is the determination of this Hearing Offtcer that North of NeII should be and is exempted from the application of the moratorium pursuant'to Section S.B. of Ordinance 19, Series of 2006 for the purposes of said application and for any building permit application that may result therefrom. Dated: October 2, 2006 EXHIBIT C DRC MINUTES DRC COMMENTS: Engineering Department: 2. 3. Building Department Adam: -Timeline for this summer? -Improvements before/after? -Work starts April 18 w/ or w/o North of Nell. -Modify drawings prior to April 18 -Dean St. improvements must happen at once Triscia: -Tie storm pipe with Dean Street -3 sides of roof will drain into storm pipe, fees? -Drainage, changing pattern needs to be addressed -Steven Speazs from Design Workshop for site plan Denis: -Construction management plan? -Provide required accessible routes. -needs to be accessible a114 sides -Ramps to be IBC compliant -Galena Street access required. -Ramp for access to South storefronts -RLN permit is for site plan Aspen Sanitation District Tom: -Moving main sewer line for both buildings -Need to know process for abandoning line -Joe R. to talk with ACSD -Secondary Service? -Agreement is not the same? concerns from Tom. 4. Zonin Todd: -New Plat required: Need correct number of units. -Current plat shows 12 units (not 14) for Comm. -38 units or 42 for residential, amend plat? -Clazification/legal advice on split units -Plat for downstairs (comm.) and upper (resident.) -Fees: TDM .46 per sgft./Pazks 4.10 per net increase -Lighting Plan must comply 5. Fire Ed: -Maintain width for apparatus (Design Workshop) -Complies with 20'/16' clear width 6. Parks Brian: -Trimming/pruning work must be with city contractor, after consulting with forester. -The applicant pays for work to trees -Consult for Galena/Durant- need to consult prior to construction -Active irrigation for trees -Irrigation to be installed w/ sidewalks -Existing snowmelt will remain (replaced w/ new) -Evaluating existing trees (hazardous conditions) ~xNl8l7 ~ GALENA STREET NEW STORMWATER FLOW LINE WITH DRAIN INLETS PROPOSED STAIRCASE PIANIER WALL (TYPj 16.5' WIDE STAIRCASE LIMIT OF CHANGE FROM EXISTING DEAI AVENUE PER RLN PU D.j NEW RETAIL ENTRANCES PER NORTH OF NELLCONCEPT IIYP) 165' WIDE STAIRCASE >RTH OF NELL BUILDING E :34.84 1G.5' WIDE STAIRCASE 8'-0' WIDE PATHWAY (MATERIALS TBO) SIDEWALK WITH STAIRS I6T WIDEI PROVIWNO ACCESS F0.0M GONDIXA PLAZAAND EAST DEPN AVENUE DESIGNWORK.4i0P lzo Fsn ntim s1~1 Aspen. CA 81611 970925.8354 tD,eL,an A^/venue/North of Nell Interface ®NDRTH t (1~blt Ti Nam $mM ~x~t16 it ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 15, 2007 COMMENTS .............................................................................................................2 DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ................................................2 NORTH OF NELL PUD ...........................................................................................2 1 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 15, 2007 Ruth opened the regular Planning & Zoning meeting in the Sister Cities Meeting Room. Commissioners John Rowland, David Guthrie, Dylan Johns, LJ Erspamer, and Ruth Kruger were present. Brian Speck and Steve Skadron were excused. Staff in attendance: Joyce Allgaier, Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Ruth Kruger thanked City Council for the support of upholding the 1001 Ute decision. Kruger suggested postponing the minutes until the next meeting and breaking the minutes into 3 sets at a time. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None stated. PUBLIC HEARING: NORTH OF NELL PUD Ruth Kruger opened the public hearing North of Nell PUD. Notice was provided. Kruger asked why this came through the P&Z and Council and not just an administrative decision. Jessica Garrow responded that a PUD was needed as well as P&Z and Council approval. Jason Lasser explained that Dean Street was being lowered with a pedestrian access plan; there was no increase to the building but the hearing officer, Tim Whitsitt, stated the grade change was from the construction on Dean Street. Staff and the hearing officer determined the construction activity of fixing the southern fagade would be exempted because of the existing construction on Dean Street. Lasser distributed a new Resolution #19 with changes in the conditions; the word applicable was added to # 1; the applicant would provide graphic calculations; the installation of an elevator to comply with ADA requirements; the height of the building to be calculated; lighting plan added prior to recording the plat. This project would be a nice addition to Dean Street. Joyce Allgaier stated that the applicant's planner, Glenn Horn, presented new information, which were some architectural changes to the building, such as changes to the balcony railings, an additional cornice at the rooftop, removal of the saw tooth edge and building up of the vertical members of the outside of the building. Allgaier said that for these architectural exterior changes could be accomplished by Community Development administratively and were not subject to the moratorium and staff would like to see the entire PUD package come as one piece to P&Z. 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 15, 2007 Jim True said that staff could address the architectural aspects. True stated that P&Z had the discretion to consider everything tonight, or hear only the PUD, or continue the whole hearing. Jason Lasser said that the architectural drawings did not reflect the new changes. Glenn Horn said that Randy Wedum was the architect, Joe Raczak was the manager of the North of Nell and Steve Spears was from The Residences at Little Nell. Horn noted that this project went through 3 City Planners. The North of Nell was built in 1969 and represents the architecture of that era. Horn stated that part of the PUD was to include amake-over for the building, cosmetic face-lift and submitted architectural plans. Horn said that they could present the architectural plans and staff could have time to review those plans and this could come back with answers to the questions. Joe Raczak said that they were told this could be a cosmetic improvement done administratively with Community Development and the Dean Avenue improvements made the North of Nell go through a major process. Steve Spears said that the Residences were to construct the entire Dean Avenue right-of--way from Galena to the Gondola Plaza and maintain through perpetuity. Spears said part of the approval of the Residences was to redesign and re-engineer Dean Street to make it the best street in Aspen with the richest pavers. Dean Avenue was lowered, which exposed the North of Nell blank wall. Randy Wedum utilized drawings to illustrate the architectural changes to the fapade to break up the block building with vertical columns, railings and a stone base using the red base stone. There were stairs up to Dean Street. Horn said the basic PUD was simple; there was no increase in net leaseable. Guthrie stated this retail/commercial space would not be affordable "mom and pop" space but rather high end retail. Kruger noted that the North of Nell was forced to redo the space. Guthrie said that it was definitely a terrible space prior to the remodel. Lasser stated from the hearing officer report "solely by virtue of the calculation under the code as a result in the grade change in Dean Street and despite the fact that there will be no change what so ever in the developed occupied space change within the North of Nell". 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Mav 15, 2007 LJ Erspamer asked where the elevator was being added. Wedum replied the lib was where Stephen Kalein was located on the west side; there were 2 steps down from Galena. Lasser explained this request for a lift came from the DRC (Development Review Committee). No public comments. Dylan Johns said that exterior renovation would enhance the area of town. Johns requested front and side elevations to illustrate the building as an element itself. John Rowland said that vitality for Dean Street would be created and the new direction for architecture was good. LJ Erspamer echoed John and Dylan's thoughts. David Guthrie said that this was an improvement. Ruth Kruger congratulated the applicant for the improvements with the number of owners to bring the project to this point. MOTION: Dylan Johns move to continue the public hearing for the North of Nell to June 5`"; seconded by.7ohn Rowland. All in favor, approved. MOTION: LJErspamer moved to adjourn the meeting; seconded by David Guthrie. All in favor, approved. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 4 ~X~~$i1' _~-- RESOLUTION N0. 19, (SERIES OF 2007) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMNIISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO LEGALIZE THE EXISTING NON- CONFORMING DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, FOR THE NORTH OF NELL CONDOMINIUMS, 555 EAST DURANT STREET, LOTS A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H AND I, BLOCK 97, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2 73 7-182-49 051 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the North of Nell Condominium Association (Applicant), requesting approval of a Planned Unit Development (as described in attached Exhibit A); and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Parking, City Engineering, Building, and Parks, as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral comments, and the applicable Land Use Code standards, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the Planned Unit Development for the North of Nell Condominiums; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standazds and that the approvals of the development proposal are consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommends City Council approve the Planned Unit Development and Amendment to the Official Zone District Map, by a vote of three to two (3 - 2); and, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMNIISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THE 17th DAY OF JULY 2007, THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standazds set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, North of Nell Condominiums, parcel identification of 2737-182-49051, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the proposed Planned Unit Development, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to final approval, the applicant will provide a PUD plat that reflects actual floor area and ratio as calculated according to the Aspen Land Use Code. 2. A PUD Agreement and Amended PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(0). 3. Prior to issuance of any building permit for any improvement to the building, the applicant shall submit building elevations and design details showing the design of all future balcony enclosures as approved by the Sagewood Condominium Association. The design shall be approved by the Community Development Director. Building permit applications shall conform to the approved design. 4. The applicant shall file a Notice of P[JD in the Clerk and Recorders office of Pitkin County subsequent to receipt of a development order, or prior to issuance of a building permit. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to this application, whether in public hearings or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, aze hereby incorporated in such plan approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not 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 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a sepazate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMIVQSSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AT ITS REGULAR MEETING ON THIS 17~ DAY OF JULY, 2007. APPROVED AS TO FORM: ~~J -7 c - J Worcester, City Attorney ATTEST: ~g-_ 7 ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk PL AND ZONING COMMI IO ~an EXISTING FLOOR AREA ANALYSIS IN SQUARE FEET TOTAL FLOOR AREA 27'$$6 Lot Area Total Floor Area $2,306 Total F. A. R. 2.9: 1 Total Permitted F.A.R. 3:1 COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA Lot Area 27'$$6 Commercial Floor Area 21,154 Commercial F.A.R. .76:1 Permitted Commercial F.A.R. 1:1 RESIDENTIAL FL OOR AREA Lot Area 27,$56 Residential Floor Area 60,762 Residential F.A.R. 2.17:1 Permitted Residential F.A.R. .5: 1 61.~N~ ~{a(~-N G~l,~s PROPOSED FLOOR AREA ANALYSES IN SQUA~tE FEET TOTAL FLOOR AREA Lot Area 27,886 Total Floor Area 83,739 Total F. A. R. 3: 1 Total Permitted F.A.R. 3:1 COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA Lot Area 27,886 Commercfal Floor Area 22,924 Commercial F.A.R. •82:1 Permftted Commercial F.A.R. 1:1 RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA Lot Area 27,886 Residential Floor Area 60,815 Residential F.A.R 2.18:1 Permitted Residential F.A.R. .5: 1 v~uf MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Planner ~~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director V~UVv' DATE OF MEMO: October 12, 2007 MEETING DATE: October 22, 2007 RE; Smuggler Racquet Club Conceptual PUD, Resolution 53, Series 2007 Staff requests City Council continue the Smuggler Conceptual PUD Public Hearing to January 14, 2008 due to the large number of agenda items currently scheduled For October 22, 2007. Staff has worked with the Applicant to find a mutually agreed upon continuation date for the Public Hearing, but the Applicant does not support this date and requests that city Council consider an earlier continuance date. Staff requests the January 14, 2008 continuance date because of the other cases currently scheduled for Council's November and December meetings (Cooper Street Pier and Wienerstube on November 12, Lift 1 Lodge and TDR establishment on November 16, and Lift 1 Lodge and Christ Episcopal Church on December 10). The Staff memo, findings, and information requested by City Council at first readin~ will be provided as part of the January 14, 2008 packet. Staff will be at the October 22" meeting to answer any questions related to this continuation. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to continue the Public Hearing for Resolution No. 53, Series of 2007, approving a Conceptual PUD for the Smuggler Racquet Club, to January 14, 2008." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Vl1G MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council ~~,~(~~ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~/Y1~ r r FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Code Amendment, Municipal Code Section 26.415, Development Involving The Aspen Inventory Of Historic Landmazk Sites And Structures Or Development In An "H," Historic Overlay District. First Reading of Ordinance No.~'~ Series of 2007 Public Hearing scheduled for November 12, 2007. DATE: October 22, 2007 BACKGROUND: On September 10, 2007, City Council directed Community Development Staff to bring forward amendments to Ordinance #30, Series of 2007. Ordinance #30 was adopted in July and addresses the identification and protection of potential historic resources. On October 9, 2007, Ordinance No. 45 was adopted by City Council upon first reading. Staff indicated that numerous changes would likely occur to the ordinance in response to Council direction and in response to suggestions made by citizens. Staff indicated that the amendments would be reviewed with Council at second reading. Upon reviewing the changes, the City Attorney has opined that the scope of the changes require "starting over" with first reading and publishing of the proposed ordinance. Staff is therefore withdrawing Ordinance 45 and is proposing Ordinance ~, Series of 2007, be adopted upon first reading with second reading scheduled for November 12, 2007. "OPTIONS:" The proposed ordinance contains many changes that Council will need to discuss. A few of these changes represent significant policy choices and staff has provided "options" for Council's consideration. Staff has highlighted these options with the text ****Option in the body of the proposed ordinance. SUMMARY: The proposed amendments entail narrowing the applicability of the Ordinance from all properties over 30 years of age to a specific list researched by staff. The City is not to LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 1 add any more sites to the list (unless initiated by the property owner) for a period of 10 years. Other changes requested by Council include the requirement that designation without owner consent needs a "super-majority vote" in order to establish a recommendation of approval by HPC and final determination of approval by City Council. Council expressed willingness to formally consider the possibility that designation would create an economic hazdship for the property owner. HPC supported the concept of super-majority as part of their own review process, but were informed the City Attorney's Office has recently determined that asuper-majority requirement at City Council conflicts with the Charter and will not be possible without a public vote. As a result, that concept has been struck from the code amendment. HPC was in favor of the idea of limiting the applicability of Ordinance 30 to a list, and wire very eager to see new incentives and other program improvements that create a more proactive, positive atmosphere azound the preservation program. With regazd to the evaluation of the economic impact of historic designation, HPC did not want to include this in their review criteria, believing it to be an issue for City Council. P&Z also supported the code amendments, with similaz concerns about the importance of incentives and a cleaz and fair process. The code amendments have moved forwazd as quickly as is reasonable. HPC discussed this matter on September 26`h and P&Z on October 2nd. Council's first reading was pre- noticed to permit the public hearing to be scheduled sooner than is typical. Staff is seeking Council's direction on the proposed code amendments. REVIEW PROCESS: According to Section 26.370.020, in order to amend the Code, there must be a public hearing and recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, and a public heazing and affirmative vote by City Council. The review criteria for code amendments are located at Section 26.310.040 and aze addressed by Staff in Exhibit A to this memo. LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS: Following is a summary of the proposed amendments, organized by code section. The attached ordinance contains the actual text being proposed. 26.415.025 Identification of Potential Historic Resources Staff comment: This section has been given a new number in order to locate it in a more logical position within the historic preservation ordinance. The preservation ordinance was intended to read in a manner that progresses through a discussion of the City's goals, criteria for the designation of historic properties, effects of designation, benefits, and penalties for unapproved work. A. Purpose Staff comment: This section describes the intent of the Identification of Potential Historic Resources Section. B. List of Potential Historic Resources. Staff comment: This section defines the term List of Potential Historic Resources which has been referred to as the "List." In previous incaznations of the regulations, "Exhibit A" was used to identify the List. C. Amendments to the List of Potential Historic Resources. Staff comment: This section has been re-written to state that no properties will be added to the List of Potential Historic Resources for 10 years, unless the owner of a property which has not been included volunteers for designation. The list will be updated from time to time as properties aze removed either because they are determined to lack historic significance, are destroyed by an Act of God, or aze designated. D. Applicability and Exemptions: Staff comment: This section establishes a formal name for the list of properties affected by the Ordinance, which will be referred to as the List of Potential Historic Resources. In addition, the section has been amended to be more flexible about the type of work that can be undertaken on a listed property without delaying building permits or triggering designation review. Furthermore, it has been clazified that emergency repairs consistent with the International Building Code will be allowed to proceed. E. Procedure to Remove a Property from the List of Potential Historic Resources or to Pursue Designation. LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 3 Staff comment: This section states that the City will not take action to initiate designation of any property on the List of Potential Historic Resources until the owner asks to "call the question." They may do so at any time, regazdless of whether or not any development is planned. The review begins with an in-depth evaluation by the Community Development Director, as was the case with Ordinance #30, Series of 2007. At Council's request, staff has removed the previously existing language which stated that a building would be assumed to be at least 30 years old if no documentation to the contrary could be located. Please note that at the end of the Ordinance, a new section has been added; Section 6, which raises the possibility that HPC would be empowered to make the determination as to whether or not any properties should be removed from the List of Potential Historic Resources in the short term. This topic will be discussed later in the memo. 1. Staff comment: This section is amended in order to be more cleaz and use language consistent with the rest of the preservation ordinance. It addresses the process by which the Community Development Director will make an initial determination as to whether or not a property should remain on the List of Potential Historic Resources. In addition it clarifies that, if the Community Development Director determines a property is not significant, HPC and Council will be afforded an opportunity to object and keep the site on the List. The decision to drop the property will be valid for 10 yeazs, rather than 5 years, as written in Ordinance #30. 2. Staff comment: If the Community Development Director determines that a property should be reviewed for designation, this section does not require the process move directly into a designation hearing. This is a significant change from Ordinance 30 which required the Community Development Director to pursue designation immediately upon a finding that the property appeared to be significant. The new language in this section gives the property owner control over the timeframe for when designation review will proceed. A designation application will not be initiated until the owner provides a written request to do so. F. Procedure to Confirm a Property is not Included on the List of Potential Historic Resources. Staff comment: This section provides a process for property owners who are not on the "List" to confirm such with a letter from the Community Development Department. G. Procedure to Pursue Designation LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 4 Staff comment: This section describes the process by which a property owner who is on the "List" can request initiation of the designation process. Significant in this section is the required "authorization" from the property owner. H. Penalties. Staff comment: New language is added in this section to clarify that not only aze there penalties for unapproved work on properties on the List of Potential Historic Resources,. but the property owner is also prohibited from undertaking "Demolition by Neglect." There aze certain kinds of work that will be allowed to proceed on these properties (see Section 26.415.025.A) and, so long as the work is completed in conformance with approvals, the penalties mentioned in this section will not be applied. 26.415.030 Designation of historic properties. Staff comment: No amendments aze proposed here. A. Establishment of the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Staff comment: No amendments are proposed here. B. Criteria. Staff comment: No amendments are proposed here. 1. Staff comment: No amendments are proposed here. 2. Staff comment: It is proposed that a property that is associated with the 20`" century must meet two, rather than one of the three existing designation criteria. This is intended to raise the standazds for designation of younger buildings. 3. Additionally, this section is amended to make the resolution of economic impacts a designation criteria, in those cases when the property owner requests Council address the issue. This is done to clazify that, while in some cases Council may find that a property has historic significance, if the economic impacts cannot be satisfactorily mitigated, the property will not be designated. This is an Option for Council to consider 4. Staff comment: No amendments are proposed here. LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 5 5. Staff comment: At Council's request, staff has removed the previously existing language which stated that a building would be assumed to be at least 30 years old if no documentation to the contrary could be located. In addition to the records of the Building Department, other records, such as Assessor's Office information or bona fide documents submitted by the property owner will be used in determining the age of a property. 6. Staff comment: In the past, HPC has developed and adopted the context papers, scoring sheets, and other designation tools. City Council has been asked to informally endorse the documents. This section is amended to require Council review this information at a public hearing. At a future date, Community Development intends to amend Council's "Powers and Duties," to state that Council, as well as HPC, must formally adopt all documents used in the process of making designation decisions. C. Authority Staff comment: This is a new section which describes "who can do what." Most sections of the Land Use Code include an authority section. Notable is the lack of authority for Council or HPC to initiate designation. This is a substantial change from the previous code. Community Development may only initiate designation if the property owner has provided "authorization." D. Application. Staff comment: No amendments are proposed here. 1. Staff comment: An application for designation must now include a letter from the property owner indicating authorization to proceed and indicating their consent to or objection to the designation. 2. Staff comment: No amendments aze proposed here. 3. Staff comment: No amendments aze proposed here. 4. Staff comment: No amendments aze proposed here. 5. Staff comment: No amendments are proposed here. 6. Staff comment: This section is references the Economic Impact Section. The decision on which option to pursue for economic impacts may effect this section. E. Review, public hearings and notice. LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 6 Staff comment: Previous language about a broad database of construction dates for all properties in the City has been struck. This is unnecessary since this ordinance limits the matter of Potential Historic Resources to a defined list. 1. Staff comment: New language is added emphasizing that Community Development will work with the needs of the property owner in scheduling all designation heazings. 2. Staff comment: This section now includes a mailing of the complete application to the property owner if the designation application is developed by the City. 3. Staff comment: Ordinance #30 proposed that the City provide the affected property owner notice of designation heazings 30 days, rather than the standard 15 days before hearings. This has been struck in order to be consistent with the other land use review processes. In addition, the code is being substantially re-written to allow the property owner to participate in the scheduling of all heazings, making lengthier notice periods unnecessary. 4. Staff comment: This new section now describes the process for staff making a recommendation. The language has been in the code, but not as a stand alone section. 5. Staff comment: This section states that, in order to recommend approval of a designation application, a majority, plus one of the members present at the HPC heazing must vote "yes." This is the "super-majority concept." Any less "yes" votes shall be considered a recommendation of denial. Historically HPC's recommendation has been forwazded to City Council. A new option is presented that would terminate the landmazk review if HPC did not recommend approval. A brief reading of HPC's opinion on this was that they did not support the concept, but the Citizen's group believes it is important to "cut off' designation review if the City's most expert board does not view the property as being important. 6. Staff comment: When a property proceeds to City Council for landmark review, this section is amended to clazify that public comment is not limited to testimony as to whether or not the property meets the designation criteria. 7. Staff comment: If City Council fails to designate a property, it cannot be reconsidered for a period of 10 yeazs, rather than 5 yeazs, or until the List of Potential Historic Resources is revised, whichever comes later. 8. Staff comment: This section has been developed to create a process for review of Economic Impact. The three Options in this area provide for a range of considering "Economic Hardship" or "Economic Impact." LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 7 Option 1 requires Council to consider if a "taking" will occur upon designation. The standard relies on the interpretation of the Courts for "takings." Options 2 and 3 represent two options for considering any impact short of a taking. Under Option 2, Council is required to take the impacts into account and provide mitigation that they deem to be reasonable. Under Option 3, Council must offset the full value of the documented economic impact. In all options, it is up to the property owner to choose whether or not to present economic information. Option 2 and 3 rely upon the formation, powers and duties of an Economic Impact Review Panel. Council may choose whether or not to compensate the members of this panel. Staff has concerns over the viability of finding volunteers to take on this time consuming role. Options 2 and 3 also suggest an agreement between the City and the property owner be developed that addresses the potential failure to achieve certain entitlements assumed in the economic impact determination. In any case, the property owner could stall the designation proceedings to pursue and secure benefits. An issue raised by Citizen's Group is the notion that Council should reimburse a property owner for the costs of an Economic Impact Review application, whether or not the property is designated. There is an option included in Section 8 of the Ordinance. Staff seeks Council direction on this idea. Sections 4-10 of Ordinance # ,Series of 2007 Staff has added several sections that propose additional commitments related to the operation of the proposed Ordinance. Many of these aze highlighted as Options for Council to consider. 4. All property owners on the List of Potential Historic Resources will be sent a copy of the Ordinance by registered mail, within 10 days of adoption. 5. Certificates of "No Historic Significance" issued through Ordinance #30, Series of 2007 will still be valid but may be "updated" to the 10-yeaz certificates contemplated in this ordinance. 6. The Citizen's Group has suggested that HPC review the List of Potential Historic Resources and be allowed to remove properties. 7. City Council may want to discuss inserting a "qualifier" in the existing score sheets used for analyzing properties. Adding points for owner consent and/or subtracting points for owner objection is one method or "raising the baz" prior to a comprehensive review of the system. LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 8 8. The Citizen's Group has suggested the costs to a property owner going through the designation process should be reimbursed by the City. 9. This section contemplates the establishment of a policy task force to make further improvements to the historic preservation program. 10. This section addresses the availability of various documents and commits to including these documents on the web as soon as practical. Amendments to the List of Potential Historic Resources Staff has identified two errors on the List of Potential Historic Resources. Within the legal description of the individual lots that comprise the Aspen Alps, staff inadvertently included an adjacent condominium; Ajax Condos. The pazcel has been removed from the list attached to this Ordinance. In addition, the street address for the Yellow Brick school was listed as 215 S. Garmisch instead of 215 N. Garmisch. The correction has been made. This is a City owned property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code complies with the applicable review criteria and should be approved. Staff would like to receive direction on the proposed amendments, in particular on the "Options" that have been presented. This will assist staff in refining the proposal for second reading. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to~ Ordinance No. `~, Series of 2007, upon first reading. Attachments: Ordinance No.~, Series of 2007 Exhibit A: Amendments to the Land Use Code -Staff Findings Exhibit B: October 16, 2007, letter from David Myler regazding the Holland House. LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT PAGE 9 . t~'~ Y 4, . ORDINANCE N0. (Series of 200'n AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING CHAPTER 26.415 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING THE ASPEN INVENTORY OF HISTORIC LANDMARK SITES AND STRUCTURES OR DEVELOPMENT IN AN "H," HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT. WHEREAS, in light of the on-going demolition of buildings, structures or objects that may have historical significance for the City of Aspen, the City Council adopted an Emergency Ordinance, Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2007, on July 10, 2007. The Ordinance amended Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, specifically Chapter 26.415 Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazk Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District and established a new process for the identification and protection of potential historic resources. T'he Ordinance was adopted to address the negative impacts that the loss of landmark eligible buildings would have on the health, peace, safety, and general well-being of the residents and visitors of Aspen, and the diminishment of Aspen's unique architectural character, livability and attractiveness as a destination; and WHEREAS, City Council subsequently directed the Community Development De- partment to prepaze further amendments to the historic preservation ordinance, including limit- ing the protection of potential historic resources to a list of properties which aze at least 30 years old and which, in staff's opinion aze associated with architectural styles and historical trends which represent Aspen's first one hundred years of history, most particularly Aspen's development since World Waz II. Said list is attached to this Ordinance as "Exhibit A;" and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommends approval of the pro- posed additions and amendments to Section 26.415 of the Municipal Code, as described herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing to con- siderthe proposed amendments to the above noted Chapter and Section on October 2, 2007, took and considered public testimony and the recommendation of the Community Devel- opment Director and recommended, by a 3-1 vote, City Council adopt the proposed amendments to the land use code by aznending the text of the above note Chapters and Sec- tions of the Land Use Code, as described herein. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfaze. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ODAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 1 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 Section 1: Pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the City Council hereby de- letes inits entirety Section 26.415.035, Designation of Historic Properties. (Note to codifier -this Section has been amended and recodified as Section 26.415.025.) Section 2: Pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the City Council hereby amends Chapter 26.415 by adding Section 26.415.025, Identification of Potential Historic Resources, which section describes the process and criteria for the Identification of Potential Historic Resources to read as follows: 26.415.025 Potential Historic Resources A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section and identifying a List of Potential Historic Re- sources is to prevent the loss of buildings, sites, structures or objects, or collections of build- ings, sites, structures or objects that may have historical, azchitectural, azchaeological, engi- neeringand cultural importance, and to limit the detrimental effect of development or demoli- tion of these potential resources on the chazacter of the town. Preserving and protecting his- toric resources promotes the public welfare by making Aspen a more attractive and desirable place in which to live, work, or visit. B. List of Potentially Historic Resources. There is hereby identified a List of Potential Historic Resources. The properties identified in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. _, Series of 2007, shall constitute this List. This List may be amended from time to time as described in Section 26.415.025.0, Amendments to the List of Potential Historic Resources. The List shall be the comprehensive summary of all properties identified as having potential historic value to the City of Aspen. The List shall be maintained and made available to the general public by the Community Development Department. C. Amendments to the List of Potential Historic Resources. The List of Potential Re- sources is not a static document and shall be amended by deletion of properties from time to time by the Community Development Director as properties aze either approved or denied des- ignationpursuant to the procedures and limitations of this Chapter. No properties, including properties removed from the List pursuant to the procedures and limitations of Section 26.415.025.E , shall be added to the List of Potential Historic Resources by the City of Aspen for a period often (10) yeazs from the date of adoption of Ordinance No. _, Series of 2007 unless requested by the property owner. Staff of the Community Development Department shall propose updates to the List of Potential Historic Resources in advance of the expiration of the ten (10) year anniversazy and City Council may, pursuant to and Ordinance adopted at a public hearing, adopt revisions to the List with a delayed effective date commensurate with the ten (10) year timeframe for the purpose of insuring continuous effect of the limitations of this Chapter. In no case shall revisions to the List become effective prior to the ten (10) year anniversary. Primazy structure(s) on anyproperty identified on the List of Potentially Historic Resources which have been destroyed by an act of God or are otherwise declazed unsafe and ordered demolished by the Chief Building Official, shall be removed from the List. D. Applicability and Exemptions. For those properties identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources, as amended pursuant to Section 26.415.025.0, no alterations, no land use Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 2 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 applications, and no building permit applications shall be undertaken by the property owner or accepted by the Community Development Department unless removed from the List of Poten- tial Historic Resources, pursuant to Section 26.415.025.E. Exempt from this restriction shall be alterations, land use applications, and building permits limited to 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. The Community Development Director may exempt other such exterior alterations which aze determined by the Community Development Director to be minimally intrusive or reversible work that does not diminish the historic chazacter of the property. Al- terations, land use applications, and building permit applications which exclusively impact the irterior of a building shall be exempt from this Section. Work undertaken in conformance with the International Building Code provisions for emergency repairs, assuming that the re- pairmatches the surrounding exterior materials and chazacter to the extent practicable, shall be exempt from this Section. E. Procedure to Remove a Property from the List of Potential Historic Resources. To request the removal of a property from the List of Potential Historic Resources, a property owner shall submit a Preliminary Determination application to the Community Development Department. This request may be made by the property owner at any time, even if no devel- opment is cunentlyproposed. The Community Development Director shall review the subject property and make a preliminary determination as to whether the property should be consid- ered for designation on the Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The deter- mination bythe Community Development Director shall be based on the criteria stated in Sec- tion 26.415.030.B and must be concluded within thirty (30) days after a complete application is received from the property owner. The property owner shall be afforded an opportunity to review the information being considered by the Community Development Director. The appli- cation for Preliminazy Determination shall include the property address, the owner's name, address and telephone number, a site plan or survey, photographs of al] buildings on the prop- erty and their dates of construction. 1. If, using the designation criteria of Section 26.415.030.B, the Community De- velopment Director determines that there is insufficient evidence to believe that the property should be considered for designation on the Inventory, or the Community Development Director fails to make a determination within thirty (30) days of the submission of a complete application for such a determination, the Community Devel- opmentDirector shall issue a written Determination ofNo Historic Significance to the Historic Preservation Commission and the City Council. The Historic Preservation Commission and City Council shall be provided with a copy of the Community Development Director's determination, along with photograph(s) of the property and shall have 7 days to object. If neither the majority of the members of HPC, nor the majority of the members of City Council make a written objection, the Community Development Director's written Determination of No Historic Signifi- cance shall be issued, recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, and shall Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 3 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 exempt the property from the procedures and limitations of this Chapter for a period of ten (10) yeazs from the date of issuance. A copy of the Determination shall be provided to the property owner. The Community Development Director shall remove the subject property from the List of Potential His- toric Resources. The Community Development Director, the Historic Preservation Commission, or City Council may not subsequently add the subject property to the List of Potential Historic Resources, for the effective period, and may not file an appli- cationfor designation of the subject property or district on the Aspen Inventory of His- toric Landmazk, Sites and Structures during that period. If a majority of the members of HPC or a majority of the members of City Council do make a written objection, the property shall remain on the List of Potential Historic Resources and there shall continue to be a prohibition on any alteration, land use ap- plication or building permit application affecting the subject property as described in Section 26.415.025.D. An owner of the subject property aggrieved by the Historic Preservation Commission's objection may appeal the decision to the City Council pur- suant to Chapter 26.316, Appeals, or pursue Historic Landmazk Designation pursuant to Section 26.415.025.6. An owner of the subject property aggrieved by the City Council's objection may appeal the decision to a court with competent jurisdiction or pursue Historic Landmark Designation pursuant to Section 26.415.025.6. 2. If, using the designation criteria of Section 26.415.030.B, the Community De- velopmentDirector determines there is sufficient evidence to believe that the property should be considered for designation on the Inventory, then the Community Develop- ment Director shall issue a written Determination of Potential Historic Significance. The subject property shall remain on the List of Potential Historic Resources and there shall continue to be a prohibition on any alteration, land use application or building permit application affecting the subject property as described in Section 26.415.025.D. An owner of the subject property aggrieved by the Community Development Direc- tor's determination may appeal the decision to the City Council pursuant to Chapter 26.316, Appeals, or pursue Historic Landmark Designation pursuant to Section 26.415.025.6. F. Procedure to Confirm a Property is not Included on the List of Potential Historic Resources. To request the confirmation that a property is not included on the List of Poten- tial Historic Resources, a property owner may submit a request to the Community Develop- ment Department. The request shall include the name and address of the property owner and any authorized agent acting on behalf of the owner. The confirmation letter shall indicate whether the subject property is on the List of Potential Historic Resources, shall include a cur- rent copy of the List of Potential Historic Resources, and shall include a description of the manner in which the List may be amended including the next timeframe when properties may be added to the List. The letter shall be in a recordable format and shall exempt the property from the procedures and limitations of this Chapter for a period often (10) yeazs or until the List of Potential Historic resources is eligible for amendment, as described in Section 26.415.025.0, whichever is sooner. Confirmation requests maybe assessed an administrative Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 4 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 ,~ review fee. An owner of the subject property aggrieved by the Community Development Di- s~,, rector's determination may appeal the decision to the City Council pursuant to Chapter 26.316, Appeals. G. Procedure to Pursue Designation. An owner of a property identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources may request the Community Development Director initiate an application for designation pursuant to Section 26.415.030, Designation of Historic Properties. The owner shall retain the right to object to designation of the property at the time of applica- tion or at any point during the review. Prior to the Community Development Director being authorized to initiate an application, the following conditions shall exist: The Director shall have first issued a Determination of Potential Historic Signifi- cance, as described in Section26.415.025.E, and any appeals therefrom shall have concluded. 2. The property owner has submitted a written request to proceed with designation re- view. Prior to submitting such a letter, the property owner may, but is not required to, meet with staff of the Community Development Department to review criteria, an- ticipated timeframes for review (see note), benefits, the procedures and protocol for an Economic Impact Report, and any other relevant issues. The letter to proceed shall indicate the property owner's consent to or, objection to designation. Notwith- standing the above, the property owner shall retain the right to object to designation at any point during the review. 3. Unless otherwise waived by the property owner, all contents ofthe designation appli- cation and the staff memo prepared for the first meeting with the Historic Preserva- tion Commission shall be sent to the property owner by registered mail at least thirty (30) days before the public heazing takes place before the Historic Preservation Commission. Subsequent memos will also be provided to the property owner in a timely fashion, no later than they are provided to the review board. 4. The criteria and procedures for designation shall be pursuant to Section 26.415.030 Note: The Municipal Code establishes deadlines for City agencies to take action. The Community Development Department will work with the property owner to establish a mutually acceptable anticipated schedule, agreed upon in advance in writing, so that the property owner can predict and control the pace of review as much as practical. However, there are circumstances that affect schedules that may not be predicted. The City shall diligently pursue timely scheduling of hearing dates and completion of the review taking the property owner's convenience, availability, and requests for prepazation time into ac- count. H. Penalties. Any owner who takes action to alter or demolish a property identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources, including purposeful removal, change or damage to any exterior materials, features, portions of a building, or structural members of a building shall be subject to the penalties established in Section 26.415.140, Penalties. The Community '°" Development Department must demonstrate to City Council, using date stamped photographs, ~_ Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 5 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 that the exterior of the building has been altered after the adoption date of this ordinance in order to apply penalties. In addition, properties on the List of Potential Historic Resources are required to receive rea- sonable caze,maintenance and upkeep as described in Section 26.415.100, Demolition by Ne- glect. Repairs or minimally intrusive work permitted under Section 26.415.025.D and which is com- pletedaccording to aDevelopment Order or Building Permit issued by the Community Devel- opment Department, as may be required, shall not be subject to penalties. Section 3: Pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the City Council hereby amends 26.415.030, Designation of Historic Properties, which section describes the process and crite- riathrough which the city designates properties of historical, azchitectural, azchaeological, en- gineering and cultural importance, to read as follows: 26.415.030 Designation of Historic Properties. The designation of properties to an official list, that is known as the Aspen Inventory of His- toric Landmark Sites and Structures which is maintained by the City of Aspen, is intended to provide a systematic public process to determine what buildings, azeas and features ofthe his- toric built environment are of value to the community. Designation provides a means of de- cidingand communicating, in advance of specific issues or conflicts, what properties aze in the public interest to protect. A. Establishment of the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazks Sites and Structures has been established by City Council to formally recognize those districts, buildings, structures, sites and objects located in Aspen that have special significance to the United States, Colorado or Aspen history, azchitec- ture, archaeology, engineering or culture. The -ocation of properties listed on the Inventory shall be indicated on maps on file in the Community Development Department. B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazk Sites and Structures, an individual building, site, structure, or object or a collection of build- ings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The signifi- cance ofproperties shall be evaluated according to the following criteria. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet the criteria described below: A property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it is: a. In whole or in part more than one hundred (100) yeazs old, and b. It possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age; Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 6 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 or, 2. A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's 20`h century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, pos- sesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, and association; and is related to two or more of the following: a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history; or b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national his- tory is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and documented; or, c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, crafrsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. 3. The following criterion must be met if the property owner has requested review of Economic Impact according to Section 26.415.030.E Economic Impact Re- port: a. City Council finds that the Economic Impact of designation is mitigated pursuant to the requirements of Section 26.415.030. Economic Impact. 4. A property that was constructed less than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made may be considered under subsection 2, above, if the application has been filed by the owner of the prop- erty at the time of designation or, when designating a historic district, the major- ity ofthe contributing resources in the district meet the thirty (30) year age crite- rion described above. 5. The construction date of a property shall be established by the date of issuance of the earliest documentation for the subject structure found in the records of the City of Aspen Community Development Department, Pitkin County Assessor's Office or bona fide records submitted by the Property Owner. 6. The Historic Preservation Commission shall adopt, maintain, and make available to the public guidelines, score sheets, and other devices used by the Commission to apply the criteria set forth in this Chapter to properties potentially eligible for inclusion on the Inventory. City Council shall review and ratify these documents at a public hearing prior to their official use. Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 7 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 C. Authority. The property owner(s), the Community Development Director, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) or the City Council may file an application for designation of a historic district to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazk Sites and Structures. The property owner(s) or the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.415.025.6, may file an application for designation of a property, site, building, structure, or object which is identified on the List of Potentially Historic Resources to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazk Sites and Structures. The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter and of this Title, shall recommend approval, approval with condi- tions, or denial of an application for designation. The Historic Preservation Commission upon a recommendation from the Community Devel- opmentDirector, inaccordance with the procedures, standazds, and limitations of this Chapter and of this Title, shall recommend approval, approval with conditions, or recommend denial ***or deny (Option)*** an application for designation. The City Council upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director and the Historic Preservation Commission, inaccordance with the procedures, standards, and limita- tions ofthis Chapter and of this Title, shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an ap- plication for designation. D. Application. The application for the designation of a district, property, site, building, structure, or object shall include the following: The applicable information required in section 26.304.030(B)(1),(2),(3) and (4). Ap- plications submitted by the Community Development Director for a property, site, building, structure, or object, pursuant to Section 26.415.025.E shall include a letter from the property owner authorizing such application and indicating the property owner's consent to or, objection to designation. Notwithstanding the above, the prop- ertyowner shall retain the right to object to designation at any point during the review. 2. Site or historic district boundary map. Property or district description including narrative text, photographs and/or other graphic materials that document its physical chazacteristics. 4. Written description of how the property meets the criteria for designation. 5. Identification of the chazacter-defining features that distinguish the entity which should be preserved. 6. Subsequent to the Historic Preservation Commission's review of a designation or dur- ing City Council's review of a designation, a property owner may choose to supple- "~ Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 8 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 ment the application with an Economic Impact Report as described in Section 26.415.030. **** Option. E. Review, public hearings and notice. 1. Scheduling. The City shall diligently pursue timely scheduling of heazing dates and completion of the review taking the property owner's convenience, availability, and requests for prepazation time into account. The Municipal Code establishes dead- linesfor City agencies to take action. The Community Development Department will work with the property owner to establish a mutually acceptable anticipated schedule, agreed upon in advance in writing, and adjusted as needed during the process, so that the property owner can predict and control the pace of review as much as practical. However, there are circumstances that affect schedules that may not be predicted. 2. Application Submission Review and Recommendation. An application for des- ignation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall be submitted to the Community Development Director to determine if the application is complete. If the application has been prepared by the Community Development De- partmentall contents of the designation application shall be sent to the property owner by registered mail upon completion of the application. 3. Notice. A date for a public hearing on a complete application shall be scheduled before the HPC. Notice of the heazing shall be provided according to the provisions of section 26.304.060.E.3. a, b, and c. Unless otherwise waived by the property owner, all contents of the designation appli- cationand the staff memo prepared for the first meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission shall be sent to the property owner by registered mail at least thirty (30) days before the public heazing takes place before the Historic Preservation Commis- sion. Subsequent memos and any supplemental information or documents will also be provided to the property owner in a timely fashion, no later than they are provided to the review boazd. Notice to the property owner shall be by registered mail. In the event that there is no evidence that the property owner received actual notice, the HPC may specify that ad- ditional measures be taken to ensure that the property owner is informed and has ade- quate prepazation time. 4. Application Review by the Community Development Director. The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter and of this Title, shall recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of an application for designation. 5. Review by the Historic Preservation Commission. The HPC shall evaluate the 4 _ application to determine if property or district meets the criteria for designation. At Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 9 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 the public heazing the property owner, parties of interest, and citizens shall have an opportunity to provide information about the property or district's eligibility for desig- nation. The HPC may recommend approval, approval with conditions, disapproval or may continue the application to request additional information necessary to make a de- cision. The HPC shall observe the review and shall a timely review of the application If the owner of the subject property objects to designation at any point prior to the vote of the Historic Preservation Commission, a recommendation to approve designation must be supported by a vote of a majority, plus one, of the regulaz members of the HPC present and voting at the meeting. ****Option 1: Any less than a majority plus one in favor of designation shall be forwazded to City Council as a recommendation of denial. ****Option 2: Any less than a majority plus one in favor of designation shall be considered a denial and no further review by City Council shall occur. This voting requirement shall apply to individual property designations and shall not apply to his- toric district designation reviews. 6. Ciry Council Review. Upon receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Director and the Historic Preservation Commission, and an Economic Impact Report if one has been prepazed, the City Council shall schedule a heazing on the application in accordance with the notice requirements for adopting an ordinance. Council shall evaluate the application to determine if the property or district meets the criteria for designation. At the public heazing the property owner, parties of interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to provide information about the property or dis- trict'seligibility for designation or other such information that may be relevant to the decision. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, deny, or continue the application to request additional information necessazy to make a decision. If at any point prior to a final vote by City Council the property owner decides to pursue an Economic Impact Report, the City Council shall table action and postpone the hearing for a sufficient time period as to permit the development of an Economic Impact Re- port, pursuant to Section 26.415.030.F. 7. Denied Applications. If an application is denied, the Community Development Director, HPC or City Council may not file a reapplication for designation ofthe same Historic Resource, property, or district to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazk, Sites and Structures or inclusion on the List of Potentially Historic Resources for ten (10) years from the date of the denial. 8. Economic Hardship of Designation. * * * * Option 1. It is the policy of the City of Aspen to respect private property rights. The City recognizes that there may be some particulaz circumstances in which the operation of this Chapter, in particulaz his- toric designation, could represent an economic hardship upon a property owner. It is the intent of this provision to insure no private property is taken without just compen- sation. If requested by an owner of a property being considered For designation, the City .,.~ Council shall review evidence provided by a property owner with regazd to economic Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 10 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 hazdship. The standazd of review for determination of economic hazdship shall be whether designation would result in a violation of the prohibitions of the U.S. and Colorado Constitutions against taking of private property for public use without just compensation as those prohibitions maybe interpreted by the courts of Colorado and the United States. Notwithstanding the above, the property owner shall retain the right to pursue a "tak- ings" claim with a court of competent jurisdiction. F. Economic Impact Report **** Options 2 and 3 1. Purpose. It is the policy of the City of Aspen to respect private property rights. The city recognizes, therefore, that there maybe some circumstances in which the op- eration of this Chapter, in particular historic designation, could represent an adverse economic impact upon the property owner. The intent of this provision is to insure the economic impact of an historic designation of a property is documented and consid- ered as part of the designation process if so desired by a property owner. 2. Initiation of Economic Impact Report. The owner of a property, site, building, structure, or object subject to a designation application may request the development of an Economic Impact Report which shall be reviewed as part ofthe designation heaz- ingbefore City Council. When an Economic Impact Report is requested, the Report shall be provided to City Council concurrent with the recommendations from the Community Development Director and the Historic Preservation Commission. If an Economic Impact Report is requested during the City Council designation, but prior to a final vote on the matter, the City Council shall table action and postpone the hearing for a sufficient time period as to permit the development of an Economic Impact Re- port. The City shall continue to work with the property owner to accomplish a timely completion of the review taking the property owner's convenience, availability, and requests for preparation time into account. 3. Economic Impact Examination Panel The City Council shall establish an Eco- nomic Impact Examination Panel to determine the economic impact of historic desig- nation of properties. The Panel shall be comprised of three (3) persons with profes- sional expertise in local real estate valuation, appraisals, mortgage banking, account- ing, development, land planning, or similar professional expertise. Members of the panel shall be volunteers but may be financially compensated by the City as deter- mined necessazy by City Council and as may be amended from time to time. The Panel shall be provided with clerical or other assistance as needed. The Panel's membership shall be determined by City Council for each application and the members of said panel shall be mutually acceptable to the property owner and to the staff of the Community Development Department and shall have no substantial business, financial, or familial relationship to the City, staff of the Community Devel- Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 11 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 opment Department, or to the property owner other than as a Panel member such that an actual or apparent conflict of interest exists according to the City Attorney. The Panel shall review information provided by the property owner and by the Com- munity Development Department. Information may include, but not be limited to, a current (prior to designation) appraisal, zoning and developmental information, local, State, and Federal financial and technical assistance programs, development benefits that the property would be eligible for upon designation, an assessment of the devel- opment orredevelopment potential of the property, including the estimated costs and time associated therewith, and maps, plats, or pictures of the subject property. The Panel shall be able to request and be provided with additional information as may be necessary to make their determination, including site visits and physical inspections of the subject building(s), appraisals of similarly situated and regulated properties, and interviews of the property owner, or representatives thereof, staff of the Community Development Department, or of local professionals with particulaz expertise in prop- erty development or valuation. The property owner and staff of the Community De- velopment Department shall have the opportunity to refute or challenge any piece of information provided and offer additional information as may be necessary. All mate- rials, information or written challenges of the property owner's or staff s information shall be provided to the other party who will be allowed adequate time and opportunity for rebuttal 4. Economic Impact Report. Upon receipt of all necessary information to render a determination, the Panel shall have thirty (30) days to render their determination. The Panel shall provide their determination in the form of a written report documenting the information provided and the rational basis for the determination. If the Panel cannot reach a unanimous opinion, the report shall describe the opinions of the individual Panel members. The report shall describe the economic impact of designation in net present value and may describe the impact in terms of a value range, depending on what benefits may or may not be approved. The report shall be addressed to and for- warded to City Council and copies shall be provided to the property owner and to the Community Development Department. At least one member of the Panel shall be available to present oral testimony to the City Council as may be requested by the Council. The property owner and staff of the Community Development Department shall retain the right to refute or challenge the Panel's findings during the public hear- ing before City Council. 5. City Council Determination of Economic Impact. As part of the public heazing for landmark designation of the subject property, City Council shall determine the economic impact of the designation by using the Report provided by the Panel, any testimony provided by members of the Panel, any additional information provided by the property owner or staff of the Community Development Department, and any other testimony or evidence provided by the public during the public hearing. The determi- nation made by City Council shall be the final administrative action on the matter. Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 12 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 Option 1: The economic impact of historic designation of a property shall be reviewed and considered by the City Council during the public heazing For landmazk designa- tion. The City Council shall determine if the economic impact upon the property owner is a disproportionate or unreasonable burden upon the property owner. Upon such a finding and upon historic designation ofthe subject property, the City Council may take any action deemed necessary to mitigate an unreasonable economic impact upon the property owner, including, but not limited to, financial compensation or other mutually acceptable means of compensation including development incentives to the extent City Council has jurisdiction. The property owner and the City may enter into a mitigation agreement which may include subsequent additional mitigation to the prop- erty owner if certain development or entitlement assumptions of the Economic Impact Report aze found to be unachievable, despite a good faith effort, after a specified time period. The additional mitigation may include removal of the subject property from the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. If requested by the property owner, re- view of landmazk designation may be delayed until a site specific development plan entitling the use of available preservation benefits is approved. Approval of said plan shall be conditioned on the listing of the property on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Option 2: The economic impact of historic designation of a property shall be reviewed and considered by the City Council during the public hearing for landmark designa- tion. Upon historic designation ofthe subject property, the City Council shall provide financial compensation, or other mutually acceptable means of compensation includ- ingdevelopment incentives to the extent City Council has jurisdiction, to the property owner equal to the determined economic impact of the designation. The property owner and the City shall enter into a mitigation agreement which shall include subse- quent additional mitigation to the property owner if certain development or entitlement assumptions of the Economic Impact Report aze found to be unachievable after a good faith effort and a time period of no more than ten (10) years. The additional mitiga- tionmay include removal of the subject property from the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. If requested by the property owner, review of landmark designation may be delayed until a site specific development plan proposing the use of available preservation benefits is reviewed. Approval of said plan shall be conditioned on the listing of the property on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazk Sites and Struc- tures. Notwithstanding the above, the property owner shall retain the right to pursue a claim of a violation ofthe prohibitions ofthe U.S. and Colorado Constitutions againsttaking ofprivate property for public use without just compensation as those prohibitions may be interpreted by the courts of Colorado and the United States. Section 4. Notice to Property Owners. All owners of properties identified on the List of Potentially Historic Resources, as provided in Exhibit A to this Ordinance, shall be mailed a copy ofthis Ordinance by registered mail, within 10 days of the final City Council approval of this Ordinance. Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 13 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 Section 5. Effect on Existing Ordinance No. 30 Determinations. ..~, This Ordinance shall not affect any Determination of No Historic Significance approved by the , Community Development Director pursuant to Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2007. These determinations issued pursuant to Ordinance No. 30 shall continue to be valid for afive-year period from their issuance date but shall not automatically become valid for a longer period. If property owners want to "update" their Determination of No Historic Significance to be valid for a ten-yeaz period, as permitted pursuant to this Ordinance, the property owner must request a new certificate be issued pursuant to the process identified in this Ordinance. To expedite service, property owners who wish to update their 5-yeaz certificate to a 10-yeaz certificate should provide a copy oftheir 5-year certificate when applying. No fees shall be assessed for processing of these updated certificates. Section 6. Historic Preservation Commission Review of List. **** Option The List of Potential Historic Resources (the List), as appended to Ordinance No. ~ Series of 2007, shall be referred to the Historic Preservation Commission (the HPC) for additional analysis and consideration. The HPC may direct the Community Development Director to remove properties from the List, pursuant to the process, including the appeals process, outlined in Section 26.415.025.E and upon mailing notification to the individual property owners. This action by the HPC shall require adoption of a resolution by a simple majority. As requested by the HPC on any specific property, the HPC shall heaz and consider any input from the Community Development DeparUnent and the property owner regazding the potential historic significance of the property. The HPC may elect to consider public testimony. The HPC's additional analysis and consideration shall not be considered prejudice upon any subsequent review of the property for Landmazk Designation or a Site Specific Development Plan. The HPC shall conclude their further analysis and consideration within one hundred and eighty (180) days from the adoption of Ordinance No. , Series of 2007, or as otherwise extended by City Council motion. The HPC may elect not to undertake this review or to discontinue this review at any point. Section 7. Update and Ratification of Score Sheets. **** Option Pursuant to Section 26.415.030.B.6, City Council hereby amends and ratifies the Historic Integrity Assessment Score Sheets by including a scoring criterion regarding the owner's consent to the designation. These scoring sheets aze used in assessing the qualities of a resource during designation review. Section 8. Owner Reimbursement for Designation Review Costs. **** Option The City Council shall establish a policy for reimbursing costs incurred by property owners associated with the review of a designation application when the property owner does not consent to the designation. Section 9. Policy Task Force. **** Option A Historic Preservation Policy Task Force shall be established in order to provide guidance on additional changes to the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Program. Membership of the Task Force shall be by appointment by City Council. Duties of the Task Force shall be determined by City Council, but shall include a review of the following as a minimum: "~ <.,,,t Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 14 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 • The criteria upon which the City historic designation applications aze judged, including ~. whether additional or different criteria should apply when the property owner objects to the designation and for 20w century properties. • Changes to the Integrity Scoring System used to evaluate properties, including to the process by which the Scoring System is adopted. • Additional benefits for owners of historic properties. Section 10. Availability of Documents. The Community Development Department shall make available to the public all documents related to the List of Potential Historic Resources, criteria upon which properties shall be evaluated, research papers, scoring sheets, development and other benefits, and copies of this ordinance and shall diligently pursue timely inclusion of this information on the City of Aspen website. Section 11. Effect on Existing Applications. This Ordinance shall not affect any active Land Use Application, existing Development Order, or Building Permit, as such terms are used in the Land Use Code, submitted and determined complete prior to the effective date of this ordinance Pre-Application Conferences, Pre-Application Conference Sununary reports, or formal or informal discussions with Community Development staffor review Boazds shall not constitute a complete application or any other official status. Applications submitted after the effective date of this ordinance shall comply with the terms of this ordinance and of the Land Use Code, as amended. Section 12. Severability. 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 13. Existing Litigation. 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 the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 14. Notice A public heazing on the ordinance was held on the _ day of _, 2007, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice ofthe same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 15 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _ day of _, 2007. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of _, 2007. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jim True, Special Counsel Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 16 of 22 First Reading Draft -10.22.07 ~,,«~ EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE No. _, SERIES OF 2007 720 S. Aspen St, Holland House: Parcel Id: 2735 1 3 1 1 9001. Legal Description: EAMES ADDITION SUBDIVISION, BLOCK 9, LOT 1 & LOT 2 DESC: & 13, & 14. 809 S. Aspen St, Shadow Mountain: Pazce] Id: 273513124014; 273513124010; 273513124008; 273513124022; 273513124017; 273513124016; 273513124015; 273513124007; 273513124013; 273513124005; 273513124003; 273513124002; 273513124001; 273513124012; 273513124006; 273513124009; 273513124019; 273513124021; 273 5 1 3 1 24020; 273513124004; 273513124011, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, SHADOW MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS. 114 E. Bleeker St: Parcel Id: 273512437010; 273512437009. Legal Description: BLOCK 65, 114 EAST BLEEKER CONDOMINIUMS. 118 E. Bleeker St: Pazcel Id: 273512437012; 273 5 1 243 701 1. Legal Description: BLOCK 65, HOGUET CONDOMINIUMS. 970 Cemetery Ln: Pazcel Id: 273512208006. Legal Description: SNOWBUNNY SUBDIVISION, BLOCK 1, LOT 3. 408 E. Cooper Ave: Aspen Sports Pazcel Id:2737-182-16-009, Legal Description: BLOCK 89, LOT PART OF L&M. 617 E. Cooper Ave, Aspen Square: Parcel Id: 273718243001; 273718243022; 273718243018; 273718243025; 273718243023; 273718243101; 273718243003; 273718243049; 273718243006; 273718243051; 273718243034; 273718243012; 273718243008; 273718243102; 273718243047; 273718243085; 273718243039; 273718243104; 273718243033; 273718243041; 273718243063; 273718243054; 273718243508; 273718243053; 273718243105, Legal Description: BLOCK 101, ALL UNITS, ASPEN SQUARE CONDOMINIUMS. 832 E. Cooper St, Viking Lodge: Pazcel Id: 2737-182-28-007, Legal Description: BLOCKl11, LOT R & S. 1001 E. Cooper Ave, Villager Townhouses: Parcel Id: 273718234012; 273718234010; 273718233504; 273718234008; 273718234007; 273718234005; 273718234009; 273718234006; 273718233801, Legal Description: BLOCK 37, ALL UNITS, VILLAGER TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUMS. 1101 E. Cooper Ave, Hildur Anderson: Pazcel Id: 273718139801, Legal Description: ANDERSON SUBDIVISION, LOT 1. Cooper Avenue, Hyman Avenue and Mill Street Pedestrian Malls 1411 Crystal Lake Rd: Parcel Id: 273718243004, Legal Description: RIVERSIDE PLACER U.S.M.S. #3905 AM. SECT,TWN,RNG:18-10-84 DESC: TRACT OF LAND IN NE4 OF SEC 18-10-84 & BEING PART OF THE RIVERSIDE PLACER USMS 3905 AM DESC AS FOLLOWS BEG AT A PT WH COR 9 OF SAID RIVERSIDE PLACER BEARS S 00 02'E 242.39 FT TH N 00 02'W 150 FT TH N 89 58'E 150 FT TH S 00 02'E 150 FT TH S 89 58'W 150 FT TO THE PT OF BEG SAID TRACT CONT 0.517 AC BK 244 PG 944 BK 268 PGS 26-27 BK 293 PG 960 & WNTY DEED IN BK 495 PG 409 BK 511 PG 233 FROM Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 17 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 BENEDICT A TRACT OF LAND BK 625 PG 156 PLUS THE SOUTHERN MOST PARCEL OF LAND IN THE GORDON/CALLAHAN RESUBDIVISION. ~~,,, 1422-1441 Crystal Lake Rd., Aspen Club Condos: Pazcel Id: 273718131001 THROUGH 273718131020; 273718131800; 273718131801, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, ASPEN CLUB CONDOMINIUMS. 333 E. Durant Ave., Mountain Chalet: Pazcel Id: 273718245002, Legal Description: BLOCK 84, MOUNTAIN CHALET PUD SUBDIVISION. 555 E. Durant St, North of Nell: Pazcel Id: 273718249002 THROUGH 273718249058; 273718249060; 273718249061; 273718249062, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, NORTH OF NELL CONDOMINIUMS. 100 E. Francis St., Given Institute: Parce] Id: 273512419851, Legal Description: BLOCK 63, LOT A -LOT F, DESCRIPTION: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLK 63 PART OF FRANCIS ST PART OF CENTER ST & PART OF THE NW4 OF THE S W4 OF SEC 7-10-84 & PART OF THE NE4 OF THE SE4 OF SEC 12-10-85 SAID PARCELS DESC AS BGNNG AT A PT OF THE N LINE OF FRANCIS ST & 24.00 FT ELY OF THE W LINE OF CENTER ST TH N 14 DEG 50'49" E 121.59 FT TH N 33 DEG 03'19"E 42.21 FT TH N 7 DEG19'OS"E 112.35 FT TH S 70 DEG 18'15"E 286.57 FT TH S 6 DEG 18'51 "W 103.11 FT TH 18 DEG ]2'00"W 108.73 FT TH 9 DEG 25'21"E 52.10 FT TH S 23 DEG 21'00"E 83.49 FT TO THE STHLY LINE OF FRANCIS ST EXTENDED ELY TH N 75 DEG 09'11 "W 288.99 FT TO THENW COR OF BLK 64 TH N 31 DEG 00'50"W 107.29 FT TO THE POB. 210 W. Francis Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512417005, Legal Description: BLOCK 48, LOT P & Q. 621 W. Francis St: Pazcel Id: 2735142426011; 2735142426012, Legal Description: BLOCK ..~,~ 22, REEDS HOUSE CONDOMINIUM. ~,, 624 W. Francis St: Pazcel Id: 273512409012, Legal Description: BLOCK 21, STARRI CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT B. 626 W. Francis St: Parcel Id: 2735 1 24090 1 1, Legal Description: BLOCK 21, STARRI CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT A. 631 S. Galena St/ 630 S. Galena/ 710 S. Galena St/ 711 S. Galena St/ 710 S. Mill St/ 1039 Waters Ave., Alpenblick: Pazcel Id: 273718279001 THROUGH 273718279019; 273718279801, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, ALPENBLICK CONDOMINIUMS. 215 N. Garmisch St., Yellow Brick: Pazcel Id: 273512436850, Legal Description: BLOCK57, LOT A -LOT S, PLUS VACATED ALLEY. 233 Gilbert St., Skier Chalet Lodge: Pazcel Id: 273513119002, Legal Description: BLOCK 9, LOTS 5 - LOT ]0 AND LOTS 4 & 11 LESS THEW 22' EAMES ADDITION SUBDIVISION. 700 W. Gillespie St., Aspen Center for Physics: Parcel Id: 273512129803, Legal Descrip- tion: LOT 3, ASPEN MEADOWS SUBDIVISION. 110 E. Hallam St., Red Brick: Parcel Id: 273707313801, Legal Description: BLOCK 71, LOTS K,L,M & FRACTIONAL LOTS A, B, & C, BLOCK 64, LOTS A-I & LOTS K-S AND A STRIP OF LAND. 327 W. Hallam St: Parcel Id: 273512434001, Legal Description: BLOCK 43, LOTS A - C. 928 W. Hallam St: Pazcel Id: 273512300015, Legal Description: BLOCK 4, LOTS PART K, L & M SECT,TWN,RNG:12-10-85, TRACT OF LAND IN SW4 (ALSO SOMETIMES KNOWN AS LOT 9) SEC 12-10-85 DESC BY M/B BK 385 PG 357 & TRACT ~+., FORMERLY KNOWN AS PARCEL C OF HERNDON SUB FIRST AMENDMENT. Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 18 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 122 W. Hopkins Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512455004, Legal Description: BLOCK 59, LOTS M & N. 129 E. Hopkins Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512458004, Legal Description: BLOCK 68, LOTS G-I. 211 W. Hopkins Ave: Pazcel Id: 273512463003, Legal Description: BLOCK 53, LOTS F & G. 608 W. Hopkins Ave, Madsen Chalet: Pazcel Id: 273512448005, Legal Description: BLOCK 25, LOTS Q, R & S. 700 W. Hopkins Ave: Parcel Id: 273512446015; 273512446018; 273512446012; 273512446011: 273512446021: 273512446020; 273512446022; 273512446014; 273512446013 273512446017; 273512446016; 273512446019; 273512446025; 273512446024; 273512546802; 273512446023, Legal Description: BLOCK 19, ALL UNITS, 700 WEST HOPKINS CONDOMINIUMS. 720 W. Hopkins Ave., Skandia Townhomes: Parcel Id: 273512446007; 273512446009; 273512446010;273512446008;273512446006; 273707334006; 273512446801,Lega1 De- scription: BLOCK 19, ALL UNITS, SKANDIA TOWNHOUSES CONDOMINIUMS. 100 E. Hyman Ave., Chalet Lisl: Parcel Id: 273512458005, Legal Description: BLOCK 68, LOTS K - M. 300 W. Hyman Ave., Kitzbuhl Lodge: Parcel Id: 273512464007, Legal Description: BLOCK 46, LOT R & S. 322 W. Hyman Ave: Parcel Id: 273512464005, Legal Description: BLOCK 46, LOTS N & O. 334 W. Hyman Ave., St. Moritz: Parcel Id: 273512464004, Legal Description: ST MORITZ LODGE MINOR PUD SUBDIVISION. ~~ 514 E. Hyman Ave., Mason and Morse: Pazcel Id: 273718213002, Legal Description: BLOCK 94, LOT N. 606 E. Hyman Ave: Parcel Id: 273718212003, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOT K & L. 610 E. Hyman Ave: Parcel Id: 273718212004, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOT M. 630 E. Hyman Ave., Patio Building: Parcel Id: 273718212007, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOTS R & S. 720 E. Hyman Ave., Aspen Athletic Club: Pazcel Id: 273718211008 THROUGH 273718211019; 27371 821 1 02 1 THROUGH 273718211031, Legal Description: BLOCK 104, ALL UNITS, ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB CONDOMINIUMS. 301 Lake Ave., Parcel Id: 273512416003, Legal Description: HALLAM ADDITION SUBDIVISION BLOCK 40, EAST 1/2 OF LOT 5 -LOT 7. 120 E. Main St., Design Workshop: Parcel Id: 273512438002, Legal Description: ELY 20 FT OF LOT M, ALL OF LOTS N & O BLOCK 66 & SLY 10 FT OF VACATED ALLEY ADJACENT ALSO LOT 2 OF US WEST SUBDIVISION. 200 W. Main St., Tyrolean Lodge: Parcel Id: 273512440010, Legal Description: BLOCK 51, LOTS R & S. 220 E. Main St., Cortina Lodge: Pazcel Id: 273707320707, Legal Description: BLOCK 73, LOTS P&Q. 420 E. Main St: Pazcel Id: 273707322801; 273707322014; 273707322015, Legal Description: BLOCK 86, ALL UNITS, GALENA PLAZA CONDOMINIUMS. 435 East Main St., Gas Station local's corner: Pazcel Id: 273707330005, Legal Description: BLOCK 87, LOTS E - I. Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 19 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 520 W. Main St., Ullr Lodge: Pazcel Id: 273512498001 THROUGH 273512498027; ~., 273512498801, Legal Description: BLOCK 30, ALL UNITS, ULLR COMMONS CONDOMINIUMS. 630 W. Main St., Mountain Rescue: Parcel Id: 273512444805, Legal Description: BLOCK 24, LOT M. 730 W. Main St., Hickory House: Parcel Id: 273 5 1 2445004, Legal Description: BLOCK 18, LOTS M - P. 834 W. Main St/107 N. Seventh St., Bavarian Housing: Pazcel Id: 273512380014 THROUGH 273512380021, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, BAVARIAN INN CONDOMINIUMS. 24 McSkimming Rd: Pazcel Id: 273718100054, Legal Description: BLOCK 19, LOT 6 & 7 RIVERSIDE ADDN & A TRACT OF LAND IN SE4 OF NE4 OF SEC 18-10-84 BEING A PART OF HIGHLAND PLACER USMS NO 6120 & THE RIVERSIDE PLACER USMS NO 3905 DESC AS FOLLOWS BEG AT A PT ON LINE 2-3 OF SAID HIGHLAND PLACER WH COR 2 OF SAID PLACER BEARS S 125' W 886.26 FT TH N 47 50'W 19.88 FT TO THE E R-O-W LINE OF A RD TH NELY ALONG SAID R-O-W FT M/L TH S 60 OS'E 122.04 FT TO LINE 2-3 OF THE HIGHLAND PLACER TH S 1 DEG 25'W TO THE PT OF BEG TOGETHER WITH IMPS THEREON BK 231 PG 84. 232 McSkimming Rd: Parcel Id: 273718103007, Legal Description: BLOCK 2, LOT2, ASPEN GROVE SUBDIVISION. 592 McSkimming Rd: 273718102003, Legal Description: BLOCK 3, LOT 4, ASPEN GROVE SUBDIVISION 745 Meadows Rd: Pazcel Id: 273512201003, Legal Description: BLOCK 1, LOT 3, -~+,, SNOBBLE SUBDIVISION. "°'°r` 765 Meadows Rd: Pazcel Id: 273512201002, Legal Description: LOT 2, SNOBBLE SUBDIVISION. 119 S. Mill St., Wells Fargo Bank: Parcel Id: 273707329009, Legal Description: BLOCK 80, LOTS P - S. 307 S. Mill St., D-19 Restaurant: Parcel Id: 273718217004, Legal Description: ASPEN COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM, UNIT:B. 536 W. North St., Christ Episcopal Church: Parcel Id: 273512111808, Legal Description: BLOCK 99, LOTS 11 - 15 HALLAM ADDITION. 403 Park Ave: Parcel Id: 273707404010 THROUGH 273707404019, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, MARTHINSSON-NOSTDAHL CONDOMINIUMS. 404 Park Ave: Parcel Id: 273707404705, Legal Description: LOT 3, SUNNY PARK SUBDIVISION. 411 Pearl Ct: Parcel Id: 273512110002, Legal Description: BLOCK 101, LOTS 7 & 8 & A STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN BLK 101 HALLAMS ADDITION BEING ONE HALF OF THE ALLEY WIDTH ADJ TO THE SLY BORDER OF LOT 7 & 8 HALLAM ADDITION. 434 Pearl Ct: Pazcel Id: 273512109002, Legal Description: BLOCK 100, SOUTH 1/2 OF LOT 2 AND LOT 3, HALLAM ADDITION. 119 Red Mountain Rd: Pazcel Id: 273707213002, Legal Description: LOT 2, ODEN SPLIT SUBDIVISION. 246 Roaring Fork Dr: Pazcel Id: 273718120017, Legal Description: LOT 23, EASTWOOD SUBDIVISION. ~ Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 20 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 258 Roaring Fork Dr: Pazcel Id: 273718120016, Legal Description: LOT26, EASTWOOD ~.. SUBDIVISION. 850 Roaring Fork Rd: Pazcel Id: 273512126001, Legal Description: LOT 1, MERRIAM SUBDIVISION. 54 Shady Ln: Parcel Id: 273707200026, Legal Description: SECT,TWN,RNG:7-10-84, TRACT OF LAND BEG AT A PT ON THE ELY R-O-W OF THE D&RGW RR (ASPEN BRANCH) WH THE W4 COR OF SAID SEC 7 BEARS W 602.4FT TH E 214.6 FT TO THE WLY R-O-W LINE OF RED MOUNTAIN RD TH ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N 12 DEG 56'E 215.SFT TO THE CENTER OFHUNTER CREEK TH S ALONG THE CENTER OF HUNTER CREEK ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S 68 DEG 02'04""W 296.19 FT TO THE ELY LINE OF SAID RR R-O-W TH S 08 DEG 5TE 90.6 FT ALONG THE ELY LINE OF SAID RR R-O-W TO THE PT OF BEG LESS A TRACT CONT 0.0924 AC M/L DEEDED TO PITKIN CO FOR RDWY DRAINAGE EASEMENT BK 554 PGS 159-161 &185 SUBJECT TO US PATENT RESERVATIONS BK 35 PG 116 R-O-W GRANTED BY BK 29 PG 582. 69 Shady Ln: Parcel Id: 273707300012, Legal Description: BEG AT POST STANDING ABOUT 30 FT S OF THE S BK OF HUNTER CREEK & 50 FT W FROM THE CENTER OF THE D&RGW RR TRACK SAID POST BEING AT THE NW COR OF PARCEL OF GROUND DEEDED TO SAID D&RGW RR CO BY THE HALLAM LAND CO TH SLY PARALLEL WITH THE D&RGW RR 266 FT TO THE N BK OF THE ROARING FORK RIVER TH FOLLOWING THEN & ET BK OF THE ROARING FORK RIVER WITH COURSES WLY & NLY 78 FT TO S BK OF HUNTER CREEK AT ITS JUNCTION WITH ROARING FORK RIVER TH N. 89 44'E 220 FT TO THE PLACE OF BEG TOGETHER WITH ALL WATER RIGHTS PERTAINING THERETO SITUATE LYING & BEING IN SEC 7-10-84 BK 311 PG 307 BK 512 PG 253. 28 Smuggler Grove: Parcel Id: 273718123002, Legal Description: LOT 2, JUKATI SUBDIVISION. 500 West Smuggler St: Parcel Id: 273512404006, Legal Description: LOTS Q, R &S, BLOCK 26. 949 W. Smuggler Ave: Parcel Id: 273512212001, Legal Description: BLOCK 3, LOT A - I. 1208 Snowbunny Ln: Parcel Id: 273512218800; 273512218002, Legal Description: CEDARWOOD CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT 1. 1210 Snowbunny Ln: Parcel Id: 273512218001, Legal Description: CEDARWOOD CONDOMINIUMS, UNIT 2. 300 S. Spring St., Hannah Dustiu: Pazcel Id: 273718227800; 273718227101, Legal Descrip- tion: BLOCK 105, LOTS A - D, ALL UNITS, HANNAH DUSTIN CONDOMINIUMS. 900 Stage Rd., Part of Bar X Ranch: Parcel Id: 273502300006, Legal Description: LEGAL DESCRIPTION TO BE DETERMINED. 219 S. Third St: Pazcel Id: 273512465005, Legal Description: BLOCK 39, LOTS O - S. 407 N. Third St: Parcel Id: 273512413006, Legal Description: BLOCK 34, LOTS P - S. 615 N. Third St: Parcel Id: 273 5 1 21 10001, Legal Description: BLOCK 101, LOTS 9 & 10. 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of Trustee Townhomes, Health Club, Doerr Ho- sier, Restaurant, Sculpture and Gardens: Parcel Id: 273512129008, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT lA. Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 21 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute (area of seminar buildings): Pazcel Id: 273512129809, -+,, Legal Description: ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT 1 B. 700 Ute Ave., Aspen Alps: Pazcel Id: 273718255001 thru -011; 273718255013 thru -017; 273718272001 thru 016; 273718239001 tliru -006; 273718239061; 273718239014; 273718271001thru-009; 273718256002; 273718295001thru-008; 273718262001thru-008; 273718269001 thru -013; 273718272999; 273718244001 thru -008, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, ASPEN ALPS CONDOMINIUMS, ASPEN ALPS WEST CONDOMINIUMS, ASPEN ALPS NORTH, MOSES LOT SPLIT, ASPEN ALPS SOUTH. 1280 Ute Ave., Benedict Building: Parcel Id: 273718156001 thru-003; 273718156005 thru - 020; 273718156023 thru -034; 273718156036; 273718156129; 273718156131; 273718156804; 273718156821; 273718156822; 273718156835, Legal Description: ALL UNITS, POWDERHOUSE CONDOMINIUMS. 1005 Waters Ave: Parcel Id: 273718282001, Legal Description: BLOCK 41, LOTS A-C, EAST ASPEN ADDITION. 1102 Waters Ave: Pazcel Id: 273718266001, Legal Description: LOT 14, CALDERWOOD SUBDIVISION. 610 S. West End St., Gant: Pazcel Id: 273718267001 thru -015; 273718267017 thru -029; 273718267036thru-046; 273718267048thru-050; 273718267053thru-056;273718267058 thru -067; 273718267069 thru -070; 273718267072 thru -078; 273718267080 thrv -097; 273718267100thru-107; 273718267109thru-111; 273718267113 thru-143,LegalDescrip- tion: ALL UNITS, GANT CONDOMINIUMS. 95 Westview Dr: Parcel Id: 273718121004, Legal Description: BLOCK 1, LOT 7, KNOLLWOOD SUBDIVISION. ~-, Ordinance #_, Series 2007 Page 22 of 22 First Reading Draft - 10.22.07